AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@talk72000,

How long before okie posts that Herbert Hoover was a Democrat?

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

If running a business is so simple, how come the majority of them fail in the first 5 years?

http://www.moyak.com/papers/small-business-statistics.html
"A study done by Inc. magazine and the National Business Incubator Association (NBIA) revealed that 80 percent of new businesses fail within the first five years."

2 Replies

@okie,

Just a sign that those in charge are even simpler.

0 Replies

@okie,

Nobody ever said running a business is easy. That's your take on what everybody else has challenged you on economics, politics, and history. There, you have been proven wrong so often, and explained it to you in detail, you still fail to understand the truth and facts. You go your merry way thinking your opinions have any merit. That's a sign of stupidity.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

I am not a corporation by the way. I am talking Schedule C of a personal income tax return, and of course it includes a 15% tax rate right off the top of all business profit, so for many years, the FICA and Medicare took a bigger bite than personal income tax.

To clarify, the 15% tax rate off the top that I referred to, was for FICA and Medicare. Those that are self employed know that we pay the full 15% approximately, while wage earners pay about 7.5% and their employer pays another 7.5%. Since we are self employed, we have the privilege of picking up both, totalling the 15%. Of course if the employer wasn't paying the 7.5%, they could increase the employee wage by that amount, so essentially the employee does pay the 15%.

So if a self employed person makes about 90,000 profit, they pay in almost 14 grand before they even consider how much the income tax will be.

0 Replies

Is this the look of confidence or likely defeat for the Dems in approximately two weeks?

http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/pelosi_093010_397x224.gif

2 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Is this the look of confidence or likely defeat for the Dems in approximately two weeks?

For the good of the country, let's all hope and pray Princess Pelosi gets put out to pasture.

0 Replies

@okie,

What a stupid post . . . you posted a moment in time.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

okie never learned to think globally.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:

No response from parados. Is he still stuck on the arithmetic, working our the percentages?

It turns out that okie was right and parados wrong.

Not too unusual in my opinion, george. I am not a corporation by the way. I am talking Schedule C of a personal income tax return, and of course it includes a 15% tax rate right off the top of all business profit, so for many years, the FICA and Medicare took a bigger bite than personal income tax.

I suspected this was the case with okie - that's why I pointed out the payroll tax element of the problem.

Folks (or families) who have regular employment, but who run a business on the side and who report this income on Schedult C, pay a Federal "self employment tax" of about 14% of earnings in addition to paying the marginal State and federal Income taxes and any sales or use taxes that may apply. In a high tax state like California this results in a 62% total tax on earnings - even before the various use and special taxes kick in.

It was his failure to pay the self employment tax on some of his earnings that got our Secretary of the Treasury in trouble.

2 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

I took several graduate classes in business school. After the first two, they were boring and repetitive. I have never worked for a business that was run as well as any of several employees could have run it, including myself. Running a business just isn't rocket science.

Then why don't you start a business to improve your economic situation?

The truth is that most new business startups end up failing. Indeed it is a rare medium or large sized corporation that lasts more than a generation or two. These facts strongly suggest that there is indeed a considerable risk and challenge involved in running a business.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

I have never worked for a business that was run as well as any of several employees could have run it, including myself. Running a business just isn't rocket science.

What a bizarre statement, POM. You sound like a chronically disgruntled employee. Have you ever worked a job where you had respect for the people you worked for?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Folks (or families) who have regular employment, but who run a business on the side and who report this income on Schedult C, pay a Federal "self employment tax" of about 14% of earnings in addition to paying the marginal State and federal Income taxes and any sales or use taxes that may apply. In a high tax state like California this results in a 62% total tax on earnings - even before the various use and special taxes kick in.

Your 62% is NOT supported by any known US taxing policies. You don't seem to understand that adding percentages is incorrect when the percentages are of different amounts.

If I pay 30% tax on 50% of my income and 20% tax on 100% of my income it doesn't mean I paid 50% of my income in taxes.

0 Replies

BIGGER GOVERNMENT LEADS TO MORE GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION--"POWER CORRUPTS; "ABSOSLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY."

Quote:

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19932&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
Hiding the Cost of Government Leads to Bigger Government
Congress hides from voters a huge part of the cost of government: the hidden costs of taxes, which include lost income and jobs. Failing to account for these costs creates a bias in favor of bigger government and a less efficient tax code, says Christopher J. Conover, a research scholar with the Center for Health Policy and Inequalities Research at Duke University.

Everyone from President Reagan's economic advisor Martin Feldstein to President Obama's economic advisor Jonathan Gruber agree that this hidden cost of taxation is very real and very large.

When the federal government takes an additional dollar from taxpayers, the actual cost to society is generally $1.44.
That extra $0.44 represents the deadweight loss of taxation.
Every time Congress shifts another dollar from Peter to Paul, it leaves society $0.44 poorer.
Yet Congress never tells voters about these hidden costs before raising our taxes. It doesn't even measure them, says Conover.

In a new study, Conover uses the recently passed health care legislation as a striking example of hidden costs.

ObamaCare includes roughly $500 billion in new taxes over the next 10 years, but also includes provisions that could result in further tax increases (such as the so-called "doc fix").
If all those additional taxes materialize (which some argue is the most likely scenario), then ObamaCare will impose an additional cost of roughly $550 billion in foregone economic output.
If Congress ends up borrowing money to finance ObamaCare's new spending or the "doc fix," the deadweight losses could climb higher still.
University of Chicago economist Harald Uhlig estimates that federal borrowing carries a much higher deadweight loss, such that every $1 of deficit spending ultimately costs society $4.40.
Politicians are defrauding the American people by not accounting for this hidden cost of government, says Conover.

Source: Christopher J. Conover, "Hiding the Cost of Government Leads to Bigger Government," Daily Caller, October 13, 2010.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

ican still doesn't understand how this country works. He is a tiresome bore.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

It was his failure to pay the self employment tax on some of his earnings that got our Secretary of the Treasury in trouble.

It still amazes me that Obama has the gall to leave that guy in office. Pleading innocence and / or ignorance just is not credible. Either he is a crook or a combination of stupid and incompetent, and in either case, the man should have been kicked out or never appointed in the first place, especially as Treasury Secretary of all things. Is his appointment a way for Obama to say "in your face" to all taxpaying, law abiding Americans?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

ican still doesn't understand how this country works. He is a tiresome bore.

cicerone imposter still doesn't understand how this country works. He is a tiresome bore.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie, Was that a difficult task for you to copy and paste?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Because business is boring. It is totally uninteresting. To me, your suggestion is that I should have become a whore. Why should I tailor my life to your way of thinking?

When my ex-husband was trying so desperately to become a multi-millionaire, he and many other petty conspirators looked to start businesses. They were obsessed with the idea. Most of the ideas were crackpot, although they generally involved some sort of scientific application (my ex holds a doctorate in chemistry and was trained as an x-ray crystallographer).

What I learned from hosting dozens of meetings in my home is that most start-ups are created simply to be bought out or to gather money. Few actually have any intention of producing a product. Think of Professor Harold Hill and the boys' bands.

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

Perhaps, you have been in charge too long and have forgotten what it likes to be an employee. Perhaps, you never worked in retail, which is just about the bottom of the employment pile. Perhaps, you fail to realize that many people go into management because they're bullies.

1 Reply

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know