75% blame Bush's policies for deteriorating economy

It does seem everyone wants to stick it to the small businees owner. The big box stores pay no impact or buiding fees and zoning laws do not apply.

 

What? Yes they do. The big box stores impact fees tend to pay for roads, intersections and street lights. And zoning laws apply more to them than anyone. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get a big box in a community? Have you ever served on a city/town board? Believe me, it is NOT easy. In fact, many communities have ordinances against big boxes already in place.

In the community I live it not only is getting a big box approved worse than a rectal exam, the town imposes design changes to lower the impact a big box has. It took almost 2 years to get our Wal-mart and Home Depot approved.

As to this writing off bull shit, I'm sorry guys... it just does not work the way you think. Everyone seems to think a write off some how negates debt, or recovers it. It just does not work like that. You might mitigate some tax liability, which IS advantageous, but its not like you somehow complete negate a loss of 17k by "writing it off"... It just does not work that way.

 

Who said it does?

It still helps is the point, you do not end up actually paying the full $17,000.00 as you are able to write the amount off, bringing down your income, reducing what you owe in taxes..

I love how you also think I am for taxing the business people, yet you failed to realize under the current circumstances it's about the best many communities can do.

MANY times these water hookups were forced onto local communities by the federal and or state level, the local community has no choice! The choice they do have is how to pay for it. Since the feds already take the vast majority of the taxes away what do you suggest they do?

Charge homeowners obscene amounts which will result in the loss of many homes for homeowners, reduced spending capital for others. Or charge businesses more than the homeowners 'which is common sense' business owners can write off the cost on taxes and recoup any additional expenses via a slight increase in their products/services.

A better solution would be to stop starting BS wars like Iraq and spending billions, reducing taxes and keeping more in the local community.

I find it hilarious that someone so pro Iraq war would bitch about a hookup fee for business.

 

BINGO!!! Ding ding ding ding ding!!!

 

Your statements implied it did.

Its still a loss. Less of a loss is still a loss. What I am saying is that you gave me the impression that most businesses look at this type of thing and go, "ah, fuck it, we'll just write it off". What I am saying is that it does not work the way you seem to be implying it does.

What on earth are you talking about? I said nothing about water hookups. Since you brought up the subject, I'll tell you who forces communities to hook up. Its not the fed, nor the state. Its the neighboring community that annexes these outlying communities into their jurisdiction.

And no GRIM, you're wrong. The Feds don't get dick. We live in same state. When it comes to property taxes, the feds don't get anything. Less than 1% goes to the state (assuming those are the "Feds" you are referring to).

The vast majority of what we pay in taxes goes to the school districts, and places like Gateway and other technical colleges. Do you own a home in WI GRIM? Look at your tax bill. It shows you were all that money goes. Generally less than 1% to the state, about 40% to the school districts, around 35% directly to the city itself, around 5-7% to the technical colleges, and the remainder goes to the outlying counties in which that city resides, ie., the county itself.

The Feds are not getting anything.

Ah, you'd really have to live on the lake here in Lake Geneva, or in North Eastern Racine to realize what "obscene amounts" really are for taxes. While high, the tax rate on residential homes in most of Wisconsin is NOT obscene enough to force people out of their homes. Have you ever seen a property tax bill???

Commercial is typically already billed more, for obvious reasons. There you go talking about writing off again. Are you trying to say a business can write off its property taxes to save on the cost of taxes? I'm glad you are not my accountant.

Since your last sentence mentions charging more for "products and services", once again we find that cost that you want shifted from consumer to business shifted back to the consumer again. That there is trickle down economics GRIM.

Its a vicious circle. Fuzzy math and accounting like this is the reason we don't need more democrats in office. They think if you take money from someone that makes a lot of it and give it to someone else you will be helping everyone. The fact is, when you punish a producer of wealth, they find ways to mitigate that punishment, which always trickles right back down to the person you were trying to help.

Military spending is a drop in the bucket compared to social spending and other government waste. Do you really think those billions would make a inkling of a difference? They did not before, why should they now?

Yeah, freedom is BS. You really surprise me lately. What happened man? You used to have some sense of reason.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I've not complained about any hookup fees or otherwise.

I simply corrected a false assumption that businesses, particularly box boxes do not have impact fees. That is incorrect. To the contrary, they, more often than not pay more than their fair share.

What people tend to forget is that that same big box that generated additional expense, not only pays for it, but adds instant revenue to the local community in several ways.

Property tax base. Sales tax base. Use tax base. Personal Property tax base. Income Tax base. Most of all, jobs! Everyone from electricians to plumbers, to concrete workers, steel workers, brick layers, and other laborers. Beyond that, the steady employment of workers once the building is built.

Yeah, some cities choose to give us businesses breaks sometimes. They do this because the benefit to them is great. Its that trickle down thing again.

Give a business an incentive to move to your community and the mutual benefit realized in way of tax generation and employment is almost way beyond comprehension.

Its really amazing how it all works when you cast aside your petty gripes and misunderstanding.

 

Taxes and tax generation are a disincentive for business.

If we truly believe that businesses pass on taxes to the customer, then taxes are ultimately a disincentive to purchase, or a lowering of purchasing power. Businesses dislike taxes because they make them uncompetitive in pricing.

If we could easily run our small businesses from a tax free environment, we would. People would buy more goods from us than a business that prices in it's tax and regulatory tax compliance costs.

 

GS, if you're online, and have sound, Professor Joe Salerno, an associate of Ron Paul's will be on the radio discussing the FED.

You can tune in here
http://www.revolutionbroadcasting.com/

The podcast will be posted probably tomorrow, here
http://www.revolutionbroadcasting.com/thomas-e-woods-shock-to-the-system-podcast.xml

Also, on the economy, blaming Bush is incorrect. This article will explain it fairly well. Although it fingers Greenspan specifically, not the FED cartel as a system.

The end of the superbubble

~

 

Mia: Owning and operating businesses, I like and appreciate how you can discuss these topics. Having done some "economic consulting" oriented work about 7-10 years ago I remember how wierd the property tax and other local costs were figured and distributed in Milwaukee and neighboring communities.

Definitely different than what I had seen elsewhere (not that I had seen a lot of examples across the country). They have definite income streams from local taxes pointed at very definitive sources, such as schools, or specific types of schools.

Big Boxes have a wierd impact on different types of communities. There is no doubt that Walmart can suck the cash out of neighboring businesses. It can price below virtually everyone. It is the world beater (or at least the US beater) on driving low prices. It employs plenty of people at very low salaries. For some communities it knocks the stuffing out of local businesses. In others with much larger economies, small businesses have a better chance at surviving. Communities have every right to debate the entry or non entry of big boxes with zoning laws or whatever they choose. It definitely can impact the folks in various regions.

It sure as hell has made the Walton's wealthy though.

In terms of big sudden unexpected fees like the aforementioned $17,000 hit....yeah...they can be treated as right offs.....which are not as good as not having to pay the fee in the first place.

On the other hand, one of the best things about running businesses is that they are the world's greatest tax write off engines.

 

Umm no it didn't.

Yet again no I am not.

Not sure what you're confused about to be honest.

The entire point you were responding to was about water hookups
The 17k....

And you are incorrect, it is not always 'annexes' it many times is forced upon communities. The town I just moved from was being FORCED by the state to improve their sewage system which equaled them having to hook onto the town next door. So sorry Mia, but having just come from a town with the exact item just happen I can safely say you are factually incorrect, this happens often. I even went to the meetings, discussing it with the state officials.

Oh they don't get dick out of income taxes hey? That's interesting. Property taxes are not all taxes now are they? Property taxes also 'last I heard' was a good majority of what the locals got, for those pesky things such as school. So yet again Mia you are incorrect. I never stated just property taxes, I stated taxes, you however chose to change it to property taxes for some unknown reason.

Yet again you changed 'all taxes' to 'property taxes' seriously confusing to say the least, I would expect better. Something that actually made sense to be honest.

Again who is saying property tax bills would force them out? What is your obsession with changing from 'taxes' to simply just property taxes?

I have owned a home for years Mia, I have owned a house since I was like 21.

Obscene amounts, hmm 17k for a home owner for water hookup, or standard property taxes. Property taxes they know they are going to have to pay, or an additional 17k, your argument is simply dreadful.

For obvious reasons as commercial makes money, residential is to survive, pretty cut and dry in my eyes and most others. Commercial also usually has higher usage involved, higher insurance, etc, etc, etc.

There you go with property taxes again, why you are so anal on that I have no idea as the discussion was 'all taxes' not just property taxes.

I guess with your lack luster logic there, counties that take sales tax take the vast majority of tax as the state sees none of the actual county tax. That is how bad your argument is.

Yeah because you'd rather charge home owners an amount that could possibly force them out of their home, or make them have no cash to spend on services which DESTROYS business.

A consumer will be more likely to be able to afford a little bit here and there instead of a huge ticket. You're for not having the business spend the fees, BUT now you're arguing against the business making up the fees at the expense of the consumer. So which is it? You don't want anyone to pay? Fairies should come from above to pay it? That's what it sounds like to me that you're saying.

NEVER was I stating only the business should pay for it, it is simple I can not believe you are not following it. One more attempt!

Service needs to be hooked onto, for whatever reason.

If you charge the local residential houses too much you will #1 force some/many to lose their homes, #2 drain the spending capital of many households.

This cripples the spending power of the local community, if the local community has no money to spend it DESTROYS the local business.

How you do not see this is puzzling.

You need to find a middle ground.............

You charge the local residential houses a fee you believe they can afford based on what is needed and based on local income averages, etc.

You also average out what the local businesses can afford, in most cases towns would have spoken with parties from both sides to figure this amount out.

Reasons for this as stated, why a business would pay more is in most cases a business can afford more from a basic home owner PLUS they can write off the amount. Of course a write off is not the entire amount saved, I never stated that, I didn't believe anyone was dumb enough that I had to specifically state as much!

The business in return will eat more of the cost in the short term it however can and more than likely will raise their products and services to pay for the fees, in the end the local community will share more of the expense than the initial spread!

I was NEVER for charging the business owners to simply charge the business owners. I was for what is common sense in the situation!

The homeowner will not be able to deduct the amount more than likely nearly as easily as the business owner, NOR will the home owner be able to recoup the amount the business owner however can!

Being a business owner for as long as I have been I know how to recoup costs from expenses.

In the end the actual amount is spread around, but the initial impact is put out with the least damaging amount of force possible!

Not that hard to follow, DO NOT twist it into I am anti business! As that is not why I have this stance. But if you'd rather the home owners lose their houses and their spending power crippling the businesses over night, have at it.

Fuzzy math is on both sides of the government, to bring up 'democrats' just goes to show your true agenda.

It is not punishing those who are a 'producer of wealth' if anything it's putting the fees out there in the best possible method for the community to absorb as a whole.

However without knowing the exact specifics of the community it's pretty hard to argue one way or the other, now isn't it?

Yeah so lets just continue to throw billions away, bitch and moan left and right but not bat an eye at wasteful 'war' spending.

We are not in Iraq for 'freedom' Sense, oh give me a break. Mia wake up to reality, such as calling RP an isolationist, you were proven wrong over and over, by your own quotes, yet you still thought you were right. In all reality it is time for you to smell the coffee.

Ahh but you attacked me over a conversation of 17k hookups fees. interesting.

Ahh but ending it with something pointed at something I had stated = it being more than what you state above.

Ahh yes, those misunderstandings.

Like your misunderstanding of my entire point.

My entire point was that the local communities need power, power the fed has taken away, tax revenue the fed has taken away.

Most republicans 'used' to understand this, but now here you are changing it to 'property taxes' not all taxes and twisting my argument into something it is not.

Do businesses bring something to the community? Of course they do!
Does drying up the local community who supports business destroy the local business? If you think it doesn't you have a lot to learn.

 

You do have one point about charging business more GRIM.

Business expense is self liquidating (profitable activity). Personal taxes are not necessarily so. Personal income is a lot less elastic than business income.

 

Trust me, as a small business owner those added expenses piss me the fuxx off. Such as 'self employment' tax.

It kills me every fng year.

I however can understand why a community would charge a business more than a home owner.

Many home owners barely make it the way it is, even a grand could force many out of their homes.

Imagine being a local business who depends almost entirely on your local residents, then the town forces them to jack into a utility which takes most if not all of their spending capital.

I as a small business owner would rather have my customers still able to buy from me, even if that meant me spending a bit more in the short term, than having most of my customers so broke or worse that they can not afford to buy anything from my shop.

Of course if you're an internet business it's hard to have the same outlook as you do not depend as much on your local community for customers in most cases.

 

That is why the mayor, city and county councils force so many small business owners out of business. Lets tax the small busines owners out of business.

 

Where is this at?

Sounds like you had a bad experience which has soured your views on the subject.

 

Maybe I've been fishing to much. We both agree that we pay to much tax.

 

Yes we totally agree there

We agree more than I think we even realize, simply looking at things a bit differently.

I am looking at what is best in my eyes for a community with the power they currently have, I also see what I'd like to have happen which is for the power to come back to the local communities, the taxes not to be taken away 'income and other taxes' sent to the federal level which then trickles back down.

With the trickle down effect the feds also force local communities 'so does the state at times' on many levels, be it school, roads, drinking laws, etc, which all costs the local community more money in the long run.