Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 222 posts

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#71

Post by scarface74 »

rat9988 wrote: post #67
scarface74 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of policemen “risking their lives” is not statistically accurate. Only 144 policemen died in the line of duty in the entire United States last year ( https://www.npr.org/2018/12/27/680410169/more-police-officer... ) The Chicago police department isn’t exactly what most people would call “quality”.

Only 144? I guess it's a matter of perception, but I'm pretty sure way less software developers died for their job.

From a sibling comment, it is the 18th most dangerous job.

Also from the article.

Leading causes included heart attacks and strokes, which caused 18 deaths. And 15 officers died due to cancers that the NLEOMF says were "related to search and recovery efforts after the attack on the World Trade Centers on September 11, 2001."

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#72

Post by closeparen »

czbond wrote: post #58
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current proposed solution is just to cut back benefits on new job offers - though obviously if they cut back too much no one decent will want to work there.

Not true - if it were, every minimum wage, overworked job would go unfilled.

Minimum wage overworked jobs have a hard time attracting people with alternatives.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#73

Post by dev_dull »

gfodor wrote: post #16
Shivetya wrote: post #14

Chicago is in the hole for nearly thirty billion dollars. They have been floating the idea of a ten billion dollar bond with the debt structured in a way which lets current politicians escape the fallout from its payment and not having to raise property taxes. The state of Illinois is not well off either with debts estimated at the low of one hundred thirty billion to two hundred fifty billion. An Illinois proposal j…

Pulling or cutting the pensions of retired public service workers (many of whom who risked their lives to protect the public) would, beyond the ethical questions, eliminate the credibility of the city's promises to those who sign up for such jobs and hence would likely greatly reduce the quantity and quality of recruits.

They were promised something by the city that couldn’t be delivered to them. There’s no other way out.

Is there a difference in Silicon Valley workers being promised future stock if they just forgo their paycheck for a little while longer? The Difference of courses that taxpayers don’t foot the difference.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#74

Post by chrismeller »

rrrrreeeee wrote: post #50
stochastastic wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US a “pension” typically means a fixed benefit regardless of investment performance. Many pension sponsors reduced contributions to their plans when markets were up and have had large shortfalls when markets have gone down, which has contributed to the “pension funding crisis”.

In Canada, pensions contributions are never ever adjusted depending on market performance. Instead, payouts are typically indexed to inflation. When markets are down, funds usually have a shortfall, so they cut the inflation indexing. When markets are up and the pension fund is overfunded, they restore the inflation adjustment. This slightly harms the pensioners, but not by much to have a critical effect on their wel…

This is a reasonable approach, but means you don’t really ever have any idea how much you’ll have when you retire. Honestly that’s probably the only approach that will ever work longer term, but it’s not an easy thing to sell or plan for.

The US Postal System has essentially this exact problem every year - they aren’t making enough to cover their pension obligations so they keep raising stamp prices (and let’s not get started on the absurdly short-term solution of “forever” stamps). Since they’re a government agency but independent and unable to accept funding from any other method it’s a great example of the problem.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#75

Post by dang »

60654 wrote: post #15

For what it's worth - the title is a bit misleading. The tax began its life as an extension/adaptation of an existing 9% "amusement tax" on patrons of amusements (movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc) in the city. But until 2015 it only included physical businesses, not any of the new online replacements. The definition is now expanded to include online games, streaming movies, movie tickets sold online, etc. Also, th…

OK, we've switched to the HTML doc title above, which isn't Netflix-specific.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#76

Post by reaperducer »

Mirioron wrote: post #61
Spivak wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Businesses have to incorporate the local tax code to any area they provide services in. Same as any brick-and-mortar business right now. 2. It becomes burdensome for businesses to comply so they ask the federal government to occupy the field and standardize. I don't really know why people expect businesses that deliver their products digitally to be treated differently from everyone else.

But we're talking about online businesses here. This isn't isolated to the US. We're talking about complying with the requirements and taxation of any city in the world. There is no federal government to address there.

Welcome to business.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#77

Post by rrrrreeeee »

chrismeller wrote: post #74
rrrrreeeee wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Canada, pensions contributions are never ever adjusted depending on market performance. Instead, payouts are typically indexed to inflation. When markets are down, funds usually have a shortfall, so they cut the inflation indexing. When markets are up and the pension fund is overfunded, they restore the inflation adjustment. This slightly harms the pensioners, but not by much to have a critical effect on their wel…

This is a reasonable approach, but means you don’t really ever have any idea how much you’ll have when you retire. Honestly that’s probably the only approach that will ever work longer term, but it’s not an easy thing to sell or plan for. The US Postal System has essentially this exact problem every year - they aren’t making enough to cover their pension obligations so they keep raising stamp prices (and let’s not ge…

You have an idea of the minimum you will get. Your pension will never go down, just that you don't know whether your pension will go up.

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#78

Post by throwawaymath »

scarface74 wrote: post #37
gfodor wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulling or cutting the pensions of retired public service workers (many of whom who risked their lives to protect the public) would, beyond the ethical questions, eliminate the credibility of the city's promises to those who sign up for such jobs and hence would likely greatly reduce the quantity and quality of recruits.

The whole idea of policemen “risking their lives” is not statistically accurate. Only 144 policemen died in the line of duty in the entire United States last year ( https://www.npr.org/2018/12/27/680410169/more-police-officer... ) The Chicago police department isn’t exactly what most people would call “quality”.

Why do you consider the idea that police officers risk their lives to be statistically inaccurate? According to the United States Department of Justice, there are approximately 1,100,000 police officers in the entire country[1]. If 144 police officers died last year, a given police officer has (assuming uniformity) slightly greater than a 0.01% chance of dying each year. In other words one out of every 10,000 officers is killed.

Assuming surviving one year does not impact the likelihood of dying the next year, over a 20 year career a police officer then has a 0.26% chance of dying in the line of duty. We can expect that slightly greater than two out of every 1,000 officers will die prior to retirement.

___________________

1. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/nsleed.pdf

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#79

Post by moorhosj »

dev_dull wrote: post #73
gfodor wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulling or cutting the pensions of retired public service workers (many of whom who risked their lives to protect the public) would, beyond the ethical questions, eliminate the credibility of the city's promises to those who sign up for such jobs and hence would likely greatly reduce the quantity and quality of recruits.

They were promised something by the city that couldn’t be delivered to them. There’s no other way out. Is there a difference in Silicon Valley workers being promised future stock if they just forgo their paycheck for a little while longer? The Difference of courses that taxpayers don’t foot the difference.

Silicon Valley workers also don’t work for the taxpayers, so that would be another difference. Who would pay public employees if not taxpayers?

Re: Chicago successfully taxes streaming services

#80

Post by scarface74 »

throwawaymath wrote: post #78
scarface74 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of policemen “risking their lives” is not statistically accurate. Only 144 policemen died in the line of duty in the entire United States last year ( https://www.npr.org/2018/12/27/680410169/more-police-officer... ) The Chicago police department isn’t exactly what most people would call “quality”.

Why do you consider the idea that police officers risk their lives to be statistically inaccurate? According to the United States Department of Justice, there are approximately 1,100,000 police officers in the entire country[1]. If 144 police officers died last year, a given police officer has (assuming uniformity) slightly greater than a 0.01% chance of dying each year. In other words one out of every 10,000 officer…

From another post, that doesn’t rank being a police in the top 15 most dangerous occupations.

https://www.ajc.com/news/world/these-are-the-deadliest-jobs-...

Post reply on HN