More 1099's?

[coinvestor]

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/05/1099-mandate-from-hell-slipped-into.html

Thoughts?

[amc-vending]

at least it will help the stock market - mainly in companies that make headache meds like advil

[lurtsman]

I am disappointed with our elected representation. Creating economic policy should require a degree in economics.

[kai1836]

Lurts,

  That's a good suggestion. You should send it on to your elected representatives. 

[BorderJerry]

As soon as this information becomes more widely publicized, I am sure there will be some online web sites set up to send letters of objection to your congress members. This creates a real bookkeeping nightmare of amazing size and needs to be repealed before going into effect in 2011...

[coinvestor]

Hes is another article about it

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/16764

[Faith Vending]

Health care bill just gets better and better......NOT!!

[Jax Snacks]

No need for all that paper work - we are just charity vendors! 

[s.weir]

Creating economic policy should require a degree in economics.

I actually wrote quite an extensive essay on this topic for my final examination in grade 12 Social Studies.  I received one of the top marks in the province.  I argued that elected representatives should be required to be educated in the areas they will be making decisions on.  For example if I want to be Minister of Economics I can not just have run a convinience store for 20 years and must actually have formal education in the management of economies and money flow.  While some would argue that this cuts out potentially good leaders who have a lack of education, it also would ensure that all of the people we have to choose from to be elected are more suited for the job then the average joe.  Personally I believe it is almost like a political security blanket.   

[Bender]

This does appear to be true, according to the text of HR3962, Section 533 (Page 352).

What a blunder.  Incumbents out on election day.

[Bender]

I forgot to post the pdf link on the original health care bill text.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/health_care/hr3962_bill_text.pdf

[lurtsman]

S.weir, that sounds like a great paper. I strongly support simple standardized measures for reducing blind stupidity. The few good leaders we might miss out on would be far more than compensated for by the number of horrible pin heads who were replaced by someone who was at least mediocre.

[Faith Vending]

This does appear to be true, according to the text of HR3962, Section 533 (Page 352).

What a blunder.  Incumbents out on election day.

Only the crooks that voted for this disaster health bill should go. If you voted for it your gone. My insurance agent just today told me this was the worst piece of legislation ever passed. By 2014 we will all be sucking off the same teat.

[Bender]

Thanks to coinvestor, who pointed this out to us here in VENDiscuss, in The Break Room!  He shined the light on the Health Care Reform 1099 issue, which, in my opinion, has absolutely nothing to do with Health Care reform!

I would like to point out the new I.R.S. 1099 reporting requirements will have a significantly larger impact than section 2572, the calorie content clause.  This amends the law to require all entities to file form 1099 to all vendors paid more than $600 each year.  Furthermore, it now treats corporations as individuals, and requires you to issue a 1099 to corporate vendors.

The respectable financial adviser, Ray Lucia, author of "Buckets of Money" and other books, and host of the Ray Lucia radio program, called this new law ""ludicrous", "insane", "an abomination" and "crazy" at the 29:00 mark in the second hour on his June 3, 2010 broadcast:

http://archives.warpradio.com/btr/RayLucia/060313.mp3

This means you will have to collect your vendors' Taxpayer Identification Number and their address information, and complete a 1099.

What does this mean?  See  below for a list of examples:

--  If you buy more than $600 of gumballs or candy from Sam's Club, you will have to obtain their TIN and address information, and file a form 1099 with the I.R.S., and send a copy to Sam's Club.

-- If you buy more than $600 of parts from your gumball machine supplier, you will have to file a form 1099 to your vendor.

-- If you pay more than $600 electricity for your office, you will have to file a form 1099 to the electric company

-- If you pay more than $600 rent to your storage unit, you will have to file a form 1099 to the storage company

-- If you buy more than $600 copy paper, you will have to file a form 1099 to your paper supplier.

It's only 4 examples, but I could go on and on.  They snuck in unnecessary bureaucratic red tape, entirely unrelated to health care, into the so-called Health Care Reform Bill, and it's going to affect every small business owner on these forums and in America.

[coinvestor]

Another article on this

http://wsbradio.com/blogs/jamie_dupree/2010/07/tax-form-1099.html

[timberframe50]

I happen to disagree with the notion that we need specialized, highly educated Representatives. Not that I'm against higher education, but soon you will need an under graduate degree to work at Walmart. Where did all of the trade schools go? Not everyone is cut out go to college. We still need capenters,plumbeers electrician etc. If I'm understand this, the thought is the health and wellfare person should either have a PHD and/or be on wellfare. Has anyone thought about why the majority of our Representatives are  blood sucking lawyers. Yes we all should write our representatives an voice our opinion, but as a politician they will ignore the 5% of their constituents that are voicing their dislikes no matter the issue. Why do we the people give millions of dollars to elect one of these blood sucking lawyers? I believe the issue is bigger than the BS healthcare bill that was passed, and believe the 2 party system has a strangle hold on this country. I also believe we have lost the sense of doing whats best for the country, to much special interest and the me, me, me attitude. Time for me to get off the soap box, I'm sure I'll piss off some bleeding heart liberal. The country needs a good revolution.

[lurtsman]

I have written to my elected representatives and informed them that as an independent I will be casting a ballot as blatantly as anyone who uses a straight party ticket. I will vote against anyone who voted in favor of this health care bill, no matter their record. I will vote for anyone who opposed it, no matter what else they have done (within reason, but only barely). They choose to be mail back standard form letters. Apparently the polling and research groups told them that people respond well to form letters that insult their intelligence.

[alyssamma]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TAX_SURPRISE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

It looks like it will be repealed. Right now Reps and Dems can't agree on how to do it, but they both want to. Odds are, before it is enacted, it will be repealed.

Kevin

[lurtsman]

Thanks for the link. Short version:

Republicans want to repeal tax and make up the loss in revenue by cutting entitlements in the health care bill.

Democrats want to repeal the tax and make up the loss by adding a new tax on international corporations.

[lak20019]

By 2014 we will all be sucking off the same teat.

Suckling off the teat of disparity. I remember in my AP Macro Economics class my senior year I could never figure out how to fix an economic collapse. The entire AP test was geared around scenarios much like today's situation- high unemployment, weak American dollar, etc. Nice to know no one in the gov't knows how to fix it either. Sheesh. Aren't these people supposed to be "experts?"

[dogcow]

I am disappointed with our elected representation. Creating economic policy should require a degree in economics.

unfortunately i wouldn't trust credentialed economists any more than the average schmuck off the street.

beyond basic microeconomic principles the field of economics is far more like philosophy than science. sure  economic theories are often supported by complex mathematical models, but these models make sure of fundamental (generally incorrect) assumptions and do not tend to accurately represent the conditions of the real world. most economists would admit to this, that there are serious flaws in these models but since there is no way to conduct a controlled experiment in economics (beyond testing certain simple microeconomic principles) it is all they have to rely on.

if you dont believe me on the folly of following credentialed economists advice, look at the infamous firm Long Term Capital Management, i believe the largest financial institution failures until the banking crisis of 2008. This firm lost about 5 billion dollars in the late 1990s and had to be bailed out, it was run by not just Phd economists, but nobel prize winners in the field of financial economics.

[dogcow]

Suckling off the teat of disparity. I remember in my AP Macro Economics class my senior year I could never figure out how to fix an economic collapse. The entire AP test was geared around scenarios much like today's situation- high unemployment, weak American dollar, etc. Nice to know no one in the gov't knows how to fix it either. Sheesh. Aren't these people supposed to be "experts?"

fixing the current mess would be quite simple, however its a matter of federal reserve policy (monetary policy) not fiscal policy. Remember the elected representatives in government has no control over the monetary policy which is set by the central bank.

Right now the federal reserve pays banks interest on any capital they keep in reserve. They are legally required to keep a certain amount of capital on reserve at all time, however the banks are keeping significant amounts of excess reserves at this time. The fed pays a quarter point of interest on the reserves which is not much, so lowering that to zero probably would not get the banks to lend. However if the fed simply applied a fine to banks holding reserves in excess of what they are legally required to, the banks would very likely begin to make loans and the economy would quickly roar back to life.

in terms of strong dollar/weak dollar, right now the dollar is actually too strong. a strong dollar will drive unemployment in the short run, a weak dollar will lower unemployment in the short run ( phillips curve effect) however in the long run a continually weakening dollar will not continue to drive down unemployment forever , eventually a long-run equilibrium is reached and you will end up with high inflation and high unemployment. there is a rate known as NAIRU which represents this long-run equilibrium. In the US it is believed to be about 5%. That is to say, employment cannot be lowered beyond 5% without risking high inflation. Right now inflation would be helpful, it would drive exports and create jobs, however inflation must be facilitated by banks lending money, if banks dont lend (or consumers dont borrow) the dollar will not dip enough relative to other currenccies to drive exports and create jobs

[lurtsman]

While a strong dollar may "drive unemployment" weakening it is not the right way to fix unemployment. Reducing the disadvantages of creating jobs would be a better way that didn't drive down the creation of wealth in our country. The strong dollar encourages imports, but that also means creating cheap labor in other countries. That helps the other countries that need jobs, and it helps America gain real wealth. To stimulate local employment we need only to remove the huge barriers to hiring. One of the more costly one was the ADA which caused companies to try to avoid hiring Americans with disabilities in the first place so they could avoid having the issue being a ticking bomb. We create an over abundance of rules to allow for punishing businesses for perceived slights. It is unwise to threaten the people who hold the creation of wealth. Real wealth is not measured in currency, but in the conveniences of our culture. It's having good homes, and ambulances. It is turning on the faucet for running water. We purify ours for taste, while other countries can not even purify theirs for bacteria. However I do believe the government officials have failed the American public. The ideal is to simplify laws and use them solely to prevent fraud and violence. Imposing fines on banks for not lending money? That would create a nightmare of excess paperwork as banks scrambled to create artificial loans to avoid penalties without loaning their money out at absurd risk rates. They made stupid bets in large part because they had assurance that if the clients fell through they would be compensated for their losses. That is also terrible policy. Creating policies aimed at raising something as artificial as home ownership is poor planning. We could debate this for days, and while I enjoy an intelligent debate on a complicated topic... I'm afraid several of the elected officials would not even comprehend the debate we are having as they read it. I do however have a great deal of respect for you for being capable of such a debate.

[lurtsman]

PS. I'm a little tired from very long hours, but it's enjoyable enough to run across someone else who knows any economics. What do you think of Walmart?