Tim Cook and Eddy Cue Receive Combined $94 Million in Apple Stock

[diazj3]

That's nothing short of obscene.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Wait, whut? How is the government getting paid first? I get paid every two weeks. I'm pretty sure my company makes quarterly payments to the government, including taxes withheld. Do I have that wrong? Are they making a transfer to the government first, waiting, and then making my direct deposit?

If you're employed, look who gets paid first from your gross income. It isn't you, who made the money by the work you did. It's first, and foremost, the government. What the FairTax does is make it so that you get everything first, then, when you purchase something at a store, then you pay the tax. (Essentially a sales tax with a prebate, which takes care of the people at the bottom.)

So, unless you are not making much, or are one of the Duggars, you will pay Fed income tax first, then FICA, then Medicare (the last two are Duggar resistant - everyone that gets a salary pays those). Those last two have been named that and go into the general fund with an IOU to be paid by future generations.

As for right/wrong, my perception on this may be different than yours, and we may disagree, but right and wrong are what the nightly cable TV yelling shows are about. I think we're just having a discussion.

 

[CFreymarc]

Anyone else notice that Tim has lost a lot of weight?

 

[Analog Kid]

If you're employed, look who gets paid first from your gross income. It isn't you, who made the money by the work you did. It's first, and foremost, the government. What the FairTax does is make it so that you get everything first, then, when you purchase something at a store, then you pay the tax. (Essentially a sales tax with a prebate, which takes care of the people at the bottom.)

So, unless you are not making much, or are one of the Duggars, you will pay Fed income tax first, then FICA, then Medicare (the last two are Duggar resistant - everyone that gets a salary pays those). Those last two have been named that and go into the general fund with an IOU to be paid by future generations.

As for right/wrong, my perception on this may be different than yours, and we may disagree, but right and wrong are what the nightly cable TV yelling shows are about. I think we're just having a discussion.

Perhaps I should have said "am I incorrect about this". I wasn't judging perceptions, I was checking my facts. I'm pretty sure my taxes are incurred when my income is disbursed (on payday) and withholdings are deposited after that date. In other words, I think I get paid first and foremost, then the government gets some portion of what I owe after I get paid. Then, typically once a year in April, I settle up for the difference.

Am I incorrect?

 

[Substance90]

Made possible by always selling last year's hardware packaged in a new box at a premium price.

Can't wait to upgrade my 64GB iPhone 5 to a 16GB iPhone 6S and become broke doing so

I hope Tim spends my money well.

 

[lowendlinux]

Not saying he's not, but it's a lot easier to be a class act when you have a bottomless wallet.

No you can have class an be poor, it's not easier when you're rich.

I do like Schiller though when he is on stage.

I do to.

Schiller is great to watch partly because he a little irreverent and partly because he's so completely bought in

 

[Four oF NINE]

If you're employed, look who gets paid first from your gross income. It isn't you, who made the money by the work you did. It's first, and foremost, the government. What the FairTax does is make it so that you get everything first, then, when you purchase something at a store, then you pay the tax. (Essentially a sales tax with a prebate, which takes care of the people at the bottom.)

So, unless you are not making much, or are one of the Duggars, you will pay Fed income tax first, then FICA, then Medicare (the last two are Duggar resistant - everyone that gets a salary pays those). Those last two have been named that and go into the general fund with an IOU to be paid by future generations.

As for right/wrong, my perception on this may be different than yours, and we may disagree, but right and wrong are what the nightly cable TV yelling shows are about. I think we're just having a discussion.

The flat tax has long been a wet dream for the greedy billionaire class.. how sweet it would be for them (to their way of thinking) to only have to pay taxes on money they spend, since the vast bulk of their income is warehoused, and not spent. So who would wind up paying the difference? The working stiff that lives paycheck to paycheck and in many cases has to spend ALL their weekly income on living expenses.. they would be getting taxed on 100% of their income, since your system is based on taxing only money that's spent.

Only the ultra wealthy, right wing ideologues and libertarian free market fundamentalists advocate that system. It is supremely regressive as a taxation system. America has long advocated a progressive taxation system so that the bulk of the tax burden falls heaviest on those best able to bear the burden.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Perhaps I should have said "am I incorrect about this". I wasn't judging perceptions, I was checking my facts. I'm pretty sure my taxes are incurred when my income is disbursed (on payday) and withholdings are deposited after that date. In other words, I think I get paid first and foremost, then the government gets some portion of what I owe after I get paid. Then, typically once a year in April, I settle up for the difference.

Am I incorrect?

You are correct in the way that you present it.

My way of looking at is is this:
There is money placed on the table, based on my earnings (time spent doing something productive for the company I work for).
Before I have a chance to touch it, the government says, "you must pay me before you touch this."
I do think there would be more people upset about taxes, and the tax rate if they had to write a check for it. As it stands now, you never see the money, so it is never "lost". This is also a good reason to use your company's 401(k).

This is different from other aspects of your money, where there is money placed on the table, and if you want to buy a car, then you actively decide to go out and purchase one, of your own free will.

 

[lowendlinux]

You are correct in the way that you present it.

My way of looking at is is this:
There is money placed on the table, based on my earnings (time spent doing something productive for the company I work for).
Before I have a chance to touch it, the government says, "you must pay me before you touch this."
I do think there would be more people upset about taxes, and the tax rate if they had to write a check for it. As it stands now, you never see the money, so it is never "lost". This is also a good reason to use your company's 401(k).

This is different from other aspects of your money, where there is money placed on the table, and if you want to buy a car, then you actively decide to go out and purchase one, of your own free will.

You're allowed your opinion but that doesn't change the fact the fair tax is regressive therefore unsuitable for a society. It's one of those fine things in theory but like most of *ism's when faced with reality it doesn't works so well. The tax system needs restructured and simplified but this isn't the path.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

The flat tax has long been a wet dream for the greedy billionaire class.. how sweet it would be for them (to their way of thinking) to only have to pay taxes on money they spend, since the vast bulk of their income is warehoused, and not spent. So who would wind up paying the difference? The working stiff that lives paycheck to paycheck and in many cases has to spend ALL their weekly income on living expenses.. they would be getting taxed on 100% of their income, since your system is based on taxing only money that's spent.

Only the ultra wealthy, right wing ideologues and libertarian free market fundamentalists advocate that system. It is supremely regressive as a taxation system. America has long advocated a progressive taxation system so that the bulk of the tax burden falls heaviest on those best able to bear the burden.

The FairTax does have a provision in it for a "prebate", where a set amount is sent to all citizens and legal immigrants over 18 to compensate for the issue you brought up. The last time I remember, it was around $460/month, which would cover the tax spent on about $2300/month (roughing up the numbers where it would be 20%).

I emboldened where I fit into your buckets. Libertarians: We will take over the world, and then leave you alone.

As for the Progressive Income Tax, I'd cite point #2 of the Communist Manifesto for the widespread origin of that idea.

 

[Abazigal]

Heh, in one of my college classes we had to create a spreadsheet of all things we wanted in life if money was no object.

Lets just say after 1.43 billion, I couldn't find anything else to spend on.

This included 76 cars (classic and exotics), a house or condo in Cali, NYC, Paris, Tokyo, and few scattered elsewhere on private islands. A private jet and yacht. A baseball and football team. And a bunch of gadgets and so forth.

The interest and income generated from some of the stuff would make me so much richer that I couldn't keep the spend up. So spending a few hundred million is easy to prove. Spending billions is a LOT harder. I mean, you literally have to buy a hammer for 100 grand to blow through money faster.

This did not take into account any taxes paid on the properties.

The result proved that after a certain point a single person can not spend fast enough the income earned.

You probably lack the insight because you are not born rich, and thus not privy into how the really rich people spend their money.

To put things in context, I once read somewhere about how a watch company made only 8 watches each costing $200k, and a middle-eastern Sheik just bought 3 of them at one go. Like you would buy 3 hot dogs at a food stand. I am guessing there is a whole market dedicated to serving the extremely rich people, and charging super-exorbitant prices while at it. I imagine that the really rich people would have no problems spending their entire fortune in one sitting if they ever felt so inclined.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

You're allowed your opinion but that doesn't change the fact the fair tax is regressive therefore unsuitable for a society. It's one of those fine things in theory but like most of *ism's when faced with reality it doesn't works so well. The tax system needs restructured and simplified but this isn't the path.

The prebate in the FairTax is what evens it out. From what I remember, every citizen over 18, and legal alien gets a check for $460 (or thereabouts, I can't remember the exact number), so that the first $2300/month spent is essentially "tax free". After that, it becomes incrementally more progressive to the maximum tax amount.

Oh there are a lot of things that need to be cleared before I will get fully behind this:
1. Get rid of the 16th Amendment. Having an income and a sales tax, and having those that are in power for 2 years make promises for those that come after them is a recipe for disaster.
2. How does this prebate get distributed?
3. How do we switch over from one to the other, like for those that have saved their money in a Roth IRA/401(k)? They get double taxed, when they spend the money.
4. What about everyone's favorite deduction, the mortgage interest?
5. How do we keep the same system we have from creeping back in (OK, for candy bars, the tax is 20%, but since we like "Bill's healthy candy bars, we're only going to tax his at 3%. Thanks Bill for the generous donation to my campaign fund!"

This is a tricky mess, but hey, if we can put someone on the moon and bring them back safely, or better yet, rescue 3 men on their way to the moon after an explosion on their spacecraft, anything is possible.

 

[Four oF NINE]

The FairTax does have a provision in it for a "prebate", where a set amount is sent to all citizens and legal immigrants over 18 to compensate for the issue you brought up. The last time I remember, it was around $460/month, which would cover the tax spent on about $2300/month (roughing up the numbers where it would be 20%).

I emboldened where I fit into your buckets. Libertarians: We will take over the world, and then leave you alone.

As for the Progressive Income Tax, I'd cite point #2 of the Communist Manifesto for the widespread origin of that idea.

Perhaps you would prefer the libertarian paradise of Somalia. Justice Brandeis observed: Taxes are the price of living in a civilized society.

Libertarian ideology is a national scourge, and will be our undoing if those policies are pursued. I understand it may have some appeal if you're 14, but thinking adults know better.

 

[LordVic]

As for the Progressive Income Tax, I'd cite point #2 of the Communist Manifesto for the widespread origin of that idea.

Can you please cite as you stated? because, while it's been nearly a Decade since the last time I read that document in it's entirety, There's really not some "bullet point list" in it defining a listing of instructions

 

[unplugme71]

Depends on the person and the income.

First of all, you mentioned a lot of stuff like cars, condos, houses, private jets and yachts. Did you factor in upkeep on those items. If you think about your own house (assuming you own one) the cost of buying the house is one thing, but there are numerous outlays involved with keeping it up every year. Things like property taxes, utilities, insurance, yard and inside maintenance, repairs, etc. Magnify that by multitudes when you start looking at things like large mansions, jets and yachts.

Second, you hear stories all the time of athletes and entertainers who blow through tens or hundreds of million dollar fortunes. It's amazing what "normal" becomes when you start playing on that level. Even looking at my own situation, I make a nice, 6-figure salary. But I am not living like a rock star compared to the days when I was making about 1/5 what I am now.

Yes, but if you take the income made from owning two sports teams, plus some of the other stuff I did not list, that income well pays for maintenance expenses.

A lot of athletes and rock-star celebrities also party a lot and drop a ton of cash on drinks, strippers, etc.. That's not a lifestyle I live now nor do I fancy that type of thing. I consider a lot of that wasteful spending. Sure cars are wasteful spending, but at least you enjoy it more than a night and don't wake up feeling ****** either.

 

[unplugme71]

You probably lack the insight because you are not born rich, and thus not privy into how the really rich people spend their money.

To put things in context, I once read somewhere about how a watch company made only 8 watches each costing $200k, and a middle-eastern Sheik just bought 3 of them at one go. Like you would buy 3 hot dogs at a food stand. I am guessing there is a whole market dedicated to serving the extremely rich people, and charging super-exorbitant prices while at it. I imagine that the really rich people would have no problems spending their entire fortune in one sitting if they ever felt so inclined.

I get it - but its one thing to buy stuff for yourself, and another to buy things just because you can. And even at some point, you just can't spend it fast enough at the rate you earn money.

Here's some insight, if you make a 100k salary and have 10mil in the bank you can easily earn your current salary over the same period of time at 1%. Now if you invest it more wisely, you can get 3-4x without much more effort and even 7-10x that with getting more lucky.

Now imagine having 10 billion in your savings, eventually you will make more than you can possibly spend yourself. And that's just one source of income. You will also have your business, you probably own a few teams, venues, etc that brings in additional income, plus charities that you run and keep a percentage of.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Can you please cite as you stated? because, while it's been nearly a Decade since the last time I read that document in it's entirety, There's really not some "bullet point list" in it defining a listing of instructions

Not a problem.... The term, "heavily" is subjective, and whether that means 0-95% (which is the highest that the US has seen) or 0-10% (10% is the original income tax that I know of, as seen in Deuteronomy - May be in Numbers, but Cain and Abel had a dispute over the acceptance of their tax they were paying, and that didn't end well for either.)
http://www.libertyzone.com/Communist-Manifesto-Planks.html
http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
(about half way down on the 2nd link)

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Perhaps you would prefer the libertarian paradise of Somalia. Justice Brandeis observed: Taxes are the price of living in a civilized society.

Libertarian ideology is a national scourge, and will be our undoing if those policies are pursued. I understand it may have some appeal if you're 14, but thinking adults know better.

I see by your tone that we're not going to have an adult conversation, so how about we depart as agreeing to disagree. As for Justice Brandeis, let's just say that taking quotes from a Progressive on taxes is like taking quotes from Colonel Sanders on the merits of chicken dinners.

On with the ad hominem attacks against me, right?

 

[Four oF NINE]

I see by your tone that we're not going to have an adult conversation, so how about we depart as agreeing to disagree. As for Justice Brandeis, let's just say that taking quotes from a Progressive on taxes is like taking quotes from Colonel Sanders on the merits of chicken dinners.

On with the ad hominem attacks against me, right?

Oh dear, I wasn't trying to be uncivil, my disdain is reserved for your ideology, not you personally. I hope you can grow beyond it, and I don't mean that condescendingly, but rather because it's really an ultimately destructive ideology. Somalia is merely the most extreme example. A society is a group that works toward a common good, not a collection of individuals living by the law of the jungle. We can decide as a society to be better than that. Join us.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

The rich get richer and the poor keep on doing all the actual work. That stock option alone would STILL pay a typical 4 year degree job for TEN years if 99% of it were given away to charity (i.e. that would still leave $940,000 with only 1%). Yes, the top 1% are SOOOO deserving of enough money to pay 1000 middle class workers (or 10,000-100,000 low wage workers; maybe 1 million if you live in China). This world is fracked up and only getting worse. The rich are trying to push us back to the Middle Ages in terms of a peasant class and the radicals in the Middle East are trying to push our society and technology back even further. The two should team up and then you'd have the Holy Roman Empire and/or Ottoman Empire once more. Oh what fun it is to be one of the 99% in that society and all based on what family you're born into.

Yeah, we don't need unions. Workers don't need no stinking rights.

 

[Steve121178]

"Eddie...we did it! We're gonna continue with our plan to rMBP, iPhones, iWatch, and iMac. Forget about those professional users who wants mac pros."

All 3 of them moved to high-end PC's years ago.

 

[pat500000]

All 3 of them moved to high-end PC's years ago.

still....

 

[rdlink]

Yes, but if you take the income made from owning two sports teams, plus some of the other stuff I did not list, that income well pays for maintenance expenses.

A lot of athletes and rock-star celebrities also party a lot and drop a ton of cash on drinks, strippers, etc.. That's not a lifestyle I live now nor do I fancy that type of thing. I consider a lot of that wasteful spending. Sure cars are wasteful spending, but at least you enjoy it more than a night and don't wake up feeling ****** either.

Not sure why you're arguing this point, when numerous people have shown the ability to lose large fortunes quite easily. Just because you have no desire to blow money at the rate that others do is not evidence that it can't be done.

As an aside, you do realize that many of the most successful sports teams on the field are also some of the biggest money losers, right? Sure, they bring in a lot of revenue, but it gets spent, and then some.

 

[rdlink]

Perhaps you would prefer the libertarian paradise of Somalia. Justice Brandeis observed: Taxes are the price of living in a civilized society.

Libertarian ideology is a national scourge, and will be our undoing if those policies are pursued. I understand it may have some appeal if you're 14, but thinking adults know better.

We have truly transcended to a surreal place when someone can, with a straight face say that Libertarian ideology is "a national scourge," and that "thinking adults know better." You have just described perfectly unchecked socialism. Show me a society in which socialism sustained itself for more than 60-70 years. And even in those instances it was done with a totalitarian hand on the tiller.

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

Oh dear, I wasn't trying to be uncivil, my disdain is reserved for your ideology, not you personally. I hope you can grow beyond it, and I don't mean that condescendingly, but rather because it's really an ultimately destructive ideology. Somalia is merely the most extreme example. A society is a group that works toward a common good, not a collection of individuals living by the law of the jungle. We can decide as a society to be better than that. Join us.

As Somalia keeps getting brought up, I'm not sure what that has to do with this conversation. I'm not talking about people immediately post war, where there is usually destruction and lawlessness, but where we are in the USA (my frame of reference). For the remarks being condescending, terms like

I understand it may have some appeal if you're 14, but thinking adults know better.

are self-evident.
There is a different road, and it is the one I choose. I belong to a church that says I must pay 10% of my earnings to help it grow, and on the first Sunday of the month, our family doesn't eat, and we give the money to be distributed to those that need it. It is entirely voluntary, and I can leave at any time. On top of that, I volunteer my time and energy to helping the young men grow to be good men through the Boy Scouts. No paid pastors, we all do it because we want to. When it comes time to volunteer to help people, I've noticed that there are doctors right next to the people that work at the gas station helping those that have fallen on hard times, from losing their job to spouses dying.
That is the key. We come to the same end, but the way I choose lets me retain my freedom to say "no", which I have never done, and the other requires me to say, "yes." That requirement is antithetical to freedom.
I ask you to join us. Besides, we have cookies and punch. Loads and loads of cookies and punch. It's an epidemic over here.
The interesting thing is that, in the past (my family was affected by this directly), the system and the place you show as where you're from was walling people to keep them from escaping, and this country is considering a wall to keep people from getting in.
Well, there we go. We've turned Tim and Eddy getting a boatload of money into a PRSI discussion.