usaar333

77 ms·

841.
by usaar333 8y ago
> Easiest strategy is to just assume the options are worthless and base your comp assessment on that. But that easy thing leads to: a. Having no basis to negotiate your options. (X% of $0 is always $0 regardless of X) b. Your comp will a
842.
by usaar333 8y ago
Definitely true. It really affects what the ideal product is. If Truffle operates like KeeperTax ( https://keepertax.com/ ), you can set the ground truth to the CC statements; the user only needs to augment this CC statements
843.
by usaar333 8y ago
Does your employer allow you to reimburse these items without receipts?
844.
by usaar333 8y ago
Schedule C deductions aren't affected by standard deduction.
845.
by usaar333 8y ago
That's far too slow given that they confidentially filed earlier. e.g. Dropbox (which also confidentially filed earlier) was public 1 month after the public S1. Realistically, Lyft is public by end of April, barring a Box-style pullbac
846.
by usaar333 8y ago
Electricity costs are also highly variable
847.
by usaar333 8y ago
Exactly. If it's only an edge case where your customers can't benefit (some retirees might have insufficient taxable income, but that's about it), it's fair to include it.
848.
by usaar333 8y ago
That's 55 miles from a low density area. I'm not sure there is anywhere where public transit wouldn't take over an hour each way.
849.
by usaar333 8y ago
A follow-up question is if Robinhood (by massively reducing trading costs/friction) is socially positive or not. Their career pitch is that they democratize America's financial system ( https://careers.robinhood.com&#x2
850.
by usaar333 8y ago
All of this is covered in Dream Horders (the linked book). Occupational licensing is a weaker argument (it's not covered in Reeve's original nytimes article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/10/opinio
851.
by usaar333 8y ago
Do you have a direct link to the paper? It doesn't look like it refute's the OP's point that the top 1% of people sorted by income are wage earners. The abstract seems to be talking about "top income' (i.e. sort peo
852.
by usaar333 8y ago
> The capital gains rate is the source of our most gruesome wealth inequality. It's absurd that Mitt Romney pays half my effective tax rate on 200 times my income. The justification for low capital gains rates is "double taxati
853.
by usaar333 8y ago
Yes they can. Carry-forward losses exist with capital gains losses as well as net operating losses from self-employment.
854.
by usaar333 8y ago
> 2.7k people per square mile Perhaps your source is per square kilometer? That seems really low for a suburb. E.g. Bay area cities (not particularly denser) are around 3k people per square kilometer.
855.
by usaar333 8y ago
It isn't people can't afford kids; it's a. The opportunity cost of having children is higher in rich countries. (E.g. If you are richer, you can say travel more.. but can't easily if you have kids! Also the income hit fr
856.
by usaar333 8y ago
Because it's hard to recover those hours entirely unless you just plain don't get into a car. Rides are often too short to context switch into doing anything useful. Even then there are all sorts of situations today where people a
857.
by usaar333 8y ago
> first of all the end of car ownership as we have it today. I see the idea thrown around a lot that self-driving cars will make us all use taxis because, absent human drivers, the taxis will be far cheaper than owning a car -- but I hav
858.
by usaar333 8y ago
241 MB on my pixel 3. Though FB messenger (comparable feature set) is also bloated at 126 MB. (Whatsapp, pure chat, by comparison is 47 MB)
859.
by usaar333 8y ago
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/02/19/electric-car-well-to-wh... 50% is hardly a small improvement. In some areas you are looking at a 70+% improvement. Asking people to swallow standard of living deductions i
860.
by usaar333 8y ago
Even in the US, it really depends where you live. In Northern California, you are looking at 0 to 30% of electricity coming from fossil fuels, of which is almost entirely natural gas. An EV in NorCal is almost certainly polluting a lot less
861.
by usaar333 8y ago
> Great acceleration chart OP's point is a bit more complex. Per capita, humans became a less respectful on initial industrialization (and initially wealthier), but become more so as they become wealthier. Probably the worse is at
862.
by usaar333 8y ago
Because it's about where the customers are, not the workers. SF's demographics favor these restaurants well (high income, low percentage of people with children). If you want to count gaps, the entire East Bay has a single Michel
863.
by usaar333 8y ago
Agreed, blaming the customer (damn transplants displacing the natives that understand fine food!) was the low-light of the article. Plenty of restaurants are doing fine; she simply didn't produce what people wanted.
864.
by usaar333 8y ago
Those SF-based servers are getting every one of benefits. Engineers outside of American tech centers are generally highly underpaid.
865.
by usaar333 8y ago
And a solid living wage for a single person in SF. It's a problem if you have children to support.
866.
by usaar333 8y ago
Not arguing that housing is expensive, just that "There is no amount of money an owner could pay an employee within the economics of a small business" is an extremely broad claim and obviously wrong. High-paying small businesses,
867.
by usaar333 8y ago
> The system has clearly been setup to fraud the majority who needs welfare and is a political virtue signaling. It has this effect, but I'd blame the need to simplify over malevolence. SF's below market rate housing is a grea
868.
by usaar333 8y ago
I really don't find the evidence agreeing with such a broad statement. At most you could claim: "A worker in food service with family will not be able to afford living in SF, as a restaurant will not be able to pay the needed sala
869.
by usaar333 8y ago
This article was a bit scattered over the various sources of issues (high living costs, low labor pool (leading to high salaries and high turnover), reduced high-skilled chefs, high taxation, complaints about customer base with some nativis
870.
by usaar333 8y ago
You are seeing different populations. I suspect people without kids on average prefer SF, while those with kids, on average, prefer the South Bay suburbs. (note: I am a recent transplant to Mt View from SF and have a toddler). Consequently

More ›