Sometime today (or so), my Sitemeter is going to hit that number. It's at 11,097,945 right now. I don't know. It seems significant. Would have seemed more significant if it happened 2 days ago. But still. It seems significant... but of what?
ADDED: Thanks to Glenn Reynolds for linking, which is a big help trying to hit the number. And it's visitors, not pageviews. Pageviews tend to be about double the visitors numbers for me. The two statistics are much closer for Instapundit, though, because he hasn't got comments.
१३ नोव्हेंबर, २००७
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
११३ टिप्पण्या:
That millions have swirled around in the vortex before being flushed into the rest of the day?
Will it happen at 11:11:11 somewhere on Earth?
How many more lies do you think you can post by that time?
!!,!!!,!1!
heh.
A cool Firefox add-on allows me to turn sitemeter off, which I do when here.
Wouldn't want to give a shameless liar the traffic.
Alpha, you seem like a very angry man.
Why the surprise? Nostradamus predicted that Ann would hit 11,111,111 within the octave of 11.11 centuries ago. Nothing Alpha can do to stop it.
But Alpha is stomping his feet and playing you-can't-see me with Firefox (which he thinks is "cool"). But you're not cool hissy-man.
Guys go for powers of ten.
Ann, I stopped worrying about being cool in High School.
You lied about Matthew Yglesias, below. I want to make sure you don't ignore being busted on your lie.
No stomping involved. Nor any lies.
OK. I figured out how to link to individual comments.
Here is where I bust Ann Althouse for blatantly lying about Yglesias.
No doubt, in the Althouse world view, this is some shortcoming on my part. An honest person would post a fresh correction.
Holding my breath I am not.
I for one think it is funny that alpha has the 11th comment on a post which is all about 11s.
dbp
alpha, that link did not go to an individual comment for me.
AlphaLiberal said...
"Here is where I bust Ann Althouse for blatantly lying about Yglesias."
LMAO. You self-important little twerp. How do you think you are... You say you stopped worrying about being cool in High School - let us know when you get done there.
It's binary for 503. I think.
Levis jeans?
Volume 503 - United States Supreme Court?
Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973?
Area code for Salem Oregon?
A goofy religious belief?
Something personal?
Alpha, is it really that important for you to catch Ann Althouse "lying" about Matthew Yglesias? Is your life so shallow and insignificant that you would spend any time on that?
Blog Liar never hangs around
When he hears this Alpha sound:
"Here I come to save the day!"
That means that Blog Liar Policeman Alpha Liberal is on the way!
Yes sir, when there is a wrong to right
Blog Liar Policeman Alpha Liberal will join the fight
On the sea or on the land
He gets the situation well in hand
So though we are in danger
We never despair
'Cause we know that where there's danger
He is there!
He is there! On the land! On the sea! In the air!
We're not worryin' at all
We're just listenin' for his call:
"Here I come to save the day!"
That means that Blog Liar Policeman Alpha Liberal is on the way!
What? I "lied" when I laughed at the Democratic bias in the post? That's really silly.
It was a nervous laugh.
Rats.
it's only 255 binary.
From Wiki:
"Its factorization makes it a sphenic number. Since 255 = 28 - 1, it is a Mersenne number, and the fourth such number not to be a prime number. It is a perfect totient number, the smallest such number to be neither a power of three nor thrice a prime.
255 is a repdigit in base 2 (11111111) in base 4 (3333), and in base 16 (FF)
This number occurs especially frequently in video games when a small number is needed, such as in the original The Legend of Zelda for the Nintendo Entertainment System where the maximum number of Rupees (the currency of the game) is 255. In the Madden NFL series, the maximum points you can score is 255."
Let me anticipate the anti-Althousiana that will claim it stands for "I,I,I,I,I,I,I,I." Or something about endlessly looking out for number one.
How about a lot of luck, instead?
SteveR said...
Alpha, is it really that important for you to catch Ann Althouse "lying" about Matthew Yglesias? Is your life so shallow and insignificant that you would spend any time on that?
Blog Liar never hangs around
When he hears this Alpha sound:
"Here I come to save the day!"
That means that Blog Liar Policeman Alpha Liberal is on the way!
The fact that you took the time to write that, let alone post it, is proof positive that you're the biggest nerd who ever fucking walked the planet.
Tell me the truth -- you're that Blackwolf guy, right? The Star Wars geek that Triumph the Insult Comic dog makes fun of?
christopher, I dispute that.
Humorous poetry has only a modicum of nerdiness to it.
However, indulging in math on a blogpost is the ne plus ultra of nerdiosity.
And by "biggest" nerd do you mean largest, tallest, or the one most nerdy? And can I just walk, or must it be a "f*cking" walk, which I have a hard time imagining, much less performing?
chrissie pooh: Just the reaction I wanted from just the person I wanted it from. You really have to do better than calling me the "the biggest nerd who ever fucking walked the planet." Is that supposed to be an insult? Put down? Come on, man! Even 8th graders do better than that.
Hmm.
Last week, David Brooks pens a shameful apologia for the racism of the Reagan administration, claiming the Gipper was just misunderstood when he talked about states rights in the town where three civil rights workers were murdered.
Today, Bob Herbert -- without mentioning Brooks by name -- shreds his pathetic argument, and reminds us all that yes, the Reagan administration used racebaiting as a tactic. Big time.
Meanwhile, Ann natters on about...
well, nothing really.
When the clocks have 11:11 or 2:22 or 5:55, etc., my kids holler "Dance!" and the required dancing must go on until 11:12.
So, Ann, what this means is that when your site-meter hits 11,111,111 that you have to dance until it changes to 11,111,112.
This only counts if you happen to notice the moment. If you miss it, you're off free.
Christopher, you're boring.
Accusing other people of not talking about *important* things is about the most boring, pathetic, excuse for relevance possible.
Christopher, if you think federalism is a codeword for racism, you really are as dumb as a box of rocks.
Why don't you go beat up people on a pet-list for promoting dog welfare while people are dying in Africa.
christopher said...
"Meanwhile, Ann natters on about... well, nothing really."
More "why won't she talk about what I think's important?" bellyaching.
Simon, it's *all* code-words, don't you know.
Conservatives, and federalists, are sneaky bastards.
christopher is evading my questions.
Simon said...
Christopher, if you think federalism is a codeword for racism, you really are as dumb as a box of rocks.
Leaving aside the fact that the Reagan administration's Southern Strategy, as masterminded by Lee Atwater, was racist to the core (which even Atwater admitted)....
Aren't you the guy who said that jackbooted environmentalists are a bigger threat to freedom than a Bush administration that claims the right to ignore any laws it wants in a time of endless national emergency, i.e. now?
If so, I'd be careful about calling somebody else an idiot....
"David Brooks pens a shameful apologia"
shameful = I think he's wrong, but won't bother to present a cogent argument why I think so.
apologia = ditto, but a pretty word so it looks all intellectual n' stuff
Althouse:
"What? I "lied" when I laughed at the Democratic bias in the post? That's really silly."
You lied when you said there was Democratic bias i what Yglesias said. Since you can't be bothered to go to that thread and read what I wrote, here it is:
Really, Althouse, you're such a liar.
Yeglesias calls for questioning that informs, instead of playing gotchya.
He makes the rather clear point that the only candidates to be embarrassed would be the ones with no plans or no answers on substantive issues.
This was NOT a partisan plan by Ygelsias. Here's what he said about a questions that might embarrass Obama and Clinton:
"Turning back to the Democrats, a serious question about Clinton's biofuels subsidies or Barack Obama's past support of coal gasification schemes might prompt some embarrassment and would be worth asking."
To paint this as a partisan rant is completely disingenuous.
It's just really disappointing to see Althouse engage in the same type of ad hominem, substance-ducking attacks that her right wing commenters favor.
Not a one of you can deal with the point I made on its substance. Instead, you just attack personally.
And you think you're intelligent? Not by your own words, people!!
Deal with the argument. Leave the playground taunts at your grammar school.
Althouse, if your Ygelsias attack was a mistake born of impatience, than a separate blog post admitting the error is in order.
Someone of intellectual integrity would do that. i don't think that includes you.
(yes, shameless lying angers me, as it should anyone).
It's an interesting illustration of the fact that "1" is the single most common digit appear in numeric data sets.
Simon said..."AlphaLiberal, LMAO. You self-important little twerp. How do you think you are..."
Maybe you could translate that comment for everybody?
And what is it that make you think YOU'RE such an authority on ANYTHING?
Scalia's picture?
That number means you possess implacable equanimity, and if not that then at least a whole lot of patience.
Let's call it Site-o-Meter so it can be funny.
I had to be careful not to have an accident while watching a speedometer turn over to 00000000. No one else was there, this is the first time I've shared that special moment.
Synova said..."Conservatives, and federalists, are sneaky bastards."
That's the most honest comment you've ever posted.
Keep it up.
Chipper says: "I had to be careful not to have an accident while watching a speedometer turn over to 00000000."
Odometer.
"It's just really disappointing to see Althouse engage in the same type of ad hominem, substance-ducking attacks that her right wing commenters favor."
Just the right wing, huh. Alrighty then.
Ann Althouse lies:
"What? I "lied" when I laughed at the Democratic bias in the post? That's really silly."
How is THIS from the very same post pro-Democratic bias?
"Turning back to the Democrats, a serious question about Clinton's biofuels subsidies or Barack Obama's past support of coal gasification schemes might prompt some embarrassment and would be worth asking."
Please elaborate for us, Ann. Should be intriguing to see how your brain works.
How's LUCY?
And LUCY, I will respond to your comment to Synova...try looking up SARCASM in your dictionary, moron.
Good grief. Someone is gonna burst a vein in his forehead!!11,111,111!!
Synova: Nice.
What happened to Maxine Weiss on Christmas, 2001?
I'm off to to sign my grad school dropout papers, and hopefully find a way out of paying the $10,425 semster charge.
Then, tomorrow, I hop on a 1-way flight to Long Beach, California.
Gravel-Paul '08!
AJ Lynch said..."...try looking up SARCASM in your dictionary..."
No kidding?
So...you thought I was being...serious?
What a chump.
christopher said...
"[The] Bush administration ... claims the right to ignore any laws it wants in a time of endless national emergency, i.e. now[.]"
Strawman. No one - not even John Yoo - has made this argument.
AlphaLiberal said...
"Not a one of you can deal with the point I made on its substance. ... Deal with the argument."
You didn't make a point or an argument, and what you posted had no substance. Buzz off.
Synova said...
"So, Ann, what this means is that when your site-meter hits 11,111,111 that you have to dance until it changes to 11,111,112."
Given Ann's traffic - check my math but right now it's about 580 hits an hour, which breaks down to a new visit roughly every six seconds - it'd have to be a very, very short dance.
"a new visit roughly every six seconds..."
That seems so strange!
Simon, denial is not an argument.
I posted text contradicting the basis for Althouse's attack on Yglesias. It's pretty cut and dried.
Here is is for you, in case your missed it, from the Russert thread a few Althouse posts down.
Althouse claims Ygelisias' post was purely partisan, but she misleads her readers when she ignores this:
"Turning back to the Democrats, a serious question about Clinton's biofuels subsidies or Barack Obama's past support of coal gasification schemes might prompt some embarrassment and would be worth asking."
So, as you (or a rational, thinking person) can see, that is both a point and an argument.
So, why don't you buzz off?
Simon when you say..."Strawman. No one - not even John Yoo - has made this argument"...what you're implying...?
NOT EVEN Yoo, huh??
HA!
Ann:
What would you estimate is Yglesias' BMI? I'd guess about 32 at least.
Aj,
Why are you constantly sucking up to Ann?
How's LUCY?
LUCY - do you comment on every one of Althouse's blog posts? Even the girly, artsy photos she takes?
Simon said...
christopher said...
"[The] Bush administration ... claims the right to ignore any laws it wants in a time of endless national emergency, i.e. now[.]"
Strawman. No one - not even John Yoo - has made this argument.
You really haven't been paying much attention to current events for the last seven years, have you.
BTW -- you were the guy who said you were more afraid of environmentalists than Bush's Justice Department, right?
Here's that Firefox extension I mentioned:
http://noscript.net/
Aj,
Do you understand how silly it is to ask ME..."how's LUCY"...if you yourself are referring to me as...LUCY? (As in; Hey, Aj...how's...Aj?)
If you're going to play, at least have the intelligence to understand the game itself.
And the dumb just keep getting dumber...
Luckyoldson said...
"Simon when you say...'Strawman. No one - not even John Yoo - has made this argument'...what you're implying...? NOT EVEN Yoo, huh??"
In view of his writing on the matter (see e.g. Yoo, War and the Constitutional Text, 69 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1639 (2002); ---, THE POWERS OF WAR AND PEACE: THE CONSTITUTION AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS AFTER 9/11 (2005)) and what we've learned of his work at DoJ, it doesn't seem like a particularly controversial statement to suggest that John Yoo is probably the leading advocate for what I've previously described as a highly robust executive. I can't think of anyone who's advanced a broader conception of the inherent Article II powers of the President (David Addington, perhaps). The implication to take would be that if even those who have made the broadest and most far-reaching claims for executive power haven't gone that far, it's a safe bet that no one even remotely within the mainstream has gone that far.
Christopher,
You can forget getting a reasonable or informative response from Simon.
This is a guy who could have only voted in one (2) Presidential elections in his entire life.
*Keep in mind, he was...
1. Not even born yet when Carter was elected.
2. Was wearing diapers when Ronald Reagan
was elected.
3. Was riding his bicycle around the neighborhood when Bush Sr. was elected.
4. Was STILL riding his bicycle around the neighborhood when when Clinton was elected.
5. And could have only voted for G.W....if he even voted.
This is what he bases his "extensive" knowledge of world politics on.
Simon,
You DO understand that when someone says "NOT EVEN..." there's an implication attached to the statement.
As in; NOT EVEN Bush would invade Iran with our military so stretched...
Get it?
*Oh, and as for Yoo...everybody who reads knows all about his views regarding torture, etc.
He's been the legal point man for the Bush administration's from day one and produced the now infamous "memo" that lead to Bush's deciding that captured members of Al Quaeda and the Taliban were unprotected by the Geneva POW Convention.
He's quite a guy and will be remembered for years to come.
Lucy, I'm not sure how we're disagreeing on the substantive point here. The point is:
(1) that Yoo might fairly be characterized as advancing a conception of executive power that is very expansive even for what we might think of as pro-executive scholars, which I take it you're not going to dispute.
(2) that Yoo has never made the claim that the President has "the right to ignore any laws [s/he] wants in a time of endless national emergency, i.e. now." You're welcome to dispute that point, but you've not yet cited anything to that effect.
(3) It follows - that this is what you should infer from my observation that not even Yoo has made that argument - that if even those who advance the broadest conception of executive power haven't made a certain claim, that claim is truly wacky and out of the mainstream, thus is held by no one of any credibility, and is thus a strawman when it's used to attack defenders of executive power.
I'm a muse. Duh!
Ruth,
Wow.
TODAY'S HEADLINES
* Alligator Eats Robbery Suspect on the Run
1 hour ago
• Long-Suspected Peeping Tom Taken Down by Angry Neighbor Despite Gunfire
4 hours ago
• Man's Fingers Blown Off by Firecracker at Basketball Game
5 hours ago
* Family Sues Funeral Home After Casket Leaks Blood-Red Liquid During Ceremony
WHERE"S THE VIDEO?!!
It's often fun to wait until the posts number over 50 to see what flame war has erupted. This one doesn't disappoint.
With the usual suspects involved--funny that. Esp for such a seinfeldian post.
HEY EVERYBODY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It just turned...2:43
NO WAIT...
...IT JUST TURNED...2:44...
Once we pass 11111111, I wonder when visitor 12345678 will occur.
NO WAIT...
...IT JUST...oh, fuck it.
MadisonMan said..."Once we pass 11111111, I wonder when visitor 12345678 will occur."
I can't wait!!
These blog wars make even a tempest in a teapot worth notifying FEMA about. But, that said, the yggy post reads:
Turning back to the Democrats, a serious question about Clinton's biofuels subsidies or Barack Obama's past support of coal gasification schemes might prompt some embarrassment and would be worth asking. But it would be bizarre to jump initially to these topics since they're less important than the more general issue of carbon caps and auctioned permits and voters deserve to hear about the important issues.
That is to say, by the time Russert worked his way through the all-important carbon caps and auctioned permits, there would be scant time left in the show to hit HRC and Obama on these even more esoteric, lesser issues.
Former Law Student said:
"That is to say, by the time Russert worked his way through the all-important carbon caps and auctioned permits, there would be scant time left in the show to hit HRC and Obama on these even more esoteric, lesser issues."
This country takes more than 12% out of everyone's pay for retirement (calls it social security) and still can't guarantee a secure retirement check for people who have worked 40-45 years!!
Why the fluff would you want to waste time on nuanced (tiny), esoteric, lesser issues?
I suggest you ask them to tell you how they will fix ONE big troublesome issue of the times - and I don't mean wiretapping or gay marriage or making sure all kids get to go to a crappy but well-funded public school.
AJ says: "This country takes more than 12% out of everyone's pay for retirement (calls it social security) and still can't guarantee a secure retirement check for people who have worked 40-45 years!!"
First of all the "country" doesn't take anything out of anything. It's the responsibility of the employer or employee to establish whatever method SS and oher deductions are handles.
Second, when you say "everyone's pay," what you really mean, except for those who are independent contractors, employees who do not have SS taken out, employers who pay under the table to save $$ and pay no contributions of any kind, and of course, those who do not work (housewives, stay at home fathers.)
independent contractors
Huh?
Hey, why didn't anyone tell me sooner? And here I've been cutting checks for BOTH sides (employer/employee) of the SS contributions in my names for close to a decade-and-a-half now.
Think I can get my money back?
LUCY - you have just proven without a doubt that you are a retard. There simply is no other way to say it.
Independent contractors (the self-employed) are responsible to pay 12.6% of their net business income (after expenses) and employers deduct the social security taxes (the govt refers to these as FICA contributions- how clever huh) and the employer forwards to the tax man.
So what is your point idiot? that a percentage of the population works under the table like you did when you served poorly-concocted drinks as a bartender and some patrons felt sorry for your sorry ass and gave you a tip?
reader,
Are you actually saying you don't know what an "independent contractor" is? Or that you DON'T take SS or ANY other deductions out of their pay?
C'mon...are you REALLY saying this?
*I've worked on and off as an independent contractor for many, many years...as do many sales people who work for a number of different companies at the same time, representing many different product lines.
AJ Lynch said..."Independent contractors (the self-employed) are responsible to pay 12.6% of their net business income (after expenses) and employers deduct the social security taxes (the govt refers to these as FICA contributions- how clever huh) and the employer forwards to the tax man."
I hope you don't own a business or work as an independent contractor.
Independent contractors (1099) DO NOT have SS or FICA deducted from their pay, nor is there any contribution from the employer...it's one of the reasons many employers would LOVE to have ALL of their people work as independents...and also why the real estate industry is so closely monitored to prevent just that kind of arrangement. (Realtors generally PAY a monthly fee for use of telephones, leads, office space, etc...and also generally DO NOT have SS, etc. deducted.)
There must be an accountant here somewhere...let's hear it.
Leaving aside the fact that the Reagan administration's Southern Strategy, as masterminded by Lee Atwater, was racist to the core (which even Atwater admitted)....
You seem to be a bit confused, chrissie. Facts are supposed to be true. That's why they're called "facts".
What Lee Atwater said was "All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he’s campaigned on since 1964… and that’s fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster". That was Reagan's "Southern Strategy". Atwater contrasted it with Nixon's "Southern Strategy" of appealing to racism. He specifically rejected the notion that these policies were an appeal to racism.
This whole discussion is silly, of course. Reagan will still be fondly remembered as one of our greatest Presidents long after everyone's forgotten that the rapidly-imploding New York Times was ever published, let alone that Herbert wrote for it or that silly wankers like you read it. The "racism" nonsense carries no weight outside of the lunatic left; sensible people know Reagan was anything but racist.
LUCY:
Do the googles on this "IRS Schedule SE". That stands for "self-employment" tax and this schedule must be filed by independent contractors. It is used to calculate their TAX liability where they owe 15.3% of net earnings to Uncle Sam for social security and Medicare "contribuitions".
God did you think indeoendent contractors did not have to pay? If you are one, do you even read and understand your own tax return?
Will, I'm saying that I myself am self-employed and that I make SS contributions (both sides) in my own name--the SE schedule. If I had W-2 employees, of course I'd be doing the deductions. If I still had subs (1099 folks), that would be their responsibility.
Perhaps I misunderstood what you wrote, which seemed to imply that if you're self-employed, you don't owe SS contributions. If I did so misread, I apologize.
Maybe it's the semantics here.
Aj,
Do you remember saying this: "This country takes more than 12% out of everyone's pay for retirement (calls it social security)..."
Well, if you do...then when you also say that when the IRS..."calculate their TAX liability where they owe 15.3% of net earnings"...you're confusing "income taxes" with Social Security...
EVERYBODY is supposed to pay INCOME TAXES, and most self-employed people try to deposit money each quarter to forestall any huge tax liability at the end of the year.
Also, in the case of independent contractors or those who are self-employed, they incur all kinds of "expenses," etc. that an regular employer would normally pay.
I have no idea why you're arguing such a ridiculous point, especially since I've been working as an independent contractor for many years (and I'll bet there are others here) and have spent hundreds of hours with very good accountants that know one hell of a lot more about tax laws than a little creep like you.
Why not just admit you made a mistake and leave it at that?
It seems to me it's not how it's collected, it's that it must be paid, in one or another.
OK. Whatever.
reader,
It's not "semantics."
AJ was blathering on about Social Security.
And by the way...if you have indeed been paying contributing SS / FICA and other taxes to your "independent contractors"...you should see your accountant...pronto.
Admit it...I'm right...and you an AJ are...WRONG.
I'm not sure what that SS statement I get from the government listing my contributions for myself is all about, though.
reader_iam said..."It seems to me it's not how it's collected, it's that it must be paid, in one or another."
Good Lord...NO!!!
The Social Security Fund does NOT HAVE TO BE PAID into.
PERIOD.
I just said more than one that I DON'T make those contributions on behalf of OTHER contractors--but rather on behalf of myself. Jeez. What's the trip-up?
OK, then, thank you. I will take that up.
I'd certainly be better off putting that money into my pension plan.
LUCY:
I did not make a mistake - the 15.3% covers both social security and medicare TAXES. It does not however include federal income taxes. The social security portion of the 15.3% is about 12.6%. And you are still a gigantic dope.
Yeah life is unfair and business owners get deductions that schlubs like you don't get. Get over it.
BTW -- you were the guy who said you were more afraid of environmentalists than Bush's Justice Department, right?
The likelihood of environmentalists doing something that harms me -- raising my taxes, confiscating some of my property, hurting the economy I rely on for my job, etc -- is very high. They've done so many times before, after all.
The likelihood of the Bush Administration's Justice Department hurting me in any way is virtually nonexistent.
I've got problems with some of the things Bush has done, but they are neither new (FDR was worse in every regard, from spying on Americans to jailing them -- or even killing them -- without trial) nor a credible threat to anyone I care about (a list that is long, but conspicuously devoid of Muslim ex-cons).
Reader,
A 401K would probably be good, but if you're "employed" by an "employer," they have to "contribute."
That's the rub for employers and why they would love for everybody to be independent contractors.
AJ,
You are as dumb as frigging stump.
Independent Contractors are not required to pay ANY Social Security into ANY FUND...at all...PERIOD.
And I have no idea you're talking about when you say "employers" get deductions that I don't get. Wat the hell does that have to do with Social Security contributions??
I've owned businesses, paid employees, worked as an employee and had contributions paid into my fund via my employer...and I've worked under the auspices of independent contractor laws in many states...I know of what I speak.
How old are you and do you even have a job???
This is business 101.
LOS -- my parents had a small business and paid self-employment tax each year. I remember it was 1.5 times the share that I was paying, and covered both the employee and employer share of FICA.
Reagan will still be fondly remembered as one of our greatest Presidents long after everyone's forgotten that the rapidly-imploding New York Times was ever published, let alone that Herbert wrote for it or that silly wankers like you read it.
jesus - only out and out nutters write about the new york times this way. high number on this site.
btw ann, your comment about hillary "suppressing" records is flatly inaccurate and informs yglesias's attack on russert. like the other commenter, i wont hold my breath waiting for an acknowledgment.
Independent Contractors are not required to pay ANY Social Security into ANY FUND...at all...PERIOD.
I'm violating my "ignore Lucky" rule (and just after I scolded jeff for not ignoring him, too) but I'm worried that someone might actually listen to him and get in hot water with The Man.
According to the IRS, when you are an independent contractor "you are responsible for paying your own income tax and self-employment tax". The "self-employment tax" is, the IRS notes, "a social security and Medicare tax primarily for individuals who work for themselves". So yes, even if you're an independent contractor, you have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. You just pay them in a different way than you would if you were an employee.
Vortex
In celebration of 11,111,111. Because a vortex machine like this is used in a chem lab to create a vortex which is useful in breaking up clumps of material like bacterial cells so one can perform experiments on them. Which is kinda like the function of this blog.
only out and out nutters write about the new york times this way
Well, let's see. In the last decade the Times has lost an eighth of its readership, seen its stock value in constant dollars decline by nearly 50%, and sacked half its employees in favor of cheap independents.
... yeah, only a "nut" would think the Times is in trouble. A nutty nut who's nuts. That's me, alright. People who aren't nuts know that when businesses lose customers, employees, and stock value all at the same time that's the sign of a health and thriving business.
I'm violating my "ignore Lucky" rule (and just after I scolded jeff for not ignoring him, too) but I'm worried that someone might actually listen to him and get in hot water with The Man.
Better you than me! ;-) That said, I have to feel sorry for any independent contractors he's paid and told with equal certainty that they don't have to pay self-employment taxes (aka Social Security taxes).
The prime factors of 11,111,111 are 11, 73, 101 and 137.
Go figure.
Q: I made several thousand dollars moonlighting as an independent contractor. What taxes do I need to pay?
A: You’re responsible for Federal income tax and self-employment taxes on your income as an independent contractor. Self-employment taxes are your contributions to social security and Medicare.
. . .
Information courtesy of the Internal Revenue Service.
Rev and others,
Do whatever you want, but as an independent contractor, I put my money into a 401K,
How long have any of you been an independent contractors?
I suggest you call an accountant.
Lucy had better call a lawyer, if there's anybody from the IRS reading this thread.
Oh, dear, that was comment number 111! I'd better post another in a hurry so I can stop dancing!
(It was funny, way up at the top, to see Alphie boasting about how he had figured out how to link to individual comments, when he really had not figured that out! The laffs just keep on coming!)
Lucy had better call a lawyer, if there's anybody from the IRS reading this thread.
Heh! Yeah, no wonder he's enthusiastic about repealing those Bush tax cuts. What's the harm in tax hikes when you don't pay your taxes?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा