gotbeer

Ad Exempt
  • Content count

    21,467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

gotbeer last won the day on March 14 2017

gotbeer had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,824 Excellent

About gotbeer

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 03/02/1970

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,436 profile views
  1. gotbeer

    General NHL Talk 2018-19

    San Jose continues to shed payroll. The just bought Out Paul Martin. According to Capfriendly, that cuts another $2.8 million. That means they will be $18 million under the cap. Sure does sound like they are going hard for Tavares.
  2. So you just listed 3 different tax rates that the seller must pay taxes to.
  3. This is one that should have been close to unanimous. But that all four dissenters had different points of view to dissenting is what I find interesting.
  4. In Major Privacy Win, Supreme Court Rules Police Need Warrant To Track Your Cellphone Interestingly 4 different dissenting points of view. If someone finds an article that summarizes each dissent, it would be appreciated.
  5. Interestingly. Last season Max 36 points. Perry 49 points. So maybe we can get away with only donating $2 million a season in a package deal and a draft pick. Doubtful they would give up the #3 overall. But they do have 4 second rounders this season.
  6. gotbeer

    General NHL Talk 2018-19

    OH, this is interesting. Goals might go up now as a result.
  7. gotbeer

    General NHL Talk 2018-19

    Barry Trotz Reportedly Nearing Contract to Become Islanders Head Coach Well, he surely was unemployed forever.
  8. I can't either. But if it means we can unload Perry in addition, I think it would be worth the risk.
  9. gotbeer

    Spin Forum Dumping Bin

    Participation trophies for the win.
  10. So what about the loss of tax revenues where the businesses are at? Online retailers are at somewhere. That they are at a state where it's business friendly should not penalize those states. Again my argument is buyers go to locations to buy. You go to a brick and mortar to buy. I go to websites to buy. Websites do not come to me like a door to door salesman to buy. So it should be that just like brick and mortars, I pay the sales tax as if I am at their location. My interpretation is just like a brick and mortar. I am virtually AT the online retailers location. Not the online retailers location AT my door. What really this decision opened up was a total shitshow that will be occuring for online sales now. I can actually now see retailers blocking sales to certain states depending on how states respond. The accounting of collecting sales tax for every single city, in California or any states case, is reason enough to hesitate on sales for most small businesses and probably medium businesses. Would it be worth it to sell 10,000 units of an item, making $2 a unit online, to 200 different cities with varying different tax rates in California. And having to fill out forms and pay taxes to each, if you are a small or medium online retailer? Or does it make sense to pay taxes on all sales, regardless of online or brick and mortar to the location of the retailer? And if you say no, it will be a flat California tax rate. Then you really contradicted your response of loss of tax revenue in the areas where the buyers live. Because cities get a lot of revenue from local taxes added to sales tax.
  11. Personally I think they have it backwards. I don't think it should be the buyers location that determines sales tax but the sellers location. Rational being, if I buy a car, and go the San Bernardino. I pay those rates. Los Angeles has no right to say I have to pay their higher rates just because I live there. Same could be said if I go to Vegas to buy stuff at the outlet. So the argument IMO is not that the retailers are coming to the customer virtually, but that just like brick and mortars, the customer is going to the retailers virtually
  12. Should The Montreal Canadiens Trade Max Pacioretty Now? Left handed Dmen on the Ducks. Lindholm. Petterson. Fowler. Larsson. Megna. Mahura. Would you do Lindholm for Max? What if Lindholm's value is just huge. Could we unload Perry + money also? Lindholm + Perry + $4 million to cover Perry for the next 3 years for Max. Financially, that would be $4.625 million for Perry $5.2 million for Lindholm going to the Canadians. $4 million staying with the Ducks + say $6 million for Max. ($4.5 million this season). Net for the Ducks would be a -$3 million and for the Canadians + $5.3.
  13. F*ck the Supreme Court. Supreme Court rules states can require online sellers to collect sales tax
  14. gotbeer

    The Official Vegas Golden Knights thread

    So I don't know what is more impressive. The landslide that Galant won by. Or that one broadcaster did not put Gallant first second or third.