Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship • Hacker News Board

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#101

Post by hexis » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 6:53 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #83

hexis wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you need living expenses, save up. If you live somewhere too expensive, move. "If your idea is too expensive to start with a laptop and cheap hosting, think of another idea." Sorry to be somewhat flip, but starting a tech company isn't complex, it's just difficult. These start-up costs are the easy part and if you can't solve them on your own, then a 10K infusion from the government isn't going to help you solve t…

Suppose you're working on a product that is time sensitive. In other words, if you don't start full time on it three months ago, you'll be too late to market. Also suppose that you see this opportunity while you're a student. Finally, consider that skilled programmers tend to be concentrated in high cost of living areas. In that case, you never had the opportunity to save up and you probably need to be where the pote…

"Suppose you're working on a product that is time sensitive."

Pick another project. There's a lot of money to be made on the internet.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#102

Post by gwright » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 6:57 PM UTC

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #74

gwright wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think people are being careful about the terminology here. Firing could mean terminating employment because someone is no longer needed (what you are calling 'laid off') but it can also mean terminating employment because they broke some rules or laws (i.e. didn't show up for work, harrased co-workers, etc). If you are fired "with cause" (i.e. you did something wrong) you aren't eligible for unemployment. If…

If you quit you are not eligible for unemployment. Let's be careful about this. It depends on the reason you quit. If you were being harassed and the company did nothing about it, or you had unsafe working conditions, etc, you can still collect. It's better to say that if you quit for reasons that have nothing to do with the employer, you cannot collect unemployment. I had a co-worker who quit because the raise he wa…

Good point. Thanks for the meta-clarification.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#103

Post by anigbrowl » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:02 PM UTC

DiabloD3 wrote: post #93

DiabloD3 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2-3x more than 5-10 cents an hour is still slave labor. Call centers may be well paying jobs in India, but I still view it as kicking an entire society while its down. In a way, its no different than back before the civil war, white plantation owners would have slaves work inside of the house, ie, a "house negro". The parallels between the two are rather scary. Its almost like the Civil War was lost in the sense that…

Wow, I'm getting down voted for pointing out slave labor in India is racist by drawing parallels from our own history. Since when did the HN community support racism?

Your argument is not really convincing, because you have neglected to consider that wages paid in foreign markets have quite different purchasing power from the amount that they would have here. Furthermore, the element of coercion is absent.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#104

Post by roc » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:25 PM UTC

clarkevans wrote: post #49

roc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty easy to document poor performance. Any McJob employer can swing it and their margins are almost certainly lower than anything involving knowledge workers. I understand that no-one likes to do the business-overhead side of things in small businesses. But either the costs of paying (undue) unemployment aren't that big of a problem, or the employer has no-one to blame but themselves for not documenting cause…

There's a big difference between McJob and software development. If someone doesn't handle N customers, fails to show up on time, or has several documented customer relationship issues: it is clear cut. You have to give the employee several opportunities, etc. If you have an equivalent recipe for a marginally performing software developer that doesn't cost more to implement than just paying the unemployment : I'd lov…

> "There's a big difference between McJob and software development."

Yes and no. The basics are the same: you need to document responsibilities, goals and performance. Document performance that doesn't meet the goals. Document some sort of plan by which you try to help the underperforming employee meet their goals and then document their continuing performance.

Is it potentially cheaper to just pay a modest severance or unemployment insurance? Quite possibly.

But documenting performance is not voodoo and the fact that just paying a modest severance or unemployment is cheaper than documenting performance rather undercuts the assertion that unemployment costs are onerous.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#105

Post by anamax » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:30 PM UTC

natnat wrote: post #71

sneak wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly enough, neither does the US government.

The government can borrow money at negative interest rates. People are literally paying the U.S. government to take their money. It may have a large budget deficit, but the government has no shortage of cash.

> The government can borrow money at negative interest rates.

The feds are borrowing at less than the rate of inflation, but they're not borrowing at negative rates.

Note that current interest rates don't accurately reflect the interest cost of borrowing because those loans will be rolled over a couple of times. Do you really think that the low interest rates will continue?

More to the point, said borrowing has to be repaid. If the expected/likely additional tax revenue from this program is less than the amount spent, it's a bad deal.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#106

Post by anamax » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:34 PM UTC

ctdonath wrote: post #47

philiphodgen wrote: post #32

1. I run a business. Therefore I make jobs. Or don't. 2. If I fire an employee, a portion of the cost of that person's unemployment claims is charged back to me. The employer. It isn't government largesse that funds unemployment claims. It's me. 3. Will this program be yet another potential cost to me? Hard to tell from the PR and press-gab. We'll have to see the law and how it is implemented. Devil in the details, e…

"2. If I fire an employee, a portion of the cost of that person's unemployment claims is charged back to me." Can you elaborate on this? It's something I've long heard and failed to grok. How can an employer, as normal business practice, have to still pay a fired employee any amount?

> It's something I've long heard and failed to grok.

Where do you think that the money to pay unemployment comes from?

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#107

Post by burgerbrain » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:39 PM UTC

krschultz wrote: post #72

nirvana wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "like it or leave it" isn't really a useful response, and it takes the discussion into the realm of politics. I'm not going to debate the politics, but since I did "leave it", I thought it might be enlightening to share a bit of my experience. (Leaving the USA had nothing to do with unemployment insurance.) It is not difficult to find first world situations that don't involve burdensome taxes or regulations.…

I don't throw out the 'love it or leave it' for 99% of posts on almost all issues, but when a person equates taxation with theft, it's just a lost cause. We can and should debate what to do with our tax money, but fundamentally the system always ends up in a state where some people are unhappy with some of the spending. There is no way to reconcile what those on the far right and far left want. We end up somewhere in…

Your "love it or leave it" attitude towards taxation assumes that all individuals should for some reason resign themselves to the sovereignty of the Unites States Federal Government.

My chosen geographic location is not an admission of consent to be 'taxed' by men with guns.

Edit: Oh cool, looks like I stepped on somebodies toes, they went back and downvoted all my currently votable comments at once. So tell me Mr Revenge Voter. What here do you actually disagree with?

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#108

Post by burgerbrain » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:43 PM UTC

gyardley wrote: post #73

srdev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm conflicted on the idea of leaving the country as a solution. Its not enough to simply live and work in another country -- you're still liable for taxes. You have to fully expatriate and renounce your citizenship. This is often very difficult and time-consuming to do, and near-impossible if you're not in a skilled line of work.

I'm still a Canadian citizen, but because I don't live in Canada, don't have assets in Canada, and don't earn income in Canada, I don't pay taxes in Canada. As far as I know, being taxed on worldwide income is just an American thing.

It is just an American thing. And it's a great example of why "if you don't like it, leave it" is bullshit particularly when spoken in the context of American politics.

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#109

Post by temphn » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:50 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #99

temphn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singapore? Hong Kong? Your underlying assumption is that the US can increase taxes and regulations indefinitely without consequence. But capital and talent are more mobile than ever before. Record numbers have been renouncing citizenship in recent years (Google it). Most likely when the current flow of expatriation becomes a flood, though, there will suddenly be restrictions imposed on exit: an asset tax, a waiting p…

More people are abandoning US citizenship because a rule change in 2008 has made it simpler, cheaper, and less restrictive to do so: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/more-americans-...

It's by no means cheaper. It used to be free to leave. Now they expropriate 50% of your net worth.

Massive shift in US policy. Used to be hard to enter the US. When they make it hard to leave, that is a terrible sign.

Legal Background:

www.mwe.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publications.nldetail/object_id/3892307d-1b8e-4636-ba2b-f58609256689.cfm

Color commentary:

www.davidtanzer.com/david_tanzer_articles.asp?article=exit+tax+in+america

"The Exit Tax works as though you have died. It’s calculated similarly to the Federal Estate Tax. It requires American taxpayers to identify all assets and debts to determine their net worth, and then to compute a theoretical gain or loss on all assets. The Exit Tax applies to anyone with a net worth of more than $2 million. It also applies to a taxpayer whose average U.S. income tax liability for the past five years is above approximately $124,000. Net worth is without inflation adjustment, which means increasingly more individuals will fall victim. It treats all property as being sold, and all deferred income retirement accounts as being distributed. There is an exclusion of $600,000 for any unrealized gain or deferred income. Then a 30% withholding tax is automatically withheld before deferred income accounts are distributed."

Re: Obama's job aid plan - $10,000 to $13,000 in assistance for entrepreneurship

#110

Post by dualogy » Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 7:52 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #52

ctdonath wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"2. If I fire an employee, a portion of the cost of that person's unemployment claims is charged back to me." Can you elaborate on this? It's something I've long heard and failed to grok. How can an employer, as normal business practice, have to still pay a fired employee any amount?

You have to pay for unemployment insurance. The more people who make claims against you, the higher your insurance gets. You probably aren't going to get charged 100% of the employee's unemployment, but you get charged a goodly chunk.

Seriously? I'm surprised anyone is still hiring at all in the US! Sheesh, what a policy. "Hello independent contractors" -- I hear you.