Education

Frott Scost said:
Then explain it to me. I know youre in business so you probably know more than me, but Im always willing to learn more. 

At what point should these companies not get millions of dollars in rebates from the taxpayers?
Click to expand...
When they have used up their losses to off set income.

The reason Amazon gets this is because they lost literally billions of dollars getting started.  That gets banked to off set future earnings.  That is not scandalous or wrong.  It's a part of allowing people to take risks in starting new businesses.  Sometimes that happens with long term companies too.  

Our company lost a lot of money between 2008 and 2011.  While doing so, we racked up a lot fo debt also to stay alive.  One benefit from the losses we were able to carry forward was that we were able to use that cash to pay down debt instead of some taxes.  Now, we are back to paying taxes, less debt and in much better shape for the next recession when it comes.  

When our company used past losses to off set income, it wasn't scandalous or wrong.  It's part of doing business and having a tax environment that helps companies that take losses either when they are started or have a bad year.

 
Look at it this way.  If you take a ten year period and the company loses a million dollars in the first 5 years and then makes a million dollars in the last 5 years, they are paying taxes on all their earnings.  

The problem is when people just look at the last 5 years and start screaming that they are tax cheats. 

 
TGHusker said:
maybe a bit of :sarcasm on the first sentence - wasn't it AOC that said that is how we pay for the NGD??  But yes, why amazon and netflix etc get rebates like this is beyond me.
Click to expand...


https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/406085-trumps-plan-to-help-eliminate-federal-debt-was-to-print-money

"President Trump allegedly suggested to his chief economic adviser last year that the government should print more money to help eliminate federal debt, according to an excerpt from Bob Woodward’s new book"

 
BigRedBuster said:
When they have used up their losses to off set income.

The reason Amazon gets this is because they lost literally billions of dollars getting started.  That gets banked to off set future earnings.  That is not scandalous or wrong.  It's a part of allowing people to take risks in starting new businesses.  Sometimes that happens with long term companies too.  

Our company lost a lot of money between 2008 and 2011.  While doing so, we racked up a lot fo debt also to stay alive.  One benefit from the losses we were able to carry forward was that we were able to use that cash to pay down debt instead of some taxes.  Now, we are back to paying taxes, less debt and in much better shape for the next recession when it comes.  

When our company used past losses to off set income, it wasn't scandalous or wrong.  It's part of doing business and having a tax environment that helps companies that take losses either when they are started or have a bad year.
Click to expand...


Thank you. You, as a business man I can definetely see why you feel the way you do about this and it makes a lot of sense. As a lay person, its just hard for me to wrap my head around the profit they make compared to what they pay in taxes. But it does make sense, especially to give incentive for people to start their own businesses. 

 
Frott Scost said:
Thank you. You, as a business man I can definetely see why you feel the way you do about this and it makes a lot of sense. As a lay person, its just hard for me to wrap my head around the profit they make compared to what they pay in taxes. But it does make sense, especially to give incentive for people to start their own businesses. 
Click to expand...
It makes a certain amount of sense except that there should be a sunset or time limit clause IMO. Something like you can only carry it forward for 10 years.

 
Frott Scost said:
Thank you. You, as a business man I can definetely see why you feel the way you do about this and it makes a lot of sense. As a lay person, its just hard for me to wrap my head around the profit they make compared to what they pay in taxes. But it does make sense, especially to give incentive for people to start their own businesses. 
Click to expand...
Because you’re only looking at one year. 

 
RedDenver said:
It makes a certain amount of sense except that there should be a sunset or time limit clause IMO. Something like you can only carry it forward for 10 years.
Click to expand...
No, because you can only use your losses to off set your earnings. 

Let’s say I lose 10 million. Then for the next ten years I only make 100,000. You’re saying I can’t account for the other 9 million?

again, if you look at it over multiple years, I’m paying taxes on all my earnings. 

 
Virtual campuses are becoming bigger for HS...but the problem is that for a lot of kids "going to school" is breakfast, lunch, babysitter and socialization.  

I would not mind at all teaching for a virtual HS...I would love to teach from home!

I would also like to coach a virtual football team...I might have better luck!

 
teachercd said:
Virtual campuses are becoming bigger for HS...but the problem is that for a lot of kids "going to school" is breakfast, lunch, babysitter and socialization.  

I would not mind at all teaching for a virtual HS...I would love to teach from home!

I would also like to coach a virtual football team...I might have better luck!
Click to expand...
I think virtual campuses only work for post secondary education. 

 
BigRedBuster said:
I think virtual campuses only work for post secondary education. 
Click to expand...
I think so too.

I think there will be a niche for it at the HS level and will eventually take the place of the super sorry kids that get homeschooled...but that still is only a super small % of the student population. 

 
teachercd said:
I think so too.

I think there will be a niche for it at the HS level and will eventually take the place of the super sorry kids that get homeschooled...but that still is only a super small % of the student population. 
Click to expand...
Yes, for instance advanced classes or college level classes are a possibility  but, my daughter tried doing anatomy/ physiology in HS that way and it sucked. She got nothing out of it. 

Thrre are many college level classes that aren’t as effective this way too. 

 
BigRedBuster said:
Yes, for instance advanced classes or college level classes are a possibility  but, my daughter tried doing anatomy/ physiology in HS that way and it sucked. She got nothing out of it. 

Thrre are many college level classes that aren’t as effective this way too. 
Click to expand...
For sure!

 
Back
Top