Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The most unethical company.
28 views
Skip to first unread message
Nashton
May 24, 2013, 8:29:34 PM5/24/13
to
http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-biggest-company-also-became-the-most-unethical
"Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
slash funding for its public schools and universities."
By far the most poignant paragraph.
Also read this:
http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-left-behind-219247
"Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
LOL!!
"Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
slash funding for its public schools and universities."
By far the most poignant paragraph.
Also read this:
http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-left-behind-219247
"Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
LOL!!
KDT
May 24, 2013, 9:12:41 PM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 8:29 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-b...
more in taxes than required?
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-b...
>
> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
> of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
> where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
> slash funding for its public schools and universities."
>
> By far the most poignant paragraph.
>
> Also read this:
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-l...
> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
> of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
> where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
> slash funding for its public schools and universities."
>
> By far the most poignant paragraph.
>
> Also read this:
>
>
> "Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
> into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
> pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
> Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
>
> LOL!!
So since you claim to be so affluent, why don't you voluntarily pay
> "Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
> into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
> pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
> Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
>
> LOL!!
more in taxes than required?
Alan Baker
May 24, 2013, 10:33:59 PM5/24/13
to
In article <knp0la$1d5$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com>
wrote:
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-biggest-co
> Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops?
Who says they do any more than... ...Nokia?
:-)
> Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
> of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
> where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
> slash funding for its public schools and universities."
Why not? It's legal.
>
> By far the most poignant paragraph.
>
> Also read this:
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-left-behin
> d-219247
>
> "Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
> into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
> pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
> Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
What were these alleged "tricks"?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
wrote:
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-biggest-co
> mpany-also-became-the-most-unethical
>
> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code?
Why not? It's legal.
>
> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code?
> Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops?
:-)
> Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive California
> of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as the state
> where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is forced to
> slash funding for its public schools and universities."
>
> By far the most poignant paragraph.
>
> Also read this:
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-left-behin
> d-219247
>
> "Tim Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings
> into Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO
> pulled a mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late
> Apple visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Flint
May 25, 2013, 7:26:53 AM5/25/13
to
according to you, because he abused the privelege, Paterno should
somehow be responsible for his illegal action.
Alan Baker - selective moralizer...
--
MFB
Alan Baker
May 25, 2013, 8:50:24 AM5/25/13
to
In article <knq6tp$81d$1...@dont-email.me>,
Really? That's the analogy you want to go with?
Paterno learned of a possible crime...
...and rather than report it to the police, or tell the young man who
looked to him for guidance to report it to them, he passed the buck.
Was it illegal? Probably not.
Was it very wrong? Absolutely.
Now a question for you:
Do YOU think that Apple taking advantage of the tax code is wrong?
Paterno learned of a possible crime...
...and rather than report it to the police, or tell the young man who
looked to him for guidance to report it to them, he passed the buck.
Was it illegal? Probably not.
Was it very wrong? Absolutely.
Now a question for you:
Do YOU think that Apple taking advantage of the tax code is wrong?
Gary
May 25, 2013, 9:30:33 AM5/25/13
to
On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-biggest-company-also-became-the-most-unethical
"Third,
>
> Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive
> California of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as
> the state where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is
> forced to slash funding for its public schools and universities."
Lmfao, i just dont know where to start on this one.
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-biggest-company-also-became-the-most-unethical
"Third,
>
> Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally profitable
> company; its recent quarterly profits are among the highest ever
> recorded by any company. It is a veritable money-making machine for its
> shareholders. So why be so aggressive in trying to find every last
> loophole in the tax code? Why push workers to exhaustion and suicide in
> Chinese sweatshops? Why shift operations to Nevada to deprive
> California of a fortune in taxes (also detailed by the Times) even as
> the state where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is
> forced to slash funding for its public schools and universities."
This is the lamest anti Apple piece i have seen in a long time. They
shifted operations from california to nevada to deprive california of a
fortune in taxes?
Hehe, i thought they weren't paying there taxes Nashton?
Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone else
is also doing exactly the same.
> the state where Apple started, drawing on an educated work force, is
> forced to slash funding for its public schools and universities."
Isnt it interesting Nashton that California has alot of movie stars,
studios, tech companies and othert major players in business yet they
are having trouble with funding for schools and universities.
And guess what, you blame Apple for starting up some jobs in navada
data centres as something that is contributing to it possibly getting
worse.
Have you applied under freedom of information for financial records
pertaining to the state of california to see if everything is in order
Nashton?
>
> By far the most poignant paragraph.
>
> Also read this:
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/apple-no-tax-gimmick-left-behind-219247
"Tim
>
> Cook did Steve Jobs proud at this week's Congressional hearings into
> Apple's tax avoidance practices. During his testimony the CEO pulled a
> mind trick or two out of his iPocket, rivaling even the late Apple
> visionary in his ability to weave reality distortion fields."
>
>
> LOL!!
In summation Nashton, if your going to re-print stories that other
people have created i would be expecting you to believe the contents
yourself which is why i have put my comments aimed at you.
If you dont like the fact that so many individuals support and enjoy
what Apple does then thats your right but please dont go donw to the
level of crapness that the first article you linked has gone.
Your better than that surely, you do own Apple products so i know you
do have some appreciation of quality.
Nashton
May 25, 2013, 9:42:05 AM5/25/13
to
challenge. He's an insignificant Apple shill.
Flint
May 25, 2013, 2:56:21 PM5/25/13
to
Alan Baker
May 26, 2013, 12:54:53 AM5/26/13
to
In article <knr18r$ln6$2...@dont-email.me>, Flint <agen...@section31.org>
wrote:
Then why did you bring it up again?
Fact: Paterno had someone report to him something that couldn't have
been anything but a crime.
Fact: Paterno did not report this to the police, nor did he instruct the
young man over whom he exercised authority to report what he'd seen to
police.
This is not in the slightest way morally equivalent to Apple...
...FOLLOWING THE TAX CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
wrote:
Fact: Paterno had someone report to him something that couldn't have
been anything but a crime.
Fact: Paterno did not report this to the police, nor did he instruct the
young man over whom he exercised authority to report what he'd seen to
police.
This is not in the slightest way morally equivalent to Apple...
...FOLLOWING THE TAX CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
Flint
May 26, 2013, 1:16:12 AM5/26/13
to
hypoc...er, 'inconsistent' application of morality.
> Fact: Paterno had someone report to him something that couldn't have
> been anything but a crime.
>
> Fact: Paterno did not report this to the police, nor did he instruct the
> young man over whom he exercised authority to report what he'd seen to
> police.
>
> This is not in the slightest way morally equivalent to Apple...
>
> ...FOLLOWING THE TAX CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
>
corporations such as Apple have no moral obligation, which I patently
disagree with. Their moral obligation may not always be codified in
law, but that doesn't mean they don't have the obligation to begin
with. Simply just following the tax code as it is written still
allows for corporations to violate the spirit of the law if not the
letter. You totally secular apologist weenies forget that...
--
MFB` `
-hh
May 26, 2013, 7:45:22 AM5/26/13
to
On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> > [...]
> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>
> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>
> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>
> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
> else is also doing exactly the same.
Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction allowances for
> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>
> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>
> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
> else is also doing exactly the same.
himself? You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
-hh
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 7:56:46 AM5/26/13
to
There is *no* tax code that forbids tax dodging via accounting tricks
that take advantage of lax tax laws in foreign countries, you STUPID
iPad repairman.
Get an education and stop pretending that Googling things is an adequate
substitute for critical thinking.
Sheesh.
>>
>
> Perhaps not, but the whole tone of your argument is such that
> corporations such as Apple have no moral obligation, which I patently
> disagree with. Their moral obligation may not always be codified in
> law, but that doesn't mean they don't have the obligation to begin
> with. Simply just following the tax code as it is written still allows
> for corporations to violate the spirit of the law if not the letter.
> You totally secular apologist weenies forget that...
obligation that stems from reasons well explained in the article I cited
that *obviously* went *way* over bakr the Liar's head....*again*..
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 9:20:26 AM5/26/13
to
On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>>
>> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>>
>> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
>> else is also doing exactly the same.
>
> Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction allowances for
> himself?
Of course not.
> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>>
>> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>>
>> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
>> else is also doing exactly the same.
>
> Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction allowances for
> himself?
> You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
> business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
> Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
WTF is your point?
>
>
>
> -hh
>
Tim Adams
May 26, 2013, 9:41:35 AM5/26/13
to
NOT tax dodging!
Tim Adams
May 26, 2013, 9:42:50 AM5/26/13
to
-hh
May 26, 2013, 11:32:28 AM5/26/13
to
Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@earthlink.net> wrote:
-hh
> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> > On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> > > On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> > >>> [...]
>
> > >> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>
> > >> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>
> > >> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
> > >> else is also doing exactly the same.
>
> > > Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction allowances for
> > > himself?
>
> > Of course not.
>
> > > You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
> > > business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
> > > Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>
> > Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>
> Yet you get your panties in a bunch when Apple does the same thing!
Precisely, which is because Nicholas chooses to be a hypocrite.
> > On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> > > On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> > >>> [...]
>
> > >> Aggressive in trying to find every tax loophole?
>
> > >> That's business Nashton, deal with it and move on.
>
> > >> If i had my own company i would do exactly the same and everyone
> > >> else is also doing exactly the same.
>
> > > Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction allowances for
> > > himself?
>
> > Of course not.
>
> > > You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
> > > business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
> > > Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>
> > Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>
> Yet you get your panties in a bunch when Apple does the same thing!
-hh
Lloyd
May 26, 2013, 12:44:18 PM5/26/13
to
Tim Adams
May 26, 2013, 1:04:14 PM5/26/13
to
KDT
May 26, 2013, 1:11:25 PM5/26/13
to
On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in value. So
if he does take all of the deductions that he can for his home office,
that means he is claiming the percentage of his house that is used for
his home office as a depreciating asset. So now he has to reconcile
the fact that some percentage of his house is an asset and some
percentage isn't - according to his definition.
jay birdsong
May 26, 2013, 1:42:44 PM5/26/13
to
"KDT" wrote in message
news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
snip rambling babble.
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 4:37:53 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/26/2013 2:42 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
>
> "KDT" wrote in message
> news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> "KDT" wrote in message
> news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > WTF is your point?
>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
>> And....
>
>> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in value.
>
> No, Brain. He never said that. Try to stick with reality.
>
> snip rambling babble.
Reading is fundamental. ;)
>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
>> And....
>
>> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in value.
>
> No, Brain. He never said that. Try to stick with reality.
>
> snip rambling babble.
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 4:38:50 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/26/2013 2:04 PM, Tim Adams wrote:
> In article <lloydparsons-2FA3...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Lloyd <lloydp...@me.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <knt26g$2nu$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>
> In article <lloydparsons-2FA3...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Lloyd <lloydp...@me.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <knt26g$2nu$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Of course not.
>>>
>>>> You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
>>>> business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
>>>> Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>>>
>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>>
>>> WTF is your point?
>>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
> nashton still won't understand!
>
You really have *no* clue as to what is being discussed, do you?
>>>
>>>> You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
>>>> business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
>>>> Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>>>
>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>>
>>> WTF is your point?
>>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
> nashton still won't understand!
>
KDT
May 26, 2013, 6:27:27 PM5/26/13
to
Nashton:
"A car depreciates too rapidly to 'be considered an asset. "
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Depreciation-Reminders
"If an ***asset**** such as a home or *****motor vehicle**** has both personal and business use, only the business portion of its cost may be depreciated. Depreciation rules regarding partial business or investment use are discussed in Publication 946, How to Depreciate Property"
jay birdsong
May 26, 2013, 7:20:32 PM5/26/13
to
"KDT" wrote in message
news:199fd5df-d9bf-420b...@googlegroups.com...
On Sunday, May 26, 2013 4:37:53 PM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
> On 5/26/2013 2:42 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > "KDT" wrote in message
>
> > news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> >
>
> > On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>
> >> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton
> >> <n...@na.com>
>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
>
>
> >>
>
>
>
> >> > WTF is your point?
>
> >>
>
> >> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are
> >> Apple's.
>
> >
>
> >> And....
>
> >
>
> >> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in
> >> value.
>
> >
>
> > No, Brain. He never said that. Try to stick with reality.
>
> >
>
> > snip rambling babble.
>
>
>
> Reading is fundamental. ;)
>Message-ID: <kknevk$a7f$1...@speranza.aioe.org>
>Nashton:
>"A car depreciates too rapidly to 'be considered an asset. "
Reading is fundamental. Understanding what you read is a necessity.
How is the animal waste disposal enterprise going?
jay birdsong
May 26, 2013, 7:26:11 PM5/26/13
to
"KDT" wrote in message
news:199fd5df-d9bf-420b...@googlegroups.com...
really nothing to do with everyday depreciation applying to
individuals without businesses. And that is why you couldn't scrape
up 10K if your life depended on it. You are totally clueless and
unable to apply what your Google searches have turned up. Sigh
.......so very sad.....
KDT
May 26, 2013, 8:09:08 PM5/26/13
to
On May 26, 7:26 pm, "jay birdsong" <jaybirds...@aol.com> wrote:
> "KDT" wrote in message
>
> news:199fd5df-d9bf-420b...@googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, May 26, 2013 4:37:53 PM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
> > On 5/26/2013 2:42 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
> > > "KDT" wrote in message
>
> > >news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>
> > >> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton
> > >> <n...@na.com>
>
> > >> wrote:
>
> > >> > WTF is your point?
>
> > >> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are
> > >> Apple's.
>
> > >> And....
>
> > >> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in
> > >> value.
>
> > > No, Brain. He never said that. Try to stick with reality.
>
> > > snip rambling babble.
>
> > Reading is fundamental. ;)
> >Message-ID: <kknevk$a7...@speranza.aioe.org>
> "KDT" wrote in message
>
> news:199fd5df-d9bf-420b...@googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, May 26, 2013 4:37:53 PM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
> > On 5/26/2013 2:42 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
> > > "KDT" wrote in message
>
> > >news:59faaddd-7372-42d6...@d10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>
> > >> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton
> > >> <n...@na.com>
>
> > >> wrote:
>
> > >> > WTF is your point?
>
> > >> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are
> > >> Apple's.
>
> > >> And....
>
> > >> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in
> > >> value.
>
> > > No, Brain. He never said that. Try to stick with reality.
>
> > > snip rambling babble.
>
> > Reading is fundamental. ;)
> >Nashton:
> >"A car depreciates too rapidly to 'be considered an asset. "
>
> http://www.irs.gov/uac/Depreciation-Reminders
> "If an ***asset**** such as a home or *****motor vehicle**** has both
> personal and business use, only the business portion of its cost may
> be depreciated. Depreciation rules regarding partial business or
> investment use are discussed in Publication 946, How to Depreciate
> Property"
>
> And that, Worm, has nothing to do with the subject at hand. And
> really nothing to do with everyday depreciation applying to
> individuals without businesses. And that is why you couldn't scrape
> up 10K if your life depended on it. You are totally clueless and
> unable to apply what your Google searches have turned up. Sigh
> .......so very sad.....
Here is what the person you defend thinks about you.....
> >"A car depreciates too rapidly to 'be considered an asset. "
>
> http://www.irs.gov/uac/Depreciation-Reminders
> "If an ***asset**** such as a home or *****motor vehicle**** has both
> personal and business use, only the business portion of its cost may
> be depreciated. Depreciation rules regarding partial business or
> investment use are discussed in Publication 946, How to Depreciate
> Property"
>
> And that, Worm, has nothing to do with the subject at hand. And
> really nothing to do with everyday depreciation applying to
> individuals without businesses. And that is why you couldn't scrape
> up 10K if your life depended on it. You are totally clueless and
> unable to apply what your Google searches have turned up. Sigh
> .......so very sad.....
Nashton:
"Zara is getting dumber and dumber and dumber...ad infinitum, by the
minute.
Stocks are traded for the specific reason of generating returns. They
are the reason why people purchase them in the first place.
According to zara "logic", the performance of a specific stock is
important only when it doesn't concern Apple, but very important when
it
concerns MS, especially if we're talking about the short term,
because
MS has lost BIG in the past decade, compared to AAPL.
Funny how the complete dipstick gets his panties in a knot when Apple
stock fluctuates and yet, posts a play by play of the stock and lets
his
sphincters go loose when MS's stock is on the upswing or Apple's on
the
downswing. "
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 9:14:32 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/26/2013 2:11 PM, KDT wrote:
> On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> On May 26, 12:44 pm, Lloyd <lloydpars...@me.com> wrote:
>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Of course not.
>>
>>>> You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
>>>> business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
>>>> Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>>
>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>
>>> WTF is your point?
>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
> And....
>
> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in value.
Never said that. You have serious reading comprehension problems.
>>
>>>> You know, things like mortgage interest, charities,
>>>> business mileage, capital depreciation, etc ... heck, even his "Home
>>>> Office" bit ... or even just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
>>
>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>
>>> WTF is your point?
>>
>> His point is that your deductions are no more 'dodges' than are Apple's.
>
> And....
>
> According to Nashton, an asset is something that goes up in value.
Of course, having nothing to say, you content yourself by attempting to
belittle me and fall flat (surprise!) on your ugly face...
......again.
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 11:44:53 PM5/26/13
to
had a clue as to what the diagram put forth by Laszlo meant or represented.
You bounce back from being the laughing stock quite fast, I must say.
LOL
Nashton
May 26, 2013, 11:46:21 PM5/26/13
to
On 5/26/2013 10:41 AM, Tim Adams wrote:
> In article <knst9l$ktv$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/26/2013 2:16 AM, Flint wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2013 12:54 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>> In article <knr18r$ln6$2...@dont-email.me>, Flint <agen...@section31.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/25/2013 8:50 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>> In article <knq6tp$81d$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/24/2013 10:33 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <knp0la$1d5$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-bi
>>>>>>>>> gge
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> st
>>>>>>>>> -co
>>>>>>>>> mpany-also-became-the-most-unethical
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally
>>>>>>>>> profitable
>>>>>>>>
>>>
> In article <knst9l$ktv$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/26/2013 2:16 AM, Flint wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2013 12:54 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>> In article <knr18r$ln6$2...@dont-email.me>, Flint <agen...@section31.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/25/2013 8:50 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>> In article <knq6tp$81d$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/24/2013 10:33 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <knp0la$1d5$1...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <na...@na.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-bi
>>>>>>>>> gge
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> st
>>>>>>>>> -co
>>>>>>>>> mpany-also-became-the-most-unethical
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Third, Apple can afford to behave better. This is phenomally
>>>>>>>>> profitable
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Fact: Paterno had someone report to him something that couldn't have
>>>> been anything but a crime.
>>>>
>>>> Fact: Paterno did not report this to the police, nor did he instruct the
>>>> young man over whom he exercised authority to report what he'd seen to
>>>> police.
>>>>
>>>> This is not in the slightest way morally equivalent to Apple...
>>>>
>>>> ...FOLLOWING THE TAX CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
>>
>> It seems that all this had gotten under your skin.
>> There is *no* tax code that forbids tax dodging via accounting tricks
>> that take advantage of lax tax laws in foreign countries, you STUPID
>> iPad repairman.
>
> poor nashton, so stupid to understand that following the law as it's written IS
> NOT tax dodging!
Tim, you really need to discuss with people at your own intellectual level.
>>>> been anything but a crime.
>>>>
>>>> Fact: Paterno did not report this to the police, nor did he instruct the
>>>> young man over whom he exercised authority to report what he'd seen to
>>>> police.
>>>>
>>>> This is not in the slightest way morally equivalent to Apple...
>>>>
>>>> ...FOLLOWING THE TAX CODE AS IT IS WRITTEN.
>>
>> It seems that all this had gotten under your skin.
>> There is *no* tax code that forbids tax dodging via accounting tricks
>> that take advantage of lax tax laws in foreign countries, you STUPID
>> iPad repairman.
>
> poor nashton, so stupid to understand that following the law as it's written IS
> NOT tax dodging!
Too bad pigs can't talk, they'd make fine interlocutors for you.
Tim Adams
May 27, 2013, 8:15:40 AM5/27/13
to
Tim Adams
May 27, 2013, 8:17:37 AM5/27/13
to
jay birdsong
May 27, 2013, 9:07:58 AM5/27/13
to
"KDT" wrote in message
news:df3b766a-02d0-42b4...@r3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
has gotten you dizzy?
snip as NA.
jay birdsong
May 27, 2013, 9:10:33 AM5/27/13
to
"KDT" wrote in message
news:df3b766a-02d0-42b4...@r3g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
-hh
May 27, 2013, 9:29:13 AM5/27/13
to
to absolve you being a hypocrite.
So all you've done is to reaffirm that you're a liar as well.
-hh
KDT
May 27, 2013, 9:50:01 AM5/27/13
to
"A car depreciates to fast to be considered an asset"
Even though references of a "motor vehicle" being an asset is littered
all over the tax code.
jay birdsong
May 27, 2013, 5:08:08 PM5/27/13
to
"Nashton" wrote in message news:knukrc$4i0$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
caught spoofing someone's nym, then he was an ammunition expert a
while back. But in fairness, Baker out bullshits him every day and
twice on Sunday.
He under the amusing impression that reading a few Google pages makes
him an expert bullshitter, but he is an amusing little buffoon. Worth
the entertainment value.
-hh
May 27, 2013, 6:16:15 PM5/27/13
to
On May 27, 5:08 pm, "jay birdsong" <jaybirds...@aol.com> wrote:
> "Nashton" wrote in messagenews:knukrc$4i0$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Even if any of your claims were true, the shortcomings of others does
nothing
to absolve Nicholas of being a hypocrite.
-hh
PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
-hh
> "Nashton" wrote in messagenews:knukrc$4i0$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
nothing
to absolve Nicholas of being a hypocrite.
-hh
PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
-hh
Nashton
May 27, 2013, 9:36:26 PM5/27/13
to
On 5/27/2013 10:29 AM, -hh wrote:
> On May 26, 11:44 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
>> On 5/26/2013 12:32 PM, -hh wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>>>>>>> [...]
=ven just the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
> On May 26, 11:44 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
>> On 5/26/2013 12:32 PM, -hh wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>
>>>> Yet you get your panties in a bunch when Apple does the same thing!
>>
>>> Precisely, which is because Nicholas chooses to be a hypocrite.
>>
>>> -hh
>>
>> Well, it seems that you got over the humiliation of pretending that you
>> had a clue as to what the diagram put forth by Laszlo meant or represented.
>> You bounce back from being the laughing stock quite fast, I must say.
>
> Even if your claim was true, the shortcomings of others does nothing
> to absolve you being a hypocrite.
>
> So all you've done is to reaffirm that you're a liar as well.
>
>
> -hh
>
Right. So you will now present, in the next few minutes, what you
>>>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means to minimize my tax bill.
>>
>>>> Yet you get your panties in a bunch when Apple does the same thing!
>>
>>> Precisely, which is because Nicholas chooses to be a hypocrite.
>>
>>> -hh
>>
>> Well, it seems that you got over the humiliation of pretending that you
>> had a clue as to what the diagram put forth by Laszlo meant or represented.
>> You bounce back from being the laughing stock quite fast, I must say.
>
> Even if your claim was true, the shortcomings of others does nothing
> to absolve you being a hypocrite.
>
> So all you've done is to reaffirm that you're a liar as well.
>
>
> -hh
>
emailed Laszlo in your "PM", pervert.
If you get upset enough, don't forget to mention my kids' names.
jay birdsong
May 28, 2013, 8:51:16 AM5/28/13
to
"-hh" wrote in message
news:19e6ac1b-6933-4dc1...@i9g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
Very good.
>-hh
>PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
>http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
of the "certain".
-hh
May 28, 2013, 9:31:16 AM5/28/13
to
On May 27, 9:36 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> On 5/27/2013 10:29 AM, -hh wrote:
> > On May 26, 11:44 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/26/2013 12:32 PM, -hh wrote:
>
> >>> Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> >>>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> >>>>>>>> [...]
>
> On 5/27/2013 10:29 AM, -hh wrote:
> > On May 26, 11:44 pm, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/26/2013 12:32 PM, -hh wrote:
>
> >>> Tim Adams <teadams$2$0$...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>>> In article <knt26g$2n...@speranza.aioe.org>, Nashton <n...@na.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/26/2013 8:45 AM, -hh wrote:
> >>>>>> On May 25, 9:30 am, Gary <gaztronomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 2013-05-25 00:29:34 +0000, Nashton said:
> >>>>>>>> [...]
>
> > Does Nicholas decline to take any tax deduction
> > allowances for himself? You know, things like mortgage
> > interest, charities, business mileage, capital depreciation,
> >etc ... heck, even his "Home Office" bit ... or even just
> > the 'Standard Deduction'. ;-)
[Why yes he does]:
> >>>>> Of course I do take advantage of legal means
> >>>>> to minimize my tax bill.
>
> >>>> Yet you get your panties in a bunch when Apple
> >>>> does the same thing!
>
> >>> Precisely, which is because Nicholas chooses to be a hypocrite.
>
> >> Well, it seems that you got over the humiliation of pretending
> >> that you had a clue as to what the diagram put forth by Laszlo
> >> meant or represented. You bounce back from being the
> >> laughing stock quite fast, I must say.
>
> > Even if your claim was true, the shortcomings of others does
> > nothing to absolve you being a hypocrite.
> >
> > So all you've done is to reaffirm that you're a liar as well.
>
> > -hh
>
> Right. So you will now present, in the next few minutes, what you
> emailed Laszlo in your "PM"...
> >> that you had a clue as to what the diagram put forth by Laszlo
> >> meant or represented. You bounce back from being the
> >> laughing stock quite fast, I must say.
>
> > Even if your claim was true, the shortcomings of others does
> > nothing to absolve you being a hypocrite.
> >
> > So all you've done is to reaffirm that you're a liar as well.
>
> > -hh
>
> Right. So you will now present, in the next few minutes, what you
Because that would absolve Nicholas from being a hypocrite? No, not
at all. But since you've been a Snit in asking for even more salt in
your self-inflicted wounds, here's a copy of the mail delivery error
report:
Reporting-MTA: dns; hemicuda.laszlosystems.com
Arrival-Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 10:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
Final-Recipient: rfc822; lazlo_...@laszlomail.com
Action: failed
Status: 4.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Spam-&-Virus-Firewall; connect to
dlxweb1.laszlomail.com[204.197.219.12]: No route to host
From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery System)
Date: May 16, 2013, 4:58:03 PM EDT
To: {...}
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
This is the Spam & Virus Firewall at hemicuda.laszlosystems.com.
I'm sorry to inform you that the message below could not be
delivered.
When delivery was attempted, the following error was returned.
<lazlo_...@laszlomail.com>: connect to
dlxweb1.laszlomail.com[204.197.219.12]: No route to host
http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2007/despair_CSMA.jpg
-hh
Alan Baker
May 28, 2013, 12:10:40 PM5/28/13
to
In article <ko2903$4oi$1...@dont-email.me>,
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Even if any of your claims were true, the shortcomings of others does
> >nothing
> >to absolve Nicholas of being a hypocrite.
>
> OK. You have made some progress. You admit to your shortcomings.
> Very good.
>
>
> >-hh
>
> >PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
>
> >http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
>
> To be honest, I don't click on links from certain people. You are one
> of the "certain".
You are good at excuses...
> >Even if any of your claims were true, the shortcomings of others does
> >nothing
> >to absolve Nicholas of being a hypocrite.
>
> OK. You have made some progress. You admit to your shortcomings.
> Very good.
>
>
> >-hh
>
> >PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
>
> >http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
>
> To be honest, I don't click on links from certain people. You are one
> of the "certain".
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
jay birdsong
May 28, 2013, 12:13:44 PM5/28/13
to
"Alan Baker" wrote in message
news:alangbaker-E0289...@news.shawcable.net...
In article <ko2903$4oi$1...@dont-email.me>,
"jay birdsong" <jaybi...@aol.com> wrote:
> >Even if any of your claims were true, the shortcomings of others
> >does
> >nothing
> >to absolve Nicholas of being a hypocrite.
>
> OK. You have made some progress. You admit to your shortcomings.
> Very good.
>
>
> >-hh
>
> >PS: hadn't bothered in CSMA last year to mention:
>
> >http://www.huntzinger.com/photo/2012/coin+X.jpg
>
> To be honest, I don't click on links from certain people. You are
> one
> of the "certain".
>You are good at excuses...
snip dumb cunt sig.
Justin
May 28, 2013, 6:57:46 PM5/28/13
to
On Fri, 24 May 2013 21:29:34 -0300, Nashton wrote:
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-
biggest-company-also-became-the-most-unethical
Legal = ethical.
The law is sacred.
> http://www.policymic.com/articles/7868/apple-icheat-how-the-world-s-
biggest-company-also-became-the-most-unethical
Legal = ethical.
The law is sacred.
Flint
May 29, 2013, 1:14:25 AM5/29/13
to
--
MFB
Justin
May 29, 2013, 9:50:53 AM5/29/13
to
Justin
May 29, 2013, 10:15:11 AM5/29/13
to
word "too." That shows you what you're dealing with.
As a CPA I feel obligated to straighten everyone out.
Yes, a vehicle is an asset. Under US GAAP, Assets do *not* increase in
value. If an asset is sold off at a higher price than its original (book)
value, the difference is recorded as a gain and the asset's value is
unchanged.
Vehicles have expenses connected to them, fuel, maintenance, and
depreciation.
As for taxes, all three (and more) expenses *are* deductible as business
expenses.
jay birdsong
May 29, 2013, 11:20:33 AM5/29/13
to
"Justin" wrote in message
news:pan.2013.05...@fartsfartsandmorefarts.edu...
fishie. Makes him feel "superior".
Nashton
May 29, 2013, 3:11:33 PM5/29/13
to
or illegal.
Same goes for advertising stupidity, which you've been doing for the
past few days.
Nashton
May 29, 2013, 3:20:53 PM5/29/13
to
things I never said, to me.
Are you confused, stupid or just plainly a shit disturber?
>>
>> "A car depreciates to fast to be considered an asset"
>>
>>
>> Even though references of a "motor vehicle" being an asset is littered
>> all over the tax code.
an asset are only pertinent when such is considered as a means to making
a profit and/or conducting business.
Hyperbole noted and I'm afraid we'll see it again from a twit like you.
>
>> Is that an actual copy and paste? If so he used the wrong version of the
>> word "too." That shows you what you're dealing with.
irrelevant stupidities, taken out of context in order to obfuscate the
fact that the Mac sucks and is an abysmal failure.
Justin
May 29, 2013, 6:17:00 PM5/29/13
to
unethical things.
KDT
May 29, 2013, 7:16:38 PM5/29/13
to
On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 3:20:53 PM UTC-4, Nashton wrote:
> On 05-29-13 12:20 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
> LOL, that's a stretch, even for you. References to an automobile being
>
> an asset are only pertinent when such is considered as a means to making
>
> a profit and/or conducting business.
So according to the tax code......
> On 05-29-13 12:20 PM, jay birdsong wrote:
>
> LOL, that's a stretch, even for you. References to an automobile being
>
> an asset are only pertinent when such is considered as a means to making
>
> a profit and/or conducting business.
When I drive my car to work (where I make money), it is for personal use.
But if I drive my car from my primary job (W2 income) to a secondary side job (1099 income) it is considered business expense.
So does my car magically turn into an "asset" once I leave my first job to go to a secondary side job even though I derive income from both jobs?
You care to find a reputable citation where a car is only an asset?
>
>
>
> Hyperbole noted and I'm afraid we'll see it again from a twit like you.
>
> >> Is that an actual copy and paste? If so he used the wrong version of the
>
> >> word "too." That shows you what you're dealing with.
>
>
>
> What I'm dealing with is a bunch of nit-picking twits whom cherry pick
>
> irrelevant stupidities, taken out of context in order to obfuscate the
>
> fact that the Mac sucks and is an abysmal failure.
-hh
May 29, 2013, 7:51:41 PM5/29/13
to
On May 29, 7:16 pm, KDT <scarface...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [pretty good trashing of Nicholas]
executor for an estate, since had he had ever done so, he would have
learned (under the 'fiduciary responsibility' parts) how every
material object has to be considered as a potential asset to be
documented and tracked in the Estate. Even a twenty year old Miata is
potentially worth at least a thousand bucks to repay the debtors
making Probate claims.
-hh
> [pretty good trashing of Nicholas]
>
> Nashton's definition of "nit-picking" : "My world view doesn't agree with reality".
What's just as evident is that Nicholas has never had to be an
> Nashton's definition of "nit-picking" : "My world view doesn't agree with reality".
executor for an estate, since had he had ever done so, he would have
learned (under the 'fiduciary responsibility' parts) how every
material object has to be considered as a potential asset to be
documented and tracked in the Estate. Even a twenty year old Miata is
potentially worth at least a thousand bucks to repay the debtors
making Probate claims.
-hh
0 new messages