Letter from the Boss

really what should be done is being done so this guy should be happy estick even.
Destroy the mid and lower class to the point that they will work for minim wage or less . And keep all the profits now hard work is hard work I aggree this guy thinks he is the only one who works hard i am sure so he deservis taht 300k bonis or better yet that 5 million one. Hey why not ? its not like he needs employs anyway . Or even if he does no problem well just higher foreigners and not even at half wage but make them PAY 6k to have the job through in a few free classes and wala 100% free workforce .
What a joke yadda yadda OO poor me I worked so hard and people who I employ accutly expect to be able to earn enough to live .
What a joke reality check today this dude has moved his company over seas and is paying a china man 10 cents an hour . The greed is bearly clocked with this letter .
50% if taht was true he would be BROKE or maybe he is so stupid he doesnt know how to get around taxes??
its not like you cant dectuct 95% of what he earns every year and end up owing NOTHING .
You do know MD gets a tax barke fro highering school studients and keep them uner 32 hours a week right?
you do know that MD gets to take ever buger they dont sell as a tax brake as well dont you?
my god who are you kidding this guy doesnt pay any more taxes then i do Unless he is just totally STUPID . Even I know how to not pay each tax legaly reinvest 100% of the profit then it CAN NOT BE TAXED DAAAAAAAAA O but then he may have to give someone a raise bummer

reply to post by TDawgRex


He is taking it from what the guy stated he paid in "quarterly taxes" around 250k

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

 

The letter is one I saw back in 2008, another said they saw it in 2007. I look at it though as something to make you think, even though you realize it's fake.

nowhere in the letter though does it satate what the company makes or the wage his 12 employees are making.

He wrote that he paid quarterly taxes of $288,000. With a top rate of 35% that works out to about $3 million or $2 million after tax.

The fact that he bitches about minimum wage hikes hurting him means he sure isn't paying top dollar to his employees.

I also bet he didn't start making that amount of coin until he started having employees so he shouldn't take all the credit.

sick of the lucky ones who happen to have the right nak crying about how unfair it is if We make enough money to eat!Its not enough they win we MUST ALL LOUSE .Its not enough they make 500k 1million or more we cant be payed enough to even rent a place .
OOOOO cry me a river I know people who have there own bussiness and are making very good money Even with all the UUUUUU Over taxing ))) yea right)) they get.
Over taxing my but the guy i know hey need a work van ? ok buy it now get a 10k tax dection and well even reduce the price for you .
A Brand spanking new chevy work cargo van he payed 7.5k the real cost after all the tax brakes he was alowed
And i was there Now cry me a river he gtes a new car 25% of cost and if i want teh excact same one it cost me 25k??? yea cry me a river

its kinda sad that the Tax small business like that when large business pays little to no taxes must be the name corporation that makes the difference. I have been watching my friends and family struggle to get there small business off the ground over the years. I am a fan of the occupy movement not the crazy hair brain communist view's. The taxe scale is broke and Obama has some crazy tax increases for the small business with the jobs bill he is tryn to push through congress. IMO if a person works for a company and still has to file for welfare or food stamps the company is playing the system and should face fines and punitive punishments.

reply to post by xxcalbier


So you are jealous then? Cause that's what you are portraying.
He got something cheaper than I did.

Boo freaking Hoo!

Whether this actual letter is true or a fabrication isn't the point. The point is that the situation described is true, and one that business owners find themselves in all over the nation.

I have a friend who is a lawyer. Her husband is also a lawyer, and they run a very small law firm (just the 2 of them and his dad.) They need to hire another person to work in the office, but they can't afford to because the unemployment tax is killing them. Did you know that THEY have to pay the unemployment benefits if one of their workers ends up qualifying for them??? So they would have to pay 99 weeks of unemployment to someone who no longer works for them. Also, they just moved to a new office to keep pace with changes in the community. The lengths they had to go to to comply with the ADA laws were ridiculous and very expensive.

So they are not hiring anyone due to the punative governmental regulations in place. Instead of creating jobs, they are working themselves to death.

While I am not asking you to feel sorry for them, I want you to realize that the government is making the unemployment problems worse. My friends are not "heartless" employers. They DO want to benefit financially from all of the hours they work, however.

reply to post by GeorgiaGirl


Just more lies used as an excuse not to hire. Unemployment tax is like 1-2% of the wage. We are talking like 25-50 cents an hour difference. The employer is not responsible for paying the 99 weeks unemployment. That comes from the fund they pay into while the person is working.

And it should be expensive to employ someone as you are signing up to pretty much care for that persons existence. People work to make a living and pay their bills. That is fact. If you can't afford to pay them a living wage then you shouldn't be employing them. By logic that is also a fact, but that doesn't stop people from arguing against it. If the only way you can obtain a living wage for yourself is to employ people at below a living wage then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

 

Just more lies used as an excuse not to hire. Unemployment tax is like 1-2% of the wage. We are talking like 25-50 cents an hour difference. The employer is not responsible for paying the 99 weeks unemployment. That comes from the fund they pay into while the person is working.

And it should be expensive to employ someone as you are signing up to pretty much care for that persons existence. People work to make a living and pay their bills. That is fact. If you can't afford to pay them a living wage then you shouldn't be employing them. By logic that is also a fact, but that doesn't stop people from arguing against it. If the only way you can obtain a living wage for yourself is to employ people at below a living wage then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.

So when my friend and I were together this weekend she was lying to me? We don't even live in the same state...why would she make up this lie? She is lying to me so she doesn't have to hire people?????

I guess you are right in one regard...because she and her husband don't want to "pretty much care for that person's existence", they have decided NOT to hire and are working themselves to death. The sad thing is that there are people who would probably appreciate the job...IF my friend's firm could establish the compensation without having to jump through all of the government's hoops. I'm confident they would be paying a living wage. It's the other costs that are prohibative.

As for the unemployment insurance, you are mistaken. She explained that if a worker ends up collecting the 99 weeks unemployment, they are REQUIRED to pay back to the government the amount paid out to the worker . Here is a source for you:

All employers other than public employers and nonprofit employers pay unemployment taxes. These taxes are based on the employer's experiences with terminating and laying off employees who then collect benefits. Public employers and nonprofit employers, rather than paying taxes, can reimburse the system directly for whatever benefits their employees collect.

www.house.leg.state.mn.us... Notice that the employer will lose either way...they can be taxed based on history of termination/layoffs, OR can reimburse the system directly for benefits. 99 weeks of benefits is too much to gamble with. So they don't hire.

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical


Add into that matching SS, Medicaid, Medicare and workers comp.
Oh, and now that you have an employee you have to change your insurance policy so you are covered in the event of an accident.

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

 

Just more lies used as an excuse not to hire. Unemployment tax is like 1-2% of the wage. We are talking like 25-50 cents an hour difference. The employer is not responsible for paying the 99 weeks unemployment. That comes from the fund they pay into while the person is working.

And it should be expensive to employ someone as you are signing up to pretty much care for that persons existence. People work to make a living and pay their bills. That is fact. If you can't afford to pay them a living wage then you shouldn't be employing them. By logic that is also a fact, but that doesn't stop people from arguing against it. If the only way you can obtain a living wage for yourself is to employ people at below a living wage then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.

So when my friend and I were together this weekend she was lying to me? We don't even live in the same state...why would she make up this lie? She is lying to me so she doesn't have to hire people?????

I guess you are right in one regard...because she and her husband don't want to "pretty much care for that person's existence", they have decided NOT to hire and are working themselves to death. The sad thing is that there are people who would probably appreciate the job...IF my friend's firm could establish the compensation without having to jump through all of the government's hoops. I'm confident they would be paying a living wage. It's the other costs that are prohibative.

As for the unemployment insurance, you are mistaken. She explained that if a worker ends up collecting the 99 weeks unemployment, they are REQUIRED to pay back to the government the amount paid out to the worker . Here is a source for you:

All employers other than public employers and nonprofit employers pay unemployment taxes. These taxes are based on the employer's experiences with terminating and laying off employees who then collect benefits. Public employers and nonprofit employers, rather than paying taxes, can reimburse the system directly for whatever benefits their employees collect.

www.house.leg.state.mn.us... Notice that the employer will lose either way...they can be taxed based on history of termination/layoffs, OR can reimburse the system directly for benefits. 99 weeks of benefits is too much to gamble with. So they don't hire.

Georgia Girl...I don't think your friends are lying...just lazy...they could have contracted a 1099 worker, paid a simple agreed amount to them, and their problem is fixed.....all your dumb excuses are out the door, all the worries, all the taxes, all the complexity....gone...

Its weird how these two people think their business will collapse due to hiring 1 person...they may be good lawyers, but they really stink at employers....the truth is probably not being stated to you...

reply to post by MentalGiant


I'm sure they understand the law much better than you or I do (unless you are a lawyer yourself). I can also assure you they are not stupid. If they have determined that it is not worth it to hire someone, you can be assured it is not worth it.

The WHOLE point is that the government's policies are what is causing this unemployment crisis in America. Period. I can't see how anyone can logically argue otherwise.

reply to post by MentalGiant


Sure, until the IRS finds out you have set hours for them to work. The IRS will classify them as an employee and you will owe all the way back to when they were hired, and that could very well put them under.

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by MentalGiant

 

Sure, until the IRS finds out you have set hours for them to work. The IRS will classify them as an employee and you will owe all the way back to when they were hired, and that could very well put them under.

I guess my friends knew that, because they are LAWYERS. Thanks for clarifying for me, because I was pretty sure if they didn't do it that way there was a pretty good reason.

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by MentalGiant

 

Sure, until the IRS finds out you have set hours for them to work. The IRS will classify them as an employee and you will owe all the way back to when they were hired, and that could very well put them under.

Are you retarded? Why would anyone set the hours of an independent contractor? Why would you hire someone as an independent contractor and treat them as an employee. That is NOT what you would do. Everytime I mention 1099, you start fantasing about how you will get in trouble for doing unethical illegal things....

Why are you obsessed with screwing someone over that does not deserve it? Why are you obsessed with lying about an independent contractor? Why do you keep stating getting in trouble for being deceitful?

Noone here is saying such things but you.... Ill leave you here, ...there is no hope for some.

Originally posted by MentalGiant

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by MentalGiant

 

Sure, until the IRS finds out you have set hours for them to work. The IRS will classify them as an employee and you will owe all the way back to when they were hired, and that could very well put them under.

Are you retarded? Why would anyone set the hours of an independent contractor? Why would you hire someone as an independent contractor and treat them as an employee. That is NOT what you would do. Everytime I mention 1099, you start fantasing about how you will get in trouble for doing unethical illegal things....

Why are you obsessed with screwing someone over that does not deserve it? Why are you obsessed with lying about an independent contractor? Why do you keep stating getting in trouble for being deceitful?

Noone here is saying such things but you.... Ill leave you here, ...there is no hope for some.

Sigh. They want someone to come into the office when it opens and work there until it closes for the day. Therefore, they DO want someone to work certain hours. Apparently, as pointed out by haarvik, they do not want to hire an independent contractor. Why should they be forced to wheel and deal? If they want someone from 9 to 5, they should be able to get someone from 9 to 5...not "Hey, whenever you want, independent contractor!!!"

Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
reply to post by MentalGiant

 

I'm sure they understand the law much better than you or I do (unless you are a lawyer yourself). I can also assure you they are not stupid. If they have determined that it is not worth it to hire someone, you can be assured it is not worth it.

The WHOLE point is that the government's policies are what is causing this unemployment crisis in America. Period. I can't see how anyone can logically argue otherwise.

Guess since they cant rape someone for next to nothing pay, its not worth it for them.....Oh I see....Good luck to them...maybe their ignorance is actually divine intervention....because they cannot get away with something that seems wrong on every level.....oh and they are too stupid to contract out the "help" they need....

Some people deserve their misery...Good Luck (cough) to your friends....and good Luck to you for gravitating to an answer that easily fits your needed response instead of searching for the reality....

Guess Im a bad guy for actually being a business owner with 1099 contractors for 12" YEARS and never a tax/audit problem ever.....but hey...go trust some unemployed chick....

reply to post by MentalGiant


Why? Because a lot of people don't realize this. If you are going to promote 1099 work, and for the record I support this, then you also have to warn them of the dangers. If you are a lawyer, you have set hours. Unless they are working from home, the IRS will categorize them as an employee because of that. I've dealt with them for many years, and have seen others burned by this. So yes, it does bear some attention.

reply to post by barkingdogamato


This is a truly thought provoking and well thought out letter...WHO Would have imagined that Bruce S. would taken the time to share his thoughts and expressed himself so Articulately! (: Guess thats why HE IS THE BOSS...

reply to post by GeorgiaGirl


The government policies are there to keep employers from taking advantage of employees. The way you talk one would think that no lawyers have employees. In fact most all successful lawyers do have employees. The problem with your friend is simply a lack of success and given the way they think it is not at all suprising.