It depends. You argument is very narrow. There are LOTS of ways to avoid paying your fair share of taxes, it depends on the situation and where the cash flows are coming from.
As for the Zuckerburg situation, what he did is pretty common. Though I have heard of an alternative to selling those shares, someone in his position could use a portion of his facebook shares as leverage and get a loan to pay the tax man, then said person could pay back the loan with the cash flows generated by the stock. Though in that scenario the interest on the loan and the cash flows of the shares would have to be favorable (i e, a finance question). Additionally, I have heard that getting a loan like that is difficult (something to do with eligibility and/or regulation), but don't quote me on that last part I am not that familiar with it myself.
No, it doesn't depend. And who said anything about fair? I'm talking about obligated and compelled.
> get a loan to pay the tax man
Yeah, so he pays the taxes with somebody else's money. Tax man gets paid, right? Tell me the scenario where a guy pays no taxes and isn't in trouble. This is empirically verifiable, but I don't recommend conducting the research.
Sorry for the tangent folks. I'm not commenting on Zuck's situation. The comment about not paying taxes all year is just plain wrong, and I would hate for someone to try it and get dinged. This is especially important for the newer startup people that don't have the usual single W-2 situation. That's all.
I guess this wasn't made clear by the way I worded my opinion, but I was insinuating that you could legally pay all you are required to as per United States tax law while socially not paying your fair share.
Great example: my fictional grandmother dies. She leaves me her 250 year old colonial home. Lets say that its worth $300,000.00. Lets say that for one reason or another I want to sell the home and prefer to invest that money in more real estate. I find a duplex that costs $300,000.00 (it could cost more or less, but I am keeping it the same to simplify the example) and I am reasonably certain that I can rent it out and generate a net profit per month. I find a 1031 real estate broker and set up a 1031 tax deferred exchange. Upon selling my fictionally grandmother's home for 300k, I will turn around and buy the duplex for $300. Uncle Sam get $0 in taxes. Zero. I pay the 1031 broker their fees. I paid all that I am legally bound to pay as per all the applicable tax laws in the United States. I have paid my fair share, as you called it. When I want to sell that property and most likely trade up I can keep doing the same thing and deferring the taxes indefinitely. There are further ways to minimize taxes on the rent collected, but that is beyond the scope of this simple example. There are a multitude of books on the subject discussed above and you are welcome to look up the 1031 tax code yourself.
The example above is purely to illustrate that there are in fact ways to minimize your tax burden. So as I said before, it depends.
In any case, I simply offered up an alternative which would enable Mark to keep 100% of his shares while still abiding by US tax codes. It appears you missed that point or were so obsessed with flaming me as a result of your personal opinion on tax law in the United States to grasp it. And no he doesn't pay the tax man with some else's money, he gives a creditor future cash flows in exchange for cash today to cover his capital gains that are being realized today (and again as I mentioned early only if the interest rate on the loan and his stock position is favorable for him to do so).
>Sorry for the tangent folks. I'm not commenting on Zuck's situation. The comment about not paying taxes all year is just plain wrong, and I would hate for someone to try it and get dinged. This is especially important for the newer startup people that don't have the usual single W-2 situation. That's all
Its unclear what you are referring to here. I am going to go out on a limb that while failing to grasp my own argument you went ahead and tried to insert words in my mouth as well. I never said he would avoid paying taxes all year, once again, he would be paying his taxes today with the loan, according to the analogy I put forward. I am not sure where you get off flaming someone on HN, this is not how to conduct an intelligent conversation here or anywhere else for that matter.
You would thinking that cute intelligent alpha male buying you coffee while the two of you pleasantly chat would be enough for people.
Also, as a potential employee, you can skip the standard application process and HR interviews (maybe they will have a formal interview process later) of most companies talk with a guy who is very likely going to be your boss should you get hired. This with almost no time investment on your side and your free to say your not interested and leave. Let me know next time your at a coffee shop in Florida. And I don't even like coffee.
We gave this guy 5 points for a sweeping generalization? Really. Get me a fucking time machine, this site was great 3 years ago without all the fucking yuppies.
What's next? Why do black people like fried chicken? Why Gob, do my friends bleed out of their asses but I don't?
Oh and here's why, because everyone and their mother wants the absolute cheapest possible flight. They don't care if they have to navigate a 50 screen questionnaire about their sex lives to get it. Consumers set the bar low and most major airlines are right there with them. Of course some airlines set the bar high, thus accomplishing "product differentiation" and "value added" (don't worry Timmy, some day you will learn what those words mean).
And. That. Explains. Everything. (except why we have a yuppy festival here instead of the previously good intelligent, rational thought convention)
I have similar experiences. I feel that degrees are only relevant to employers as a means to thin the pack of applicants and only relevant to students as a way to better network and fill that check box putting them into the thinned herd.
Though I am frankly amazed that pastebin was blocked. I know what its used for... everything. It is about as nefarious as a chalk board. When are those getting banned?
Basically anything that makes content sharing easy, becomes a threat to the government.
The thing is Radio, TV and Papers are already bought by the government. Its paid media, and media that is isn't paid is generally killed.
Internet is a dangerous beast. No centralized control, amazingly rich content can be shared seamlessly. This is dangerous to the government. That is why there is so much commotion.
"Bootstrapping in business means starting a business without external help or capital. Such startups fund the development of their company through internal cash flow and are cautious with their expenses.[11][12] Generally at the start of a venture, a small amount of money will be set aside for the bootstrap[13] process. Bootstrapping can also be a supplement for econometric models.[14]"
I looked it up to be sure, but bootstrapping as I know it has more to with business experience then programming. Things like knowing how to (cheaply) form a corporation (and the right kind too), set up (cheaply) any administrative infrastructure like accounting, control spending, ect.
Additionally, I am having trouble seeing how learning programming will help you with the above, or help you either A) find a technical co-founder or B) contract out developers to develop you product. I don't like the title and I don't think the author supported the title with his argument at all.
After reading the chain of comments above, I can't help but find your comment inappropriate.
A) Someone gave a back story, that this guys is a actually a comedian. Do I get upset when a comedian makes fun of fat people? No, whether people laugh or not, it is quite obvious that it was a joke. Granted, it sounds like this guy was not funny despite females getting tossed under the proverbial bus, leading to point
B) When its your company you can choose which ever speaker you like. Until then, your just going to have to settle with your opinion, which is frankly is neither relevant nor funny.
It's amusing to me that you construe my comment as inappropriate, but not this guy telling a room full of technical conference goers to tell their wives "Shut up, bitch!" I haven't even use a swear word yet.
Of course this comic has the right to say this. Of course the company has a right to hire him. What I'm saying is that, in America, if a company did this, they would face the consequences. If people are offended because your company appears to support misogyny, you will lose business and "but he's a comedian!" will not suffice as an apology. At least, if you have been projecting an image of corporate neutrality. I suppose if your brand identity is, we're a bunch of brogrammer morons, it probably would help your image. But we're not talking about a company like that, we're talking about Dell.
I think the key connection that you and the author are missing, is that conferences are also about networking. Yes, there is certainly promotion going on, but more than that or additionally to that, people who go to conferences want to network. While I certainly agree on some of the points the author makes, part of the reason why the question asker is specific and uses common lingo (in the case of uncommon I agree with the author) is to give himself credibility. Which is important if you are going to pull aside the speaker afterword and talk to him, possibly exchange business cards, maybe ask him to lunch, and ultimately find him on LinkedIn. As during the final step of networking, Question Asker A, wants Speaker B to remember who he was and add him to his virtual network.
Which is ultimately a hell of a lot more useful then pretending as OP said to be there solely for "education" or "sharing ideas." Not trying to discount what OP said, but point to something valuable being overlooked.
I guess the fact that Google put them up to it as retaliation for the fact that MS did the exact same thing to them is lost on this thread.
Did you know Microsoft makes more money licensing Android to Google then it does selling windows phones? Yeah payback is a bitch. Its ok thread goers, lets continue ignoring the real issue here and side with one of the largest patent trolls: MS.
As for the Zuckerburg situation, what he did is pretty common. Though I have heard of an alternative to selling those shares, someone in his position could use a portion of his facebook shares as leverage and get a loan to pay the tax man, then said person could pay back the loan with the cash flows generated by the stock. Though in that scenario the interest on the loan and the cash flows of the shares would have to be favorable (i e, a finance question). Additionally, I have heard that getting a loan like that is difficult (something to do with eligibility and/or regulation), but don't quote me on that last part I am not that familiar with it myself.