I get how he does it. What I don't get is how raising the regular income rate and not the capital gains rate will cause someone making the majority of their income as capital gains pay more.

In some ways perhaps, but if you bought a $10,000 house in 1960 and basically only maintained it rather than improved it and you sell it today for $300,000 you have not made $290,000 in income/profit in my mind.

Sure, if you could buy the 1960's $10,000 house on the lot next to yours for $10,000 on the day you just sold your house for $300,000 ok, but if that house next door is going to cost you $300,000 then you haven't made a thing. You put one house's worth of money into the house when you bought it in 1960 and you get one house's worth of money out of it when you sell it today.

To treat that as regular income would be a rip off of major proportions.\\all the best,

drew

I think his point is that the "gross revenue" of their business is treated as their personal income. Is this really the case and if it is, why do they not incorporate to avoid this "trap"?

all the best,

drew

I see this explanation made often.

Why do they structure their business like this instead of incorporating? Why is this point made without laying out the facts/evidence to back up the point. I have paying some attention for a good while now and have not seen this.

all the best,

drew

Isn't his "official" rate already higher? And yet he is described as actually paying less. If you raise his "official" rate but he ends up paying the same amount as now and so still pays less, how does that help?

I still think neither side of this debate puts all of the cards on the table when explaining their position.

all the best,

drew

"The OED is a descriptivist dictionary, as opposed to a prescriptivist dictionary. That means that the OED includes words that are actually being used, rather than prescribing which words should and should not be used. This means including words that many people object to, but too bad, there are a large number of people who use the word regardless of any official position about the word."

The problem is, we *want* to use slang when we use some of those words. If you go and make it an official word, we just have to start the laborious process of finding and spreading a new slang word all over again... ~;-)

all the best,

drew

"by all ethical and civic standards, its position is unsound"

Well, there is always:

"No taxation without representation"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation

So, I don't know about Amazon's position, but there exists an ethical reason for not collecting taxes from those who cannot vote.

Oh but it does hold water, even if for some it is only the "Fool me once..." principle.

Your post made me think you might be interested in these two links:

Some thoughts on a "Copyright Offensive"
http://zotzbro.blogspot.com/2007/04/some-thoughts-on-copyright-offensive.html

Packet In's Income Thoughts, plans, possibilities, etc.
http://packet-in.org/wiki/index.php?title=Income

all the best,

drew

"Okay, so my mom uses a program to help her with her quilting. Who in the hell is going to write that for her if no one is paid to do it?"

You. You love your mom, right? ~;-)

Failing that, she and her quilting friends can pay a programmer and have it written as Free Software.

It is possible.

all the best,

drew

Perhaps Palin will switch to be a Democrat and Republicans will "Crowdsource To Vote Palin In Democratic Primaries" ???

Gotta be careful starting these kind of games...

Indeed.

Or:

reallysucks.com

reallytrulysucks.com

reallytrulysucksbigtime.com

superreallytrulysucksbigtime.com

and so on....

Lots of buying to do there... I don't see how such defensive strategies can work... Am I missing something?

Imagine if your paper ballot came pre-ticked and you had to erase the default if you did not like it.

While I agree that people should read, how many will cast a mistaken vote because of this? We do not know. Do we really think it will be zero?

all the best,

drew

"Actually if one reads the link you will see that Slashdot is at it again.
They are touch screen systems. If you keep your finger on them to long you end up with double picking.
This is a coding error. They just need to change the select from touch begin to touch end and maybe add a next button to take you to the next screen."

Perhaps, but it is a coding error in a production system of some importance right? Should this have not been dealt with before going live? To me, this sort of error would invalidate an election. Not a good thing.

all the best,

drew

Try one of cc's Free licenses and I would love to. If you need to use NC though I will pass on that.

all the best,

drew
http://freemusicpush.blogspot.com/

I got what you meant, but I still think there needs to be an exception for claims on works put under a Free License. Anyone may claim a copyright in a photograph that does not rise to the level to get a copyright. Do you want this law to apply to claiming a copyright on a photograph which you put under a Free license but which is not worthy of a copyright?

(Is what I am saying clear yet?)

all the best,

drew