Florida becoming more and more Republican

[BlackDude]

6 minutes ago, JimInWisc said:

We all know "Dems" have gotten lots of bills passed, well beyond IRS/Tax enforcement.  Which Dem is claiming this?  (and why are they not voted out?)

[think before following links] https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/congressional-democrats-deliver-promises-complicated/story?id=80691209
 

Here is one article. Bunch of excuses, which I covered in a previous comment. Of course, when I said “never get anything passed” i was generalizing. 

[viking8x6]

4 hours ago, BlackDude said:

laws are only as good as their enforcement and enforcement requires resources

Gee, did you notice how the Republicans are the ones who are trying to cut funding for the IRS? The funding that would allow them to enforce taxes on the rich?

[Willing]

14 hours ago, topblkmale said:

Vote blue. 🤣

Yes blue 💙 

[BootmanLA]

In light of the taxes and small businesses thread, I should note: I own and operate a small business as my primary source of income. It's a service business, not a retail or manufacturing one, so I don't have expenses like raw materials or costs of goods to purchase. Most of my customers pay in the low to mid four figures annually for the services we provide.

Because we ordinarily don't take cash (I might, in a given year, have $50 in total cash transactions), I don't have any opportunity to hide money that way from the IRS, not that I think I'd take advantage of it if I did. So I'm not particularly sympathetic to "small businesses" claiming "onerous regulations" when the only "onerous" thing they're being asked to do is actually declare what they make.

Conversely, I know a barber locally who easily grosses over 150,000 - he can knock out about four haircuts an hour, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, at $20 a pop. Most of the cuts are simple (lots of police and military customers) and over half pay cash. And I know for a fact that most of that cash never gets reported as income. One reason he's steadfastly refused to take credit cards or e-payments is that if customers stop giving him cash, and use Venmo or Zelle or ApplePay or whatever, he'll have to report all those payments, and he's used to making that money tax free.

THAT is what fighting these disclosure 1099's is about. Is it as important as stopping the Donald Trumps of the world from cheating on their taxes? No. But it's part of the picture.

[BootmanLA]

22 hours ago, BlackDude said:

I don’t disagree with anything you said technically. However, laws are only as good as their enforcement and enforcement requires resources. We have many laws on the books that we don’t enforce because they are not practical, dated/harm people or the resources to enforce them outweighs the benefits to society. That’s like arresting people for sodomy and saying “well the law is the law.” We have a social understanding that those laws should be ignored, and we don’t dedicate resources to enforcing it. 

The fact that Dems claim they can never get anything passed, except when it come to focusing on IRS/tax enforcement for smaller businesses tells me where their priorities are. 

There's a big difference between sodomy laws and these others, because there the difference isn't "outweighing benefits to society"; it's that there is no benefit to society to police people's private sex lives.

And as a matter of fact, those laws against sodomy WERE enforced - at least, in some parts of the country. Not just by arresting people and convicting them of it, but by using those laws as tacit justification for denying gay people access to all sorts of things - security clearances in jobs, for instance. If being a criminal means you can't get a clearance, and you're admitting to being a criminal because you're openly gay, well, you can't have that job. That went on well into THIS century.

As for passing the IRS thing: If you had a single fucking clue you'd know that was part of a much, MUCH larger law - the Inflation Reduction Act. That law contained, in addition, billions to lower the costs of home energy and to help transition to renewables, billions for helping get American manufacturing back up to where it was before offshoring, billions for improving agricultural practices - and a hell of a lot more. 

But apparently because you (as best I can figure) only listen to right-wing news sources, all of that IN THE SAME FUCKING LAW is overlooked and all you seem to know about that law is that it has more money for the IRS. Money that, in fact, will be more than offset because the new agents auditing business and the rich will pull in far more in new revenue (that was previously going untaxed) than the cost of the agents.

[BlackDude]

6 hours ago, BootmanLA said:

There's a big difference between sodomy laws and these others, because there the difference isn't "outweighing benefits to society"; it's that there is no benefit to society to police people's private sex lives.

And as a matter of fact, those laws against sodomy WERE enforced - at least, in some parts of the country. Not just by arresting people and convicting them of it, but by using those laws as tacit justification for denying gay people access to all sorts of things - security clearances in jobs, for instance. If being a criminal means you can't get a clearance, and you're admitting to being a criminal because you're openly gay, well, you can't have that job. That went on well into THIS century.

As for passing the IRS thing: If you had a single fucking clue you'd know that was part of a much, MUCH larger law - the Inflation Reduction Act. That law contained, in addition, billions to lower the costs of home energy and to help transition to renewables, billions for helping get American manufacturing back up to where it was before offshoring, billions for improving agricultural practices - and a hell of a lot more. 

But apparently because you (as best I can figure) only listen to right-wing news sources, all of that IN THE SAME FUCKING LAW is overlooked and all you seem to know about that law is that it has more money for the IRS. Money that, in fact, will be more than offset because the new agents auditing business and the rich will pull in far more in new revenue (that was previously going untaxed) than the cost of the agents.

1. I’m aware of the Inflation Reduction Act. They didn’t have to include increased IRS monitoring in the law. 
 

2. Corporations won’t be audited

3. Your assumption is incorrect. I don’t listen to right wing news sources. I don’t root for any political party. I don’t look at politics like a football game.

I vote for interests and an agenda. 

Edited November 12, 2023 by BlackDude

[BootmanLA]

19 hours ago, BlackDude said:

1. I’m aware of the Inflation Reduction Act. They didn’t have to include increased IRS monitoring in the law. 
 

2. Corporations won’t be audited

3. Your assumption is incorrect. I don’t listen to right wing news sources. I don’t root for any political party. I don’t look at politics like a football game.

I vote for interests and an agenda. 

So again, your interest and/or agenda includes coddling tax cheats? I can't think of any reason to oppose seeing that dishonest people pay the taxes they legitimately owe, other than that.