Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs - Page 223

sebastian_dangerfield · 12-02-2010, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

Pretty close to the same, except that the size of the banks relative to the economy is way bigger over there. And here the bondholders aren't explicitly guaranteed.

Crown Royal is shit and not Irish.

Whiff.

And you're clearly drinking right now. Reread.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy · 12-02-2010, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It's going to involve work, and much better record keeping, on my part. This might come as a shock, but I don't have any interest in doing hyper-detailed bookkeeping. Anything more than minimal attention is too much.

You do your own books?

I'm sorry.

You do realize you have to be a trade or business to do the 1099s - individuals don't have to file them?

sebastian_dangerfield · 12-02-2010, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

You do your own books?

I'm sorry.

You do realize you have to be a trade or business to do the 1099s - individuals don't have to file them?

So a sole proprietor is exempted? A court reporter being paid by me can hide the income while one being paid by a guy who's incorporated can't? That seems a little silly.

ETA: Am I breaking the law when I don't have my collection agency 1099 me for representing it? I pay taxes on the income, but we've never done a 1099 because it just seemed silly. I use the business's own books to know what I owe.

Adder · 12-02-2010, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Whiff.

I've always been rather hazy on what this means. But I don't think the part about banks was a whiff (more accurately it was agreement).

Quote:

And you're clearly drinking right now. Reread.

I choose to exercise my rights under which ever amendment of the constitution that says I ain't gotta anser nuttin', osifer.

I promise to drink your Jameson's next time I get an invite for dinner, though.

Adder · 12-03-2010, 10:17 AM

And somehow I suspect this isn't the only issue that would look like this:

Hank Chinaski · 12-03-2010, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

And somehow I suspect this isn't the only issue that would look like this:

do you understand the wars in Afghanistan to be "foreign aid?" I suspect some people do.

Hank Chinaski · 12-03-2010, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

I've always been rather hazy on what this means.

of course you would. it's impossible to understand what a Hurricane is when you're in it.

Adder · 12-03-2010, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

do you understand the wars in Afghanistan to be "foreign aid?"

No, but we do other things there that are foreign aid.

Quote:

I suspect some people do.

Really? You are probably right, but thinking "here, have a nice 5000 lbs bomb that we dropped from 10,000 feet" is a strange way to conceive of foreign aid.

While I'm sure you are right that there are people who think that way out there, I'm doubtful that it explains the massive disconnect.

Cletus Miller · 12-03-2010, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

And somehow I suspect this isn't the only issue that would look like this:

It's probably the reverse on Medicare and SS. That is, people think they are cheap, think we should spend a little more, but they are actually v. expensive.

Cletus Miller · 12-03-2010, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Take my money all you like, but don't dare make me do administrative work for the state. It's bad enough getting shit together for taxes. I only do that with a smile because the progressive tax system we have favors me with deductions I heartily enjoy. I can't imagine shit I'll get for 1099ing the people at Best Buy for my new laser printer/copier save further validation of my opinion we'd be better off governed by a dartboard of policy choices thrown at by a council of blindfolded drunks.

This points out the other side of the increased revenue equation that I had failed to think about--elimination of BS business deductions w/o need to audit. If you don't 1099 those ten $1500 "expenses", you can't claim them as business expenses. Also, puts the brakes on BS depreciation, as the actual equipment purchased is identified.

Adder · 12-03-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

It's probably the reverse on Medicare and SS. That is, people think they are cheap, think we should spend a little more, but they are actually v. expensive.

That's probably right, but fits with what I would predict for the general pattern: people in general have no clue what is going on.

Cletus Miller · 12-03-2010, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

That's probably right, but fits with what I would predict for the general pattern: people in general have no clue what is going on.

As TM says often, most people are idiots.

I think that a larger majority of people who respond to polls are idiots. I think an even larger majority of people who respond to polls with the methodology of this one* are idiots.

And, on top of that, 37% of the poll respondents were from the "South". And 16% of them expressed no preference among Dem/Repub/Independent.

Also, if the poll had included a quiz to see if the people understood either (a) what the "federal budget" includes or the total size of the budget or (b) what 25% or 10% of that means, I suspect that you'd have 90% failure--that they wouldn't understand either what the question actually was or what their answer actually meant. This isn't "is Obama the antichrist", it relies on a reasonable understanding of math in a nation that is majority functionally-innumerate.

*"The poll of 848 Americans was fielded from November 6 to15, 2010. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.4 percent. It was conducted using the web-enabled KnowledgePanel®, a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population. Initially, participants are chosen scientifically by a random selection of telephone numbers and residential addresses. Persons in selected households are then invited by telephone or by mail to participate in the web-enabled KnowledgePanel®. For those who agree to participate, but do not already have Internet access, Knowledge Networks provides at no cost a laptop and ISP connection. Panelists receive unique log-in information for accessing surveys online and are contacted by an email inviting them to participate in a study."

LessinSF · 12-03-2010, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder

No, but we do other things there that are foreign aid.

Really? You are probably right, but thinking "here, have a nice 5000 lbs bomb that we dropped from 10,000 feet" is a strange way to conceive of foreign aid.

[Hank]Then why do we call it "nation building?"[/Hank]

Tyrone Slothrop · 12-03-2010, 03:05 PM

Via Delong, this is an excellent point.

Quote:

Matthew Yglesias reads the latest from President Obama:

Quote:

This morning, my budget director, Jack Lew, spoke with Chairman Bowles and invited the entire Commission in to meet with him and Secretary Geithner to discuss the Commission’s proposals. Overall, my goal is to build on the steps we’ve already taken to reduce our deficit, like slowing the growth of health care costs, proposing a three-year freeze in non-security discretionary spending and a two-year pay freeze for federal civilian workers, and restoring the rule that we pay for all of our priorities.

and he comments:

Quote:

Yglesias » Mental Prisoner of the Congress: [T]his... illustrates the extent to which the former-Senator President and his senior staff... [are] mental prisoners of the legislative process. “Restoring the rule that we pay for all of our priorities” is a references to re-adopting statutory PAYGO rules in the congressional process.... [I]f the President does think it’s a good idea he can adopt the same thing unilaterally. He just needs to say “I will veto any bill that increases the deficit relative to current law.” He needs to really, really mean it. When people say “what about the AMT patch?” he could say “I’m for AMT patches, but only if they’re paid for.” When people say “what about the Bush tax cuts?” he could say “I’m for middle class tax cuts, but only if they’re paid for.” When people say “whata bout the doc fix?” he could say “I’m against cutting Medicare reimbursement rates, but only if it’s paid for.” Repeat that enough times and suddenly it becomes congress’ problem. Congress wants an AMT patch? Fine, then congress needs to pay for it. There are lots of things the President can’t do in the legislative process, but refusing to sign deficit-increasing bills is something he definitely can do.

Sigh.

Adder · 12-03-2010, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Via Delong, this is an excellent point.

Sigh.

I'm not so sure about the sigh, because I'm not so sure that Obama and his team are so solidly opposed to deficit spending right now (as they shoudn't be).

But given our wondrous political realities ("I'm mad about deficits, but keep paying for everything yer paying for and don't raise my taxes!") they need to look like deficit reduction is job 1.

Or more accurately, they think they need to look like deficit reduction is job 1 because they are too cowardly to make the case for why government spending is needed.