Sure, the link to the Tax Foundation page states as much. The average for everyone is about 15%, but for top-earners it is quite a bit higher. Of course they have a lower effective Social Security tax (as it caps out around $115,000 or so), but are usually subject to the highest State income taxes. People in Europe don't really realize that their income tax is effectively the same as our Federal and State income taxes and our FICA/Social Security payments. And when you add them up - it's really not all that different.
While our average income tax rate is about 15% effective, that does not include the 15.2% for FICA and Social Security. Nor State income taxes up to 13.3%, meaning that in the US, an average tax load as paid in Europe would be around 44% for a person living in California (and much higher for someone earning around $10,000 per month - about 50%). Not much different at all.
And no data has been presented to show the 2018 data is superior, either. The point is that if the underlying data is so fragmented and malleable, then how firm of conviction can you reasonably be about conclusions from that dataset?
The problem is that the data doesn't match the models, and it's those models that say it is supposed to be 2 deg C warmer. The data doesn't support the models' claims. Science says that when data and theory/model conflict, the theory/model is wrong.
Furthermore, look at the GISS temperature record from 1988 and from 2018. You'll see that it's been adjusted to eliminate the peak in 1940, and the cooling from 1940 to 1970. When you can adjust away the past, then you can dictate the present. But it's not quite honest now, is it?
Lastly, look at HadCRUT4 from 1895 to 1943, and then again from 1957 to 2005. They are essentially the same - yet the former (1895 to 1943) is supposed to be not affected by the sudden rise in CO2. If we had the same type of climate change with and without the impact of CO2, then what does that say about the impact of CO2?
On one hand, this is a great thing, making people aware of the issues with the new proposed law and the way Government (or, in this case, a supra-government Government) can run roughshod on your rights. On the other hand, this is from the "right wing/extremist" current Italian Government, who we're told is all about running roughshod on your rights. Methinks those on the political left in Italy and the EU will have a bit of cognitive dissonance going on...
Now if we can just get a fully digital windshield so we don't have to clean that too, that could save all the effort of pressing that little wiper lever. That has to be worth a few hundred a year!
Yep, just like the last four times in the last ~140 years it's happened. I assume we'll recover like we did before - jobs will change, but there will still be jobs.
Median wages are up as well, well, other than the 2009 to 2015 drop... So the mean and median are both up relative to the 1970s, rendering your statement false.
Per the Census, income per capita (adjusted for constant dollars) has increased since 1970s. Minimum wage may be stagnant, but actual wages aren't.
As far as minimum wage laws go, there shouldn't be one at a Federal, and most likely even at State levels. What minimum wage would you set that would apply in San Francisco or Manhattan that would also be applicable to McAllen, TX? It makes no sense on a Federal level. And in some States (such as CA), it makes no sense state-wide. The cost of living in Oxnard is about 46% of that in Santa Monica, just 45 minutes away. How do you set a minimum wage that is "livable" for someone in a high-income area and doesn't kill small businesses in low-cost areas?
The solution is to eliminate a minimum wage law at the Federal and State level, and let counties or municipalities set it if they so choose.
Nope. Look at the financial report. It's a separate line item. Just check the financials. Gross profit of $456MM. Subtract out the R&D ($367MM) and SG&A ($686MM), and you end up with the operating loss (-$597MM).
And you get 4 answers... We had automation in the 1800s (rail and steam), then in the early 1900s (electricity and gasoline). Then again in the 1960s/1970s (computers) and again in the 1990s (telecom/Internet). What's going to be different this time?
Around 87 million albums sold in the US in 2017. At an average price of $14.99, that's around $1.2 billion in revenue. BestBuy did $40 million? That's a pitifully small number for the industry as a whole, especially given the number of BestBuy stores (1000) - that's about 200 CDs a month per store, at best.
A subjective opinion is protected by free speech. Now, if the bad review contained factual claims that could be proven as false, they I'd agree to removing the posts. But if I jump on Yelp and say "they were slovenly, slow, and the food was way too salty" then that's valid - it's all subjective opinion. Sucks that some might take it as damaging, but that's the way subjective reviews work.
Falling back on the 1996 law is bad precedent, because if that law changes, then this ruling is up for review. It should have been held on grounds similar to those for journalists and professional reviewers, since Yelp and other platforms basically allow anyone to be a "mini-journalist". What the Court should have done was say "if this review would have been OK for a professional restaurant reviewer to write, then it's OK for an amateur to write" and be done with it.
I'm not a fan of Samsung software, but I so freaking love the Note... I'm a "write it down/sketch it out" kind of guy, and having an essentially endless notebook with me at all times it so convenient. If someone else came out with a phone with a decent stylus/note-taking/sketching tool, I'd jump in a heartbeat. But until then... At least in the meantime I've disabled the Bixby button!
That might be the case. However, they only have a few more quarters of cash on hand (at the current burn rate) without diluting the stock or trying to take on even more debt. The time to turn the corner to profitable was probably last Q3, just before Model 3 units started shipping...
Yep, nuclear power could be quite affordable, and it has a very small footprint and massive amounts of energy available at any time - but our politics keeps it failing. We've paid for Yucca mountain, we have tens of billions of dollars in a trust fund waiting to handle Yucca mountain, and we can't use it because politics.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, the link to the Tax Foundation page states as much. The average for everyone is about 15%, but for top-earners it is quite a bit higher. Of course they have a lower effective Social Security tax (as it caps out around $115,000 or so), but are usually subject to the highest State income taxes. People in Europe don't really realize that their income tax is effectively the same as our Federal and State income taxes and our FICA/Social Security payments. And when you add them up - it's really not all that different.
While our average income tax rate is about 15% effective, that does not include the 15.2% for FICA and Social Security. Nor State income taxes up to 13.3%, meaning that in the US, an average tax load as paid in Europe would be around 44% for a person living in California (and much higher for someone earning around $10,000 per month - about 50%). Not much different at all.
Well, somebody has to make sure the Middle East oil keeps flowing for Asian and European consumption...
And no data has been presented to show the 2018 data is superior, either. The point is that if the underlying data is so fragmented and malleable, then how firm of conviction can you reasonably be about conclusions from that dataset?
So the data presented is bad?
The problem is that the data doesn't match the models, and it's those models that say it is supposed to be 2 deg C warmer. The data doesn't support the models' claims. Science says that when data and theory/model conflict, the theory/model is wrong.
Additionally, the theory is that a warming world should have more and stronger hurricanes, yet the trendline since 1992 is down and this year is forecast to be lower still. More data and theory conflicting...
Furthermore, look at the GISS temperature record from 1988 and from 2018. You'll see that it's been adjusted to eliminate the peak in 1940, and the cooling from 1940 to 1970. When you can adjust away the past, then you can dictate the present. But it's not quite honest now, is it?
Lastly, look at HadCRUT4 from 1895 to 1943, and then again from 1957 to 2005. They are essentially the same - yet the former (1895 to 1943) is supposed to be not affected by the sudden rise in CO2. If we had the same type of climate change with and without the impact of CO2, then what does that say about the impact of CO2?
I'm a vegetarian. I just like it processed into pork, beef, and chicken...
Proof? There's a lot of claims there, let's see your numbers to back them up...
On one hand, this is a great thing, making people aware of the issues with the new proposed law and the way Government (or, in this case, a supra-government Government) can run roughshod on your rights. On the other hand, this is from the "right wing/extremist" current Italian Government, who we're told is all about running roughshod on your rights. Methinks those on the political left in Italy and the EU will have a bit of cognitive dissonance going on...
Now if we can just get a fully digital windshield so we don't have to clean that too, that could save all the effort of pressing that little wiper lever. That has to be worth a few hundred a year!
You can be like James Bond and push a button (there's an app for that!) that changes the plate! Think of how cool that could be...
Or not.
Too late - I already have PlateCoin locked up...
So what you're saying is the drop in the Obama Administration wasn't just 5-6%, but it was closer to 20%?
As I posted just above, the mean is also up...
Now, as far as minimum wage goes, what minimum wage to you suggest? What would be a living wage in Manhattan or San Francisco and McAllen, TX?
Yep, just like the last four times in the last ~140 years it's happened. I assume we'll recover like we did before - jobs will change, but there will still be jobs.
Median wages are up as well, well, other than the 2009 to 2015 drop... So the mean and median are both up relative to the 1970s, rendering your statement false.
Per the Census, income per capita (adjusted for constant dollars) has increased since 1970s. Minimum wage may be stagnant, but actual wages aren't.
As far as minimum wage laws go, there shouldn't be one at a Federal, and most likely even at State levels. What minimum wage would you set that would apply in San Francisco or Manhattan that would also be applicable to McAllen, TX? It makes no sense on a Federal level. And in some States (such as CA), it makes no sense state-wide. The cost of living in Oxnard is about 46% of that in Santa Monica, just 45 minutes away. How do you set a minimum wage that is "livable" for someone in a high-income area and doesn't kill small businesses in low-cost areas?
The solution is to eliminate a minimum wage law at the Federal and State level, and let counties or municipalities set it if they so choose.
Nope. Look at the financial report. It's a separate line item. Just check the financials. Gross profit of $456MM. Subtract out the R&D ($367MM) and SG&A ($686MM), and you end up with the operating loss (-$597MM).
And you get 4 answers... We had automation in the 1800s (rail and steam), then in the early 1900s (electricity and gasoline). Then again in the 1960s/1970s (computers) and again in the 1990s (telecom/Internet). What's going to be different this time?
Around 87 million albums sold in the US in 2017. At an average price of $14.99, that's around $1.2 billion in revenue. BestBuy did $40 million? That's a pitifully small number for the industry as a whole, especially given the number of BestBuy stores (1000) - that's about 200 CDs a month per store, at best.
A subjective opinion is protected by free speech. Now, if the bad review contained factual claims that could be proven as false, they I'd agree to removing the posts. But if I jump on Yelp and say "they were slovenly, slow, and the food was way too salty" then that's valid - it's all subjective opinion. Sucks that some might take it as damaging, but that's the way subjective reviews work.
Falling back on the 1996 law is bad precedent, because if that law changes, then this ruling is up for review. It should have been held on grounds similar to those for journalists and professional reviewers, since Yelp and other platforms basically allow anyone to be a "mini-journalist". What the Court should have done was say "if this review would have been OK for a professional restaurant reviewer to write, then it's OK for an amateur to write" and be done with it.
I'm not a fan of Samsung software, but I so freaking love the Note... I'm a "write it down/sketch it out" kind of guy, and having an essentially endless notebook with me at all times it so convenient. If someone else came out with a phone with a decent stylus/note-taking/sketching tool, I'd jump in a heartbeat. But until then... At least in the meantime I've disabled the Bixby button!
I blame Bixby, about the worst digital "assistant" I've ever seen. I bet that Bixby is "interpreting" actions or words to do something stupid...
That might be the case. However, they only have a few more quarters of cash on hand (at the current burn rate) without diluting the stock or trying to take on even more debt. The time to turn the corner to profitable was probably last Q3, just before Model 3 units started shipping...
Yep, nuclear power could be quite affordable, and it has a very small footprint and massive amounts of energy available at any time - but our politics keeps it failing. We've paid for Yucca mountain, we have tens of billions of dollars in a trust fund waiting to handle Yucca mountain, and we can't use it because politics.