G
goout
Guest
As a small business owner, government paperwork and wage rules directly and negatively influence my ability to hire others.
Any other questions?
Any other questions?
- Status
L
Lifeisbeautiful3
Guest
Should wage take into account the amount an individual produces for their business? If someone can lift more boxes, or use raw intelligence to process more information, or looks/personality to get more sales -
Is it okay for a stronger person to make more money? How about a higher IQ person? Someone with a better personality?
Is it okay for a stronger person to make more money? How about a higher IQ person? Someone with a better personality?
T
tafan2
Guest
While I too think those benefits are too much, I think this line betrays (along with several others on this thread) an attitude of an opposite extreme.
D
Dracarys
Guest
Yes during the day I use my phone so my highlighting and pasting are not as exact as on my PC.
How is it a nonsense answer ? Your high personal income tax is 55%. Do you deny that? My point is that with all the entitlements you get from your socialist state you can not afford to increase your NATO contribution. All your money is locked up in giving goodies to you citizens. I remain amazed that you had your entire college education paid on your behalf and you don’t even recognize you live in a socialist welfare state. As I said above let’s see what would happen to your entitlements if the US withdrew all it’s military aid and you had to be on your own.
Really? So your college education was paid for by money that just materialized out of thin air right? Wealthier Danes did not foot your bill? Do you have any idea what the expression there us no such thing as a free lunch means? Wealthy people are paying your way. That most certainly IS how taxation works.
That is not what my research said, but the bottom line is that Danes who have the ambition to achieve success have to pay more than half their income to give people like you a free ride. As I said above go thank a rich guy.
Do you mean $15 to $18 an hour minimum wage? You said “per months”. Your not being clear. As I have said above some business models depend on cheap unskilled labor. These are usually teenagers and young adults. They don’t provide the utility to justify twice the minimum wage. Why is it you want to interfear with the free market? I keep saying it’s the employees responsibility to provide the skills, knowledge, or talent to justify their wage. Employers run a business not a charity.
Last edited:
S
Socrates92
Guest
Dracarys:
There’s nothing inherently wrong with receiving a large portion of one’s compensation in the form of benefits. Wages are not necessarily superior to increased benefits, for some people. Just be aware that increasing one form of compensation will directly cut into other forms of compensation (Even if it’s a hidden cut in the form of foregone wage growth). The only thing I take issue with is the interference by government in the chosen compensation structure of employee-employer relations. The overall net effect is negative, even if there are a few winners.
T
tafan2
Guest
Fair enough, My main issue was the sentence “They give you wages”, just wanted it to be clear that I was not arguing the rest of his post. The idea that employers are just “giving you” your pay is absurd. Earlier someone said that employees are just “taking your money” and begging for a handout (I believe that post was removed). The attitude on this thread continues to amaze me.
D
Dracarys
Guest
I am not a chartered accountant, but according to all my research your tax code has expanded to over three times the size it was. As I suspected you are glossing over the high marginal rate for those making 150 plus of 45 %. How do you think it’s fair for your government to confiscate over half the wealth of your more successful citizens. I say more than 50% because after you add in the insurance, the two tier capital gains tax, and the additional 13500 one may have to pay for pensions. In addition you all have to pay the VAT.
I will never understand this whole philosophy of penalizing success. I don’t know what the cost of living is in UK, but 150000 is hardly super rich.
I also don’t understand why people who don’t have children have to pay for your maternity leave. Would you go to your neighbors and demand they give you money for baby food etc?
D
Dracarys
Guest
Yes there is. It takes away freedom of choice. If I am paying out funds for other people’s kids, health care etc than I have less for me to invest in my new business. It also takes away competition among providers when it’s all government run instead of privitized. What if another company can provide different or other plans? I want my money up front so I can spend and invest as I choose.
Last edited:
D
Dracarys
Guest
Not sure I follow your confusion. The employees add utility by working at company and employer pays them accordingly. Is that clear?
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Not to mention that income tax was only introduced in 1920s as a compromise for Prohibition. Prior to Prohibition there was no Income Tax. Govt got 60% of its revenue from Alcohol Tax, so would never agree to Prohibition without an Alternative Revenue Stream, hence introduction of Income Tax. But once Prohibition was withdrawn and Alcohol re-taxed? Hmmm, Income Tax remained, what more evidence do we need its a scam.
S
Socrates92
Guest
tafan2:
The confusion seems pretty clear. Correct me if I’m wrong @tafan2, but your issue is that “give you wages” to you implies a hand out, whereas @Dracarys doesn’t infer any such thing from the phrase. I’m not seeing any actual difference of opinion here, but feel free to contradict that. I’ll grab another bag of popcorn.
T
tafan2
Guest
To me, the word “give” implies a one-way transaction. As does “taking your money”.
T
tafan2
Guest
Perhaps it is just a confusion. But the way people word things without thought often betrays their underlying feelings. The complete phrase, “They give you wages, and now the government requires them to babysit you as well. If that happened to me as owner I would fire all of you and move to Texas”, does seem to imply a handout IMO. BTW, I am from Texas, been here all my life, we Texans traditionally have more respect for our employees than is demonstrated on this thread.
D
Dracarys
Guest
Sure that decision is personal. I just don’t want to have to pay for your kids. I don’t even like that my property taxes force me to pay for schools I don’t use. That is grossly unfair, but it will never change.
A
Aquinas11
Guest
Correct, technically its theft.
D
Dracarys
Guest
You are taking things out of context and reading in things that aren’t there. If you look at the thread I referenced that person said she receives a year of maternity leave and her employer has to pay her and save her job. She also said she receives all the vacation days she wants. Go back and read it. She gets a list of freebies and entitlements. I have friends in Texas so I know that while they may be gracious they certainly expect you to work for your job. Well…maybe not in Austin
The people I know work in oil. They work hard and they are expected to be at work. Yes they are compensated quite well. Am I wrong?
T
tafan2
Guest
My gosh, if anyone could complain about property taxes supporting other kids’ education, its me. I have always sent my kids to Catholic schools. And I gladly pay my property taxes for public education (well, I always wish they were lower). Universal primary and secondary education has served this country well for a long time. It has always been paid for by taxes across the population. I am a huge supporter of subsidiarity in politics, and I certainly see the problems with how it has largely been abandoned almost everywhere. But I hope and the extreme opposite reaction, of disparaging all forms of public solidarity never takes hold. Why would we want to ever go back to a system where the only kids who get an education are those whose parents can afford it. Do we really want to be a third world country with half of our people being a permanent underclass?
D
Dracarys
Guest
100 % correct. Not to get off subject, but we Americans need to start voting Libertarian.
T
tafan2
Guest
They most certainly are, and I do not believe their employers feel like they are simply giving them money.
D
Dracarys
Guest
The Catholic Church espouses no birth control and says the primary reason for marriage is children. Okay fine, but why do families with no kids, Protestants who use common sense birth control, and people of other faiths and no faith have to pay for Catholic families with multiple kids? I know this is how it’s done, but I reject it. I am not happy to pay exorbatant property taxes so how do I opt out? I can’t.
The high school in my city just sold off a piece of land they weren’t using for $1.2 million. I wrote a letter to editor of paper and asked: let me understand this. The school got to acquire and hold valuable property TAX FREE for 10 years till it appreciated, and then sold it for over a million. So did my school mileage go down? NO IT INCREASED.
All I ask is to be left alone. Have all the kids in school you want. The Earth is huge so I don’t worry about population growth, global warming or any of that. Just stop confiscating my money through force and make me pay for your choices.
Last edited:
- Status