Sam Elliott

[Darrell]

As James Lileks said, Sam Elliott is made of beef jerky.

I like Conagher. Filmed in southern Colorado, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conagher

[slowpoke]

I don't know much about him personally or his politics. Maybe that's why I like him. I've always thought movie stars should not be celebrities. They should be like racehorses - you bring them out to perform, then put them away and ignore them.

I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to start using that line.

[Jered]

If you think he dies a lot, look at Sean Bean.

[skb12172]

And he survived Gettysburg too.

But he had lovely ground. The best damn ground we've seen all day…

Good Ground

[308Mike]

After reading the title, I was afraid you might be posting about his passing - so I'm THANKFUL that wasn't the case!!!

I LOVE hearing his voice in movies, and for me, he's one of the old Classic Actors, and not one of the newer butt-kissing-asswipes, willing to get down on knees to get any acting job offered by the studios. He's unique enough he CAN raise his own price (depending on how shitty the script is and how much he feels he NEEDS to make), simply because NO ONE sounds like Sam Elliott. Sam Elliott is a UNIQUE commodity and Hollywierd is willing to pay him for his uniqueness, apparently regardless of his politics (as long as he continues to the scripts).

I wouldn't be surprised if there turned up some movies where he took them ONLY because of the money offered, but in his latter years, I doubt that would be the case (unless he needed to raise large amounts of money QUICKLY).

Hell, I even like Wesley Snipes (and have NO IDEA about his personal RKBA attitudes), simply because he thumbed his nose at the IRS and Federal Government over taxes. I STRONGLY suspect I'm NOT the ONLY ONE to feel that way, by trying to tell the IRS to go POUND SAND and stop terrorizing people simply because they questioned the amount of money they had to pay for THEIR TAXES!!!!!

:jacked:

Now, if they instituted a SIMPLE, FLAT TAX, without deductions, exemptions, etc., etc., then I bet once the furor died down and people saw what it REALLY meant (other than until the protesting from the vast amount of people stirred up by the low-tax-paying classes eventually diminished to support their NO-TAX-PAYING employers) and eventually EVERYONE **FINALLY** figured out that EVERYONE is paying the EXACT SAME TAXES as everyone else on a percentage basis - and NO ONE was happy except the middle class because the poor now HAD to pay SOME tax (which if they actually filed Income Taxes, it wouldn't change a thing), but the biggest hit would be borne by the rich and corporations (SOME of this would be paying a LOT LESS taxes, and others a LOT MORE TAXES) - but EVERYONE would be billed at the SAME RATE - so NO ONE would be paying any more or ANY LESS than ANYONE ELSE.

YES, businesses would need to have SOME leeway to determine just what they were being taxed on and what they weren't - otherwise, you'd wind up with businesses failing simply because they couldn't pay all the taxes assigned to them, while many of their costs pertained to running their businesses (and keep it going).

So, in regards to businesses, WHERE do you draw the line (what's taxable and what's not)????? Otherwise, businesses could be looking at part of their operations being taxed at WELL OVER 50%, and then some (not producing much revenue), not getting taxed at all. HOW do you divide up a company and it's operations for taxes - *IF* you want that company to stay afloat???

I LOVE thinking about a FLAT TAX, but when I think of businesses, it becomes a mess.

PLEASE, educate me (finding the RIGHT Google article is confusing to know WHICH ONE to follow, and which makes the most sense for implementation for businesses AND individuals/couples).

YMMV!!!

[Wrenchbender1]

He made it through "Once an Eagle" by the skin of his teeth.

[PawPaw]

:jacked:

So, in regards to businesses, WHERE do you draw the line (what's taxable and what's not)????? Otherwise, businesses could be looking at part of their operations being taxed at WELL OVER 50%, and then some (not producing much revenue), not getting taxed at all. HOW do you divide up a company and it's operations for taxes - *IF* you want that company to stay afloat???

Subchapter S.

My sisters and I recently formed an LLC with Subchapter S taxation. As I understand it, the business will pay no taxes, but all profits are taxable to the individual owners, whether or not the business actually declares a distribution of profits. Simple example, lets say that five investors throw in 1,000 each to start a business and after a year, that business has a profit of $1million. Each investor is on the hook for $200K in taxable income, but the business itself pays no taxes.

I'm sure that a tax professional can give you a better understanding.

[308Mike]

:jacked:

So, in regards to businesses, WHERE do you draw the line (what's taxable and what's not)????? Otherwise, businesses could be looking at part of their operations being taxed at WELL OVER 50%, and then some (not producing much revenue), not getting taxed at all. HOW do you divide up a company and it's operations for taxes - *IF* you want that company to stay afloat???

Subchapter S.

My sisters and I recently formed an LLC with Subchapter S taxation. As I understand it, the business will pay no taxes, but all profits are taxable to the individual owners, whether or not the business actually declares a distribution of profits. Simple example, lets say that five investors throw in 1,000 each to start a business and after a year, that business has a profit of $1million. Each investor is on the hook for $200K in taxable income, but the business itself pays no taxes.

I'm sure that a tax professional can give you a better understanding.

Actually, I was trying to see how you'd relate a business to a flat-tax plan, so everyone pays the same percentage of taxes (individuals AND businesses) so we can get rid of the IRS. But I appreciate the info anyway!

[Weetabix]

:jacked:

So, in regards to businesses, WHERE do you draw the line (what's taxable and what's not)????? Otherwise, businesses could be looking at part of their operations being taxed at WELL OVER 50%, and then some (not producing much revenue), not getting taxed at all. HOW do you divide up a company and it's operations for taxes - *IF* you want that company to stay afloat???

Subchapter S.

My sisters and I recently formed an LLC with Subchapter S taxation. As I understand it, the business will pay no taxes, but all profits are taxable to the individual owners, whether or not the business actually declares a distribution of profits. Simple example, lets say that five investors throw in 1,000 each to start a business and after a year, that business has a profit of $1million. Each investor is on the hook for $200K in taxable income, but the business itself pays no taxes.

I'm sure that a tax professional can give you a better understanding.

Actually, I was trying to see how you'd relate a business to a flat-tax plan, so everyone pays the same percentage of taxes (individuals AND businesses) so we can get rid of the IRS. But I appreciate the info anyway!

I'd think it would be easier just to tax the people who make the money, i.e. owners. If you tax the business, they just pass it on to the customers, anyway, so it becomes more complicated. If you want simple, keep it simple.

[308Mike]

:jacked: Subchapter S.

My sisters and I recently formed an LLC with Subchapter S taxation. As I understand it, the business will pay no taxes, but all profits are taxable to the individual owners, whether or not the business actually declares a distribution of profits. Simple example, lets say that five investors throw in 1,000 each to start a business and after a year, that business has a profit of $1million. Each investor is on the hook for $200K in taxable income, but the business itself pays no taxes.

I'm sure that a tax professional can give you a better understanding.

Actually, I was trying to see how you'd relate a business to a flat-tax plan, so everyone pays the same percentage of taxes (individuals AND businesses) so we can get rid of the IRS. But I appreciate the info anyway!

I'd think it would be easier just to tax the people who make the money, i.e. owners. If you tax the business, they just pass it on to the customers, anyway, so it becomes more complicated. If you want simple, keep it simple.

True - which means the government will never go for it.