Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, saying things like "Anyone who knows anything......" which is continued by an explanation of something everyone already knows. It comes across as arrogant. No big deal though.
A lot of people don't understand that W2 income (working Americans) is always the income that is hit the hardest when taxes are increased. Call it arrogance if you like but people who support liberal policies because they think they are getting the rich are not only wrong, they are getting hurt by the very policies they support. Worse, they insist on letting the liberal media "educate" them and as we both know, they are being lied to.
I have been full time, self employed (S-Corp), and now W2 Contractor (hourly), and the W2 Contract works the best under the current situation
How about more detail of the situation and why it is better for you to work as a W2 contractor instead of a self employed (S-Corp). Not that these circumstances don't exist. I'd just like more information.
In my first salaried job, we got paid OT but only under some ridiculous rules. You had to put in at least 12 hours in one week AND each day you worked OT you had to clock at least 3 hours AND you had to have worked OT at least 4 days in that week.
Meaning... if my boss came up to me on Wednesday and said "I need you to stay late today" - there was zero chance I'd get overtime. Not enough days left in the week. Or what happened ever more often was I'd work unpaid OT Monday Tuesday and Wednesday - get my 3+ hours/day in to qualify for OT and then on Thursday and Friday, even though work had to be done, he'd tap someone else for OT and send me home. Effectively negating the 9+ hours I had already worked.
It was systemic.
However, after I left that job, I've only worked in places where I'm salaried and get paid my hourly rate for OT (rate = yearly salary/2080). It is straight time, not 1.5x time. I'll take it. Every hour I work, I get paid. And depending on the situation, I can take either the pay or I can take the time back. It really seems like common sense.
What boggles my mind is how I know a lot of people on that unpaid OT treadmill and they just take it is a fact of life. Sure, they might make 100k/year but they aren't being paid $50/hr. With all the OT they are working, they work an extra 600 hours a year and effectively are paid $38.50/hr.
That was terrible what happened to you with regard to being shafted on OT hours! So many companies get away with doing that and also refusing to give comp time.
It is so true about the "OT treadmill" too! That is why one of the most important questions you need to ask when being interviewed is what the hours will be because if you're thinking about switching jobs because you're getting a 50% pay raise, it isn't a pay raise if you're expected to work 50% longer w/o OT or comp time! So many job hunters think just about the pay when considering a new job when other benefits like flex time, comp time, OT eligibility, more vacation time and telecommuting are worth so much more. Time is truly money!
After I left my old job and got a better job (paid straight OT or comp time) with a higher salary, a friend of mine wanted to ditch the same company and get a better job as well. He told his salary and it was pretty good, but he also said that 45 hours was a "standard week." Ok, so take your (assuming) 100k and now divide it by 2340 hours/year. Which means he wasn't getting 50/hr he was getting more like 42/hr. But it gets worse. His PTO was tracked in hours, not days. And if you took a day off... it was a 9 hour day, not an 8 hour day. Yet, he only got 80 hours to start with. And holidays... same weird deal. Everyone got the equivalent of "minus 1" holiday. You'd pick 10 of the 11 holidays to get off and the other you had to work.
Just seemed like nonsense. He still works there - I guess he likes it enough. Good for him. I did enough 50-60 hour weeks in my first job to know that if I'm going to work those hours, I either get paid for them or I stand to benefit directly (I get the profit).
A lot of people don't understand that W2 income (working Americans) is always the income that is hit the hardest when taxes are increased. Call it arrogance if you like but people who support liberal policies because they think they are getting the rich are not only wrong, they are getting hurt by the very policies they support. Worse, they insist on letting the liberal media "educate" them and as we both know, they are being lied to.
I have never heard "liberal media" claim W2 is the best deal. It just happens to be the only realistic deal for most Americans. I don't know what your agenda here is. It sounds like you argue that the instruction to work and earn your living is some kind of liberal conspiracy, and that if you believe it then you are a media controlled idiot. Go figure.
How about more detail of the situation and why it is better for you to work as a W2 contractor instead of a self employed (S-Corp). Not that these circumstances don't exist. I'd just like more information.
I compared dollars to dollars in my personal situation, and determined I will end up with more in my pocket if I ditched the S-Corp and converted to hourly W2 Contractor. I am not saying it is so in every case, but it was in my case. Additionally, my tax guy said he has been to 5 seminars about the new tax law and no one knows for sure what the new definition for "fair compensation" (the W2 portion) will be for 1099 contractors in service sector, but he said it will likely be enforced at 70%. He shook his head because his own profession is considered a service sector and he was an S-Corp himself. If that is true, it would have hiked my payroll taxes by a very large amount.
Not a single Republican or economist has ever advocated a system called "trickle down economics." It was always a Democrat/progressive pejorative term that was slapped on supply side economics and lower tax rates to shift the balance of money to the individual and away from government.
One of the most enduring lies ever is that Republicans and/or any economist ever even used the term "trickle down." It doesn't even make sense to say that the best way to help poor people is to give bags of money to rich people and hope the money trickles down to them. And supply side economics doesn't make that claim. All it claims is that the government taking and meddling less is the best method to have capital flowing more freely, and the free flow of capital is a generally good thing for the whole economy.
No reason to argue the rest of the post because it keeps repeating the same tired lie.
The word "give" is wrong. The word "keep" is more appropriate.
The poor want more money "given" to them, the working class and the rich want to "keep" more of the money they make.
You have a point with the poor but the failure of Congress and the Presidents to update the Fair Labor Standards Act neglected to compensate the middle class for going above and beyond the traditional forty hour week. The current system of designating someone salaried is one of the biggest scams to ever victimize the middle class. Based on the last five recessions it also appears that the Republican party has teamed up with big business to make the recession a salary control tool. In fact it appears that another recession is coming late in Trumps first term: https://www.guggenheiminvestments.co...next-recession
So batten down the hatches boys. Another Republican recession is coming, the treasury yield curve is almost flat. When that curve goes inverted, the people that you've voted for are thanking you.
I compared dollars to dollars in my personal situation, and determined I will end up with more in my pocket if I ditched the S-Corp and converted to hourly W2 Contractor. I am not saying it is so in every case, but it was in my case. Additionally, my tax guy said he has been to 5 seminars about the new tax law and no one knows for sure what the new definition for "fair compensation" (the W2 portion) will be for 1099 contractors in service sector, but he said it will likely be enforced at 70%. He shook his head because his own profession is considered a service sector and he was an S-Corp himself. If that is true, it would have hiked my payroll taxes by a very large amount.
Thanks for the information on changes to s-corp benefits. Regretfully just as corporations are trying to create fewer full time employees dependent on them, Congress came along and robbed you of what was previously a cushy way of doing business independently.
I have never heard "liberal media" claim W2 is the best deal. It just happens to be the only realistic deal for most Americans. I don't know what your agenda here is. It sounds like you argue that the instruction to work and earn your living is some kind of liberal conspiracy, and that if you believe it then you are a media controlled idiot. Go figure.
Comcast
Disney
GE
Murdoch
That's the liberal media.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
