[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Re: Ruby, Rails and now og

Tom Copeland

5/4/2005 11:31:00 PM

On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 07:01 +0900, Andrew Ballantine wrote:
> I hope to continue reading and
> contributing when I can.

Welcome aboard!

Yours,

Tom
54 Answers

Mike Smith

4/6/2012 6:33:00 PM

0

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:12:08 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:

>
>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>news:i8itn7l5fst2mjkn3h3eec6bj1b0olvv5q@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 16:07:33 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:RK6dnazq2aRtceDSnZ2dnUVZ5t2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp wrote:
>>>>> Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>>>> rolled into the price of their product.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what?
>>>>> All that implies is that taxing the corporation
>>>>> is more efficient.
>>>>> Do you think it would be better to collect
>>>>> the federal fuel tax on gasoline from each
>>>>> individual gas station on each individual sale?
>>>>> Or is it far more efficient to collect from
>>>>> a handful of refineries?
>>>>
>>>> In between the rifineries and the filling stations used to be something
>>>> my
>>>> dad referred to as, "distributers". I don't really know whether these
>>>> people still exist, because my Dad died in 1968, and I haven't had
>>>> anything to do with the gasoline business since then.
>>>
>>>What Smith says is FALSE
>>>Corporate income tax is not a cost of doing business.
>>>Corporate income tax CANNOT affect the price of a product.
>>>
>>>SAME OLD Republican bullshit!
>>
>> Same old completely clueless libtard fantasy... This is clearly one of
>> your more stupid statements.
>>
>> Free clue: taxes are a COB and are rolled into the cost of everything
>> sold. It is a HUGE hidden tax that we all pay.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
>Do you have an accountant?
>Corporate income tax is not a cost of doing business.
>Corporate income tax does NOT raise the price of goods sold
>
>Ask someone who knows instead of reciting Republican propaganda.
>

I have, and you don't have a clue..

Mike Smith

Sid9

4/6/2012 7:05:00 PM

0


"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:nhdun7lk751ljvfjnlbtqcmesiv4ludb89@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 06:05:34 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis
> <forbisgaryg@msn.com> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 6, 3:46 am, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Free clue: taxes are a COB and are rolled into the cost of everything
>>> sold. It is a HUGE hidden tax that we all pay.
>>
>>How stupid are you?
>
> You do not have the intelligence to possibly know, even if I told you.
>
>>
>>Don't you know that the market is made where supply
>>and demand meet? If this is insufficient to cover costs,
>>including the cost of living while producing, material costs,
>>taxes, etc. then supply will be limited. Taxes are a cost
>>of business but they aren't rolled into the cost (price) of
>>anything sold. The price is set by the market alone.
>
> You don't know shit about business, do you... Are you another educated
> idiot?
>
> Mike Smith

As opposed to being an uneducated dupe like you.....

A tax on profit is NOT part of the cost of doing business...
except in the case of toady fools who spout Republican mantra

Sid9

4/6/2012 7:06:00 PM

0


"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:eadun7l8nh0dr5gt7ugulinn11jdu25sbb@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:10:04 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>>news:h4jtn79ph6s0m7k7p9ares3nofmfl43gc8@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:40:14 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:0ksqn7h6324fj3dvhd6h5b20mo4turk786@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 20:35:20 -0500, Steve Rothstein
>>>>> <stephan_rothstein@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 4/4/2012 6:37 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/3/2012 6:38 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The business is not a legal person in at least one sense. I can
>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>> a legal person. I can own a business. This is where your argument
>>>>>>>>>> falls
>>>>>>>>>> down. Taxing the business and the real person on the same money
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> double taxation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its not my argument. It is the law that has evolved over
>>>>>>>>> centuries.
>>>>>>>>> Your view is a recent poorly thought out harebrained scheme.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not quite over centuries, or even one century. The income tax is
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> 100
>>>>>>>> years old yet.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Corporations were taxed before income tax.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Possibly. But the individual who received the profit from his
>>>>>>corporation by getting a dividend did not get taxed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The double taxation is the concept we are debating, not the taxation
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>a corporation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Steve Rothstein
>>>>>
>>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>>> rolled into the price of their product. People buying their product
>>>>> pay that totally hidden tax.
>>>>> (estimated hidden tax on a gallon of milk = $1.05)
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike Smith
>>>>
>>>>Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
>>>>There they go again!
>>>
>>> So, in your little fantasy world, if the several transportation
>>> companies used to get that gallon of milk from the farm to the retail
>>> store is paying 1% income taxes and it is jumped to 10% or 30%, the
>>> cost of that milk will not change?
>>>
>>> Dude, you need to sue your college for teaching you really stupid
>>> shit.
>>>
>>> Mike smith
>>.
>>
>>.
>>Do you have an accountant?
>>Do you know an accountant?
>>Do you know someone who prepares corporate tax returns?
>>
>>Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
>>Corporate income tax does not raise the price of goods sold.
>>Money has no memory
>>
>>
>>It's the law,
>>Your statement is Republican propaganda.
>
> Like I previously stated... sue your college.
> You have a slam-dunk case.
>
> Mike Smith

Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
Corporate income tax does not raise the price of goods sold.
Money has no memory

If you believe otherwise you are uninformed or a fool

sjedgingN0Sp

4/6/2012 8:27:00 PM

0



BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>
> On 4/6/2012 11:46 AM, jim wrote:
> >
> >
> > BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> To use the tax law to otherwise manipulate is to not live up to the
> >> intent of the tax laws. The constitution doesn't make them available
> >> for "MANIPULATING MY BEHAVIOR" every tax law
> >
> > The constitution doesn't say anything about you breathing air.
> > So you better stop that right now.
>
> Actually the constitution tells the Federal government what the taxes
> are to be used for.... and that is how it works.

That has little to do with the fact that all taxes modify
behavior. Do you think Congress gave no thought to
how the tax on whiskey in thw 1790's would affect behavior?

Scout

4/6/2012 8:37:00 PM

0



"jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net> wrote in message
news:36mdnQttZf6Ad-PSnZ2dnUVZ_oGdnZ2d@bright.net...
>
>
> Scout wrote:
>
>> >
>> > SALES TAX is NOT a cost of doing business... it is only tagged onto
>> > what you sell after the fact and is outside or separate of the price of
>> > what you are buying. But corporation tax is a tax on the profit that
>> > is made and is a tax that is included into the price of the items
>> > production, if the corporate tax is high the price of the item will
>> > reflect the need for more profit to help pay the tax. In a sales tax
>> > the seller is independent of the tax and they often sell their products
>> > in high tax as well as low tax areas. A corporation on the other hand
>> > will move the base of operations and the production to two different
>> > places on the planet to get the best effective escape from high
>> > corporate taxes and regulations.
>> >
>> >
>> > It seems crazy that you and the government don't understand how a
>> > business works, yet another indictment of the governments Socialist
>> > school system.
>>
>> Let's be honest, if they understood it, then the government wouldn't be
>> bankrupt.
>>
>
> that statement indicates you are clueless.
>
> The govt is not and will not be bankrupt. Even if Congress tries to
> balance the budget and that causes a great depression it won't
> bankrupt the govt.

So tell me, what do you call it when an individual, group or organization
declares all it's existing debts null and void and they will no longer pay
them?

Scout

4/6/2012 8:38:00 PM

0



"Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jlmtjs$pb7$1@dont-email.me...
>
> "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
> news:h4jtn79ph6s0m7k7p9ares3nofmfl43gc8@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:40:14 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>>>news:0ksqn7h6324fj3dvhd6h5b20mo4turk786@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 20:35:20 -0500, Steve Rothstein
>>>> <stephan_rothstein@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 4/4/2012 6:37 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/3/2012 6:38 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The business is not a legal person in at least one sense. I can
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>> a legal person. I can own a business. This is where your argument
>>>>>>>>> falls
>>>>>>>>> down. Taxing the business and the real person on the same money is
>>>>>>>>> double taxation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Its not my argument. It is the law that has evolved over centuries.
>>>>>>>> Your view is a recent poorly thought out harebrained scheme.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not quite over centuries, or even one century. The income tax is not
>>>>>>> 100
>>>>>>> years old yet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corporations were taxed before income tax.
>>>>>
>>>>>Possibly. But the individual who received the profit from his
>>>>>corporation by getting a dividend did not get taxed.
>>>>>
>>>>>The double taxation is the concept we are debating, not the taxation of
>>>>>a corporation.
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve Rothstein
>>>>
>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>> rolled into the price of their product. People buying their product
>>>> pay that totally hidden tax.
>>>> (estimated hidden tax on a gallon of milk = $1.05)
>>>>
>>>> Mike Smith
>>>
>>>Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
>>>There they go again!
>>
>> So, in your little fantasy world, if the several transportation
>> companies used to get that gallon of milk from the farm to the retail
>> store is paying 1% income taxes and it is jumped to 10% or 30%, the
>> cost of that milk will not change?
>>
>> Dude, you need to sue your college for teaching you really stupid
>> shit.
>>
>> Mike smith
> .
>
> .
> Do you have an accountant?
> Do you know an accountant?
> Do you know someone who prepares corporate tax returns?

Are you trying to figure out why he's so much smarter than you?


> Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
> Corporate income tax does not raise the price of goods sold.
> Money has no memory

Which doesn't alter the fact that government taxes have an impact on the
market and thus the price the consumer pays.

>
>
> It's the law,
> Your statement is Republican propaganda.

Scout

4/6/2012 8:39:00 PM

0



"Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jlnerd$4lr$1@dont-email.me...
>
> "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
> news:eadun7l8nh0dr5gt7ugulinn11jdu25sbb@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:10:04 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>>>news:h4jtn79ph6s0m7k7p9ares3nofmfl43gc8@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:40:14 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:0ksqn7h6324fj3dvhd6h5b20mo4turk786@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 20:35:20 -0500, Steve Rothstein
>>>>>> <stephan_rothstein@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 4/4/2012 6:37 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/3/2012 6:38 AM, jim wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Steve Rothstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The business is not a legal person in at least one sense. I can
>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>> a legal person. I can own a business. This is where your
>>>>>>>>>>> argument
>>>>>>>>>>> falls
>>>>>>>>>>> down. Taxing the business and the real person on the same money
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> double taxation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Its not my argument. It is the law that has evolved over
>>>>>>>>>> centuries.
>>>>>>>>>> Your view is a recent poorly thought out harebrained scheme.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not quite over centuries, or even one century. The income tax is
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> 100
>>>>>>>>> years old yet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Corporations were taxed before income tax.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Possibly. But the individual who received the profit from his
>>>>>>>corporation by getting a dividend did not get taxed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The double taxation is the concept we are debating, not the taxation
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>a corporation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Steve Rothstein
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>>>> rolled into the price of their product. People buying their product
>>>>>> pay that totally hidden tax.
>>>>>> (estimated hidden tax on a gallon of milk = $1.05)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike Smith
>>>>>
>>>>>Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
>>>>>There they go again!
>>>>
>>>> So, in your little fantasy world, if the several transportation
>>>> companies used to get that gallon of milk from the farm to the retail
>>>> store is paying 1% income taxes and it is jumped to 10% or 30%, the
>>>> cost of that milk will not change?
>>>>
>>>> Dude, you need to sue your college for teaching you really stupid
>>>> shit.
>>>>
>>>> Mike smith
>>>.
>>>
>>>.
>>>Do you have an accountant?
>>>Do you know an accountant?
>>>Do you know someone who prepares corporate tax returns?
>>>
>>>Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
>>>Corporate income tax does not raise the price of goods sold.
>>>Money has no memory
>>>
>>>
>>>It's the law,
>>>Your statement is Republican propaganda.
>>
>> Like I previously stated... sue your college.
>> You have a slam-dunk case.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
> Corporate income tax is NOT a cost of doing business.
> Corporate income tax does not raise the price of goods sold.
> Money has no memory

Sid is reduced to repeating his mantra...probably while holding his hands
over his ears.

Scout

4/6/2012 8:41:00 PM

0



"Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
news:i8itn7l5fst2mjkn3h3eec6bj1b0olvv5q@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 16:07:33 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:RK6dnazq2aRtceDSnZ2dnUVZ5t2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>> jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp wrote:
>>>> Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>>> rolled into the price of their product.
>>>>
>>>> So what?
>>>> All that implies is that taxing the corporation
>>>> is more efficient.
>>>> Do you think it would be better to collect
>>>> the federal fuel tax on gasoline from each
>>>> individual gas station on each individual sale?
>>>> Or is it far more efficient to collect from
>>>> a handful of refineries?
>>>
>>> In between the rifineries and the filling stations used to be something
>>> my
>>> dad referred to as, "distributers". I don't really know whether these
>>> people still exist, because my Dad died in 1968, and I haven't had
>>> anything to do with the gasoline business since then.
>>
>>What Smith says is FALSE
>>Corporate income tax is not a cost of doing business.
>>Corporate income tax CANNOT affect the price of a product.
>>
>>SAME OLD Republican bullshit!
>
> Same old completely clueless libtard fantasy... This is clearly one of
> your more stupid statements.
>
> Free clue: taxes are a COB and are rolled into the cost of everything
> sold. It is a HUGE hidden tax that we all pay.

Well let's be accurate here.....for accountants and other pencil pushers,
corporate taxes aren't a COB....but for everyone else, they are and directly
impact the price the company sets for it's products because it's all about
the bottom line....ie net profit.

Scout

4/6/2012 8:45:00 PM

0



"Gary Forbis" <forbisgaryg@msn.com> wrote in message
news:0f04f6d4-6893-4041-b073-13457851588a@to5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 6, 3:46 am, Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> Free clue: taxes are a COB and are rolled into the cost of everything
>> sold. It is a HUGE hidden tax that we all pay.
>
> How stupid are you?
>
> Don't you know that the market is made where supply
> and demand meet? If this is insufficient to cover costs,
> including the cost of living while producing, material costs,
> taxes, etc. then supply will be limited. Taxes are a cost
> of business but they aren't rolled into the cost (price) of
> anything sold. The price is set by the market alone.

Really?

Ok. Let's take an example.

Government decides that starting next month the tax on gasoline will be
increased by $1 per gallon.
Are you claiming the price of gas will not increase by $1 per gallon, but
will hold at it's current price because of the 'market'?

Sorry, but government actions can and do impact the market (such as
increasing taxes) which will impact the price set by that market.

If the government increases corporate income tax by 10% then you can expect
the market price to increase to match that cost to companies.

Scout

4/6/2012 8:49:00 PM

0



"Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jlmtjt$pb7$2@dont-email.me...
>
> "Mike Smith" <mws@wt.net> wrote in message
> news:i8itn7l5fst2mjkn3h3eec6bj1b0olvv5q@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012 16:07:33 -0400, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Bill Graham" <weg9@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:RK6dnazq2aRtceDSnZ2dnUVZ5t2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
>>>> jim" <"sjedgingN0Sp wrote:
>>>>> Mike Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Corporations should not be taxed on their income. Every bit of their
>>>>>> income tax is rolled into their cost of doing business and that is
>>>>>> rolled into the price of their product.
>>>>>
>>>>> So what?
>>>>> All that implies is that taxing the corporation
>>>>> is more efficient.
>>>>> Do you think it would be better to collect
>>>>> the federal fuel tax on gasoline from each
>>>>> individual gas station on each individual sale?
>>>>> Or is it far more efficient to collect from
>>>>> a handful of refineries?
>>>>
>>>> In between the rifineries and the filling stations used to be something
>>>> my
>>>> dad referred to as, "distributers". I don't really know whether these
>>>> people still exist, because my Dad died in 1968, and I haven't had
>>>> anything to do with the gasoline business since then.
>>>
>>>What Smith says is FALSE
>>>Corporate income tax is not a cost of doing business.
>>>Corporate income tax CANNOT affect the price of a product.
>>>
>>>SAME OLD Republican bullshit!
>>
>> Same old completely clueless libtard fantasy... This is clearly one of
>> your more stupid statements.
>>
>> Free clue: taxes are a COB and are rolled into the cost of everything
>> sold. It is a HUGE hidden tax that we all pay.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
> Do you have an accountant?

irrelevant/

> Corporate income tax is not a cost of doing business.

Technically that is true....for accountants, however realistically it is a
cost that is incured by doing business and thus is considered when setting
prices for products.


> Corporate income tax does NOT raise the price of goods sold

Cool. Then let's increase corporate tax rates to 99.9% which will eliminate
the federal deficit and according to Sid the price of goods will remain the
same.

Right Sid?

.....or are we going to look at reality where companies will increase prices
or evade the taxes in order to maintain their bottom line?