Progressive Politics

hideshow 10 child comments

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (9 children)

Does it matter what you call them if you get the same amount of cash? It all spends the same.

Don't ask for dividends, ask for equity. Ownership. see if they have an ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan. That is a term of art: it's not one you should paraphrase, but the acronym is pronouncable and hr will recognize it) as that is the most common and easiest way for business owners to compensate workers by giving them a piece of the business. At least in statesia, ymmv elsewhere.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)

It matters greatly!
Do you confuse a slice of a pie for an ingredient of a pie?
With your slice, you can reinvest in whatever markets you wish, tax free ofc.

Interesting edit you made there.
But sure, being part owner of where you work has its merits, but I am talking about labor for work produced. You can't really yield equity on service economics.

But at the least you see the problem with Congress evading the root of the problem.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 point 5 months ago* (7 children)

Okay, short story a business can't just "pay you in dividends" because there is very strict law around the issuance of dividends. If you already owned enough of the company that you could be effectively paid via your stock, you would be accepting stock options as a major part of your compensation package, not dividends.

(this is a simplification assuming only one class of stock, but) If they issue dividends, they go out to everyone who owns stock at the same ratio. You don't just get to issue dividends to one person.

What you are talking about is a structural feature that typically only corporate sole proprietors get to take advantage of, and they have better ways to pull a sneaky on the irs. Like seriously, you're throwing in some additional taxes that don't need to be paid in there compared to if we just did a disbursement. It all depends what your goals are.

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 point 5 months ago (6 children)

there is very strict law

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;

If Congress could do something about perverse laws🤔

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 point 5 months ago (5 children)

i'm sorry, let's have congress change the law because you want to quibble over what you call your income?

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

More Congress is working in its best interest:

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

how about giving me something useful instead of just talking past me because i mentioned a word that set you off? I could use a good recipe for hulatang

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

What more are you seeking?
Congress has every power to fix the problems with capitalism, but constitutionally won't.
Law is theirs to define, and amend.

Do you want to fix Congress’s constitutional power to legislate commerce&trade, or are you here to lick their shoes?