Buying Boat Gear Just Got More Expensive

[deblen]

And-typical human nature-we keep asking for more & expect to pay same or less taxes.
Can't have both-regardless of your politics


Len

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by deblen

And-typical human nature-we keep asking for more & expect to pay same or less taxes.
Can't have both-regardless of your politics[emoji2]


Len

This is very true. I saw this in my own business. The customers demanded more for less, year after year.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by daletournier

It's a little more complicated. The amount of taxes may not be nessacary if countries managed their finances as if they were a private company that could go broke. Major inefficiency and waste of tax dollars dosent get fixed by more taxes. 800 billion in military spending!!

The Ponzi scheme of credit is nothing more than" bringing tommorows prosperity to now", and unfortunately future generations will pay the cost.

Originally Posted by deblen

And-typical human nature-we keep asking for more & expect to pay same or less taxes.
Can't have both-regardless of your politics

I think governments and businesses are fundamentally different beasts. Part of our problem has been this push to treat them the same. But I agree with both your comments here. If we stopped believing in the proverbial ‘free lunch’, and either paid a fair share for the things we use, then we’d go a long way to solving many of our societies’ problems.

But of course who wants to pay for roads, bridges, water, healthcare, social security, justice...? Or even more directly, who wants to pay the full price for stuff like oil, nuclear power and dog pillows . Certainly not us.

Originally Posted by daletournier

That's abit harsh Mike? He has different beliefs than you, that's OK, right? Debate is good.

Yes … perhaps. I hesitated before posting it. Lets just say it’s just based on past experience trying to have discussions with him. Hard to discuss stuff with someone who already has all the answers.

[Caribbeachbum]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

.....so please put away the smugness that we all want to pay our fair share for the Good of Humanity...ha ha ha... because the reality on the ground Trumps the talk on Chat Rooms.

Some of us want to pay our fair share, others want to leech off of that decency. In this context, I see no difference between a black welfare queen and a greedy old white man.

[sailjumanji]

Take your online advertisement to West Marine, have them price match, pay your local sales tax with the purchase. No shipping cost if you pick up item at store. If you are a points member, get 4% back in coupons; 12% on triple points weekend.

So you've paid sales tax, avoided shipping charge, paid a competitive price, and if timed correctly even got money back coupons.

I own no interest or stock in West Marine. I do have an interest in keeping a local store open so I can see and hold an item before purchase.

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Don’t worry about Third. There are many people on this forum who are worth discussing things with. And then there are folks like Third.

Don’t even bother. Waste of time.

Hmm, and that says a lot about you, right there. And I'm sure it doesn't matter to you, but I agree with Third.

[Singularity]

Originally Posted by daletournier

It's a little more complicated. The amount of taxes may not be nessacary if countries managed their finances as if they were a private company that could go broke. Major inefficiency and waste of tax dollars dosent get fixed by more taxes. 800 billion in military spending!!

The Ponzi scheme of credit is nothing more than" bringing tommorows prosperity to now", and unfortunately future generations will pay the cost.

It's really not more complicated. I am not an expert in politics, but I do have a university degree on the subject and can offer some basic logic for analysis. My favorite definition of politics is the means by which a society distributes limited resources to what are effectively unlimited demands from the society. Regarding the cost-efficiency of private vs public firms:

Public entity costs to deliver a good/service = "perfect world" operational non-waste costs + waste costs

Private entity costs to deliver the same good/service = "perfect world" operational non-waste costs + waste costs + profit/wealth transfer + societal costs for assuming debt of failed firms

* "Perfect world" operational costs are the costs you yourself (or the trusted team of advisors you delegate for the report) determine SHOULD be the costs to provide the good/service according to your specific needs according to you.

During the above analysis the "large firms become less and less efficient" phenomenon MUST be accounted for.

As a consumer who desires to keep capital, but needs a good/service, what you REALLY need to know is, in the real-world, which type of firm can provide the good/service with the LOWEST cost to your wallet. Unfortunately we all don't share the same cognitive biases and can't agree on what the "real world" is (free-riders are particularly stereotypic on their reality's view on taxes).

It has become a religion for a sizeable percentage of people to denigrate government while ignoring (or more likely) not really understanding the reality. $430 billion in government spending is not money that was taken from people and burned in a field. What happened was $430 billion was redistributed in the economy (or more precisely put was redistributed to buttress the weakening portions of the pyramid scheme while 80% of wealth is syphoned off to the top few percentage wealthy people, but I digress).

So all the government haters in the US can look forward toy a future of defaults on public debt after which the public goods (like roads, bridges, airports, schools) can be sold off to large firms like "Bezos and Kin" and all our problems will be solved with private firms running everything.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Singularity

It's really not more complicated. I am not an expert in politics, but I do have a university degree on the subject and can offer some basic logic for analysis. My favorite definition of politics is the means by which a society distributes limited resources to what are effectively unlimited demands from the society. Regarding the cost-efficiency of private vs public firms:

Public entity costs to deliver a good/service = "perfect world" operational non-waste costs + waste costs

Private entity costs to deliver the same good/service = "perfect world" operational non-waste costs + waste costs + profit/wealth transfer + societal costs for assuming debt of failed firms

* "Perfect world" operational costs are the costs you yourself (or the trusted team of advisors you delegate for the report) determine SHOULD be the costs to provide the good/service according to your specific needs according to you.

During the above analysis the "large firms become less and less efficient" phenomenon MUST be accounted for.

As a consumer who desires to keep capital, but needs a good/service, what you REALLY need to know is, in the real-world, which type of firm can provide the good/service with the LOWEST cost to your wallet. Unfortunately we all don't share the same cognitive biases and can't agree on what the "real world" is (free-riders are particularly stereotypic on their reality's view on taxes).

It has become a religion for a sizeable percentage of people to denigrate government while ignoring (or more likely) not really understanding the reality. $430 billion in government spending is not money that was taken from people and burned in a field. What happened was $430 billion was redistributed in the economy (or more precisely put was redistributed to buttress the weakening portions of the pyramid scheme while 80% of wealth is syphoned off to the top few percentage wealthy people, but I digress).

So all the government haters in the US can look forward toy a future of defaults on public debt after which the public goods (like roads, bridges, airports, schools) can be sold off to large firms like "Bezos and Kin" and all our problems will be solved with private firms running everything.

Limited resources meeting unlimited demands isn't as excuse for mis management of those limited resources, regardless of how it is framed. Look at Russia's sovereign debt or private debt vs gdp, and yes I understand it's a completely different political system BUT responsible fiscal policy is what we are discussing. Governments have a responsibility to manage those funds correctly, keeping their house in order, as do individuals, companies and any other entity.

Regarding defaults on sovereign debts, I fully agree. We have a fundamentally flawed monetary system and the problems associated with this system are now coming to a head (IMHO) . I believe sovereign debt to be a lesser problem than the private sector debt, although neither are sustainable. The credit driven asset boom (bubble) has affected all segments of society. It really is a case of living beyond our means, whether that be a federal government or an individual. I was alluding to our broken financial system when I made the comment "its a little more complicated". We are breaking records in many areas regarding debt levels and over valuations.

I also understand and agree on the transfer of wealth you briefly mentioned. Governments, local state and federal across the world (not every) are insolvent.

Out of curiosity, what is your degree?

[KarenSJ]

The only thing you can be sure of in the near term is that residents of S. Dakota will be paying sales tax on Internet purchases made from high volume sellers as soon as the SD Supreme Court cleans up some details in its law just made Constitutional. 22 or so other states have laws on the books to collect sales tax from their residents buying on line, and each is different. It will likely be somewhat chaotic as each sales tax state figures out how to get their piece of the tax pie from such sales. Uniformity could be created if Congress enacts a law to regulate the taxation of internet commerce, but I'm not taking that bet. I also hope for exemptions for small sellers, or that the likes of Ebay and Etsy will make compliance centralized, easy and cheap.

[Sailorbob8599]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Illegal?
You mean like all those Mail Drops South of the Canadian Border for Canadians to have US Companies ship their orders to so they can drive across the Border, stash the product in their trunk and then smuggle the items back into their Country to avoid Canadian Taxes? Ha ha ha.....

That's been happening long before El Trumpo came into office mi Amigo....but nice try.

I am Canadian & use a 'mail-drop' service in WA state where I have all my on-line purchases delivered. The reason I do this is, because the majority of companies I buy from provide "Free Shipping" anywhere in the states (except Hawaii & Alaska) … but not Canada. … I live only 15 minutes from the border, so why would I not take advantage of "Free Shipping" when it is available?
As for paying taxes on my purchases, I declare everything purchased when returning through the Canada border. It is up to our Customs Border guards to determine if taxes are applicable. Usually, they do not charge cross-border shoppers under a certain dollar figure.
I've found the legal way to bring items across (the border) tax free is to not exceed the limits … which can be found on a Tariff sheet accessible on-line. Also, they do not charge tax on items that are not made in Canada & I do not know of any Canadian manufacturer of sailboat gear other than Dickinson, a local manufacturer of Stoves, BBQ's & Heaters for boats. There may be other things but I am not aware of them.

I started using mail drop box services a few years ago when making a purchase that was to be delivered to my home by UPS. Prior to hitting the "Purchase" button I specifically inquired about shipping costs & was informed it was totally free. On delivery, the UPS driver collected a fairly hefty delivery charge. On questioning him I was told it was only free to the US Border & this charge was made by the Canadian Division of UPS for customs documentation & truck delivery from Vancouver airport, a distance of about 50 kms. … he told me that UPS Canada & USA were affiliated, but effectively two different companies. I got a similar response when I phoned their Canadian office to complain. WTF? I do not file papers or use a broker when bringing items through customs myself, why was I not informed prior to shipment?
As far as I'm concerned, UPS is UPS no matter which side of the border they operate. I was so totally pissed me off, I vowed never again to do business with anyone where UPS would be involved & so far, I've kept that promise. I too have my principles.

Finally, I am a NEXUS traveller so I'm quite fastidious about following the rules & reporting everything I transport across the border in both directions because, I do not want to risk losing my good name, my Nexus Pass or being denied entry to the USA where I have relatives. I never have problems travelling either way.

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by daletournier

It's a little more complicated. The amount of taxes may not be nessacary if countries managed their finances as if they were a private company that could go broke. Major inefficiency and waste of tax dollars dosent get fixed by more taxes. 800 billion in military spending!!

The Ponzi scheme of credit is nothing more than" bringing tommorows prosperity to now", and unfortunately future generations will pay the cost.

I get a real laugh out of people that say government should be run like a business, because in my experience government is run exactly like a large corporation. Government makes lots of promises and puts off paying for them until sometime in the future. Why? It gives the voters something so that they'll reelect them but the bill won't come due until after they leave office. A CEO agrees to a union retirement plan that is unsustainable but only if it applies down the road sometime. No money is actually put aside to pay for it, so it doesn't affect the bottom line this quarter thus the workers get something, the stock holders get something, and most important the CEO gets his big bonus. He'll be retired before the bill comes due and it will be some other poor smuck's problem. In the meantime he has walked away with his multi-million dollar bonus. Take a look at many large corporations that have recently declared bankruptcy and managed to dump the pension plans they promised so many years ago. The only difference I have seen is that for some reason government actually seeks to lower their income while maintaining their spending. I have never seen a corporation actually try to reduce their income.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Don’t worry about Third. There are many people on this forum who are worth discussing things with. And then there are folks like Third.

Don’t even bother. Waste of time.

Why thank you...but I did notice you didn't take your own advice, so if you don't take your own advice, what value is it to others?

If you want to go down the getting personal road it's says more about you and the quality of your argument....

Originally Posted by Sailorbob8599

IAs far as I'm concerned, UPS is UPS no matter which side of the border they operate. I was so totally pissed me off, I vowed never again to do business with anyone where UPS would be involved & so far, I've kept that promise. I too have my principles..

Yep...UPS Crossing Borders is a Fiasco, which is why we use DHL Exclusively for International Shipping.

[Mike OReilly]

Happy Canada Day … and the official launch of Canada’s retaliatory tariffs. As of today a whole bunch of American boaty stuff is now more expensive for us Canucks. Somehow, I don’t feel like celebrating.

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

I get a real laugh out of people that say government should be run like a business, because in my experience government is run exactly like a large corporation…..

Agreed. While I appreciate the basic idea that government should spend tax dollars wisely and efficiently, the whole concept of treating government like a business is fundamentally flawed. It seems almost trite to say, but government and businesses are set up to do different things. They have different purposes, and different goals. So this whole notion of treating citizens like customers (or worse, consumers), and demanding that government treat tax revenue like income from selling widgets is simply wrong.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

the whole concept of treating government like a business is fundamentally flawed.

Exactly.
Governments Take what people want at the threat of force for non-compliance.

Corporations Produce what people want in the free exchange beneficial to both parties.

This basic concept was understood by the signers of the Declaration of Independence 242yrs ago, but understood poorly by the populace today that looks to Government for more than History teaches it is capable of providing.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

I get a real laugh out of people that say government should be run like a business, because in my experience government is run exactly like a large corporation. Government makes lots of promises and puts off paying for them until sometime in the future. Why? It gives the voters something so that they'll reelect them but the bill won't come due until after they leave office. A CEO agrees to a union retirement plan that is unsustainable but only if it applies down the road sometime. No money is actually put aside to pay for it, so it doesn't affect the bottom line this quarter thus the workers get something, the stock holders get something, and most important the CEO gets his big bonus. He'll be retired before the bill comes due and it will be some other poor smuck's problem. In the meantime he has walked away with his multi-million dollar bonus. Take a look at many large corporations that have recently declared bankruptcy and managed to dump the pension plans they promised so many years ago. The only difference I have seen is that for some reason government actually seeks to lower their income while maintaining their spending. I have never seen a corporation actually try to reduce their income.

OK, let me clarify. Private business not public (although it shouldn't matter) , a business needs to stay solvent or it fails to exist therefore can't service its customers. When I had my business if I spent more than come in I went broke, it's that simple.

Regardless want many may think businesss aren't just about turning a profit, they also profide a service, in fact that's their main function, if they don't get that right there is no profit.

Government, be it local, state or federal has a responsibility to stay solvent, they serve no one if they go broke, basic services break down if the money runs out.

Unfortunately most are technically insolvent now, just running on credit.

BTW, I sense a anti business sentiment? You ever have a job? That's what business's do, employ people.