Life sucks right now?

[jillian]

First of all, both men are not being helped by the government. Only the employee. Not the former business owner.

Secondly, helped is one thing. Supported by, is another.

But the business owner got many, many tax breaks and incentives along the way that the employee did not.

He did?

As a business owner, I get tax breaks on my personal income tax?

Exactly what are you referring to?

if you have a business, you know that if you pay an employee, that isn't profit on which you'd pay taxes.

so perhaps you can explain?

 

[Mr Natural]

First of all, both men are not being helped by the government. Only the employee. Not the former business owner.

Secondly, helped is one thing. Supported by, is another.

But the business owner got many, many tax breaks and incentives along the way that the employee did not.

He did?

As a business owner, I get tax breaks on my personal income tax?

Exactly what are you referring to?

Why would you be taking personal income out of your business?

 

[Jarhead]

But the business owner got many, many tax breaks and incentives along the way that the employee did not.

He did?

As a business owner, I get tax breaks on my personal income tax?

Exactly what are you referring to?

Why would you be taking personal income out of your business?

As a sub chapter (s) corp in NYS, I take a weekly check that is taxed and tax matched and I also take monthly distributions. If I have anythig left over at the end of the year in my corporate account, it is taxed at a higher rate as "profit" than I would be taxed if I take it out and consider it personal income. So I take it out and it goes down as income.

You told me you were a business owner....or a former business owner and I thought you said in NYS.. How do you not know this?

 

[Jarhead]

But the business owner got many, many tax breaks and incentives along the way that the employee did not.

He did?

As a business owner, I get tax breaks on my personal income tax?

Exactly what are you referring to?

if you have a business, you know that if you pay an employee, that isn't profit on which you'd pay taxes.

so perhaps you can explain?

No. it isnt. It is ALSO not income to me.
So what is the point you are making?

 

[asterism]

But the business owner got many, many tax breaks and incentives along the way that the employee did not.

A specific business owner or all of them in general?

I am a NYS sub chapter (s) corp.
I take distributions as income and I also take a weekly check.
My personal return has no advantages over my employees personal returns.

I do not understand what he is referring to.

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

 

[Jarhead]

A specific business owner or all of them in general?

I am a NYS sub chapter (s) corp.
I take distributions as income and I also take a weekly check.
My personal return has no advantages over my employees personal returns.

I do not understand what he is referring to.

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

 

[asterism]

I am a NYS sub chapter (s) corp.
I take distributions as income and I also take a weekly check.
My personal return has no advantages over my employees personal returns.

I do not understand what he is referring to.

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

I hear ya.

I'm so greedy that I dug into my own retirement funds in 2008 and 2009 to weather the storm instead of downsize. I cut costs elsewhere at the same time, as did most every other small business.

Health plan and 401(k)? I took a poll. Everyone wanted more pay and the right to choose their own options. I'm not sure if that's even going to be legal in a few years.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I did better under Bush but my wealth is still going up. Palin would be best for my wallet cause I'm in oil.

Better consult with her hand, on that....'cause her head doesn't know WHAT-the-Hell is goin'-on!!!!

 

[Jarhead]

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

I hear ya.

I'm so greedy that I dug into my own retirement funds in 2008 and 2009 to weather the storm instead of downsize. I cut costs elsewhere at the same time, as did most every other small business.

Health plan and 401(k)? I took a poll. Everyone wanted more pay and the right to choose their own options. I'm not sure if that's even going to be legal in a few years.

I did not go in that direction. I simply kept things as they were.

One thing, however. I have a woman who works for me who, this year, will likely make more than I do.

And whereas my free time is spent in my office on this stupid forum, I gave all of my employees an extra week off this year during the summer as we are THAT slow....and that is with pay.....better than sitting here and getting bored.

Heck, my employees did great for me from 2004-2009. And their returns were salaries at and above market, nice benefits, 401(k), bonuses...and job secrurity during the slow times.....like now.

So now the left want to make the burden even harder on me so they can then compalin about me when I am forced to lay off.

Go figure.

 

[Jarhead]

I did better under Bush but my wealth is still going up. Palin would be best for my wallet cause I'm in oil.

Better consult with her hand, on that....'cause her head doesn't know WHAT-the-Hell is goin'-on!!!!

Funny thing.....she may not be the most worldly...she may not be your cup of tea.....she may not have youyr ideology....

But your claim is nothing more than a regurgitation of left wing talking points.

Those left wing pundits count on fools like you to repeat things that have no basis....and you guys, regardless of how foolish and silly it makes you look, continue to do it for them.

Must be a pathetic life being a follower.

 

[asterism]

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

I hear ya.

I'm so greedy that I dug into my own retirement funds in 2008 and 2009 to weather the storm instead of downsize. I cut costs elsewhere at the same time, as did most every other small business.

Health plan and 401(k)? I took a poll. Everyone wanted more pay and the right to choose their own options. I'm not sure if that's even going to be legal in a few years.

I did not go in that direction. I simply kept things as they were.

One thing, however. I have a woman who works for me who, this year, will likely make more than I do.

And whereas my free time is spent in my office on this stupid forum, I gave all of my employees an extra week off this year during the summer as we are THAT slow....and that is with pay.....better than sitting here and getting bored.

Heck, my employees did great for me from 2004-2009. And their returns were salaries at and above market, nice benefits, 401(k), bonuses...and job secrurity during the slow times.....like now.

So now the left want to make the burden even harder on me so they can then compalin about me when I am forced to lay off.

Go figure.

To be fair, it's the lack of practical experience that drives that mentality. There are entire agencies and think tanks which do nothing but chop up numbers with the intent of justifying a position. Then another group of "experts" build on that research to craft theories and predictions. Mind you, none of these predictions have ever come true but since it gives cover to those policy initiatives they are still viewed as credible.

As I've said before, just take a look at what a liberal actually does with his own money if you want to know how they really think.

Not a single one of them ever gave more to the government when given the option.

 

[Jarhead]

I hear ya.

I'm so greedy that I dug into my own retirement funds in 2008 and 2009 to weather the storm instead of downsize. I cut costs elsewhere at the same time, as did most every other small business.

Health plan and 401(k)? I took a poll. Everyone wanted more pay and the right to choose their own options. I'm not sure if that's even going to be legal in a few years.

I did not go in that direction. I simply kept things as they were.

One thing, however. I have a woman who works for me who, this year, will likely make more than I do.

And whereas my free time is spent in my office on this stupid forum, I gave all of my employees an extra week off this year during the summer as we are THAT slow....and that is with pay.....better than sitting here and getting bored.

Heck, my employees did great for me from 2004-2009. And their returns were salaries at and above market, nice benefits, 401(k), bonuses...and job secrurity during the slow times.....like now.

So now the left want to make the burden even harder on me so they can then compalin about me when I am forced to lay off.

Go figure.

To be fair, it's the lack of practical experience that drives that mentality. There are entire agencies and think tanks which do nothing but chop up numbers for the express intent on justifying a position. Then another group of "experts" build on that research to craft theories and predictions. Mind you, none of these predictions have ever come true but since it gives cover to those policy initiatives they are still viewed as credible.

As I've said before, just take a look at what a liberal actually does with his own money if you want to know how they really think.

Not a single one of them ever gave more to the government when given the option.

Kerry is a classic example.

He did what any normal American would do. He found a legal way to not have to pay taxes.

But the irony when he endorses the "rich should pay more into the sytstem"....

 

[jillian]

I am a NYS sub chapter (s) corp.
I take distributions as income and I also take a weekly check.
My personal return has no advantages over my employees personal returns.

I do not understand what he is referring to.

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

yes, your income is personally distributed.

you do get the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

you also get the profits (as well as the losses, but that's the risk you take when you work for yourself).

as for the rest.. i ran my own practice for a long time. i can't imagine keeping more staff than i needed. i think that's bad business.

and saying things like the big bad meanies on the left will think you're evil and greedy... is simply not rational.

i also think you know that when they talk about corporate greed and corporate welfare, they aren't talking about small business like yours... they're talking about large corporations that do things like steal this country's jobs by outsourcing to pay for some incompetent CEO's golden parachute. they're talking about corporations that pay a miniscule percentage of profits in taxes because their lobbyists stuff legislators with money for their campaigns.

Tell me, you think Tony Hayward deserved a 17 million dollar severance package? how about carly fiorina's 42 million for almost running HP into the ground?

 

[asterism]

To be fair, it's the lack of practical experience that drives that mentality. There are entire agencies and think tanks which do nothing but chop up numbers for the express intent on justifying a position. Then another group of "experts" build on that research to craft theories and predictions. Mind you, none of these predictions have ever come true but since it gives cover to those policy initiatives they are still viewed as credible.

As I've said before, just take a look at what a liberal actually does with his own money if you want to know how they really think.

Not a single one of them ever gave more to the government when given the option.

Kerry is a classic example.

He did what any normal American would do. He found a legal way to not have to pay taxes.

But the irony when he endorses the "rich should pay more into the sytstem"....

Yup.

More irony is that guys like you and I don't really want a tax cut at this time. We want a tax increase. Lower our rate and we'll gladly pay a higher tax bill next year.

 

[asterism]

you also get the profits (as well as the losses, but that's the risk you take when you work for yourself).

I think you're onto something here.

i ran my own practice for a long time.

This Administration says job creation is a priority. Do you think tax increases foster job creation? Why did you stop running your own practice? In your opinion should more people do what you did?

 

[Jarhead]

Neither do I.

Funny how all that "corporate welfare" the left howls about never seems to make it into the tax code. I'm sure there are earmarks and special back room deals out there (though certainly not on the scale of Goldman Sachs getting paid back for contributing millions to Obama), but I've never seen any direct knowledge of any.

I do know that I didn't get a tax rate cut during the Bush years and neither did any other S-Corp owner because of AMT.

My incentive to start my own was so I can be in control of my destiny. I gain nothing by owning my own except the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

I have analyzed my situation and can make exactly the same amount of money with half the staff.

Some will say my business model sucks. They are correct. I overpay my employees. I give them a decent health policy with the only contribution being the "family" side of it. I do a nice max 401(K) match.

Why? Becuase I like my employees.

But if I downsize, I am mean, evil and greedy....not a msart man with a sound business model.

Funny how that pans out for us business owners thanks to the rhetoric NON BUSINESS owner politicians put out there.

yes, your income is personally distributed.

you do get the headaches, the worries, the personnel issues and the audits.

you also get the profits (as well as the losses, but that's the risk you take when you work for yourself).

as for the rest.. i ran my own practice for a long time. i can't imagine keeping more staff than i needed. i think that's bad business.

and saying things like the big bad meanies on the left will think you're evil and greedy... is simply not rational.

i also think you know that when they talk about corporate greed and corporate welfare, they aren't talking about small business like yours... they're talking about large corporations that do things like steal this country's jobs by outsourcing to pay for some incompetent CEO's golden parachute. they're talking about corporations that pay a miniscule percentage of profits in taxes because their lobbyists stuff legislators with money for their campaigns.

Tell me, you think Tony Hayward deserved a 17 million dollar severance package? how about carly fiorina's 42 million for almost running HP into the ground?

To answer the line in red. Yes, there is possible profit and risk of loss. But I noticed you referred to it as risk I take to weork for myself. In fairness, the risk I take to work for myself AND create income for others (empolyees)

TO answer line in blue: True. It is not rational, but when times are good I am in that top 5% and you hear the rhetoric out there about the top 5%. And NO...the politicians on the left are by no means delineating between the big corporations and the small business owner. They simply group us by income...and they group us 250K earners with the 250million earners...as the top 5%. ANd you know how gullible people can be when a politician talks.

As for Hayward. I cant answer that without emotion. Emotionally? NO WAY! However, logically? The board of BP approved a contract based on his demand at the time. So did he deserve it? It is none of our business. The board did what they thought was best.

And by the way...as for your comment on overstaffing.

I made a judegment call. If the market rebounds, I have the best staff in NYC for my business. If I let anyone go, they become my compettiton when the market comes back, and I dont want to compete against the best.

So I will keep them in tact as long as I can.

 

[Jarhead]

And Jillian...

In all fairness....running a practice is a business, yes, but MY business is running businesses like yours.

Medical professionals and Attorneys are two examples of intelligent people that are not necessarily prepared to run a business as their training is in their field, not in business management

As a result, the need for my business came into existance....we help those that do not know how to start and run a business, do it.

So you must realize, I think from a different perspective than you do. I do more forecasting than I do analyzing existing coinditions.

Just mentioned that for full disclosure.