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.
Yeah, right. I was an S-Corp, and my taxes went up by so much I converted to W2. If you are an S-Corp, you might want to check with your tax guy, because you could be looking at a big disappointment next March.
Anyone who knows anything about the types of income and taxation knows that W2 income is the worst type of income. That's why I laughed when Democrats and Obama fooled their supporters into thinking that raising taxes on income was the answer. They obviously don't have a clue and they'll continue to pay until they wise up so they'll know when some smooth talking politicians are feeding them bull.
Anyone who knows anything about the types of income and taxation knows that W2 income is the worst type of income.
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. Arrogance does not make you look any more knowledgeable. Try another angle.
Most of the jobs in America are crap. The only way to improve them across the board is with unions.
Another way is to stop flooding the market with employees who are willing to accept less for the job. It's a matter of supply and demand, if you won't accept the job or demands, then there is always someone else who will. Yea, open those borders and watch it get even worse.
About a year before the end of President Obama's second term was up, he attempted to raise the minimum dollar level at which one was eligible for overtime pay to $47,000 a year. This was struck down with the weakest of excuses by a Republican judge in December of 2016. The judge said that he struck it down so that the new President wouldn't have to do it.
Free overtime is a form of corporate welfare and the only way to police how much of your free time your boss is allowed to take from you is to make them pay you for it at time and a half. The current level of $23,660 is absurdly low. Congress may change hands next year. The time to start building a fire under their feet is now.
Anytime some idiot tries to make the argument that there's no difference between the two parties, this is the only thing that needs to be brought up. Obama and Democrats fought for this, and had it on the books to go into effect. Trump and Republicans fought against it, succeeded in getting it delayed, and I don't know what the timeline is for this overdue update.
The Republican party has been droning on about the benefits of trickle down economics since the eighties.
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.
Yeah, right. I was an S-Corp, and my taxes went up by so much I converted to W2. If you are an S-Corp, you might want to check with your tax guy, because you could be looking at a big disappointment next March.
S-corps are flow through. Profits are distributed to the shareholders (for small business it's usually the owner), who is then taxed on profits at their personal income tax. It is income-splitting potential for owner/employees where you can take a smaller salary (W2 income) and pay payroll taxes on up to $118,000, then take the remainder of profit as a distribution subject to income tax only. Because flow-through taxes will be paid at the personal rate, high-income shareholders will pay more taxes on their distributions.
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.
That is exactly what quantitative easing does. Gives bags full of money to the markets and hope a little trickles down. Granted, that was backed in a very bipartisan manner.
S-corps are flow through. Profits are distributed to the shareholders (for small business it's usually the owner), who is then taxed on profits at their personal income tax. It is income-splitting potential for owner/employees where you can take a smaller salary (W2 income) and pay payroll taxes on up to $118,000, then take the remainder of profit as a distribution subject to income tax only. Because flow-through taxes will be paid at the personal rate, high-income shareholders will pay more taxes on their distributions.
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.
I was paid an extra two hours Saturday because I was called to come in to work without at least 12 hours notice.
12 worked+6 OT+2 call in.
That's the same policy where I worked.
2 hours call in, except, it's automatic OT for (any) unscheduled work hours.
No Union there either. I have complaints about that place but pay was never one of them.
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.
