• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

poppy

Banned
Sep 10, 2008
2,854
928
Miramar Beach
Manufacturing for 2 international co. Last year 1 threatened to go to China unless he lowered his prices.

10 years ago another friend moved his company to China due to EPA regulations , employee problems & costs + taxes

EPA regulations? Here are examples of life with no EPA also known as the Conservative model for the USA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DtOhe2LfQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_d-Ky7Se-v8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMhV5GWzWpk

Employee problems? What were the problems, employees demanding fair wages and treatment? Here is an example of the Conservative idea of perfect employees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxmD2xPBJ2w

Taxes? What was his effective rate? Remember, many corporations pay zero taxes. Talk about deadbeats living off the government teat.

Steve Piechota of Netronix Integration in San Jose, Calif., leads the list of complainers. He explains that his business has grown from 3 employees to 50 over the past five years and that the “growth has kept our income low, as we’ve invested back into the company in the form of additional jobs and equipment.” But thanks to tax hikes, he fears that the growth has come to an end. “Bottom line,” he warns, “raising our taxes means we’ll quit growing, lay off people and stay under the $250k level for income.” His concern is reminiscent of a (since-corrected) September 2011 USA Today piece warning people that the extra money that comes with a raise “is nice, but it could very well bump you into the next tax bracket, possibly leaving you with less money than you had before the raise.”


The good news for Piechota, in case he’s listening, is that this isn’t how tax brackets work. One can only hope Piechota will consult with an accountant or other professional before laying off workers and deliberately reducing his income. The way U.S. income tax brackets work is that taxes are levied on marginal income. In other words, the rate applied to income earned over the $250,000 threshold is irrelevant to the first $250,000 worth of taxable income. If you have $250,010 of taxable earnings then only that last $10 is taxed at the higher rate. In all cases, higher pre-tax earnings lead to higher after-tax income.


Similarly, a curiously large number of the small business owners surveyed by House Republicans don’t seem to understand the difference between profits and revenues. The issue here is that some (but not all) small firms are organized as what are called “pass-through entities” for tax purposes. The exception is what’s known as a C Corporation, typically a larger firm. A C corporation files a tax return as a freestanding entity and pays corporate income tax on its profits. If after-tax profits are distributed to shareholders as dividends or share buybacks, then the individuals who profit are taxed on their earnings according to the tax schedule for dividends or capital gains. A pass-through entity, by contrast, pays no taxes. Instead its profits are distributed to its owners (typically a small group of people) and they pay income—but not payroll—taxes on the proceeds.


So when Steve Woodall of Reliant Business Products says his “guess is that we would have to start looking for ways to outsource some of our jobs in order to keep the company solvent,” he’s missing the point. If his company isn’t profitable, he’ll have no income to pay taxes on at all. Dave Parry of MPS Techline of Pennsylvania says his company’s revenues go to “paying the 23 employees, buying the necessary raw materials, paying all of the overhead bills, and investing in new equipment.” Here, again, he’s missing the point that there’s no federal income tax levied on income that’s used to pay business expenses. Money that Parry spends on employee salaries, for example, isn’t his income—it’s his employees’ income—and they’ll pay taxes on it. Absolutely nothing about a tax increase would turn a previously profitable investment, new hire, or expansion into an unprofitable one.


That’s not to say there’s no potentially valid concern about the impact of personal income taxes on small businesses. The key issue is that any business owner needs to decide how much of his or her own personal time and effort to put into the business. Do you stay late burning the midnight oil or close up early to make sure to be able to have dinner with your kids?


Workers of all kinds face these kind of tradeoffs. But one major advantage of small-business ownership is that you get an unusually large amount of latitude in determining your own schedule. And here taxes are clearly relevant. Insofar as putting in more hours will earn you extra profits, how much of those extra profits you have to keep and how much goes to the government may weigh on your mind. The value to the country of being able to afford Social Security, Medicare, the military, and transportation infrastructure needs to be set against the value of harder work on the part of high-income individuals with flexible schedules.
 
Last edited:

ottomatik

Beach Fanatic
Jun 12, 2007
294
636
Seagrove
Employee problems= Failed drug tests, tardiness, not showing up for work, generally lousy work ethic.

EPA = Other Company had a paint booth (which the previous co. had been using up until he purchased building). EPA came in told paint booth was not up to new regulations. Could not afford new booth. So he shut booth down and started buying spray paint @ local hardware store. No laws or regulations on that or against spray cans of paint
Needless to say the powers that be, started making life miserable. So he moved operation to China.

BTW
What do you call 8 members of congress arrested and led away in handcuffs?
http://politix.topix.com/homepage/8344-8-democratic-congressmen-arrested-today

A GOOD START
 
Last edited:

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
the problem....take it to china, demonize our fellow citizens for wanting a decent living wage,benefits and clean air to breathe,water to drink. we have to find solutions to help/incentivize business owners to be profitable here, and penalize offshoring of manufacturing and stashing of revenue by corporations. We could start with Apple as the posterchild of bad behavior.
 

poppy

Banned
Sep 10, 2008
2,854
928
Miramar Beach
Otto you're right, it is a good start. Now we need to see some Congress people from the Republican side come out and take a stand for those who have no voice or the funds hire lobbyists and donate to politicians.
 

Kurt

Admin
Oct 15, 2004
2,415
5,087
SoWal
mooncreek.com
You would communicate a lot more effectively if you would put some of your own words with your links if you in fact have anything to say. For one, the link is broken. Even if it it weren't, rather than make me, the reader, read between the lines, you really ought to at least comment on the salient points of the article, the conclusions you draw, and perhaps your policy recommendations. My interpretation of the article may be much different than yours possibly prompting me to say "so what?" Do you see what I'm saying? In any event, I have no idea what point you are trying to make because your link is broken. I couldn't share your giddiness in the highly unlikely chance that I agree with you or give a damn until you fix it.

Yes this is more or less required when posting. Please don't post links without commenting, or at least describing or summarizing what's on the other side.
 

beachsinger

Beach Comber
Mar 5, 2012
36
1
Seagrove Beach
I really do believe that while the House did not approve the funding for ACA, they did approve funding for other government activities. The Senate then chose to not authorize the budget on an all or nothing premise - 'if you don't give me everything I want, I won't play at all'. I think it is VERY fuzzy logic to lay the blame for everything on the House's shoulders. There has been a lack of willingness from all areas to bend, compromise, discuss, which will happen when one imposes strong-arm tactics instead of finesse. It could have happened differently. It SHOULD have. Unfortunately, the parties are so completely polarized at this point, I don't know how they will start acting like adults and come to a conclusion that all can live with.

If there is this much concern over the ACA (I really deplore the term Obamacare - it humanizes the legislation, which I think is dangerous on all levels), shouldn't it be the responsibility of government to hash it out until all parties are satisfied? Yes, a lot of people want the ACA, but a lot of people also have issues with it - how it is being funded, how it will work, how it will affect the working class.
 

Leader of the Banned

Beach Fanatic
Apr 23, 2013
4,094
6,092
I don't know what you mean. The House passed the Senate bill with a 219–212 vote on March 21, 2010. The Supreme court upheld the law and the GOP is still treating it as a bill which is absurd. More absurd is that the GOP is trying to use this law as a bargaining chip by shutting down the government, when the shutdown will not affect funding for the ACA in any way. I wouldn't expect Republicans to actually think things through, so this does not surprise me in the least. Their little charade will soon end, they will insist that everything went their way, and that a Cruz/Palin ticket will emerge victorious in the 2016 presidential election.
 

Bob

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2004
10,366
1,391
O'Wal
I really do believe that while the House did not approve the funding for ACA, they did approve funding for other government activities. The Senate then chose to not authorize the budget on an all or nothing premise - 'if you don't give me everything I want, I won't play at all'. I think it is VERY fuzzy logic to lay the blame for everything on the House's shoulders. There has been a lack of willingness from all areas to bend, compromise, discuss, which will happen when one imposes strong-arm tactics instead of finesse. It could have happened differently. It SHOULD have. Unfortunately, the parties are so completely polarized at this point, I don't know how they will start acting like adults and come to a conclusion that all can live with.

If there is this much concern over the ACA (I really deplore the term Obamacare - it humanizes the legislation, which I think is dangerous on all levels), shouldn't it be the responsibility of government to hash it out until all parties are satisfied? Yes, a lot of people want the ACA, but a lot of people also have issues with it - how it is being funded, how it will work, how it will affect the working class.
ACA is the law, you cannot defund it.
 

Leader of the Banned

Beach Fanatic
Apr 23, 2013
4,094
6,092
The law could be repealed, but it won't happen as long as we have a democratically controlled Senate and a Democratic President. Goodness knows the House has tried. Perhaps 43rd time is a charm???? The way things are going I'll predict that the GOP will lose control of the House in 2014. Anyone who wants to see the ACA repealed, good luck with that. Even if the GOP got control of House, Senate, and Presidency, it's not going to be easy to simply end it on a dime, seeing as programs would be entrenched in our infrastructure. It would have to be dismantled over time, much like the other GOP pipe dreams such as repeal of Medicare and Social Security.
 

Zebraspots

Beach Fanatic
May 15, 2008
840
247
Santa Rosa Beach
Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother and a foreign father. He is still a Canadian citizen.

Birthers past antics have basically ensured he cannot run for President.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter