"jk" wrote in message
...
"Buerste" wrote:



How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!

Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.


jk

No, consumers pay those taxes. And, because taxes are an operating expense,
profits are based on percentage of costs, consumers also pay the bump.
Foolish consumers! Liberals SCREAM "Tax Business!" not knowing that
business just passes it on. But, it must feel good and all liberals care
about is feeling good.

"Buerste" wrote:



How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!

Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.


jk

"Buerste" wrote:


"jk" wrote in message
.. .
"Buerste" wrote:



How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!

Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.


jk


No, consumers pay those taxes. And, because taxes are an operating expense,
profits are based on percentage of costs, consumers also pay the bump.
Foolish consumers! Liberals SCREAM "Tax Business!" not knowing that
business just passes it on. But, it must feel good and all liberals care
about is feeling good.
No, The consumers do NOT pay those taxes in the sense of paying it to
the government, they just pay more than they might otherwise.

Using that same logic, my Employer pays my taxes, I just pass the cost
along in what I am willing to work for. So there are no taxpayers.


jk

"jk" wrote in message
...
"Buerste" wrote:


"jk" wrote in message
. ..
"Buerste" wrote:



How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay
federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!

Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.


jk


No, consumers pay those taxes. And, because taxes are an operating
expense,
profits are based on percentage of costs, consumers also pay the bump.
Foolish consumers! Liberals SCREAM "Tax Business!" not knowing that
business just passes it on. But, it must feel good and all liberals care
about is feeling good.
No, The consumers do NOT pay those taxes in the sense of paying it to
the government, they just pay more than they might otherwise.

Using that same logic, my Employer pays my taxes, I just pass the cost
along in what I am willing to work for. So there are no taxpayers.


jk

Your employer pays half of your total Social Security tax bill. He takes
that into consideration with his pay offering. Also taken from your pay is
the amount it costs to do all the employment accounting, holidays, vacation,
sick days, personal days, medical, etc. Your logic is just plain wrong,
rethink it and get back to me if you have any questions.

Buerste wrote:

"jk" wrote in message
...
"Buerste" wrote:


"jk" wrote in message
...
"Buerste" wrote:



How about a straight popular vote only by people that actually pay
federal
income taxes? THAT would certainly change EVERYTHING!

Just remember, that corporations are legally "people" to a degree, and
they do (ok some do) pay those taxes.


jk


No, consumers pay those taxes. And, because taxes are an operating
expense,
profits are based on percentage of costs, consumers also pay the bump.
Foolish consumers! Liberals SCREAM "Tax Business!" not knowing that
business just passes it on. But, it must feel good and all liberals
care
about is feeling good.
No, The consumers do NOT pay those taxes in the sense of paying it to
the government, they just pay more than they might otherwise.

Using that same logic, my Employer pays my taxes, I just pass the cost
along in what I am willing to work for. So there are no taxpayers.


jk

Your employer pays half of your total Social Security tax bill. He
takes that into consideration with his pay offering. Also taken from
your pay is the amount it costs to do all the employment accounting,
holidays, vacation, sick days, personal days, medical, etc. Your logic
is just plain wrong, rethink it and get back to me if you have any
questions.

It always amazes me where folks talking about any benefits or taxes seem
to think the money comes from. They don't seem to think about the fact
that the company pays out a LOT of money to pay for those "benefits" and
what it actually costs just to keep them employed.

I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an employee.
So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
100,000 just to keep you as an employee.

There is a LOT of overhead involved and they just keep piling more on.

I looked into opening a new garage a couple years ago. Prior to even
opening the doors I figured on spending 1.8 million dollars!

--
Steve W.

On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:21 -0500, "Steve W." wrote:


I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an employee.
So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
100,000 just to keep you as an employee.


That's cheap. My (internal, before profits) chargeable cost is 2.5 times my
before tax pay rate...


Mark Rand
RTFM

On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 00:30:42 +0000, the renowned Mark Rand
wrote:

On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 17:01:21 -0500, "Steve W." wrote:


I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an employee.
So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
100,000 just to keep you as an employee.


That's cheap. My (internal, before profits) chargeable cost is 2.5 times my
before tax pay rate...


Mark Rand
RTFM

I use 2.0 as a rule of thumb.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

"Steve W." wrote in message
...

It always amazes me where folks talking about any benefits or taxes seem
to think the money comes from. They don't seem to think about the fact
that the company pays out a LOT of money to pay for those "benefits" and
what it actually costs just to keep them employed.

I think the last number I heard was that you could take your hourly rate
and figure that 2/3 of it could be added on just to keep you as an
employee.
So if you're earning 60,000 a year it is costing the employer closer to
100,000 just to keep you as an employee.

There is a LOT of overhead involved and they just keep piling more on.

I looked into opening a new garage a couple years ago. Prior to even
opening the doors I figured on spending 1.8 million dollars!

--
Steve W.

It costs me 1.5 times an employees pay. Often, they only comprehend their
take-home.