The End of Employees

[OnePercenter]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh I get it! OnePercenter is using Common Core math!

In 2017, Apple had $230B in revenue and $50B in profits. Compute the effect on Apples profits of OnePercenter "idea" of taxing revenue

A. Profits would increase to $100B
B. Pineapple
C. Profits would drop to $6B

What is the amount of Apples tax and employee expenses?

 

[OnePercenter]

What problems?

Well, I don't have time right now, but you can look around and see the impact of some of these thing for real.

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

 

[froggy]

"Never before have big employers tried so hard to hand over chunks of their business to contractors. From Google to Wal-Mart, the strategy prunes costs for firms and job security for millions of workers"

The End of Employees

I have something to put a stop to this BS.

-Base Federal tax for corporations at 30% of revenue.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2018 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with unlimited employees; employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2018 price structure.

-Remove the FICA limit.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 15 years which will eliminate inflation.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

-Make inversion illegal.

My plan would reduce business costs for employees and taxes to 30%. That's a 15%-30% drop.

My plan would put BILLIONS into the economy daily.

My plan would put the $100 trillion plus currently owned by corporate America back into the economy.

My plan would end all welfare.

My plan would significantly increase social security and pension payments.

My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

Robots may replace 800 million workers by 2030. These skills will keep you employed

 

[OnePercenter]

"Never before have big employers tried so hard to hand over chunks of their business to contractors. From Google to Wal-Mart, the strategy prunes costs for firms and job security for millions of workers"

The End of Employees

I have something to put a stop to this BS.

-Base Federal tax for corporations at 30% of revenue.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2018 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with unlimited employees; employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2018 price structure.

-Remove the FICA limit.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 15 years which will eliminate inflation.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

-Make inversion illegal.

My plan would reduce business costs for employees and taxes to 30%. That's a 15%-30% drop.

My plan would put BILLIONS into the economy daily.

My plan would put the $100 trillion plus currently owned by corporate America back into the economy.

My plan would end all welfare.

My plan would significantly increase social security and pension payments.

My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

Robots may replace 800 million workers by 2030. These skills will keep you employed

My plan would make robots a financial disadvantage.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well, I don't have time right now, but you can look around and see the impact of some of these thing for real.

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

The biggest problem here is human nature. Humans are naturally selfish. There's no way in hell many people are going to work for the US selflessly. They can confuse some of the least intelligent with simple patriotism and send them off to be cannon fodder, but that requires a ton of effort and doesn't always work.

Why would someone make a business with a high risk of failure and no chance of rich rewards?

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

 

[frigidweirdo]

"Never before have big employers tried so hard to hand over chunks of their business to contractors. From Google to Wal-Mart, the strategy prunes costs for firms and job security for millions of workers"

The End of Employees

I have something to put a stop to this BS.

-Base Federal tax for corporations at 30% of revenue.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2018 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-offs/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees with the Feds refunding city, State, and fees.

-Companies with unlimited employees; employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2018 price structure.

-Remove the FICA limit.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 15 years which will eliminate inflation.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

-Make inversion illegal.

My plan would reduce business costs for employees and taxes to 30%. That's a 15%-30% drop.

My plan would put BILLIONS into the economy daily.

My plan would put the $100 trillion plus currently owned by corporate America back into the economy.

My plan would end all welfare.

My plan would significantly increase social security and pension payments.

My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

Robots may replace 800 million workers by 2030. These skills will keep you employed

My plan would make robots a financial disadvantage.

Why?

Haven't we got a better world when less people are in agriculture due to machinery in the use of agricultural production?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

To pay their workers who spend it in the economy.

Is the Fed going to have to print the trillions the Federal government will be handing to corporations?

The effect would be 1.00:1.70.

LOL!

My plan would hold prices for 10 years, thus eliminating inflation.

Price controls never work.

-Remove the FICA limit.
But you've cut the rate in half.​

Is the Fed going to have to print the trillions the Federal government will be handing to corporations?

No, employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

LOL!

I've already covered what happens to the dollar spent at the store.

Price controls never work.

Wage freezes don't work.

But you've cut the rate in half.

No, I've increased the amount collected.

No, employee expenses above the deduction are subsidized at 100% with funds usually give back to the States.

Your subsidy is much larger than the funds the Feds give to the states.

Price controls never work.​

​

Wage freezes don't work.

I'm glad we agree the government shouldn't try either of those.
No, I've increased the amount collected.

If you make every expense related to employment refundable, the employer is now paying 0% for payroll taxes.​

Your subsidy is much larger than the funds the Feds give to the states.

By what dollar amount?

I'm glad we agree the government shouldn't try either of those.

Price freezes check inflation. Wages freezes are just Republican.

If you make every expense related to employment refundable, the employer is now paying 0% for payroll taxes.

Under my plan, employers have to PAY payroll taxes, they will be able to deduct dollar-for-dollar from federal taxes.

By what dollar amount?

By trillions.

Price freezes check inflation.

They cause drops in production and shortages.

Under my plan, employers have to PAY payroll taxes, they will be able to deduct dollar-for-dollar from federal taxes.

Yes, you're refunding the employer payment. That makes their payment zero.

By trillions.

How many trillions?

They cause drops in production and shortages.

Not under my plan.

Yes, you're refunding the employer payment. That makes their payment zero.

Employers already enjoy deductions in employee expenses.

Too many trillions.
Under any plan.
Deductions are much smaller than credits.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, I don't have time right now, but you can look around and see the impact of some of these thing for real.

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Massive government borrowing for handouts to employers.
No need to raise salaries one cent in your plan.

 

[OnePercenter]

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

The biggest problem here is human nature. Humans are naturally selfish. There's no way in hell many people are going to work for the US selflessly. They can confuse some of the least intelligent with simple patriotism and send them off to be cannon fodder, but that requires a ton of effort and doesn't always work.

Why would someone make a business with a high risk of failure and no chance of rich rewards?

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

You're right.

Thank You!

 

[frigidweirdo]

The biggest problem here is human nature. Humans are naturally selfish. There's no way in hell many people are going to work for the US selflessly. They can confuse some of the least intelligent with simple patriotism and send them off to be cannon fodder, but that requires a ton of effort and doesn't always work.

Why would someone make a business with a high risk of failure and no chance of rich rewards?

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

You're right.

Thank You!

Fucking hell. Why do I bother replying to people who can't be bothered to read past the first two words?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well, I don't have time right now, but you can look around and see the impact of some of these thing for real.

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Because the government is the best allocator of resources.

So your "plan" is basically "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". That seems so familiar

 

[frigidweirdo]

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Because the government is the best allocator of resources.

So your "plan" is basically "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". That seems so familiar

Sounds like a "the more you spend, the more you earn". I can do that. I can spend all day spending money to earn more money.

 

[hadit]

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

The biggest problem here is human nature. Humans are naturally selfish. There's no way in hell many people are going to work for the US selflessly. They can confuse some of the least intelligent with simple patriotism and send them off to be cannon fodder, but that requires a ton of effort and doesn't always work.

Why would someone make a business with a high risk of failure and no chance of rich rewards?

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

That's not the point. We're supposed to be turning businesses into welfare distribution centers.

 

[OnePercenter]

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

You're right.

Thank You!

Fucking hell. Why do I bother replying to people who can't be bothered to read past the first two words?

Why shouldn't I accept kudos?

Your other two sentences are common sense.

It's the employers fault in hiring wrong, or not nurturing your employees. People aren't field mules.

 

[OnePercenter]

Increasing profit for businesses and pay for the American Worker?

House flippers will have a hard time, but most do anyway.

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Because the government is the best allocator of resources.

So your "plan" is basically "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". That seems so familiar

No. My plan is returning taxes to taxpayers to spend in the economy.

 

[OnePercenter]

How does a 30% tax on revenues increase profits?

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Because the government is the best allocator of resources.

So your "plan" is basically "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". That seems so familiar

Sounds like a "the more you spend, the more you earn". I can do that. I can spend all day spending money to earn more money.

As long as a company spends on employee expenses, yes.

 

[OnePercenter]

The biggest problem here is human nature. Humans are naturally selfish. There's no way in hell many people are going to work for the US selflessly. They can confuse some of the least intelligent with simple patriotism and send them off to be cannon fodder, but that requires a ton of effort and doesn't always work.

Why would someone make a business with a high risk of failure and no chance of rich rewards?

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

That's not the point. We're supposed to be turning businesses into welfare distribution centers.

So now employees are welfare recipients? You're making Putin proud.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

By reducing the biggest costs (taxes, fees, and employee expenses) to no more than 30% of revenue.

By handing businesses trillions in government cash.

To pay employees who spend the trillions back into the economy.

Because the government is the best allocator of resources.

So your "plan" is basically "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs". That seems so familiar

Sounds like a "the more you spend, the more you earn". I can do that. I can spend all day spending money to earn more money.

As long as a company spends on employee expenses, yes.

As long as a company spends on employee expenses, yes.

How much were "employee expenses" in 2016 and 2017?

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2018-08/pi0718_0.txt

 

[hadit]

Humans are naturally selfish.

That's why we have regulations and laws.

You have to understand that a lot of founders of business work a hell of a lot more than people who earn low wages.

That's because they don't do it right.

"Hire people that know more than you then step back and let them do their job". Howard Schultz

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

That's not the point. We're supposed to be turning businesses into welfare distribution centers.

So now employees are welfare recipients? You're making Putin proud.

They are when the government forces their pay to be higher than the value of their work.

 

[OnePercenter]

Yes, it is. However regulations and laws can't always force people to work.

In the USSR and other "Communist" countries they'd have people working in jobs but their productivity would be so low because they had no incentive to bother working.

Yes, they don't do it right. What do politicians do right? Hardly anything. This is a large problem with humans.

So, you're basically giving MORE REASONS why what you said is wrong.

Paying people a livable wage for making their employer all of their money is NEVER a bad idea.

You're right.

However what happens when that employee doesn't make the employer money?

What happens when an employees' productivity is BELOW a livable wage?

That's not the point. We're supposed to be turning businesses into welfare distribution centers.

So now employees are welfare recipients? You're making Putin proud.

They are when the government forces their pay to be higher than the value of their work.

Employees make employers all of their money, so what's the value of the employee?