Point of order.

The corporate tax rate is lower and the income would have to be declared by the wife and then would be taxed at a high rate for married couples-right now probably at 38%.

So the supposed scam doesn't hold water.

I am not a tax accountant but I play one on TV.

Daddio

Point of order.

The corporate tax rate is lower and the income would have to be declared by the wife and then would be taxed at a high rate for married couples-right now probably at 38%.

So the supposed scam doesn't hold water.

I am not a tax accountant but I play one on TV.

Daddio

Well, if "corporations are people, my friend", I guess they can get married, though in most places, it'd better be to a corporation of the opposite gender.

Point of order.

The corporate tax rate is lower and the income would have to be declared by the wife and then would be taxed at a high rate for married couples-right now probably at 38%.

So the supposed scam doesn't hold water.

I am not a tax accountant but I play one on TV.

Daddio

Which corporate tax rate? The one for S corps or the one for C corps?

Oh that's right, S corps aren't taxed they pass everything on to the owners for their personal tax returns.

---

in all honesty no corporation has ever paid tax.

anything they are taxed upon they pass the cost to the consumer.

this is just how business works.

---

as for personal income tax most people don't have income they have compensation

for their time and effort.

income used to be defined as profits derived from investments it took congress

to make compensation equivalent to income.




btw i make less then 1000 dollars a month and it would make things easier to have

a starlight up % to pay rather then trying to figure out what is or is not

deductible. if their is a deductible it should be set at the, poverty level,

and everyone should get it.

---

Chris that is a fallacious argument. Most "unearned income" is going to people in the upper income range who have a lower marginal propensity to spend than those in the lower income range who mainly have "earned income. This is one of the things that is concentrating wealth into a smaller segment of society.

---

Chris I did not say you were making that argument I just pointed out that the argument is wrong.

---

Yes, that was the case in Italy in the early 20th century and it helps explain the mass migrations out of that country to the Americas during that era.

---

I am having a disconnect, how did Marx get into this?

---

Reading the last few posts makes me shake my head in disbelief.

Sounds like the have nots are screaming that what is wrong is the haves won't spend every dime they get their hands on just like they do. News flash, that is how you change from a have not to a have.

I just wonder if this is the same thing that "Super Size Me" was all about?

---

Reading the last few posts makes me shake my head in disbelief.

Sounds like the have nots are screaming that what is wrong is the haves won't spend every dime they get their hands on just like they do. News flash, that is how you change from a have not to a have.

What planet are you living on?

The have-nots: - working a 40-60 hr week. Wage taxed at source, then rent/mortgage, followed by utilities, followed by food with the remaining either going into savings if no kids - if kids then clothing & education - So what's left?

The haves - big bonuses/tax avoidance/evasion, offshore accounts etc etc

Pretty obvious why the have-nots are complaining.

With all the extremely large amounts available for bonuses, it would be better to increase the little people's salaries to an extend that the moaning will stop & the bonuses will still be there.

How can this be justified....

"Among the top earners, 50 people were paid between £2.5m and £5m last year, while a further 373 were paid between £1m and £2.5m."

Full Report

---

Reading the last few posts makes me shake my head in disbelief.

Sounds like the have nots are screaming that what is wrong is the haves won't spend every dime they get their hands on just like they do. News flash, that is how you change from a have not to a have.

I just wonder if this is the same thing that "Super Size Me" was all about?

When the disparity becomes great enough social unrest always follows. It is in the best interest of the haves to ensure that they are not too far removed from the have nots. Use the French revolution as a learning experience.

---

Reading the last few posts makes me shake my head in disbelief.

Sounds like the have nots are screaming that what is wrong is the haves won't spend every dime they get their hands on just like they do. News flash, that is how you change from a have not to a have.

What planet are you living on?

The have-nots: - working a 40-60 hr week. Wage taxed at source, then rent/mortgage, followed by utilities, followed by food with the remaining either going into savings if no kids - if kids then clothing & education - So what's left?

Glad you asked. I happen to work in "the barrio" Have some employees making next to minimum wage at work. Lets call them P, Q, R, S, and T. Q has a wife and 2 kids to support. Q is putting money away to send the kids to school and has two cars. Q is renting a house. Q isn't living paycheck to paycheck. R is single. R frequently has to beg for money a day or two before he gets his paycheck for lunch or bus fare. R is paying rent to Dad, so we know it is less than market rate. R has four, yes 4, active cell phones. R has seven computers. R has a girlfriend. R likes to party and to top it off is a gang banger. R also smokes. R has a wage garnishment for unpaid taxes. P is a family man. P does not have a car. P doesn't ever complain about money, even though it is obvious he doesn't have a lot. S is also a family man. S has a car. S complains all the time about money. S also didn't notice his last raise, but he sure noticed the Social Security tax rate going up, I learned some new cuss words in Mexican from S because of that. Then there is T, single mom with kids. T has the kids enrolled in private school. Had to ask T why the last 5 paychecks hadn't been cashed.

The planet I live on has two names, Little Tijuana and East Los Angeles. What planet do you do you live on? The planet of perpetual bitching and self defeating attitudes?

Once you stop worrying about "keeping up with the Joneses," ignore Madison Avenue, and practice a bit of self denial, amazing things happen.

So which advice do you follow? Spend it all from a guy with nothing, or deny to yourself from a guy with a fortune?

---

Once you stop worrying about "keeping up with the Joneses," ignore Madison Avenue, and practice a bit of self denial, amazing things happen.

So which advice do you follow? Spend it all from a guy with nothing, or deny to yourself from a guy with a fortune?

Again, what planet are you living on? There are those who work like you posted but who are just earning sufficient to cover household expenses, no 4 phones, no 7 computers, no cars & in self denial & barely managing to exist let alone live while all around them they see druggies on benefits, alcholics on benefits, bankers awarding themselves obscene bonuses.....

.....costs go up yet wages on a freeze.... ever heard of the "law of diminishing returns"?

A belting example for you....

Nice salary - shame about the work

As for keeping up with the smith & jones types, they can't afford to. They are a rare breed in today's societies, excellent neighbours & theres plenty more like them in the neighbourhood....

..so according to you, they're all losers & whiners?

---

i will be building a second computer and when the joneses can afford meat you are darn right i envy them.

---

Once you stop worrying about "keeping up with the Joneses," ignore Madison Avenue, and practice a bit of self denial, amazing things happen.

So which advice do you follow? Spend it all from a guy with nothing, or deny to yourself from a guy with a fortune?

Again, what planet are you living on? There are those who work like you posted but who are just earning sufficient to cover household expenses, no 4 phones, no 7 computers, no cars & in self denial & barely managing to exist let alone live

Those examples are real people. I didn't post two things about R either. R has bill collectors calling his boss trying to collect. R is offered an 8 hour work day. R can't seem to get there early enough to get more than about 7 hours in a day. Even when R begs for money and this is pointed out, R still can't get his arse in gear and show up on time. Conclusion: R must enjoy being poor.

I know there are some who can't seem to scrape together enough to eat. Others paid the exact same amount are able to eat and even save. What is different? Their life choices. Some people, not all, choose to be poor and bitch and complain, because it is easy and comfortable to them. A reality you need to accept.

---

I think what Sirius meant was that if your income stays the same, but living costs rise, you get less for your money and are worse off. That is something different.

Anyway I haven't got an answer to it, so I'll leave it there.


I still haven't ....

I know this problem is hitting my retired neighbour. He received his new tax code last week, (the UK tax code equates to your personal allowance before tax is deducted).
From the info given you can work out what the new State Pension rate is for him.
Due to a decision last year to freeze the tax allowance for pensioners, until it is equal to that for working people. It effectively means there is less tax allowance on his works pension, so he will pay more tax on that.

He also received the annual letter on pensions from his previous employer, that because their pension rates are tied to the workers wage rates and the workers are receiving no annual pay increase, it therefore means his effective works pension increase is negative.

He will probably receive a very small increase in income this year, but it has already been wiped out by the news of increases in Utility bills.

I think what Sirius meant was that if your income stays the same, but living costs rise, you get less for your money and are worse off. That is something different.

Anyway I haven't got an answer to it, so I'll leave it there.

I still haven't ....

Thanks Chris, that's exactly what I meant. Unfortunately, I do live in the real world & I'm seeing this more each passing week.

As for the "daily Mail", yes they do seem to go overboard, but the underlying facts are that the stories themselves are actually happening. Benefit reforms are well overdue but the problem is they're hitting the wrong people!

As for answers, i haven't got one either.

---

I am in a similar position with the pension increases, and again lucky as the county and local councils have both said there will be no increases.

But my utility bills have increased, although I expect to be in credit on the gas bill when they do the annual statement and review as I replaced the central heating boiler in January. If the reviews were correct it is meant to be the most efficient for its output range.

Conclusion: R must enjoy being poor.

Alternative conclusion - R is just a lazy little git who doesn't deserve any sympathy!

R is a product of the California Public School system. As R was taught by teachers heavily invested in union activity, the union ethic of entitlement has fully infused into his core. R, unfortunately, is typical of his age group. One day R and the rest of his age group hopefully will wake up to the reality of life.

---