#OccupyWallStreet

"The occupiers have already made history. They have broken the media and elite-imposed taboo on talking about the destructive impact of inequality on the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world in developing and developed countries. The new feudalism that has been emerging for over twenty years is now exposed. Everyone can see the elephant in the room.

But now that the elephant can be seen ,what is the next step in confronting the corporate and state powers that it symbolizes…………?"

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/11/21/Listen-To-Occupy/

You can't parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can't be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so many times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions are a tool that is insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML is not a regular language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are not equipped to break down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to me. Even enhanced irregular regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing HTML. You will never make me crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Even Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions. Every time you attempt to parse HTML with regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp. Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide. The [HTML_REMOVED]center[HTML_REMOVED] cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and HTML together in the same conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you parse HTML with regex you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to inhuman toil for the One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes. HTML-plus-regexp will liquify the n?erves of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the onslaught of horror. Rege???x-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too late it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a chi?ld ensures regex will consume all living tissue (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how can anyone survive this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of dread torture and security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach between this world and the dread realm of c??o??rrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a mere glimpse of the world of reg?ex parsers for HTML will ins?tantly transport a programmer's consciousness into a world of ceaseless screaming, he comes, the pestilent slithy regex-infection wil?l devour your HT?ML parser, application and existence for all time like Visual Basic only worse he comes he comes do not fi?ght he com?e?s, ?h?i?s un?ho?ly radian?ce? destro?ying all enli????ghtenment, HTML tags lea?ki?n?g fr?o?m ?yo??ur eye?s? ?l?ik?e liq?uid pain, the song of re?gular exp?ression parsing will exti?nguish the voices of mor?tal man from the sp?here I can see it can you see ?????i???t???????? it is beautiful t?he final snuffing of the lie?s of Man ALL IS LOS????????T ALL I?S LOST the pon?y he comes he c??omes he comes the ich?or permeates all MY FACE MY FACE ?h god no NO NOO?O?O N? stop the an?*??????????g????????l??????????e??s ?a???r?????e n?ot re????a?l???????? ZA????LG? IS????????? TO???????? TH?E??? ?P???O??N?Y? H??????????E?????????? ??????????C??????????O??????M??????????E?????????S??????????

and dumbest post of the year goes to…

"My generation of activists keeps insisting that government - the state - is the only possible counterpoint to global corporate power and we just have to take it back. But young people have had such a viscerally negative experience of the hegemony of corporate rule and state complicity - constantly legitimized by a corrupt and monolithic media [HTML_REMOVED]#8211; that they aren't buying it. The notion that we can somehow go back to the golden age is delusional and they know it. This is perhaps the most important lesson they are teaching us.

Occupiers are not necessarily asking that we join them in their camps but in their spirit of resistance and cultural rebellion, and in the task of imagining a better world - realizing that we have been sleep-walking towards the edge of the cliff. They are telling us all to wake up before it's too late."

Too bad on that 2nd point, I'm sure thewalrus was anxious to do an outdoor sleepover w/the hippies and junkies.

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/11/21/Corporate-Psychopaths/

"Perhaps investors at major financial institutions should require that senior level managers submit to established tests to ensure they are not psychopathic. This is not an issue of civil liberties since the precedent has already been well established regarding drug impairment in the workplace. Likewise, it is not a regulatory issue since private shareholders have every right to demand that executives demonstrate they are not biochemically impaired and therefore unable to carry out their fiduciary duties on behalf of investors. If corporate boards are hiring psychopaths as executive management, they are not carrying out their due diligence and could be held legally liable for their oversight."

well, its been working fine for the last three years and my cga is expensive but good. her fees i can write off, too. so all is well.

And how much less percentage of taxes do you pay by doing this?

And how much less percentage of taxes do you pay by doing this?

well I don't pay throughout the year, i just lump sum any payments due - usually only GST and its real close. then last year i got almost $10k back (including my wife). cgas are worth every penny.

See now I am curious, are your wife and kids Employees or Independent Contractors? The B.C. Employment Standards Act is very 'strict' regarding the definitions.

I don't have kids, but I figured that you don't give money directly to the kids, you set up an education trust or something.

If the kids don't work, you can dividend out a pretty good chunk of change without them paying a dime of income tax. I'm guessing they have to be legal adults to hold shares?

And how much less percentage of taxes do you pay by doing this?

If your wife doesn't work you can dividend out about $25,000 without paying any personal tax. You just pay the 13.5% corp tax and whatever set-up costs there are to get your wife some shares.

For the "average" situation (you're making about $125K before taxes, wife doesn't work), you pay about $9500 less per year by using a holding corp, including the $3000 per year for the CGA and lawyer. Moves you from about 28% tax to 20% tax.

You can save a little bit more from the "company" expenses. Medical expenses are slightly cheaper too, if you're not covered by a real plan.

I think the real difference is from a savings and investment perspective. You can do most of your investing within the corp instead of an RRSP and have full control over when and how you take your income during retirement. I don't know much about RRSP's but I know that being forced to draw down on your savings in a year when you have employment income as well can really screw things up.

At least that's what my accountant tells me!

Is your main source of income from an employer, or are you self employed and make money via contracting?

It's a blurry line I guess?

Consulting firm is owned by several holding corps. Each partner controls a portion of the consulting firm through shares held by their holding corp, rather than owning shares personally. I believe most smaller outfits (3-5 partners) are set up this way. Doctors and dentists, lawyers, accountants, engineers, etc.

Not that it's all gravy… there's a pretty big upfront cost for setting everything up (about $5K I think) plus the ongoing costs to have a CGA do your books every year. And if you're a dual-income family the tax savings are minimal, though the other advantages still apply.

Oh, the other nice thing is that you don't have to pay into CPP if you don't want to. I kind of doubt there will be much left after the baby boomers are through with it, so I'm investing that money privately.

And if you're a dual-income family the tax savings are minimal, though the other advantages still apply.

So I'm in a dual income situation, with the income coming from employers (payroll, paid bi-weekly, income deducted during payment, etc.)

What savings can be had?

When I was single and working for myself, there were a lot of deductions I could legally substantiate, but I don't see much that can be be done with both spouses working.

So I'm in a dual income situation, with the income coming from employers (payroll, paid bi-weekly, income deducted during payment, etc.)

What savings can be had?

I'm really not sure. If there's one thing I've learned is that it's worth finding out your options from an accountant with lots of good references. I know of a couple cases where guys had both a CGA and a holding corp, but were still taking income personally and paying big taxes. Fired the CGA and got on the new system but they'll never get that $100K back.