361–370 of 395 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You cant automate the tactical assessment of "do we want to incur this tax?" Not easily anyway
I meant most of the process and boilerplate being automated. Someone still has to go through the rubberstamping process, but at least the BS and clicks can come from the BS and clicks generator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that this is downvoted is deeply disturbing. Timothy Snyder has similar thoughts on concentration camp labor: https://snyder.substack.com/p/concentration-camp-labor Meanwhile, SV darling Curtis Yarvin is plainly insinuating that we should bring slavery back: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:gqqqg5xi4p2x4bfgphr7akip/po... What in the fuck is wrong with people?
It is important to understand that the methods selected for the “Final Solution” were intended to minimize costs. It is dangerous for crime at this scale to become cheap. The experience of the Einsatzgruppen in Poland showed that mass execution with guns used too much material and was too stressful for the perpetrators. Camps allowed operational costs to be amortized while individual responsibility was diffused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a naive perspective. In reality, most of the software development that a typical growth company does is eligible. As one of CRA’s auditors once told me, “The general arc of your development has to meet the criteria of being technically challenging and uncertain, and you have to follow a generally scientific approach, measuring your results empirically. But if you need a web console to help with that, who are…
>This is a naive perspective. Okay. SR&ED had 22,758 applications last year. Software development only accounted for 40% of it. So 9000 applications from software dev firms, the majority being very small firms. That is a tiny, tiny minority of software firms in this country. >In reality, most of the software development that a typical growth company does is eligible No, it absolutely is not, unless you are lying on t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it means that indirectly, developers' salaries are not a taxable income in Canada if they are working on R&D? Meaning, they do pay taxes on their income, but their employer gets those taxes back, so if tax is 60%, the employer could pay 250% of what they'd pay otherwise, get 150% back, then the developer pays 150% of taxes, and gets 100%, so in effect the salary is tax-free. Is that what you meant to say? If so, i…
There is lots of paperwork for SR&ED, enough so that companies opt not to do it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The largest competitor to US renewables, would be China. They have been rolling back their subsidies for years. [1] China, India, Russia, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, and Indonesia (off the top of my head, and a quick google to add a few I missed [2]) have all increased investments into coal since 2020. The renewable industry in the US was wrought with companies seizing as many renewable credits and subsidies as they…
China has been rolling back subsidies because they won solar panels. No other country is even remotely close to market strength as China here and obviously for Chinese it makes sense to reduce incentives but does that make sense for the US which has 1% of this market power? > Between January and May, China added 198 GW of solar and 46 GW of wind, enough to generate as much electricity as Indonesia or Turkey [1] 1 - h…
However, market share doesn't really translate into the economics of large scale generation. The projects that are marginal (or negative) in the US and rest of the world for that matter, are costed using whatever the cheapest panels or materials available are. Whether they are local or not does not matter. You are conflating two unrelated things here (local manufacturing capability and power generation e.g. actually deploying renewables).
China meeting arbitrary targets is also beside the point. They are building a tonne of solar and wind, but they are also building more coal too. (Refer to my previous comment in how they along with many other G7 and developed nations are investing more in coal than they were in 2020).
GP made some specific claims which were demonstratably false. The points you raise here aren't particularly related to those.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The largest competitor to US renewables, would be China. They have been rolling back their subsidies for years. [1] China, India, Russia, Turkey, Japan, South Korea, and Indonesia (off the top of my head, and a quick google to add a few I missed [2]) have all increased investments into coal since 2020. The renewable industry in the US was wrought with companies seizing as many renewable credits and subsidies as they…
> We have long been told that renewables are cheaper in every way that matters, so let's see the economics of that play out. Renewables are cheaper now than they used to be. Why? The same reason anything is cheaper the longer you make it: technological improvement, economies of scale, production efficiency, increased # customers, reduced capex, amortized r&d, etc. "the economics of that" aren't black and white. Just…
I think you are talking past me. The green bodies have constantly touted how we already reached the inflection point where renewables are cheaper than coal, nuclear, etc. The quiet part that isn't spoken aloud is that these renewables were only economically positive with substantial subsidies and credits. You can't have an honest conversation when the water is mudied to such an extent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Italian here, and I know a few things about fascism not just because of that. Yes, what is happening in the US is the rise of a fascist state controlled by a small minority of very wealthy and powerful people purely for economical reasons with Trump being just a tool in their hands. As with happened in my country back then, there are only two possible reasons for endorsing it: being part of the cult, or being part of…
Your nationality is not a credential, I don't know why Europeans can't understand this.
States that haven't had that issue before, on the other hand, have a population that is woefully naive to the dangers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (Fun question with not-so-fun answers: why isn't the filibuster gone already?) Because both parties are scared eventually the other party will be back in the majority.
I don't think Republicans need to worry about Dems retaking the Senate anytime soon.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/40th_United_States_Congress#...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/74th_United_States_Congress#...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/76th_United_States_Congress#...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/89th_United_States_Congress#...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What evidence is there those with capital/the market are making the best engineering and science based decisions and not just juicing their portfolio because they’ll be dead when shit hits the fan?
People have children they might care about. Governments don’t.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is lots of paperwork for SR&ED, enough so that companies opt not to do it.
Honestly, this is a not true. If you work with a decent accounting firm like KPMG’s Vancouver practice, and maintain a decent dev task management system like JIRA, you will be fine to hand over your payroll register and a CSV dump every January. A few weeks later, you have your claim. Once in a while, you have to sit there and talk with the CRA’s auditor.
You have a conjecture that all companies keep good jira task tracking and payroll, AND that all companies contract out big accounting firms like KPMG.
From my personal experience I have been at two Canadian companies who didn’t claim SR&ED and therefore your conjecture is disproven with counter examples.
Some companies don’t keep good enough task tracking, some companies don’t know about SR&ED, some companies think the paperwork and auditing is burdensome, some companies are just lazy.
