Text 3783, 157 rader
Skriven 2006-07-08 21:58:00 av Robert E Starr JR (4256.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Dennis \(Icarus\) to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * *
*
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <586c3$44b017ed$18d64cf6$20203@KNOLOGY.NET>
@REPLY: <89392$44a7de37$18d64cf6$7427@KNOLOGY.NET>
"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:19kua2lnmplp0vf8ghs1l7oqhue3p95r0c@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 19:53:13 -0500, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> <ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:uekta29spvdh78kh9qdpr9kakclku6cdtp@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 21:44:05 -0500, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
> >> <ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> ><snip>
> >> >
> >> >Jsoh, after I've excvhanged my money for the softweare, it became Bill
> >> >Gates' money, and thus he can pass it on to his heirs, give it a way,
or
> >> >burn it - that's because...its....his.....money.
> >>
> >> Sure. But it's not taxed when it's his money: it's taxed when it goes
> >> to his heirs. Gifts and wages are no different: if Gates paid a kid of
> >> his to do a job for him or gave him a gift larger than the annual
> >> deductible, the heir would have to pay income tax on the money he'd
> >> received.
> >
> >Well, its taxed when its income/profit, right?
> >So it was taxed.
>
> Not necessarily -- if it was a long-term capital gain it may not have
> been taxed. But that doesn't make a difference anyway. Money is
> typically taxed when it changes hands. If Bill gives $10,000 to his
> niece, she pays taxes on it, even though he paid taxes on it when he
> earned it.

So my purchase of the software, if purchased directly from MS, would show as
income to MS, and hence, would have been taxed. Then it becomes th
corporations money. Once Bill gets paid his salary, its then his money.

Only if its above the gift tax limit - currently $12000.
http://www.smartmoney.com/tax/homefamily/index.cfm?story=gifttax
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98968,00.html


>
> >> >> /That's/ what I'm arguing with. The money is no longer an incentive.
> >> >
> >> >It can be - makes it far easier for the person to do what they'd like.
> >>
> >> That's precisely the problem. I mean, if everybody could do whatever
> >> they like, who would take out the garbage or feed the pigs?
> >
> >Folks who figure they could make good money at it, because there are
other
> >folks who wouldn't.
>
> But you're removing the incentive to make good money. That's the
> point. When you have a billion dollars in the bank, you don't /have/
> to work. Some people do because they like to, but some don't, just as
> in the case of welfare.

And that would be their choice - since the billion bucks is theirs, they can
do what they like.

<snip>

> >>
> >> Typical Republican smear. The CA schools went to hell after
> >> Proposition 13 limited tax receipts.
> >
> >So correctly pointing out who was running CA at the time the article in
the
> >link was written is now a smear.
> >Check.
>
> It's a smear, or at least a cheap political trick, to blame a
> political figure for something for which he isn't responsible.
> California's schools have been a mess ever since Proposition 13.

http://www.dof.ca.gov/Budget/Budget2006-07/FullBudgetSummary.pdf

page 83
66.2 billion to california's schools in 2006-2007
53.3 was spent in 2001.

Here's the 2001 budget
http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/Budgt01-02/K-12-T.htm

So even with prop 13 (which I'm familiar with, having lived in CA at the
time it passed - even enrolled in school at the time)
they managed to come up with about 13 billion more dollars. between 2006 and
2007

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)

Now, who develops the budgets? Who apprioves them?
If you said "the governor and the legislature" you'd be correct.
They are responsible for spending the money.

>
> >> >> >> Why would that matter? The question I'd ask is who pays the most
in
> >> >> >> /taxes/ compared to /their actual income and capital gains./ Just
> >try
> >> >> >> to find the answer.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Because, any move to cut taxes, will affect "the rich" because
they're
> >> >the
> >> >> >ones who pay the most.
> >> >> >particularly with AMT.
> >> >>
> >> >> A tax cut can be directed anywhere. If you're going to cut taxes why
> >> >> not cut them for the middle class and poor, whose after-tax income
has
> >> >> been static while that of the rich has increased by 210%? There's no
> >> >> economic justification for this, no social justification: it's just
> >> >> that the GOP leadership favors the rich.
> >> >
> >> >An income tax cut, when there are only a couple of brackets, can't be
> >> >directed very well.
> >> >15%-x. 28%-y, etc.
> >>
> >> There used to be more, I think. Ideally, the formula would be updated
> >> to take into account the capability of computers, but given that it
> >> requires a bit of mathematical know-how and legislators are involved,
> >> I wouldn't count on it (remember the state legislature that passed a
> >> law setting the value of pi equal to 3?).
> >
> >http://www.snopes.com/religion/pi.htm
> >
> >Though the claim about the Alabama state legislature is pure nonsense, it
is
> >similar to an event that happened more than a century ago. In 1897 the
> >Indiana House of Representatives unanimously passed a measure redefining
the
> >area of a circle and the value of pi. (House Bill no. 246, introduced by
> >Rep. Taylor I. Record.) The bill died in the state Senate.
> >
> >Or do you have another reference?
>
> Just something I've read in the past . . .

Ah. well, near as I can tell, there was no such law.

Dennis


.
                               
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)