241–250 of 388 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other problem is cryptocurrencies have created a ton of new companies that are paying big for talent. I actually think this is a good thing. Too many people were working on dumb startups back then. I want more engineers at Tesla.
Are they paying in cash, or in their cryptocurrency?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd love to work for a startup with a like-brand-X-but-for-Y or a word-salad elevator pitch Why? I'd much rather actually deliver something to the client, even if... > I get billed to a customer at $200-$400/hr and get maybe $50-$60 of that in total compensation. Then it sounds like everything else around what you deliver is worth at least $140-350/hr. If it's really so easy I'm sure you could offer your services f…
"Then it sounds like everything else around what you deliver is worth at least $140-350/hr. If it's really so easy I'm sure you could offer your services for $100/hr, take a nice big raise and save your clients hundreds of thousands a year." Not everyone wants to, or is able to strike it out on their own.
I would need a non-technical co-founder that I could trust to not stab me in the back, and an investor willing to give us enough runway to take off without putting any land mines in it. So far, those conditions have never been met. Business around here is very often more about who you know than what you can do, and since I don't know the right people, those customers are simply unavailable, even at a deep discount to $100/hr.
All that overhead is necessary to navigate the system that has been set up to favor those that support the system. The bureaucratic hoops are insurmountable barriers to entry to individuals, and very steep even for a hypothetical small company that is 51% owned by a disabled Indian veteran woman. It wouldn't be much of a military-industrial complex if it could be disrupted that easily. The "clients" are far less interested in saving money than with preserving their influence over the nature of the work, an end often pursued by spending every penny of the allocated budget, regardless of need.
A union could change it. A U.S. attorney with a forensic accountant, TS/SCI security clearance, and a stack of subpoenas could change it. A political party could change it. A handful of generals and admirals could change it. One software pro, working alone? Not so much.
This is really the best deal I can get right now, without dropping everything and moving again. It isn't great, but it is available to me, and I don't have to front capital, work owner-manager hours, or do types of work that I am not comparatively good at doing.
Besides that, I have already failed at going it alone once, and once was all I could afford. I didn't make it, and lost everything. The work was good enough, but not enough people wanted to buy it, and not enough customers recommended it to their friends. So that runway is gone, and I'm stuck workin' for The Man until I can retire. In retrospect, I would have been far better off not trying. But that's all anecdotal. You might succeed on your own. Maybe I just didn't work hard enough.
I'm going to say something that may be unpopular. Hopefully my karma can handle it. The latest analysis I saw of this from Fenwick says that this is only applying to non-qualified stock options. Employees get NSOs when you vest too much to get ISOs in a calendar year, based on the vesting schedule and value at the time of grant, not fair market value at time of vesting of the option. That limit is $100K, for people w…
That seems correct: However, it is intended that statutory options are not considered nonqualified deferred compensation for purposes of the proposal. An exception is provided for that portion of a plan consisting of a transfer of property described in section 83 (other than stock options) or which consists of a trust to which section 402(b) applies. Page 209 of https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=download&id=…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're getting options and RSUs, you're going to be upper middle class at least, and thus wealthy by the definitions of most Americans.
When people talk about this package benefiting the wealthy, they mean very wealthy people. The upper-middle-class would probably take more damage from it than most.
I don't like the plan because I pay more under it, but the value of the giveaways to the very rich seem rather small compared to low income benefits. Lowering of the corporate income tax rate and axing the mortgage interest deduction has broad support from economists across the political spectrum too.
NPR had an interesting piece on this in 2012:
https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/19/157047211/six-...
Edit, great chart showing who pays more / less: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-the-winners-and-l...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One would assume that companies would stop doing this and issue ISOs instead.
Its not that trivial. ISO's have a $100k limit.
[1] http://www.naspp.com/blog/2009/08/iso-100000-limitation.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about property tax deduction? Why isn't that on the table if you are concerned about fairness. Texas has some of the highest property tax rates in the country. Why not focus on that deduction?
I was referring to all state and local deductions. At the end of the day, the same income should pay the same federal tax. What states choose to do is their business. My point is that states ought not benefit or be discriminated against based on their tax policy. My federal tax bill ought not be different because of the state I live in. I actually live outside the United States, yet I get to file and pay taxes subsid…
Given the vast difference between local economies, this would result in huge disparities in effective tax rate depending on where you live.
For example, a person who makes $100k in Kansas City, MO is far wealthier than someone making that much in San Jose, CA. Taxing them at the same rate is essentially a massive tax break for one and not the other.
The SALT deductions account for this.
I'm going to say something that may be unpopular. Hopefully my karma can handle it. The latest analysis I saw of this from Fenwick says that this is only applying to non-qualified stock options. Employees get NSOs when you vest too much to get ISOs in a calendar year, based on the vesting schedule and value at the time of grant, not fair market value at time of vesting of the option. That limit is $100K, for people w…
Today, ISO’s are commonly given to engineers at pre-IPO startups. Nothing says they have to go to execs. Those engineers end up holding them for years before they can exercise, so $100K is a small fraction of a normal Silicon Valley startup, when you divide it out. Many startups take 6-10 years to IPO these days.
Source on $100K cap: stock plan admins at work, and also this article: http://help.capshare.com/knowledge-base/what-is-an-iso-100k-...
Please do not comment on technical nuances of the tax code you do not understand. Misunderstandings around this stuff bankrupts people all the time. (especially the type of people that hang out here!)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how the tax plan helps the rural red state poor. It certainly helps the rich and prefers red states (people lose state and local deduction, businesses keep it). However, the rural red state poor already aren't paying much if any taxes. It's more of a red meat issue for them.
I honestly haven't calculated the tax difference for the rural red state poor. Are you sure they won't benefit from the increased standard deduction? If you're sure then I'll trust your calculations over my not-calculations.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/preliminary-dist...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this instance the exchange you would have to make would be crippling startups and small businesses, which is where the vast majority of the growth of the economy happens. As an aside, how many companies do you see actually building Snapchat for Etsy-linked tumblr posts? I see that criticism of Silicon Valley all the time, yet despite being in the heart of it I rarely see that kind of company. I’d guess an order of…
That's just it. Where I am, I don't see new companies building anything . YC isn't here . I'd love to work for a startup with a like-brand-X-but-for-Y or a word-salad elevator pitch, that also offered a compensation package as good as any found in Silicon Valley. But I don't get options or RSUs, or even cash bonuses. I get billed to a customer at $200-$400/hr and get maybe $50-$60 of that in total compensation. It's…
Bang on. I'm mostly glad that my particular corner of the Midwest doesn't seem terribly keen on aping the SV model of shitty business practices, at least. Small victories and all that.