aswitcher
Aug 7, 02:58 AM
How about a new design pro keyboard to go with the new Mac Pro and Displays? I think its due.....
ShadoW
Pro-Keyboard would be very interesting.
ShadoW
Pro-Keyboard would be very interesting.
vampyren
Nov 12, 01:30 AM
I use Eset NOD32 on my pc and i must say it's the best AV software in my opinion after testing many others. Once they make their AV available on mac i will get it. Or if a AV get's its way to the new mac appstore. This way i know i can simply remove it by deleting it (i hope). I just hate installers that spread stuff on my mac. It's so ...windows :)
theOtherGeoff
Apr 6, 05:22 PM
This may give you some insight as to why.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/262199-ipad-s-outlook-encouraging-but-impact-on-stock-limited
The problem is that Liven2 is talking out of his *ss and not seeing the reality...
comparitive Marketvalues since iPhone released. (http://www.google.com//finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=maximized&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1302128233687&chddm=406949&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:GOOG&ntsp=0)
short story: Since iOS:Apple stock up 300%, Google up 30% I want to fail this bad with every stock I own.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/262199-ipad-s-outlook-encouraging-but-impact-on-stock-limited
The problem is that Liven2 is talking out of his *ss and not seeing the reality...
comparitive Marketvalues since iPhone released. (http://www.google.com//finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=maximized&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1302128233687&chddm=406949&chls=IntervalBasedLine&cmpto=NASDAQ:AAPL&cmptdms=0&q=NASDAQ:GOOG&ntsp=0)
short story: Since iOS:Apple stock up 300%, Google up 30% I want to fail this bad with every stock I own.
jaw04005
May 7, 10:34 AM
If true, this is good news.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
However, it would make sense Apple would limit the free service to iPod touch, iPhone, Mac and iPad owners. Maybe then it’ll remain ad free.
Their next step should be to purchase DropBox and replace iDisk or at least implement a faster WebDAV solution. iDisk is dog slow even on fast connections compared to other services.
Then they should up the storage limit from 20GB to 50GB and finally implement LaLa-like iTunes Web streaming.
justflie
Nov 26, 10:35 AM
Interesting I guess. But is there really a home/consumer market for this? I could see it working for artists and other professionals of that nature, but I know more than a few people that own PC tablets that hardly ever use them as such.
Nuvi
Nov 6, 04:36 PM
OK so for the slower people why would you separate the GPS unit and mount when it is being used on a day to day basis? The TomTom mounts are so slim and there is no other use for the unit so there is no point to separate the two for storage. The iPhone is mainly a phone and i would need to separate the two on a regular basis.
The entry level TomTom units have the slim dock but the more advance ones have the bulky active dock / or non active but still bulky ;) (5x0 - 9x0 series). There is no way you would want to carry around the more advanced units attached to the dock but if you can just leave the dock sticking on your windshield then this is not a problem.
Anyway, iPhone has one undeniable advantage over the stand alone units and thats the ability to choose the software. However, the screen on iPhone is small and the features will probably never be par with high end stand alone units.
The entry level TomTom units have the slim dock but the more advance ones have the bulky active dock / or non active but still bulky ;) (5x0 - 9x0 series). There is no way you would want to carry around the more advanced units attached to the dock but if you can just leave the dock sticking on your windshield then this is not a problem.
Anyway, iPhone has one undeniable advantage over the stand alone units and thats the ability to choose the software. However, the screen on iPhone is small and the features will probably never be par with high end stand alone units.
CalBoy
Apr 15, 01:45 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been. The people who would have worked there can't complain the way an autoworker or public school teacher can complain. It's okay, it's not like we need jobs or anything. Let's just raise taxes enough on the top 1% of earners to employ everyone looking for a job. We can have them built a high speed rail network across the country. The only snag is our country would collapse before finishing one route. We would have a scattering of tracks as a reminder of our incompetence.
There's also positives that come along with this as well. If higher capital gains were able to support things like universal healthcare and better education, then more individuals would not only be able to innovate, but also take the risk on themselves because failure wouldn't mean dying as a pauper on the streets.
Our current tax system only encourages rewarding those who already have plenty. It does nothing for the small business owner that might lose his shirt if the business fails. We live in a land of extremes; you're either extremely wealthy or teetering on the brink of insolvency. That isn't the recipe for a successful society.
You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
There's also positives that come along with this as well. If higher capital gains were able to support things like universal healthcare and better education, then more individuals would not only be able to innovate, but also take the risk on themselves because failure wouldn't mean dying as a pauper on the streets.
Our current tax system only encourages rewarding those who already have plenty. It does nothing for the small business owner that might lose his shirt if the business fails. We live in a land of extremes; you're either extremely wealthy or teetering on the brink of insolvency. That isn't the recipe for a successful society.
You're also operating from a false premise. Investors would continue to invest in whatever had the best returns. When you raise taxes across the board, all alternatives have the same tax exposure, which means the previously best option will remain the best option.
Unless you're seriously suggesting that a 35% (or higher) tax rate is really going to cause all billionaires to sit on their money and earn a lower return, just to stick it to Uncle Sam.
kdarling
Apr 25, 11:28 AM
iOS uses services from a company called Skyhook to help with location tracking. they use GPS and wifi access points to pinpoint locations faster than GPS.
Apple stopped using Skyhook a while back, I think around v3.2 or something. Let me check. Yes, that was when Apple changed (http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/apple-location/) to using their own WiFi and cell databases.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes.
See above. Apple does something very similar. Whenever an app requests a location using GPS, the phone also scans for nearby cell towers and WiFi hotspots. That info is sent up to Apple to build their database.
Why does Google need to know this?
Same reason as Apple. While on this topic, let's hit the wayback machine:
Before the iPhone came out, Google was secretly collecting cell location info via any phone with GPS and Google Maps. Mostly Windows Mobile phones, I would think.
Good thing, too, because the iPhone debuted without GPS and was pretty much useless in that respect. Then Google unveiled a version of Google Maps using their cell location database, and suddenly the iPhone and other phones without GPS reception were useful after all.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
Yet you didn't know Apple was. Ignorance is bliss.
Except that neither cares about watching YOU. They're watching for cells and hotspots. Sorry, they're more important :)
Ok, here's the information that's actually known about the consolidated.db file:
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
That's almost all correct (*). It's just a receive-only cache to speed up locating and use less battery and network resources.
(*) WiFi and cell are not part of A-GPS. The A in A-GPS on the iPhone is about receiving satellite information from an assistance server on the 'net.
Apple stopped using Skyhook a while back, I think around v3.2 or something. Let me check. Yes, that was when Apple changed (http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/apple-location/) to using their own WiFi and cell databases.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes.
See above. Apple does something very similar. Whenever an app requests a location using GPS, the phone also scans for nearby cell towers and WiFi hotspots. That info is sent up to Apple to build their database.
Why does Google need to know this?
Same reason as Apple. While on this topic, let's hit the wayback machine:
Before the iPhone came out, Google was secretly collecting cell location info via any phone with GPS and Google Maps. Mostly Windows Mobile phones, I would think.
Good thing, too, because the iPhone debuted without GPS and was pretty much useless in that respect. Then Google unveiled a version of Google Maps using their cell location database, and suddenly the iPhone and other phones without GPS reception were useful after all.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
Yet you didn't know Apple was. Ignorance is bliss.
Except that neither cares about watching YOU. They're watching for cells and hotspots. Sorry, they're more important :)
Ok, here's the information that's actually known about the consolidated.db file:
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
That's almost all correct (*). It's just a receive-only cache to speed up locating and use less battery and network resources.
(*) WiFi and cell are not part of A-GPS. The A in A-GPS on the iPhone is about receiving satellite information from an assistance server on the 'net.
dbit
Sep 16, 02:45 PM
Quick question,
Is it possible to order online and pick up in a specified store when available?
This would be the most convinient way for me to purchase when the new MBP's come out.
Is it possible to order online and pick up in a specified store when available?
This would be the most convinient way for me to purchase when the new MBP's come out.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:15 AM
Making it free would be a smart move by Apple. It would help bond iphone users more effectively to Apple ecosystem.
At the moment, I don't use the MobileMe service (though I'd like to have findmyphone and perhaps back to my mac services) but if I had it free, it would be a thing that would make it less likely that I would switch to RIM/WIN7 or Android.
Does anyone know if the Windows version of this similar service bundle is free?
The download for the Mobileme control panel for windows is free. It's very basic but all people really need is to link with Outlook contacts and Exchange. Everything else can be done me.com.
At the moment, I don't use the MobileMe service (though I'd like to have findmyphone and perhaps back to my mac services) but if I had it free, it would be a thing that would make it less likely that I would switch to RIM/WIN7 or Android.
Does anyone know if the Windows version of this similar service bundle is free?
The download for the Mobileme control panel for windows is free. It's very basic but all people really need is to link with Outlook contacts and Exchange. Everything else can be done me.com.
mambodancer
Jul 30, 09:45 PM
[QUOTE=mackiwi]umm....that magazine add looks rather real to me. WTF?:eek:
iCreate magazine buts together a fake ad each issue. The ad shown is a kind of "What if" or "Wishful Thinking" feature of their magazine. Had the poster posted the full page graphic, you would have seen this.
iCreate magazine buts together a fake ad each issue. The ad shown is a kind of "What if" or "Wishful Thinking" feature of their magazine. Had the poster posted the full page graphic, you would have seen this.
toddybody
Mar 31, 09:01 AM
Lol...
So where exactly did I personally insult you?
Ehh, you were a bit snarky:p
That said, people need to thicken their skin a bit...last time i checked sarcasm and subtle jabbing isnt a reportable offense on MR; at least not yet :rolleyes:
So where exactly did I personally insult you?
Ehh, you were a bit snarky:p
That said, people need to thicken their skin a bit...last time i checked sarcasm and subtle jabbing isnt a reportable offense on MR; at least not yet :rolleyes:
GregA
Jul 31, 12:22 AM
If this ever happens, I would bet the farm that Apple will do it with their own MVNO. I would make a reasonable guess that this MVNO would be based on Sprint.If Disney is truly thinking of shutting down their MVNO, perhaps Apple would go halves in it? It is a little outside of Apple's normal interests, but it'd be good for them to have a share. (this doesn't help us outside the US!)
As for WiFi:
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
If Apple make a VoIP phone (via Wifi with an Airport base station), naturally you'd have coverage in your home and at work, and Apple might make some strategic deals with WiFi Networks in many cities. At home & work you'd simply have a phone with no mobile charges. As you move about the city, it could update voicemail & email (etc) where possible. That solution would not require FCC approval.
I think the killer feature would be iChat Mobile... To be able to video chat with your friends on the go -- people would eat it up. I don't know why no one has done it yet, as it seems the technology is already there.You can already video chat with friends on the go. Are you suggesting this should be free?
Apple will innovate a whole new concept to music and how we use cell phones. Let's not limit our thinking to just iPods and cell phones. I read an article awhile back about Apple's interest in the high-speed Internet market (for cell phones). Imagine if calling someone was more like an audio/video chat instead. Now that would be sweet.
I think developing something for high speed internet is the answer. At the moment, wireless-Internet is an after thought in mobile phones. Always-on (via wifi or 3G) will enable new types of applications.
Who knows, considering that WWDC is developer centric, what if Apple releases an API to allow either software to be ported to the device's OS and to allow third-party developers to write applications for the phone. I'm really looking forward to this year's WWDC more than I have past event. It's getting exciting.
It would be interesting if Apple released a new development framework for mobile devices. Announce groupware technologies and the devices they'll work on, let developers come up with novel ideas.
Personally, I'm hoping Apple starts really simple.
As for WiFi:
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
If Apple make a VoIP phone (via Wifi with an Airport base station), naturally you'd have coverage in your home and at work, and Apple might make some strategic deals with WiFi Networks in many cities. At home & work you'd simply have a phone with no mobile charges. As you move about the city, it could update voicemail & email (etc) where possible. That solution would not require FCC approval.
I think the killer feature would be iChat Mobile... To be able to video chat with your friends on the go -- people would eat it up. I don't know why no one has done it yet, as it seems the technology is already there.You can already video chat with friends on the go. Are you suggesting this should be free?
Apple will innovate a whole new concept to music and how we use cell phones. Let's not limit our thinking to just iPods and cell phones. I read an article awhile back about Apple's interest in the high-speed Internet market (for cell phones). Imagine if calling someone was more like an audio/video chat instead. Now that would be sweet.
I think developing something for high speed internet is the answer. At the moment, wireless-Internet is an after thought in mobile phones. Always-on (via wifi or 3G) will enable new types of applications.
Who knows, considering that WWDC is developer centric, what if Apple releases an API to allow either software to be ported to the device's OS and to allow third-party developers to write applications for the phone. I'm really looking forward to this year's WWDC more than I have past event. It's getting exciting.
It would be interesting if Apple released a new development framework for mobile devices. Announce groupware technologies and the devices they'll work on, let developers come up with novel ideas.
Personally, I'm hoping Apple starts really simple.
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 08:20 PM
Yes they did. Did you even try it before replying anything?
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
bella92108
Apr 5, 03:03 PM
I guess you mean they disturb your view of the world .... ;)
Well the reason I was saying throw it out is because it hurts the Apple outlook, but hey, if you want to compare an OS that's been out for a year to one that's been out for a month, go for it, but the critics will eat you up just like they did Steve's comments about android 3.0 only having 50 apps. How many did iOS have FOR the iPad when it was announced? FIVE, and they were the five that APPLE created, but hey, live in your world.
Well the reason I was saying throw it out is because it hurts the Apple outlook, but hey, if you want to compare an OS that's been out for a year to one that's been out for a month, go for it, but the critics will eat you up just like they did Steve's comments about android 3.0 only having 50 apps. How many did iOS have FOR the iPad when it was announced? FIVE, and they were the five that APPLE created, but hey, live in your world.
hobbbz
Apr 21, 02:50 PM
Here's a quick scale / mockup
addicted44
Apr 23, 06:06 PM
And today they are the Gold Standard for consumer tech.
OS X runs very well on Apple hardware. OS X apps run very well on Apple hardware. Not sure what the problem with performance is.
Those "laptops on a stand" are selling in record numbers while the rest of the computer industry is in a sharp downturn.
They've got the future of gaming all locked up nice and tight on iOS, not on PCs as we know them but on mobile devices which keep getting more powerful and which as we know, are the future of computing.
Your anecdotal opinion is cool and all, but perspective please!
Apple has been completely and unequivocally unaffected by conceding the gaming market to someone else. Instead, they've revisited it and have created a new standard. if that's what "losing" means then I'm damned impressed.
Apple has products that meet pretty much every market. Professionals buy Mac Pros, which are top notch (although the design is getting a little dated) and non-pros buy iMacs, which suffice for everything they need to do.
The only market they aren't meeting are the high-end gaming market. And considering how few games supported macs, and how the vast majority of games were actually played on dedicated consoles, this wasn't a bad decision at all.
Re: Resolution Independence, that idea is essentially dead. Its a great idea in theory, but nearly unworkable in practice. No developer wants to go back and redesign all their graphics in vector art (nvm that vector art doesn't even work for all designs, and that most designers prefer pixel drawings). And since there is a clear upper bound after which any improvements in resolution are largely worthless, as long as people develop their artwork at that resolution, every range of useful resolution is covered. At much lesser effort, and expense. The only tradeoff is Hard disk space, and I think we can all agree that HD space is one of the cheapest resources we have.
OS X runs very well on Apple hardware. OS X apps run very well on Apple hardware. Not sure what the problem with performance is.
Those "laptops on a stand" are selling in record numbers while the rest of the computer industry is in a sharp downturn.
They've got the future of gaming all locked up nice and tight on iOS, not on PCs as we know them but on mobile devices which keep getting more powerful and which as we know, are the future of computing.
Your anecdotal opinion is cool and all, but perspective please!
Apple has been completely and unequivocally unaffected by conceding the gaming market to someone else. Instead, they've revisited it and have created a new standard. if that's what "losing" means then I'm damned impressed.
Apple has products that meet pretty much every market. Professionals buy Mac Pros, which are top notch (although the design is getting a little dated) and non-pros buy iMacs, which suffice for everything they need to do.
The only market they aren't meeting are the high-end gaming market. And considering how few games supported macs, and how the vast majority of games were actually played on dedicated consoles, this wasn't a bad decision at all.
Re: Resolution Independence, that idea is essentially dead. Its a great idea in theory, but nearly unworkable in practice. No developer wants to go back and redesign all their graphics in vector art (nvm that vector art doesn't even work for all designs, and that most designers prefer pixel drawings). And since there is a clear upper bound after which any improvements in resolution are largely worthless, as long as people develop their artwork at that resolution, every range of useful resolution is covered. At much lesser effort, and expense. The only tradeoff is Hard disk space, and I think we can all agree that HD space is one of the cheapest resources we have.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:44 AM
As amazing as free MobileMe sounds, I find this HIGHLY unlikely.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
wizard
Mar 29, 03:29 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Hey Apple,
I don't want my iPhone 5 to be leaking radiation...
Too soon? :cool::rolleyes:
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
Hey Apple,
I don't want my iPhone 5 to be leaking radiation...
Too soon? :cool::rolleyes:
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
JackAxe
Apr 18, 05:07 PM
Apple should sue Apple trees for their repeated use of Apple's logo! :mad:
Hisdem
Mar 29, 01:40 PM
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Yeah, but you have to think that Apple also sells outside the US. And then their products would be more expensive worldwide. I would not pay a premium to have a product that was built in the US. And I don't think the Europeans or Asians would either, to be honest.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Yeah, but you have to think that Apple also sells outside the US. And then their products would be more expensive worldwide. I would not pay a premium to have a product that was built in the US. And I don't think the Europeans or Asians would either, to be honest.
iGary
Aug 7, 05:47 PM
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0631.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
ender land
Apr 14, 11:02 AM
Interesting article. More or less well thought out.
Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners.
This is such a lie, lol, social security is half funded by businesses. Those who are self employed have to pay 2x what most of us pay because they pay the 'company' portion too.
The chart under 3, with someone making 26k and paying 6k in federal tax is a bit of a misnomer; I made nearly this much last year and paid zero in federal tax. So while it might be possible to pay that much I would imagine the majority of Americans do NOT pay 6k out of a 26k income.
The "it wasn't always like this" chart seems to be indicating that average effective incomes -accounting for inflation - have dropped significantly over the past 28 years (well 31 now, presumably the author would state the trend continues). By roughly a factor of 180% (!). Literally, 1$ they had in 1980 would buy the equivalent of about $0.35 now. But then again, a chart without any sort of labels or context or clarification is not really too valid in terms of making an argument either way. Not to mention the numbers do not align with any of the figures in the "The Wage Gap Widens" chart above it.
The stuff on the Making Work Pay Credit is funny to me, this credit isn't a tax cut so much as a tax rebate - it is a refundable credit, so if you have enough tax deductions you can actually receive this $400/800 a year back from the government even if you do not pay any taxes. This is not a tax cut. This is a rebate/stimulus. A tax cut would not refund you beyond what you paid in taxes. Not taking money from one person and giving it to another.
Finally, the last section is interesting. Perhaps it is true, and other governments do it better - our government has been fiscally irresponsible for years. I do NOT want them to control that much of my income until they prove fiscally responsible. If they can bring the budget under balance over the next few years in manners other than blatantly increasing taxes (perhaps a combination of slightly increasing taxes but many spending cuts) then I will feel confident in them being able to manage money well. But until they do that, I do not have a lot of faith in them being able to handle an increase in funds any more effectively than they do now.
Overall, I think this was a fairly decent attempt. In spite of a lot of errors it does show what should be obvious to anyone paying attention to American economic tax policies as of late - taxes on the rich are less now than they were before.
Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance taxes (known as payroll taxes) are paid mostly by the bottom 90 percent of wage earners.
This is such a lie, lol, social security is half funded by businesses. Those who are self employed have to pay 2x what most of us pay because they pay the 'company' portion too.
The chart under 3, with someone making 26k and paying 6k in federal tax is a bit of a misnomer; I made nearly this much last year and paid zero in federal tax. So while it might be possible to pay that much I would imagine the majority of Americans do NOT pay 6k out of a 26k income.
The "it wasn't always like this" chart seems to be indicating that average effective incomes -accounting for inflation - have dropped significantly over the past 28 years (well 31 now, presumably the author would state the trend continues). By roughly a factor of 180% (!). Literally, 1$ they had in 1980 would buy the equivalent of about $0.35 now. But then again, a chart without any sort of labels or context or clarification is not really too valid in terms of making an argument either way. Not to mention the numbers do not align with any of the figures in the "The Wage Gap Widens" chart above it.
The stuff on the Making Work Pay Credit is funny to me, this credit isn't a tax cut so much as a tax rebate - it is a refundable credit, so if you have enough tax deductions you can actually receive this $400/800 a year back from the government even if you do not pay any taxes. This is not a tax cut. This is a rebate/stimulus. A tax cut would not refund you beyond what you paid in taxes. Not taking money from one person and giving it to another.
Finally, the last section is interesting. Perhaps it is true, and other governments do it better - our government has been fiscally irresponsible for years. I do NOT want them to control that much of my income until they prove fiscally responsible. If they can bring the budget under balance over the next few years in manners other than blatantly increasing taxes (perhaps a combination of slightly increasing taxes but many spending cuts) then I will feel confident in them being able to manage money well. But until they do that, I do not have a lot of faith in them being able to handle an increase in funds any more effectively than they do now.
Overall, I think this was a fairly decent attempt. In spite of a lot of errors it does show what should be obvious to anyone paying attention to American economic tax policies as of late - taxes on the rich are less now than they were before.
tblrsa
Apr 20, 03:13 AM
Looks like a specs upgrade to me. I�ll most likely skip this and buy the next revision. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment