• RME Gear & Apparel

Political So now what

Political discussions within
glockman

glockman

I hate Jeep trucks
Location
Pleasant Grove
Here we go again. When I swapped the LJ, I tried my best to keep it emissions legal. However, there is a mountain of ridiculous requirements. If I modified the oem harness, that's a no go. What does that have to do with emissions? Stick a sniffer in the tail pipe and determine if I am emitting more than the allowable amount of Co2. These types of laws are why I hate the government with the passion of a horny teenage boy.
Don't get me started on the youth OHV course I am 10 hours into with my 12 year old that you can't test out of and has multiple lessons teaching incorrect riding or how to trailer your OHV IN THE YOUTH COURSE!!!!
 
jeeper

jeeper

Currently without Jeep
Location
So Jo, Ut
glockman said:
Don't get me started on the youth OHV course I am 10 hours into with my 12 year old that you can't test out of and has multiple lessons teaching incorrect riding or how to trailer your OHV IN THE YOUTH COURSE!!!!
Click to expand...

I got a phone call from another angry friend about the course with these same comments. He was 3 days in to get his kids all through it, and eventually just did it himself.

My kids did like a 2 hour in person course and got a free helmet. I didn't think it was an issue..

I'd for sure write a well worded opinion to the course directors.
 
Houndoc

Houndoc

Registered User
Location
Grantsville
2021 was a brutal tax year for me- the "curse" of a good business year I suppose. I was not a happy man leaving my CPA office that day. This year was better. But I appreciate having a CPA for my business who, like @Pike2350 , keeps things above board.

But the anti-tax sentiment expressed creates a couple of moral/philosophical issues.

One, is unless we all push for smaller government and less spending (something most people claim to support until the cuts would impact them personally and neither party cares about so long as they are in the majority), the bills have to be paid.

Second one is related. Anytime an individual or company avoids taxes via questionable means (legal, moral, whatever) that does nothing to decrease the size of government. All it does is place that burden on someone else- other businesses, individuals, children/grandchildren. It is not taking a moral stand of any sort.
 
TRD270

TRD270

Emptying Pockets Again
Supporting Member
Location
SaSaSandy
Houndoc said:
2021 was a brutal tax year for me- the "curse" of a good business year I suppose. I was not a happy man leaving my CPA office that day. This year was better. But I appreciate having a CPA for my business who, like @Pike2350 , keeps things above board.

But the anti-tax sentiment expressed creates a couple of moral/philosophical issues.

One, is unless we all push for smaller government and less spending (something most people claim to support until the cuts would impact them personally and neither party cares about so long as they are in the majority), the bills have to be paid.

Second one is related. Anytime an individual or company avoids taxes via questionable means (legal, moral, whatever) that does nothing to decrease the size of government. All it does is place that burden on someone else- other businesses, individuals, children/grandchildren. It is not taking a moral stand of any sort.
Click to expand...

Stop sending BILLIONS overseas, pump the brakes on all the social programs. This alone would reduce our deficit and decrease the burden on average Joe being taxed to literal death.

But naw, let’s just increase the deficit some more and fire up 832,782,892,422 more social programs.
 
glockman

glockman

I hate Jeep trucks
Location
Pleasant Grove
Houndoc said:
2021 was a brutal tax year for me- the "curse" of a good business year I suppose. I was not a happy man leaving my CPA office that day. This year was better. But I appreciate having a CPA for my business who, like @Pike2350 , keeps things above board.

But the anti-tax sentiment expressed creates a couple of moral/philosophical issues.

One, is unless we all push for smaller government and less spending (something most people claim to support until the cuts would impact them personally and neither party cares about so long as they are in the majority), the bills have to be paid.

Second one is related. Anytime an individual or company avoids taxes via questionable means (legal, moral, whatever) that does nothing to decrease the size of government. All it does is place that burden on someone else- other businesses, individuals, children/grandchildren. It is not taking a moral stand of any sort.
Click to expand...
I vote in line with my small government ideology. I avoid taxes where I can. I only worry about things I can control and the size of government is not one of them. I don't give my money willingly to organizations that I don't align with morally if I have the ability. The government is one such org. So I disagree that avoiding taxes is not taking a moral stance even though it doesn't change the size of government. It does allow me to do what I think is right with my money, like care for my family and enjoy what I have worked for, which keeps me sane and a contributing member of society.
 
johngottfredson

johngottfredson

Threat Level Midnight
Location
Alpine
Houndoc said:
2021 was a brutal tax year for me- the "curse" of a good business year I suppose. I was not a happy man leaving my CPA office that day. This year was better. But I appreciate having a CPA for my business who, like @Pike2350 , keeps things above board.

But the anti-tax sentiment expressed creates a couple of moral/philosophical issues.

One, is unless we all push for smaller government and less spending (something most people claim to support until the cuts would impact them personally and neither party cares about so long as they are in the majority), the bills have to be paid.

Second one is related. Anytime an individual or company avoids taxes via questionable means (legal, moral, whatever) that does nothing to decrease the size of government. All it does is place that burden on someone else- other businesses, individuals, children/grandchildren. It is not taking a moral stand of any sort.
Click to expand...
I sort of agree. First, regarding bills having to be paid, this is the liberal line every single time we hit the debt ceiling. Rather than cut entitlements, programs, foreign spending, whatever, it’s framed as a moral responsibility to pay our bills. If enough people said no, they’d have to change policies. Debts should be paid, but the cost should come from sequestrations. Also, I agree that both parties love big government and socialist programs, even if the programs they love are different. Like the freaking farm bill isn’t straight socialism for red-state farmers. It’s a real problem, and not sustainable.

Second, avoiding taxes “via questionable means” opens up lots of questions. Where is the line drawn at questionable? If I write off my whole business truck purchase, but run to the store on a personal errand, am I immoral for not tracking those miles and adding that back in for taxes? What about buying an f-350 when an f-150 might get the job done? What about buying any truck above the base model? If I swing for leather, should that be a write off morally? What percentage of all business write offs are absolutely necessary - is it not questionable to write off anything above base necessity?

Sometimes I think we just have different limits. Would you justify playing tax games if you were living under nazi germany? What about if the tax bracket was 90%? Is there ever a line at which it becomes less immoral to ‘avoid via questionable means’? Again, if the answer for you is NEVER, then you have my respect, and it’s a valid philosophical position. If the moral standing of the government or its tax policies ever affects the morality of avoiding those taxes, then maybe we just have different limits of what we’re willing to stand from the .gov before we take evasive action.

A study out of Stanfords Hoover Institute found that over decades, rich Americans typically paid around 20% taxes, regardless of whether their tax bracket was 90% in the 50’s or 35% under Bush. After 20% it becomes worth it to take avoidance measures, below that it didn’t. That’s about my limit as well. If I’m evil for it, I’m at least average evil.
 
Houndoc

Houndoc

Registered User
Location
Grantsville
johngottfredson said:
I sort of agree. First, regarding bills having to be paid, this is the liberal line every single time we hit the debt ceiling. Rather than cut entitlements, programs, foreign spending, whatever, it’s framed as a moral responsibility to pay our bills. If enough people said no, they’d have to change policies. Debts should be paid, but the cost should come from sequestrations. Also, I agree that both parties love big government and socialist programs, even if the programs they love are different. Like the freaking farm bill isn’t straight socialism for red-state farmers. It’s a real problem, and not sustainable.

Second, avoiding taxes “via questionable means” opens up lots of questions. Where is the line drawn at questionable? If I write off my whole business truck purchase, but run to the store on a personal errand, am I immoral for not tracking those miles and adding that back in for taxes? What about buying an f-350 when an f-150 might get the job done? What about buying any truck above the base model? If I swing for leather, should that be a write off morally? What percentage of all business write offs are absolutely necessary - is it not questionable to write off anything above base necessity?

Sometimes I think we just have different limits. Would you justify playing tax games if you were living under nazi germany? What about if the tax bracket was 90%? Is there ever a line at which it becomes less immoral to ‘avoid via questionable means’? Again, if the answer for you is NEVER, then you have my respect, and it’s a valid philosophical position. If the moral standing of the government or its tax policies ever affects the morality of avoiding those taxes, then maybe we just have different limits of what we’re willing to stand from the .gov before we take evasive action.

A study out of Stanfords Hoover Institute found that over decades, rich Americans typically paid around 20% taxes, regardless of whether their tax bracket was 90% in the 50’s or 35% under Bush. After 20% it becomes worth it to take avoidance measures, below that it didn’t. That’s about my limit as well. If I’m evil for it, I’m at least average evil.
Click to expand...

The debt ceiling is not the issue- that is paying for what has already been spent (a personal equivalent would be to buy a new boat then decide you couldn't afford it so you default on the payments but expect to keep the boat.)

True budget cuts and government reform are needed but once the money is spent debts need to be paid.

And I do agree that higher tax rates encourage tax avoidance. A lower tax rate with simplified tax laws would benefit all the way around.

I also do not question whether an expense is more than the minimum to get the job done- in your example buying a nicer truck. Go for it. That is very different than buying cars for multiple family members under the company who use them for only personal use as was an example in another post.
 
Spork

Spork

Tin Foil Hat Equipped
Location
Saratoga Springs, UT
Houndoc said:
...

And I do agree that higher tax rates encourage tax avoidance. A lower tax rate with simplified tax laws would benefit all the way around.
...
Click to expand...
People fail to realize regulation costs money. Laws cost money. Used to work for a bank and the largest most complicated system wasn't for keeping track of your balance, it was for compliance to regulation.
 
anderson750

anderson750

I'm working on it Rose
Location
Price, Utah
Houndoc said:
The debt ceiling is not the issue- that is paying for what has already been spent (a personal equivalent would be to buy a new boat then decide you couldn't afford it so you default on the payments but expect to keep the boat.)

True budget cuts and government reform are needed but once the money is spent debts need to be paid.

And I do agree that higher tax rates encourage tax avoidance. A lower tax rate with simplified tax laws would benefit all the way around.

I also do not question whether an expense is more than the minimum to get the job done- in your example buying a nicer truck. Go for it. That is very different than buying cars for multiple family members under the company who use them for only personal use as was an example in another post.
Click to expand...
Lets push the envelope of what some people feel as the "moral compass" of tax deductions. In small communities, many businesses sponsor little league teams, booster clubs, travel sports teams etc. Many of these entities are not actually registered with the state. Those donations are listed on their taxes as either a sponsorship, donation, or however else they want to code them. I sponsor some of these types of things in my community as well as some of my kids motorcylce racing through my businesses.

These donations make very little impact in the tax liability of a business, but none the less, they are be listed as either an expense or a donation. I guess I have always subscribed to the philosophy that it is not always how much you make.......it is how much you keep.
 
johngottfredson

johngottfredson

Threat Level Midnight
Location
Alpine
Houndoc said:
I also do not question whether an expense is more than the minimum to get the job done- in your example buying a nicer truck. Go for it. That is very different than buying cars for multiple family members under the company who use them for only personal use as was an example in another post.
Click to expand...
Got it. So I’m cool to buy a $90k Ram TRX but not a $45k f-150 for me and a $45k explorer for my wife. Word.
 
glockman

glockman

I hate Jeep trucks
Location
Pleasant Grove
Herzog said:
It's a battle against generational wealth.

The push for the CBDC (central bank digital currency) will completely get rid of generational wealth... meaning anything you build now will never benefit your children. The proposed digital currency will have an expiration programmed into it (if not at first, it will eventually) to where if you don't spend it, it expires.

This is not a "conspiracy theory" either... but who cares if it is. Our batting average is to the moon.
Click to expand...
My inheritance is quite literally in precious metals. Some molded into freedom sticks and many, many more molded into freedom seeds. Try and expire that ya bastards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top