The Employee Meeting

[southsider]

Originally Posted by aimeebee Really??!! LOL, but that is ludicrous. People in poverty get most of the services that our taxes pay for...welfare, medicaid, food stamps, unemployment....I'd even say there is more criminal activity, more incarceration, more police services and more emergency services used by those in poverty.

Now who is the one being ludicrous? The poor get the most?

The only ones that get back more than they put in are the wealthy.

Roads - Somebody that owns a business is going to be the one that gets the most out of this. How are their goods or services going to be sold otherwise.

Police - the more you own the more you benefit. I worked at a convenience store while going to school. I got to know some of the cops. Businesses get higher priority on a call. Plus the cops will drive by checks for businesses which they do not do for individual homes

Firemen - see police

Census - Where do you think businesses get marketing data?

Military - Oh! go on about the one where we are all protected. If we were all equally protected our military would all be stationed at home. Do note that even when there isn't a war going on that our military is stationed all over the world, Spain, Japan and Germany just to name a few. Now why is that? Could it be to protect business interests outside the US? Also remember that the people that are going to being taking advantage of foreign travel are going to be the wealthy. What do you think is the biggest thing on the budget? Please do not even bring up that bogus right wing pie chart. Social Security and Medicare are not included in the budget because it has it's own tax that is kept separate.

Diplomats - Who lays the groundwork for treaties so our businesses can go in?


Social Service programs a such a tiny slice of the budget that it makes what you are saying laughable. Don't forget to add on that our military does not even get paid enough that they qualify for social programs.

[southsider]

Originally Posted by Dengineer JWho says--you or Karl Marx? Oh, I just found out--Wikipedia said it. My years working for a CPA and my accounting degree. Instead of yakking about Karl Marx maybe you should start looking into Adam Smith. Hmmm...our PERSONAL tax return was 61 pages and we have one business. I don't even know how many pages our business return was because it's packed up but it was AT LEAST that big. But I'm just glad it wasn't 78 pages because then I might feel guilty for us being so rich and all. Now let's see if I recall correctly! You had a business and your husband had a business. And wasn't there a third one too? If you have a 61 page tax return with one business you would have to have a whole lot of investment activity. How in the HE---CK would you even know? This whole post that I am quoting was written by somebody who has no idea what they're talking about. Like I said my years working for a CPA firm and my accounting degree. If that isn't enough for you - I have had numerous family members that have actually owned a small business. I also worked for a company that rebuilt auto parts and twenty years ago a single store was getting millions of dollars worth of products for only a three types of products. (Don't forget I worked in accounting so I saw those figures) Now if you add in all the other items they got from other manufactures you are going to have gross intake at one store in the hundreds of thousands if not the millions for the year. By the way the owner and the owner's son always described their business as a medium size business that did large business volume. They had in the area of 200 people working for them. I love it when you say that--it makes me laugh every time!!

What would have been laughable was that article. It would have been except there are some people who will fall for that kind a propaganda. Come on you know that you don't even have any kind of excuse to support that article! Are you just trying to have fun? Anybody with a small business knows that what was written was somebody that obviously had no idea what a small business was.

[Colinsgrandma]

Originally Posted by southsider Just a few comments. 1/2 million is not a small business 12 stores is not a small business 187 employees is not a small business If an individual has a 78 page tax return than that individual has several businesses and not just one - that individual has investments - a small business owner would actually have a small tax return in the area of 10 to 25 pages A business is not small if it is a pass through entity - that just means that it is not a C-Corp. Although this is not a small business it is also not a big business. There is an in between - it is called a mid-size business. Sub-Chapter S - this means that in likelihood there is more than one owner - otherwise this would be a single proprietorship less than $50,000 net for 1 tire and automotive store - who is he kidding I used to work for a company that rebuilt auto parts - you are talking net in the millions for one store - and I am using figures from 20 years ago - so add inflation The owner opened 12 stores in 23 years - this does not happen - 12 store would be a multi-generational business - you would have a business with a single store for at least two generations if not 3 or 4 - The first generation would probably only open an additional 3 or 4 stores This is written by somebody that has no idea of what they are talking about. Taxing the wealthy is not wealth redistribution. People who are wealthy are actually getting more of the services that our taxes pay for. Income taxes are actually trying to tax on wealth. You have a graduated tax rate because the higher the income the easier it is to accumulate wealth. Somebody that has $30,000 a year is not going be able to put aside as much as somebody that makes $150,000. That is why people with higher incomes are taxed a higher rate.

Someone who makes $30,000 would pay $3,000 at 10% the person making $150,000 would pay $15,000. Why is it fair to raise the percentage of tax on a higher income person? After standard deductions the lower income person would be paying less % on total income than the higher income person if everyone paid a flat rate tax. Also if we are going to have a fair universal health care plan why will that plan cost some nothing and others more? What is fair about that?

[southsider]

Originally Posted by Colinsgrandma Someone who makes $30,000 would pay $3,000 at 10% the person making $150,000 would pay $15,000. Why is it fair to raise the percentage of tax on a higher income person? After standard deductions the lower income person would be paying less % on total income than the higher income person if everyone paid a flat rate tax. Also if we are going to have a fair universal health care plan why will that plan cost some nothing and others more? What is fair about that?

It makes it confusing because it is called an income tax. When you have step rates you are in reality not taxing income but the ability to increase wealth.That is why a flat tax is not fair. It is actually considered a regressive tax such as the sales tax.

Let's go back to when an income tax was first started for the US. The income tax was not intended for everybody. It actually only affected the upper-middle class and the wealthy. It did not affect the average person. Over the years the wealthy have been paying less and less of the tax burden and the middle class has been having their portion of the tax burden increased. What is really sick is that the poor are even paying an income tax.

Now let's go back to taxing ability to increase wealth and why this is a fairer tax than a flat tax. Remember the poor and most of the middle class were originally not paying an income tax. The reason was because they were thought to not have the ability to significantly increase their wealth. You brought up the tax deduction but not enough is taken off and you still would not be taxing according the ability to gain wealth.

The reason you go by the ability to gain wealth is because you have to first calculate what a person needs to survive. Do you think it is fair to tax a person who is not making enough to get by at the same rate as the person who has enough to invest most of their money and make even more? Let's assume we have 6 families of 4 (2 adults and 2 children). Let's also assume that the minimum a family of 4 would need for the basic necessities (food, shelter, replacement clothing, medical and a small fund to cover expenses that will be needed within the year) without going into debt is $40,000. Family A makes $30,000 and is loosing $10,000 each year because they actually would need $40,000. Family B makes $40,000 and breaks even. Family C makes $60,000 and has $20,000 disposable income that they can invest and increase their wealth. Family D has $80,000 and has $40,000 disposable income. Family E has $100,000 income and has $60,000 in disposable income. Family F has $150,000 income and has $110,000 in disposable income.

Now look at what each family has in disposable income. Then you have to consider that the higher the amount that you have to invest the better chance you have on being able to take some investment risk and get a better rate of return. The family with $20,000 is probably going to be investing in a home and may have some money put aside and invested in a CD or bank account. The family with $40,000 will have a home, savings and maybe some stocks. The family with $60,000 in disposable income may have their own business and/or own rental property. The family with $110,00 in disposable income probably has a well rounded portfolio and a couple of businesses or more than one rental property.

Now when you look at the the additional opportunities that reasonably become available you also have to realize that it is easier to diversify and lesson the risk that you are taking on investments. When you have more to invest you also have the ability to make investments that have higher returns. This is the main reason why somebody with a significantly higher income should be paying a higher rate.

[southsider]

I just wanted to add a link for Citizens for Tax Justice. They give explanations for why certain taxes would be fair or unfair and why.

This is their home page

CTJ - Citizens For Tax Justice

This is a link for suggested principles for tax reform.

http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/...ciples_for.php

Here is a link about a national sales tax

http://www.ctj.org/html/nytsales.html


Here is a link for regressive taxes The national sales tax and a flat tax are included

CTJ, Citizens For Tax Justice

Here is an article on a flat tax

http://www.ctj.org/html/flatwrng.html

[Colinsgrandma]

People who make better life choices end up with more money....it's that simple.My husband routinely worked 80 hour weeks and our income reflected his dedication and work ethic. We also never bought what we could not afford and always put away at least 30% of our income. We are well off but no one has ever given us one cent that we didn't earn. We drive cars that are 15 and 9 years old and my kitchen has not been remodeled in 35 years. We don't now and never have measured our worth by what we owned. People who are not willing to sacrifice to get what they want should not expect people that do to pay their way. We were married when I was 19 and he was 23. We both worked and he went to school. We lived in a two room apartment for five years. I still remember those days as among the happiest of my life.

[MaryMary]

Originally Posted by southsider Just a few comments. 1/2 million is not a small business 12 stores is not a small business 187 employees is not a small business If an individual has a 78 page tax return than that individual has several businesses and not just one - that individual has investments - a small business owner would actually have a small tax return in the area of 10 to 25 pages A business is not small if it is a pass through entity - that just means that it is not a C-Corp.

c-corp may have up to 2.5M in sales, no matter how many locations.
Amount of paperwork in tax return is not proportional to income, they may have complicated family situation along with trading/investments which currently produce not much money.

Sub-Chapter S - this means that in likelihood there is more than one owner - otherwise this would be a single proprietorship

Not at all. Corporation filed solely for protecton and tax purposes. Only the sales amount can dictate what type, C or S, should be done.

The owner opened 12 stores in 23 years - this does not happen - 12 store would be a multi-generational business - you would have a business with a single store for at least two generations if not 3 or 4 - The first generation would probably only open an additional 3 or 4 stores This is written by somebody that has no idea of what they are talking about.

Like we do not have such businesses as Ebay and Dell, rising from owners garage to multibillion corporations in less then 20 years..
Your impression about business growth is from mid 50's of the last century.

Taxing the wealthy is not wealth redistribution. People who are wealthy are actually getting more of the services that our taxes pay for. Income taxes are actually trying to tax on wealth. You have a graduated tax rate because the higher the income the easier it is to accumulate wealth. Somebody that has $30,000 a year is not going be able to put aside as much as somebody that makes $150,000. That is why people with higher incomes are taxed a higher rate.

Yes it is wealth redistribution.
Making good incomes is actually not about putting as much as possible money aside, but spending it. When someone goes out and buys goods and services this what makes our economy spin.
someone who makes 30K sure is not able to set aside as much as someone with 150K income, but they have much less expences for their lifestyles, at least suppose to. People with higher incomes pay higher taxes because the government decides they can afford to pay more.

In OP's case the owner makes $1/2M from 12 locations and about to be taxed higher rate. Closing 2-3 locations may drop him to a lower bracket, eventually leaving him with the same net (after taxes) as with 12 branches. It may mean less worries, less expences and less paperwork to that owner, but a couple dozen of people will lose their income.

[southsider]

Originally Posted by Colinsgrandma People who make better life choices end up with more money....it's that simple.My husband routinely worked 80 hour weeks and our income reflected his dedication and work ethic. We also never bought what we could not afford and always put away at least 30% of our income. We are well off but no one has ever given us one cent that we didn't earn. We drive cars that are 15 and 9 years old and my kitchen has not been remodeled in 35 years. We don't now and never have measured our worth by what we owned. People who are not willing to sacrifice to get what they want should not expect people that do to pay their way. We were married when I was 19 and he was 23. We both worked and he went to school. We lived in a two room apartment for five years. I still remember those days as among the happiest of my life.

Please note that I did not say gaining wealth but the ability to gain wealth. Somebody with $20,000 disposable income can save it or spend it or proportionally do both. It still starts with having disposable income. If you do not have income left over after paying essentials you can not save.

How long did your husband put in 80 hour weeks? There is a reason we have laws that require time and a half after forty hours. I have done stretches working a full time job and a part time job with about 60 hours a week. Maybe it is different if you have somebody at home but it does not help in the long run. I was single and living alone and most of the extra money went to short cuts because I didn't have the time. I would have to break off because I was loosing track of friends and I was also starting to burn out. I have also worked full time and gone to school full time at the same time.

You have to remember your health. You can not keep up 60 or 80 hour work weeks without it taking its toll on your health. I heard about this guy that works with computers that was putting a lot of time in for Y-2K bug and ended up in the hospital from exhaustion because he did not know enough to realize that you have to back off before you burn out.

[Colinsgrandma]

The choices you make are the deciding factor if you have disposable income. My husband worked long hours for years but was able to retire in his 50's because he made the sacrifice when he was younger. I have couponed since the 80's and have always looked for sales. I don't have much sympathy for people who aren't willing to work toward goals and expect other people to always bail them out of their bad choices.

[southsider]

Originally Posted by Colinsgrandma The choices you make are the deciding factor if you have disposable income. My husband worked long hours for years but was able to retire in his 50's because he made the sacrifice when he was younger. I have couponed since the 80's and have always looked for sales. I don't have much sympathy for people who aren't willing to work toward goals and expect other people to always bail them out of their bad choices.

The problems come about when all you have are bad choices and you can pick the lessor of evils. I agree with you about not having sympathy for people who have disposable incomes and still do not save any money. But there are plenty of people that are in a bad situation because of circumstances beyond their control. You have to remember that there some people who work long hours and still do not have disposable income because of the job market or the lack of skills. If you have to work extra hours to get by it is very hard to gain additional skills to increase you earning potential because decreasing your work time will put you in a whole.