Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

forebill t1_it9anap wrote

Reply to comment by DoobieBrotherhood in Many countries have a "hidden welfare state" for incumbent homeowners, as governments subsidize homeowners through the tax system. The homeownership welfare state is strongest in the US and other Anglophone countries, but weakest in the Scandinavian countries. by smurfyjenkins

Actually it's not. It's just an accounting distinction. You could just as easily say employee income is revenue gained from an investment of time and labor. You could tax a corporation's revenue, and choose not to tax an employee's income using the rationality that the money has already been taxed as corporate revenue.

All of these categories are just accounting terms. They are all the result of an exchange of time, material, labor, and knowledge for money. The distinctions only get important when you apply policy to them.

1

DoobieBrotherhood t1_it9co5f wrote

>Revenue gained from an investment of time and labor.

It’s not though. As an employee, you are paid a salary or wages, which are fundamentally different from investment income. You can always be an independent contractor and deduct your home office expenses against your contract revenues.

Neither of these things are corporate taxes though.

1

forebill t1_it9fuu9 wrote

It's not at all. As an employee I'm investing my time, labor, and knowledge. It's all an accounting distinction. The economy is an aggregation of the exchange of money for the fruits of labor. All an entrepreneur does is convince employees that he can sell their labor better than they can. It's an American myth that it is a higher form of economic participation.

Revenue is revenue, the rest is all accounting.

0

DoobieBrotherhood t1_it9h1so wrote

It’s not an accounting distinction. When you earn salary/wages, the company is expending all of the deductible expenses you would be if you owned the business. You are approaching this like a high school student who took one philosophy class and dropped it halfway through. We are on the science sub. You know that “labor” is not a deductible business expense.

I never said ownership was a higher form of economic participation. Don’t straw man me.

1

forebill t1_it9htbi wrote

You are using accounting terms trying to argue its not an accounting distinction.

Revenue is revenue. The only difference between corporate revenue and an employees revenue is the column it ends up in in the ledgers, kept by accountants so the taxes can be calculated properly. And that is all a matter of policy, enforced by accountants. It's all accounting.

But the flow of money is exactly the same in terms of economic impact. It still is an exchange.

0

DoobieBrotherhood t1_it9idd7 wrote

Terms have definitions. The reason we distinguish is because they are no equivalent. You cannot just say “blah blah nihilism” and pretend you don’t need to make a solid claim for equivalency.

I’ve already explained the differences. Repeating yourself and ignoring those explanations does not help your case.

1

forebill t1_it9lhuc wrote

Your explanations are useless. If I dig a ditch and receive $500.00, or I work 40 hours and receive $500.00 on a W2 there is NO difference. I've done $500.00 of economic activity. How that money is handled on either side of that exchange is all a matter of accounting, and policy.

I'm sorry you are too thick to see that really simple concept.

0

DoobieBrotherhood t1_it9vl7j wrote

If you work as an independent contractor and dig a ditch with your own shovel and wheelbarrow, those expenses are deductible on your taxes. If you work for a ditch digging company and use their shovel and wheelbarrow, those expenses are not deductible.

Speaking of digging oneself a hole, I am sorry that you dis that in this discussion and also that you lack the humility to admit when you are wrong. No doubt, that will ensure that you never learn while others surpass your knowledge. I cannot imagine how difficult that must be for your fragile ego.

1