miscellaneous

91 people have 8+ stars

91 x 8 = 728 stars. Not including the extras who have less than 8 stars and more than 8 stars.

That's $7,280....

Who thinks Mr Ender has paid tax on that?

That is all. xoxoxox

Why does God need to pay tax?

Threatening game developers has never ended good.

One thousand cans of Red Bull/other caffeine sources A lot of sandwiches Server maintenance "Research" costs

All tax deductible.

Plus factor in the amount of hours of manpower poured into this.

Total taxable amount: Fuck You.

Threatening game developers has never ended good.

No threat intended.

One thousand cans of Red Bull/other caffeine sources A lot of sandwiches > Server maintenance "Research" costs

All tax deductible.

Plus factor in the amount of hours of manpower poured into this.

Total taxable amount: Fuck You.

Only deductible if its a registered business or sole trader. Wasn't an attack, simply an observation.

xoxoxox

Unless you are an accountant wishing to offer your services, bringing up something like this never ends well.

April 15th is coming up soon...

I'm going to look into writing off part of my (considerable) rent as a business expense, basically the corner where my computer sits. Hopefully that will help keep some of the star money in my pocket.

Maybe it shouldnt be located in Manhattan.. :D

thing is he doesnt get paid for the game we give him the money as a gift in return he gives us stars so why should he pay tax on gifts from us?

If it was that simple, no merchant, entrepreneur, or tradesman would ever need to pay tax.

That's $7,280....

@Ender how much have you maid off bots?

If it was that simple, no merchant, entrepreneur, or tradesman would ever need to pay tax.

+1 I have several business of my own, I'd love for the tax man not to take 21% from the top, never mind taxing my wage and National Insurance (UK).

Perhaps the UK needs to elect more Daniel Hannan's and revive the Manchester School then :p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_capitalism

I don't mind paying reasonable tax. I just hate progressive tax.

Taxing people based on "ability" to pay is either a a pathetic attempt to legislate people into equality, or an equally stupid attempt to legislate well off people into benevolence. Both are flawed concepts and are bad for society in general, both short term and long run.

I think the taxes in america should be based on a flat rate instead of the insanely complicated tax code there is right now.

Don't elect a commie next time. :)

+1 for Neps

I didn't vote for him.

I know, you're like the last person I'd call a commie. :)

hehehe

Seriously though, welfare state's coddle the lazy and demotivate the hardworking. In my opinion, if a country can't afford a socialized service, the solution is NOT to implement it, not try to figure who to tax more so the government can pay for it.

moar money moar problems

This has just increased my respect for Neps and Draoi +1. Congrats. :p

Now, as far as flat tax. No. No income tax period. End the IRS! End the wars and Empire, and get rid of the Welfare State. You could pay for the Government with a modest 1% flat Tariff on all goods and services. No more internal taxation. That is a free-society and a free peoples, the way our Republic was founded.

That is quite an ethnocentric view you have.

How so? Do you even understand what ethnocentric is? I don't think you do.

/proudly waves a red flag

^^

shoots down dragonrose and flag

Looks like you could use yourself some socialized medicine! :)

attempts to make a flag

/sets up the dominoes

^_~

fly's his flag

/me takes a shit on your flag

fly's his flag

*flies

lol wegandi. lol. I could tell you a thing or two about economics and society.

@Ender how much have you maid off bots?

According to my records, I've collected $18,440 in revenue since I began accepting payments in March 2011. Factor in ~5.5% for PayPal fees and 30% for US taxes and that comes out to just under $12,000. I've spent maybe $500-$700 on domain/hosting fees, so I figure I've made at least $11,000.

And yes, though we all call what you guys give me "donations", the fact remains that you send me money and I send you a (virtual) good, so the tax man is going to unfortunately want his cut.

that's a lot of fucking tax :(

That is pretty standard tax rate for developed countries, maybe even on the low side.

wikipedia

The problem with the US tax code isn't the rates, it is the fact that no one pays them. I pay ~800 dollars in tax a semester for my job, yet when April (tax month in the US) comes along... low and behold... I get 1,600 back. WTF IRS? Everyone in the US gets tax credits, tax rebates, yada yada yada. USA top 500 Forbes companies love to say that there is a "35%" corporation tax... yet most of these companies receive tax breaks and tax credits so they pay little to no tax. The tax code should, like the law, apply the same to everyone. If you require one person to pay 30% all people should pay 30%. However, I disagree with argument neps gave about progressive taxes, as some taxes have been used to create equality and to create benevolence. First benevolence is not bad for society, but thats another matter all together. Secondly, while some, if not most, progressive taxes have been used like a blunt club the idea behind the rest is this: You have dude A has 10,000 dollar income, dude B 100,000 income, and dude C has 1,000,000 income (per year). If you taxed everyone at 30% everyone pays 30%, but dude A pays MORE relative income to dude B and dude C. 30% of 10,000 has more impact on the living standard of dude B and dude C. So, while I support a flat tax for everyone, progressive taxes are not just blunt clubs used to beat people into benevolence (benevolence, is not a bad property of society) or to create equality they are a way to even the -relative- burden of taxes. Not to promote social equality, but to try and help the standard of living of those at the lower end of the spectrum. Is it flawed? No one knows. Never been able to isolate every aspect of economics for a long enough period of time to actually draw meaningful data for trends.

http://www.forbes.com/2011/04/13/ge-exxon-walmart-apple-business-washington-corporate-taxes.html

One problem that I think a lot of people don't realize is that you get these tax breaks for donating to charities that would normally be government supported. I'm sure some people donate because of the tax incentives but I'm sure most people would still donate regardless.

In the sense of corporations receiving tax breaks because of donations to charities...it really is just getting paid to give yourself good PR. ><

I don't want laws that try to legislate people into "benevolence," because benevolence forced is no benevolence at all. It breeds contempt for those the system supposedly helps and incites class warfare.

I don't want laws that try to legislate people into equality because, to be honest, people just aren't created equal. Some people are lazy, some are hardworking, some are ambitious, some are not. Take a look at the gigantic failed social experiment north of China. A reminder that trying to force equality onto people will always end in disaster.

A few facts:

The government cannot give you something without taking it from someone else.

People, when faced with a situation where all get the same share regardless of individual efforts, or where effort and hard work give diminishing returns, have a high chance of reverting to laziness. (a.k.a. Progressive taxation)

We can't all be rich, but everyone being poor is possible.

Take those three statements, put them together, and you end up with the future of the welfare state.

I understand why the welfare state seems so attractive. It seems nice to have the security of knowing big brothers is supposedly looking after you, that you can cruise through life, freeloading on other people's tax dollars. But that's a system bound to implode.

An ideal world for me, is where ambitious people aren't weighted down by lazy freeloaders. Inequality will and should always exist, because that's the beauty of being a human being: we are all individuals, not mindless drones. We can be achievers if we want to. If I want to be filthy rich, and I am willing to work hard to get there, I should not need to work hard enough to make everyone in my country filthy rich as well, which is what "legislating people into equality" means.

The idea behind tax breaks for donating was that it would allow you to 'spend' your tax dollars to the charity of your choice.

I wasn't talking about that, I was talking about the whole "redistribution of wealth" concept in general.