"100% of people who do not save money do not have any!"--Dave Ramsey

[redpoint5]

Yeah, profit is a squishy term. The way you avoid paying corporate taxes is to not have any profit, which just means you've "invested" the money back into the business, which can pretty much mean anything including paying any amount to executives and high paid consultants.

As I've said (among most every economist), corporate taxes should probably be zero, or very near to it. No more wasted money seeking tax loopholes as there are no (corporate) taxes.

[Fat Charlie]

As long as they waste it inside the country, the effect is almost good enough.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Fat Charlie

As long as they waste it inside the country, the effect is almost good enough.

Time/energy spent looking for tax avoidance isn't valuable to consumers or the community. Those tax avoidance strategies have varying degrees of benefit to the community from nothing at all, to perhaps a little valuable.

If a company can benefit by investing in something, the decision should be free of tax implications of that investment. For instance, if you need a new truck, you buy a new truck instead of trying to figure out how many trucks should be purchased to depreciate the value against tax liability.

[All Darc]

On Brazil we have water reservoir (in general 1500 or 2000 liter waterbox) becase Brazil's supply services wasn't as trustable as in USA, and there was more risk of hours days without water along the year. Even in cities and states with better services, close to american standart, it stay, as it was a tradition and a safe reservoir. All homes here have it.

If USA homes had waterbox, many movies would miss the chance to create conflict among neigbours, in situation of caos. Like this short film :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CUI27Qfu7E

I was making a point, but hadn't intention to be right wing. Social contrast raized in USA along last 3 decades.
Health it's still a problem. You can get car, air conditioned, large bathtube, being "poor" in america, but can die if have or can't afford a good health ensurance.
Anyway, one more critic to fanatic left wing, since already did one against right wing (on health issue): SOme left winger said many criminals steal because they are in need, but a ot of them have jobs and home, car, bathtube. If they was in real need, like hugry, while other are in wealthy luxury, it could be a argument, but not a argument if they are in safe conditions.
I see left wingers on Brazil almost trying to justify stealing for crazy reasons, like to have the same expensive watch of a rich guy, or the same expensive cloth ou car. This is a sick argument and very dangerous, since can estimulaty criminality or criate criminal ideologies. What will be the next, try to force beautiful people to play plastic surgery to uggly people, just because they born "with privilegy"in aesthetics???
They (in this specific example) are making people think like a stupid crabbyng child.
Some comunist politicians, with a golden rolex on wrist... and the most esxpensive clothes and pricy gadgets on market. And what excuse such crap bas...t... hipocrite use? They say : "We want that everyone to get rich and be able to buy a expensive thing like this". And some stupid people believe them. They forgot, or jsut don't know, that there is no rich people without poor people (or medium class that would be poor compared to rich people).

Originally Posted by Shaneajanderson

You are correct here in all points, Americans are very fortunate (spoiled?)

Emergency water storage is a great idea, and I intend to do some in my new house, can't where I am now. We also try to keep a couple weeks supply of food on hand in case we can't get out or something happens: where I live it's not uncommon to get trapped in town for a week because of a blizzard, and while I could drive across town the the local grocery store, the prices locally are 3-4X what they are in Fargo just 50 miles away; preparedness saves you money too.

I've read before that an American making minimum wage today is more wealthy than over 99% of people throughout history, and more wealthy than many many people alive today. People here can have a decent apartment, a running car, and a smart phone from a minimum wage job, if they know how to budget a little.

[Fat Charlie]

The poor can get all these whizbang things that didn't exist 20, 50, 100 years ago because they're cheap. Literally cheap. Not in the "my grandpa bought his first house for $1000, and look at today's prices" sense, but in availability and ease of manufacturing: anything people want is being cranked out by factories faster than we can use them.

The only thing that's really gone up over time is the perceived value of human life. And that's why actual good food and health care are the really expensive things.

[redpoint5]

Most theft in the US is to feed a drug habit, and most premature death is due to drug abuse. Other theft might be from kids or other equally underdeveloped individuals partaking in a crime of opportunity.

Street corner begging, or "Spanging" (spare change) as my cousin called it can raise a couple hundred dollars in a day. I suspect the incidence of theft probably is correlated with how successful/unsuccessful people are at having raised the money necessary to feed that days drug addiction.

In the US, all people can be seen at an emergency room regardless of ability to pay, so acute health problems usually get medical attention. Somewhere around 90% of visits to the emergency room are not medical emergencies. In Oregon, they piloted a program where a random selection of low income people were given 100% subsidized medical insurance, and they found that emergency room use increased among those individuals rather than decreased even though they had access to primary medicine.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

1)People don't have the right to live in a private apartment......
2)...arbitrary and evil minimum wage is arbitrary and evil......
3)...minimum wage jobs aren't designed to be "living" wages....

1) With repeated one-two punches, employers work hard that employees work for the least & re-pubic-lick-uns work hard so poor people have the least rights.
2) redpoint5 doubly repeats the re-pubic-lick-un calculated & evil war against the working poor, to give them the least.
3) re-pubic-lick-uns work hard that minimum wage jobs aren't designed to be "living" wages.

Poor people are savaged by employers to survive on minimum wage jobs, jobs that are often calculated to have evil work conditions.

[All Darc]

Funny... American left wing use examples about poverty that would be more suitable to Brazil (and others under development countries), to try atack wealth people.
And brazilian right wing uses examples about hard work and merit that are more suitable to USA, to try to say povert it's almost a choice.

Emergency, like the word say, it's for emergency. On Brazil people do the same, or worse, like demand the doctor to give a medical certificate for them scape penality for miss the day work, or go to emergency for any silly thing, or even because got drunk.
But emergency don't take the necessary things to help sick people. It do not pay surgeries, or transplants or exames for prevent or early detect a lot of possible diseases.

About drugs and unwanted pregnancy/single mother pregnancy (if almost alone, young and poor), these are high problems, leading to disgrace. The stupid thing it's left wing making critics to poverty but at same time raising flags in favor of drugs, erotism hedonism in early age, single motherhood as a simple chocie, and so making poor people more into these things, leading them to disgrace and poverty.
And right wing, conservatives, don't care about birth control, since religious want to make people have more kids. They also don't appear to care much about kids, get kids school, education, health, protection etc...

[Xist]

The millennials that I watch on YouTube say to:
1. Live within your means.
2. Save up for 3.5% down on a modest house--ideally new paint and other cosmetic, but not structural, improvements.
3. Assuming this is your new primary residence and your living costs have not increased substantially:
4. Save up for 3.5% down on another modest house with the same criteria.
5. Buy the house and rent it out for market value.
6. Repeat 4 and 5 as much as you can safely.

Even if you can afford nice things, they say your money is better invested.

They regularly talk about how you can limit your tax liability. In this case, it encourages affordable housing, but I am confident there are many other scenarios.

I kind of like Homestead Home's approach, buy a dire fixer-upper cheaply, and, would you believe? Fix it up?

He pays about the same amount in cash that other people might pay for a down payment. If they both spend the same amount to make it rentable (with Homestead Home doing all of the work himself), HH may own a house worth $100,000 for $30,000, but if he spends six months or a year renovating it, he is really a repairman that happens to own several properties. I do not believe that I have done the math, but I would think that you could grow faster buying good houses than buying trashed ones and remodeling them.

However, I do not feel there is anything special about the easy approach, but I think that taking a shell of a house, and turning it into a home takes real skill.

[All Darc]

Take the situation :
Two cars accidents, two victms, both now needs a bonnes prosthetic (there are but expensive) to save the righ arm.

The victim number one have no money, since earned 3300 dollars/month but expend with pricy gadgets, pricy cars, many pricy clothers, a large apartment, changed furniture all years. He is in debth, even before the crash.

The victim number 2 have money, his economies, since he earned 1900 dollars/month but use to save a lot, have a simpler house, a simple car, simpler home forniture, and don't get pricy clothes and pricy gadgets, but just what he needs.

Do you think it's fare to the government to pay prosthetic bonnes for the guy in debt and make the guy who saved a lot of money pay for the prosthetic?