Tax Day Tea Party

[SpidermanTuba]

yup
either way, the middle class and the poor pay it
either with higher costs or a reduction in jobs

Right, because a rich man never took a temporary loss in order to make a long term gain. If taxes go up he's got to make up the loss IMMEDIATELY, he can't say, keep prices lower than his competitors, take a loss for a little while, in order to drive away competition and make long term gains. Businessmen never do anything like that. Taxes go up $1 per widget - they will charge you exactly $1 more per widget, without fail, they are like moronic robots.


Is that what you are trying to say?


otherwise - they lay off labor and make a product of exactly the same quality? Because if that's the case, that's just making their business more efficient and I thought that was a GOOD thing, right? Or do you consider business more like a charitable organization, who is supposed to hire employees they don't really need?


please, elaborate!

you still dont get it
that was a simplified example in hopes you MIGHT understand
but you prove yet again what a moron you are

Right, because a rich man never took a temporary loss in order to make a long term gain. If taxes go up he's got to make up the loss IMMEDIATELY, he can't say, keep prices lower than his competitors, take a loss for a little while, in order to drive away competition and make long term gains. Businessmen never do anything like that. Taxes go up $1 per widget - they will charge you exactly $1 more per widget, without fail, they are like moronic robots.


Is that what you are trying to say?


otherwise - they lay off labor and make a product of exactly the same quality? Because if that's the case, that's just making their business more efficient and I thought that was a GOOD thing, right? Or do you consider business more like a charitable organization, who is supposed to hire employees they don't really need?


please, elaborate!

 

[SpidermanTuba]

When Uncle Sam takes a bigger chunk, if I want to keep my price competitive I cut somewhere. Like say, a worker or two. Or, I don't buy that new machine. Or, forgo those raises I was gonna give the crew...

Or heck, maybe the overhead pressures will just get too damned high and I'll just have some child-labor factory in China make my widgets, for 1/8th of what it costs me to make them, and cut my price a nickel while laying everyone off, selling all my equipment, moving out of the factory and selling it, and rake in 1000 times the profit as before!

My 200 or so ex-employees can find other work, no problem!

/hypothetical but real-world deal.

?????? Income taxes aren't "overhead." Other taxes may or may not be, but income taxes are not. They are applied AFTER the profit. Overhead is applied BEFORE the profit. I think you don't know what you're talking about.

If you're a business, these taxes go in quarterly reports to the IRS. ALL outlays and disbursements are overhead, slick. Add to this, you know in advance when taxes are going up, and you plan accordingly.

I note in passing you had no comment on the rest of the hypothetical.

I note in passing income taxes are applied to profit of business, not to cost of business.

 

[DiveCon]

?????? Income taxes aren't "overhead." Other taxes may or may not be, but income taxes are not. They are applied AFTER the profit. Overhead is applied BEFORE the profit. I think you don't know what you're talking about.

If you're a business, these taxes go in quarterly reports to the IRS. ALL outlays and disbursements are overhead, slick. Add to this, you know in advance when taxes are going up, and you plan accordingly.

I note in passing you had no comment on the rest of the hypothetical.

I note in passing income taxes are applied to profit of business, not to cost of business.

to the GOVERNMENT
not to the business owner

 

[Midnight Marauder]

?????? Income taxes aren't "overhead." Other taxes may or may not be, but income taxes are not. They are applied AFTER the profit. Overhead is applied BEFORE the profit. I think you don't know what you're talking about.

If you're a business, these taxes go in quarterly reports to the IRS. ALL outlays and disbursements are overhead, slick. Add to this, you know in advance when taxes are going up, and you plan accordingly.

I note in passing you had no comment on the rest of the hypothetical.

I note in passing income taxes are applied to profit of business, not to cost of business.

Shit under pressure, you don't understand how business works. Think, for a second although I know it's hard for you -- businesses plan months in advance what their reaction to higher taxes will be. They don't fucking wait until they're already PAYING the higher taxes. It's planned for and made contingency for just like every other expense.

 

[garyd]

Tuba you can do that in the short term you cannot do it for ever. Hence eventually your business has to take into account any and all government dictated costs of doing business, those include both taxes and regulations.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

If you're a business, these taxes go in quarterly reports to the IRS. ALL outlays and disbursements are overhead, slick. Add to this, you know in advance when taxes are going up, and you plan accordingly.

I note in passing you had no comment on the rest of the hypothetical.

I note in passing income taxes are applied to profit of business, not to cost of business.

Shit under pressure, you don't understand how business works. Think, for a second although I know it's hard for you -- businesses plan months in advance what their reaction to higher taxes will be. They don't fucking wait until they're already PAYING the higher taxes. It's planned for and made contingency for just like every other expense.

While I'm sure that's true of excise taxes and other taxes, it can't possibly be true of income tax on the profit. The job of a business is to maximize its profit - if laying off someone would help them do that, why would they wait until a tax hike? If raising their prices would make for more profit, why would they wait until a tax hike? If I sell 100 widgets a week for $10 each, and I have a competitor across the street who also sells 100 a week for $10 - don't you think if I raise the price of my widgets to $11 - for WHATEVER reason, be it higher taxes or otherwise - and my competitor stays at $10, or just goes up to $10.50 - I will sell a lot less widgets and lose a ton of money ?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Tuba you can do that in the short term you cannot do it for ever. Hence eventually your business has to take into account any and all government dictated costs of doing business, those include both taxes and regulations.

INCOME TAX IS NOT A COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

To make this abundantly clear, lets say two brothers were unequal partners in a business, one brother owning 10% and the other owning 90%. The business nets a profit of $100,000 a year, so the 10% brother gets $10,000 off the business and the 90% brother gets $90,000. Now let's say that taxes go up for the 90% brother but stay the same for the 10% brother, since he doesn't make much at all. Does this mean the 10% brother will get a smaller share than before to help offset the 90% brother's higher taxes? Under your treatment of an income tax as a business "cost" - why wouldn't it?


Ask the IRS. Or any accountant. Or anyone who knows anything about business. When your personal income tax goes up, do you call your fellow shareholders of the companies you own stock in and inform them that prices need to be raised?


Sorry, but the goal of business is to maximize profit. Income tax comes after that's already been done.

What you're suggesting is that when my income tax goes higher I will want to make more at my business to make up the difference, either by raising prices or cutting labor or both. Why wouldn't I ALWAYS want to make more money, though? Do businesses only look for ways to squeeze out more profit when income taxes go up? Hardly.




Do any of you guys actually own a business?

 

[DiveCon]

Tuba you can do that in the short term you cannot do it for ever. Hence eventually your business has to take into account any and all government dictated costs of doing business, those include both taxes and regulations.

INCOME TAX IS NOT A COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

To make this abundantly clear, lets say two brothers were unequal partners in a business, one brother owning 10% and the other owning 90%. The business nets a profit of $100,000 a year, so the 10% brother gets $10,000 off the business and the 90% brother gets $90,000. Now let's say that taxes go up for the 90% brother but stay the same for the 10% brother, since he doesn't make much at all. Does this mean the 10% brother will get a smaller share than before to help offset the 90% brother's higher taxes? Under your treatment of an income tax as a business "cost" - why wouldn't it?


Ask the IRS. Or any accountant. Or anyone who knows anything about business. When your personal income tax goes up, do you call your fellow shareholders of the companies you own stock in and inform them that prices need to be raised?


Sorry, but the goal of business is to maximize profit. Income tax comes after that's already been done.

What you're suggesting is that when my income tax goes higher I will want to make more at my business to make up the difference, either by raising prices or cutting labor or both. Why wouldn't I ALWAYS want to make more money, though? Do businesses only look for ways to squeeze out more profit when income taxes go up? Hardly.




Do any of you guys actually own a business?

clearly YOU dont
and with the way you work math, you never will

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Tuba you can do that in the short term you cannot do it for ever. Hence eventually your business has to take into account any and all government dictated costs of doing business, those include both taxes and regulations.

INCOME TAX IS NOT A COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

To make this abundantly clear, lets say two brothers were unequal partners in a business, one brother owning 10% and the other owning 90%. The business nets a profit of $100,000 a year, so the 10% brother gets $10,000 off the business and the 90% brother gets $90,000. Now let's say that taxes go up for the 90% brother but stay the same for the 10% brother, since he doesn't make much at all. Does this mean the 10% brother will get a smaller share than before to help offset the 90% brother's higher taxes? Under your treatment of an income tax as a business "cost" - why wouldn't it?


Ask the IRS. Or any accountant. Or anyone who knows anything about business. When your personal income tax goes up, do you call your fellow shareholders of the companies you own stock in and inform them that prices need to be raised?


Sorry, but the goal of business is to maximize profit. Income tax comes after that's already been done.

What you're suggesting is that when my income tax goes higher I will want to make more at my business to make up the difference, either by raising prices or cutting labor or both. Why wouldn't I ALWAYS want to make more money, though? Do businesses only look for ways to squeeze out more profit when income taxes go up? Hardly.




Do any of you guys actually own a business?

clearly YOU dont
and with the way you work math, you never will

Can I put that down as a "No" ?

What's wrong with my math?

 

[DiveCon]

INCOME TAX IS NOT A COST OF DOING BUSINESS.

To make this abundantly clear, lets say two brothers were unequal partners in a business, one brother owning 10% and the other owning 90%. The business nets a profit of $100,000 a year, so the 10% brother gets $10,000 off the business and the 90% brother gets $90,000. Now let's say that taxes go up for the 90% brother but stay the same for the 10% brother, since he doesn't make much at all. Does this mean the 10% brother will get a smaller share than before to help offset the 90% brother's higher taxes? Under your treatment of an income tax as a business "cost" - why wouldn't it?


Ask the IRS. Or any accountant. Or anyone who knows anything about business. When your personal income tax goes up, do you call your fellow shareholders of the companies you own stock in and inform them that prices need to be raised?


Sorry, but the goal of business is to maximize profit. Income tax comes after that's already been done.

What you're suggesting is that when my income tax goes higher I will want to make more at my business to make up the difference, either by raising prices or cutting labor or both. Why wouldn't I ALWAYS want to make more money, though? Do businesses only look for ways to squeeze out more profit when income taxes go up? Hardly.




Do any of you guys actually own a business?

clearly YOU dont
and with the way you work math, you never will

Can I put that down as a "No" ?

What's wrong with my math?

you ignore corp taxes

 

[Angel Heart]

You don't want to pay too many taxes?

Easy, either go broke or make so much money you can afford an army of accounts.

For those of you who are productive middle class citizens, well...you're just screwed.

You are expected to pay the taxes for those who cannot work, and for those who make huge amounts of dough.

It's the middle class squeeze.

There's a lot of talk about 'going Galt'. I have yet to read 'Atlas Shrugged'. So, I don't completely understand the concept. But, from what I understand it's the ones that would be taxed stepping out of their jobs and retiring or getting jobs that pay less. All in the effort to not pay taxes. Causing the entire thing to fall in on itself.

If I got that wrong please let me know.

 

[Annie]

You don't want to pay too many taxes?

Easy, either go broke or make so much money you can afford an army of accounts.

For those of you who are productive middle class citizens, well...you're just screwed.

You are expected to pay the taxes for those who cannot work, and for those who make huge amounts of dough.

It's the middle class squeeze.

There's a lot of talk about 'going Galt'. I have yet to read 'Atlas Shrugged'. So, I don't completely understand the concept. But, from what I understand it's the ones that would be taxed stepping out of their jobs and retiring or getting jobs that pay less. All in the effort to not pay taxes. Causing the entire thing to fall in on itself.

If I got that wrong please let me know.

It's got to be at least 20 years since I read 'Atlas Shrugged' and will say at the time didn't have a huge impact on my thinking, at least that I was aware. It's always had followers, but seems I may have to go back and read it again.

I found this column, Helen Smith is married to Glenn Reynolds, she's very smart:

The Washington Independent » Battling Obama by ‘Going Galt’

Battling Obama by ‘Going Galt’
Conservatives Look to 'Atlas Shrugged' for Answers to Keynesian Policies
By DAVID WEIGEL 3/6/09 1:15 PM

”Do you ever wonder,” wrote Dr. Helen Smith, “after dealing with all that is going on with the economy and the upcoming election, if it’s getting to be time to ‘go John Galt?’”

It is Oct. 12, 2008, and inspired by Barack Obama’s curbside debate with Joe the Plumber — and the likelihood of his election to the presidency — Smith, a forensic psychologist in Knoxville, Tenn., was tossing the readers of her blog a serious question. It had been years since she had read “Atlas Shrugged.”

“I had to refresh my memory with the Cliffs Notes,” she said Thursday in an interview. But the themes of Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel, and the themes of the climactic 40-page speech by self-imposed social outcast “John Galt”, had stuck with her.

The themes had stuck with her readers, too. Within days, Smith had collected nearly 200 comments and a steady stream of e-mails from readers who were responding to the possibility of a Democratic victory by brainstorming ways to pull out of the economy. Four months later, Smith — a host of “Ask Dr. Helen” on the right-leaning web site PajamasTV — is collecting stories and suggestions from readers scattered across the country, all of them using the “Atlas Shrugged” analogy as a rallying cry against President Barack Obama’s economic policies.

Smith was a little ahead of the curve of what has become an incredibly popular meme. Across the broad conservative movement, from members of Congress to activists to economists, Rand’s final, allegorical novel is being looked at with fresh eyes. According to the Atlas Society, a think tank that promotes and analyzes Rand’s work, sales of “Atlas Shrugged” have tripled since the presidential election. One congressman says that Rand wrote a “rulebook” that can guide conservatives through the age of Obama; another calls Obama’s policies something right out of the mind of Rand. One economist says that Rand’s fantasies have become reality. Smith is one of many activists citing Rand to explain their decisions to sell their stocks, or to explain why the president’s “demonization” of run-amok CEOs is aggravating the economic slowdown. The popular meme is giving critics of the president’s policies a way to explain why, they believe, it’s doomed to fail — because Rand predicted all of this....

Seems we may be setting up a 'perfect storm' between Rand and Alinsky?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

clearly YOU dont
and with the way you work math, you never will

Can I put that down as a "No" ?

What's wrong with my math?

you ignore corp taxes

We aren't talking about corporate taxes, we're talking about small private business fool, they don't pay corporate taxes.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

But, from what I understand it's the ones that would be taxed stepping out of their jobs and retiring or getting jobs that pay less. All in the effort to not pay taxes.

Sounds great, I'm sure there will be plenty people willing to take their place.


Anyone who works in research physics who thinks higher taxes will make it not worth working, please, by all means, quit your job, I'd love to take your place.

 

[DiveCon]

Can I put that down as a "No" ?

What's wrong with my math?

you ignore corp taxes

We aren't talking about corporate taxes, we're talking about small private business fool, they don't pay corporate taxes.

shows how little you actually comprehend

 

[SpidermanTuba]

you ignore corp taxes

We aren't talking about corporate taxes, we're talking about small private business fool, they don't pay corporate taxes.

shows how little you actually comprehend

Sole proprietors and partnerships are not charged any corporate taxes, this is friggin taxes 101 man. You can't seriously be this stupid while going around calling others stupid.

A partnership must file an annual information return to report the income, deductions, gains, losses, etc., from its operations, but it does not pay income tax. Instead, it "passes through" any profits or losses to its partners. Each partner includes his or her share of the partnership's income or loss on his or her tax return.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98214,00.html

If you own a small business as a sole proprietor or as a partner with someone else, the tax is applied ONLY to your personal income from the business, not the business itself.


You still haven't answered my question. Do you own a small business?

 

[DiveCon]

We aren't talking about corporate taxes, we're talking about small private business fool, they don't pay corporate taxes.

shows how little you actually comprehend

Sole proprietors and partnerships are not charged any corporate taxes, this is friggin taxes 101 man. You can't seriously be this stupid while going around calling others stupid.

A partnership must file an annual information return to report the income, deductions, gains, losses, etc., from its operations, but it does not pay income tax. Instead, it "passes through" any profits or losses to its partners. Each partner includes his or her share of the partnership's income or loss on his or her tax return.

Partnerships

If you own a small business as a sole proprietor or as a partner with someone else, the tax is applied ONLY to your personal income from the business, not the business itself.


You still haven't answered my question. Do you own a small business?

no shit sherlock
this is why you are looking like a fucking moron
you dont even know what is being discussed


and as to your strawman question, its none of your fucking business what i do or don't own

 

[Ravi]

You don't want to pay too many taxes?

Easy, either go broke or make so much money you can afford an army of accounts.

For those of you who are productive middle class citizens, well...you're just screwed.

You are expected to pay the taxes for those who cannot work, and for those who make huge amounts of dough.

It's the middle class squeeze.

There's a lot of talk about 'going Galt'. I have yet to read 'Atlas Shrugged'. So, I don't completely understand the concept. But, from what I understand it's the ones that would be taxed stepping out of their jobs and retiring or getting jobs that pay less. All in the effort to not pay taxes. Causing the entire thing to fall in on itself.

If I got that wrong please let me know.

Going Galt is basically deciding that you are too put upon so you go live in a cave and hopefully watch society crumble without your brilliance and contribution.

I think it's a pretty funny concept...because there are always people to step in and fill your shoes.

 

[Annie]

Couple good posts:

Instapundit » Blog Archive » TODAY KANSAS CITY SAW ITS fourth weekly “tea party” protest. Pictures and video at the link. And…

MARCH 14, 2009
TODAY KANSAS CITY SAW ITS fourth weekly “tea party” protest. Pictures and video at the link.

And here’s some excellent video from last week. Note that they marched on Claire McCaskill’s office and she wound up voting against the Omnibus bill. As the photo below demonstrates, while these things aren’t getting a lot of national coverage so far, they’re getting plenty of local media, and that’s something that Congressional offices notice. Scroll down or click here for pics and a report from Columbus, Ohio.

Links at site.

On The Left-Wing Reaction to John Galt, Ayn Rand, and Tea Parties by Edward Cline -- Capitalism Magazine

Ditto with links here:

On The Left-Wing Reaction to John Galt, Ayn Rand, and Tea Parties
by Edward Cline (March 13, 2009)

The cultural and political elite are upset that she has not been forgotten. That philosophy has returned to haunt them and aggravate their guilt. And they are in high dudgeon because they are being cast in the role, not as saviors, but as her black-hearted villains. They are discovering that ideas cannot be interred as permanently as their authors. Atlas Shrugged is on their minds.

The Times blog, “Opinionator” (a round-up of positions expressed in other blogs) of March 6th, called “’Going Galt’: Everyone’s Doing It!“ is a testimonial to how the elite have been blind-sided in their arrogant complacency and sent spinning out of control on the Internet highway, and evidence of how thoroughly they have been indoctrinated in the belief that reality has nothing to do with their chosen “reality.” ....

...That they protest too much is an indication that they do understand. These are the crusaders who crusaded to destroy literary, economic and political values, and made living in this culture as pointless as watching a snow-covered TV screen. They would not have campaigned to destroy them if they did not feel threatened by them.
....

 

[Annie]

As April 15th approaches, refining the message:

WillCollier.com: What Is The Tea Party Manifesto?

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 1, 2009
What Is The Tea Party Manifesto?

Lefties have assiduously tried to paint the Tea Party movement as an "astroturf" campaign orchestrated behind the scenes by the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (notably in the retracted bogus Playboy story about the Koch Foundation; despite the retraction that one is considered received wisdom in the Left blogosphere). This push has played at least some part in the major media's dogged insistence on ignoring Tea Party events, but the problem with that theory is that the movement to date has been almost entirely inchoate, and far too disorganized to be the product of any kind of plan. Look at the local and blog reporting from the earliest wave of Tea Parties, you'll find no coherent message other than "this sucks!" While true, that isn't enough to get you anywhere in the political process.

The other day I heard Neal Boortz asking a Tea Party enthusiast caller what she wanted to accomplish out of the events. Paraphrasing, she replied along the lines of "show them how angry we are" and "make a statement." Boortz replied that he didn't see the point, and he was correct in doing so. "Expressing anger" is not a coherent platform, it's just venting. As Boortz noted, no congresscritter is going to pay any attention to a box full of tea bags on his doorstep; it's just empty symbolism.

If the Tea Party movement is going to amount to anything more than people who wouldn't normally go to a protest protesting, it's going to have to come up with a consistent set of concrete (and realistic) goals, and clearly express those goals to the press and to the rest of the public.

A Tea Party Manifesto should have no more than ten items, and each one should be a clear, achievable goal. No fair putting in platitudes like "fix the financial system," that's too much like hopey-changitude, the point here is to be practical and specific. Some suggestions:

1. A moratorium on bailouts, whether for Wall Street bankers, General Motors, or the irresponsible guy down the street who "bought" too much house. "Failures must be allowed to fail."

2. Repeal of all "Stimulus" spending for the years 2011 and beyond.

3. Repeal of all "Stimulus" pet projects in 2009-2010 with no stimulative effect.

4. Defeat of the Obama 2010 budget, with a new budget set at 2008 levels plus inflation. We've already spent too much money that we don't have.

5. Defeat of any politician who voted for the February "Stimulus" bill.

6. Complete selloff and shutdown of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and an immediate ban on campaign contributions from both, as well as any other firm in Federal receivership.

That's a start. Feel free to add your own.