#and to have it all be gone because the new network owners care about conservative $$$ | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

we-link-building-techniques-blog · 5 years

Text

Link Building Techniques: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

However, some people are still unsure about what constitutes a good link or a bad connection. That information is essential in making intelligent SEO link building techniques decisions. They get into the techniques of building questionable links today - even without intention - and it is very likely that you are on the wrong side of a penalty, which costs you traffic and sales. Finding out about SEO is a top need for any keen entrepreneur. Here are the best SEO website SEO Tips INC that can help you to know more information about SEO.

That is why it is so important to understand exactly what type of links has a positive impact on ranking and are acceptable according to Google's webmaster guidelines .

So let's dig into the good, bad and ugly links.

This post will explain what type will harm your website, which has just wasted time by not improving the ranking and that will push you to the top of the search results.

On a related note, it is important to have a strategy instead of just building blind links. This will save you time, money and energy while improving your results.

Good connections

Good connections tend to be obtained naturally and are generally not scalable.

Organic latest link building techniques takes much more time and effort, but it also means that links I understand you are more valuable because they are more difficult for your competitors to match.

This gives you a more dominant position in your market, and that is what we are all looking for, right?

Editorial Links

The most obvious example of a good link is when, without the knowledge that, a journalist (or collaborator or blogger) is so surprised by you, your company or your products or services that they take the initiative to write an article about you and link to your website. Contrary to what some in the SEO community (including Google) claim, this is quite rare.

It's just as good is when a personal relationship leads to a similar situation, either directly or through an introduction to a journalist, contributor or blogger - provided there is legitimate value to your audience in your story. For example, in a recent article on the role of traditional public relations in SEO that I wrote for another search publication, I have included several quotes and a link from a friend who has a large and successful PR company precisely because his vision was incredibly valuable. for the public, thanks to his extensive experience.

Guest Blogging

Guest blogs, when done correctly, occupies only a little below the two previous examples in terms of value, mainly because while the website that has been published in editorial supervision account is still produced by you instead of a third party more objective

It is imperative that these articles provide value to your audience and not be there just for a link. In fact, because Google has harshly repressed guest displacement as a link building tactic, I think it's better to be too cautious to go far beyond value expectations and be extremely conservative in terms of outbound links. to your own website.

To play it safe, any guest blogs must be done with the intention of building your brand and reaching a wider audience - instead of building links. Advanced link building techniques is simply a byproduct of doing a great job on that.

Niche Directories

In general, directories are almost dead. However, highly focused place directories can still be a valuable source of links.

That said, you can only find a handful of worthwhile directories focused on your niche, and your SEO value will vary dramatically, but it is definitely worth analyzing. You should expand your thinking beyond the traditional idea of a web directory and look at professional organizations, specific network-niche groups and professional associations, as well because most have a directory of members these days.

When evaluating a directory, you will want to make sure that:

Have an investigation process, instead of accepting anyone willing to pay the fee.

Periodically publish valuable content that search engines can access and index.

Regularly prune broken links of members who no longer have an active website.

This may seem too puritanical, but I would avoid directories that allow keywords in the anchor text of the listings.

The promotion of good connections

Gone are the days of anchor text precisely matching the keyword phrases you want to rank. It looks unnatural, and therefore easily identifiable by Google's algorithm, that only continue to improve in pattern detection thanks to artificial intelligence .

When someone else links to you without your input, the link text tends to be quite natural, so you don't have much to worry about. When you are the one who creates the links, however, for example, when you are an accounting guest, you have to be much more careful because your own actions (compared to those of a third party) can be seen with much greater scrutiny if any Once checked manually.

There is a time and place for the exact match anchor text, but in most cases, you tend to opt for something more descriptive, as I did in the previous link to my SEJ article on artificial intelligence. You should also generally link to the most relevant internal page instead of the page (unless you are quoting the company, in which case you must use the company name instead of a keyword).

The ugly links

While it may be easy to produce such links in large numbers, they will not have much impact (if any) on their organic classification.

The investment of time in the production of this type of links is a waste of time, money and energy, since it will never generate much of a return on investment.

To make matters worse, if you use these link building tactics - even though they are not effective - you are likely to suffer a penalty.

Posting Guest in the Scale

If you have been in the SEO industry for more than a few years, you will probably remember when article directories were the hot new thing and you could simply shoot a program to submit your article to thousands of these websites at once. Most of these programs even had the ability to “turn” or modify the content, resulting in a “unique” article for each presentation. This created a strip of garbage websites that was useless for anything other than the publication of advertisements within the content mostly useless and redundant.

Those days have been left behind thanks to God. However, even when done manually and on a smaller scale, this tactic is problematic when you are doing it primarily to establish links as it creates obvious patterns that Google's algorithm can easily identify.

Links from non-relevant websites

There is virtually no value in the links on the website of a divorce lawyer to the website of a general contractor. Nowadays Google is quite good at identifying the theme of a website, and usually only a significant weight is assigned to links that are relevant to its purpose. No matter how easy it can be to acquire a link, do not waste your time if it is not relevant.

Header, footer and sidebar links

Google doesn't give much weight to links in certain areas of a web page, including headers, footers and sidebars. In general, links throughout the site are a bad idea except in a few cases:

Linking to a relevant sister publication that is the owner. For example, if Huffington Post linked to your edition of India, that would be fine. However, if a general contractor and a mortgage company were run, a link across the site from one to the other would be risky.

Identification of the software that runs a website, as seen with most content management, blogs, and e-commerce systems.

The identification of who designed a website.

An important caveat here is that while it is not necessary to use the nofollow attribute in these links, you need to use brand terms such as the company or publication name instead of rich anchor text keywords.

Bad links

Further down the rabbit hole are links that should be avoided at all costs.

You must repudiate the bad links you have used in the past, as it will absolutely result in a penalty when you are inevitably caught. From that point forward, Google will begin to see its link building efforts with much more scrutiny.

When you have landed on Google radar, any action that may have been dismissed as an honest mistake will now be seen as an attempt to manipulate without ethical classification.

The paid links

You might be thinking that you can get away with the purchase of paid links, because you are doing it on a small scale and / or through personal relationships, right?

That sounds plausible, until it is considered that if the owner of a website is selling links to you, they are more likely to sell links to at least a couple of other people as well, and those people are more likely. of buying links from other websites. You can see how quickly the network expands from there.

Think about how many people, buyers and sellers, are really involved, and then wonder how difficult it would be for an organization with Google’s data and resources to identify paid links. All they need to do is pick up a buyer or seller and follow the links to identify the other buyers and sellers.

Comment or Spam Forum

While it is easy to launch attacks against thousands of links to forums and blog comment sections, it is also easy to destroy your brand by doing this because you are hitting your spam links across someone else's website.

In addition, the links in the blog comments section are nofollow, and many nofollow forums outbound links, as well, so you will not see much, if any, the SEO benefit, but you will open yourself to the risk of a penalty based on the link. Especially since you are going to anger other website owners that you will be more than happy to inform Google.

General Directories

We have already discussed how local directories have the potential to be valuable. However, general directories like the plague should be avoided.

These are the epitome of everything Google hates because they usually accept any website (except those that promote pornography, gambling, or violence), as long as you are willing to pay your fee.

This is a classic example of a paid link. The directory is not relevant to your website, and in most cases, it lacks any useful content.

Private Blog Networks

Why go through the trouble of building legitimate links when you can install WordPress in a few dozen domains and link to any website you want at any time?

Well, for starters, as with paid links, it is quite easy for Google to identify networks of private blogs, which leads to penalties in the short term, and greater scrutiny in the long term.

The most important reason for not using private blog networks as a link building techniques is that you will still have to publish a lot of high quality original content and create inbound links for blogs on the network in order to have any value. absolutely.

That time, money and energy would be better spent creating amazing content and earning inbound links to your own website.

When the majority of legitimate website owners are considered to work continuously to produce new content and gain new links, the value of a link from their website to theirs continuously becomes more valuable.

conclusion

Links are an essential part of SEO today, but if you don't know what type violates Google guidelines, you can easily end up doing more harm than good.

The links will not disappear as a ranking factor at any time in the foreseeable future, so it is important that you understand exactly what type will improve your ranking, what not, and perhaps most importantly, what type you will get Your website penalized type.

#SEO #WEBSITE #website ranking

1 note · View note

thoughtsfrommareincognitum · 6 years

Text

Trump and the intellectuals.

Many years ago, I reviewed one of David Gelernter's books for my college newspaper. It was, and remains, one of the worst books I have ever read, so poorly written and badly reasoned that it stayed in my mind more vividly than a lot of better books did. Bad books have a way of haunting us, which is probably why we hate them so. The worst movie you see in your life will be gone from your head by the next morning, but the worst book you were forced to read in school will be with you till you take your last breath.

The world and I moved on, but David Gelernter did not stop writing. Now he’s written an essay for The Wall Street Journal in which he claims to have solved the mystery of why “the left” hates Donald Trump so much. Since the article is now trapped behind a paywall, I’ll go ahead and spoil the surprise: The reason, you see, is that Trump is a “typical American,” and leftists hate typical Americans because they hate America.

For Gelernter, of course, “the left” means Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama—mainstream Democrats. It means politicians who have spent their careers trying to win the votes of “typical Americans.” If they do hate such people, they are wise enough to keep it to themselves. Gelernter is not wise enough to keep any of his thoughts to himself. He just lets them fly, uncensored by doubt. This is an actual sentence from his essay:

The president deserves our respect because Americans deserve it—not such fancy-pants extras as network commentators, socialist high-school teachers and eminent professors, but the basic human stuff that has made America great, and is making us greater all the time.

Well, perhaps this is not an actual sentence.

Gelernter accepts the right-wing doctrine that contemporary Democrats are somehow different than the Democrats he grew up with. They are different, of course, but not in a way that he would care about. He just means that the Democrats of his youth talked about the greatness of America more than he thinks today’s Democrats do. He’s oblivious to the fact that Barack Obama spent hundreds of hours during his presidency talking about the greatness of America during Veterans Day speeches and the like, because Gelernter, like other right-wingers, experiences the words of liberals only as filtered through his favorite websites and cable news shows. As far as he’s concerned, the non-conservatives are all working for the same team, and the apparent differences of opinion between, say, a Nancy Pelosi and an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are just a ruse. He’s clearly never met the kind of leftist who spits out the word “liberal” as if they were expelling a wayward gnat from their mouth.

Why does “the left” hate us poor working stiffs so much? Gelernter explains:

The difference between citizens who hate Mr. Trump and those who can live with him…comes down to their views of the typical American: the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife. The leftist intellectuals I know say they dislike such people insofar as they tend to be conservative Republicans.

“Insofar as” means “to the extent or degree that.” It does not mean “because.” I personally find it hard to believe that Gelernter’s social circle is swarming with “leftist intellectuals” eager to declare a blanket hatred of all software engineers. I am sure, however, that “teamster” deserves its capital letter, and that members of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters overwhelmingly support Democrats. For that matter, factory workers, auto mechanics, machinists, clerks, infantrymen, and stay-at-home mothers are all likely to make less than $50,000 a year, and individuals in that income bracket were overwhelmingly more likely to vote Democratic in the 2016 election. Gelernter doesn’t care about any of that. He doesn’t even nod in the direction of a statistic. He has all the swagger of the loudmouth at the neighborhood bar, and about as much wisdom.

But suppose we grant Gelernter his fantasies about the “typical American.” What does that have to do with Donald Trump? It turns out that Gelernter thinks Trump exemplifies the virtues that make non-liberal America great. These are some of his wholesome, all-American qualities:

Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable.

There’s not much here, and what is here isn’t worth much. “Unwillingness to walk away from a fight” is a virtue only if you believe that every fight is worth fighting, which is a belief held only by violent lunatics. As for exceptional America, it was Trump himself who chose to defend Vladimir Putin by sneering, “You think our country’s so innocent?”

Vulgarity, simple, bluntness, mistrust—the very words Gelernter uses to praise Trump say more than the actual sentences he puts them into.

Gelernter’s essay is not very interesting. But it does illustrate an interesting phenomenon: the plight of the right-wing intellectual in the Age of Trump. In 2018, to be a right-winger and an intellectual means that you either have to reject Trump or find some way to defend him. And rejecting Trump, for a right-winger, is not as simple as denouncing Trump as a person. Trump is no longer just Trump. He has made over the entire party in his image. State and local candidates’ careers are made and ruined by what they say about him.

If you are a thoughtful and honest person, as any intellectual should be, it’s bound to occur to you that everything vile about Trump—his ignorance, his racism, his contempt for the law, his endorsement of mob violence—was there in the Republican Party long before he showed up. To reject Trump is to reject those things, but to reject those things is to reject what the right-wing movement always was. When Max Boot broke with the Republicans over Trump, he didn’t just denounce the man, he denounced the movement that had given rise to him. But Boot is, so far, almost the only right-wing intellectual with the courage to do this.

The alternative is to defend Trump—and perhaps a man of “genius,” as Time magazine once described David Gelernter, is just the man to undertake this hazardous mission. Gelernter, alas, can only give us sentences like this, one after another:

Scholarship is fine, but the typical modern intellectual cheapens his learning with politics, and is proud to vary his teaching with broken-down left-wing junk.

Gelernter’s day job has something to do with computers, and his performance here puts one in mind of HAL in 2001. Perhaps the stress of this particular mission was too much for him.

1 note · View note

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

I Care a Lot: Can Professional Guardians and Conservatorships Really Get THAT Bad?

https://ift.tt/3qCWe0N

This article contains I Care a Lot spoilers. You can read our spoiler-free review here.

How odd that in the span of a couple days it seems like everyone is debating the virtues of professional guardianships and what it means to become a legal conservator. Only a week ago, Hulu and The New York Times debuted its social media lightning rod of a documentary, Framing Britney Spears, and now barely more than seven days later, Netflix is debuting J Blakeson’s I Care a Lot, a baroque comedy (or tragedy?) in which Rosamund Pike plays a professional legal guardian who cares. She cares a lot. Just not about her wards.

As becomes queasily apparent early on in I Care a Lot, the things that keep Pike’s Marla Grayson up at night are not the dozens of wards she has a legal responsibility toward, nor necessarily the employees in her company. Rather it’s her clients’ bank accounts where Marla’s interests lie; and she uses them to bill herself hourly rates and underwrites any expenses she incurs while raiding their homes for valuables.

Within the movie’s first 15 minutes, we even see Grayson’s nightmarish con in a nutshell when she has a little old lady named Jennier (Dianne Wiest) declared incompetent because of dementia. Marla shows up on Jennifer’s doorstep with the cops and a court order to lock Jennifer away forever in a nursing home, even though Wiest’s senior has never even seen the inside of a courtroom.

Can something this scandalous and awful actually happen in America? The short answer is yes.

“These stories were horrifying and not uncommon,” Blakeson told The Moveable Fest last September. “So I fell down a bit of a rabbit hole in reading about these various stories happening in various places and thought there was something almost Kafkaesque about somebody knocking on your door and just taking you away for a reason you didn’t think was valid.”

And as has become increasingly publicized in recent weeks, once you get in the system of guardianships/conservatorships, it’s very hard to get out.

Guardianships of course play a pivotal role in modern society. As a legal responsibility created to protect those deemed vulnerable due to a diminished capacity that’s left them “incapacitated” or “incompetent,” guardianship is usually taken up by family members or professionals (mostly lawyers) who agree to manage a vulnerable party’s assets, caring for their estate and possibly their day-to-day person and body. This means a guardian is in charge of their wards’ assets and finances, what doctors they see, what medications they take, where they live, and potentially who they interact with and how they lead their daily lives. One woman in this situation told The New York Times, “It’s worse than incarceration. At least in prison you have rights.”

It’s an arrangement most often used to protect elderly people who cannot care for themselves, but problems can occur when one must decide how to determine someone is “incapacitated” or “incompetent,” and whether a ward needs a guardian in perpetuity. Additionally, just how vulnerable is the position of being a professional guardian itself vulnerable to profit motive?

Most legal guardianships or conservatorships are not egregiously corrupt like Marla Grayson’s racket in I Care a Lot, and many professional guardians will note how difficult it is to manage the affairs of low income individuals who need daily assistance—or how professional guardians are required to step in by the courts when the children of elderly parents enter lawsuits against each other.

However, the details are frustratingly hard to track. The National Center for State Courts estimates the number of people in guardianships is between one and three million in the U.S., but it’s impossible to accurately measure when legal records of guardianships are often sealed and there is no standardized recordkeeping; The Times reported guardianship records are kept separately by each of New York’s individual 62 counties, with no standardized reporting on state or even city totals; and a Government Accountability Office report from 2010 revealed that “we could not locate a single Web site, federal agency, state or local entity, or any other organization that compiles comprehensive information on the issue.”

Rather state by state, and case by case, courts appear to be left to their own devices on how to handle situations—and also uncomfortably relying on what amounts to an honor system regarding professional guardians. As per The Times, the state of New York requires any aspiring professional guardian to only complete a one-day certification course, and according to the aforementioned GAO report, courts require no background checks for aspiring legal guardians. Instead they trust applicants to disclose any previous criminal convictions or recent bankruptcies.

This can create a recipe for abuse and cases as extreme as Pike’s wolfish Marla Grayson showing up at your door with a court order. Famously in New York, Judge John Phillips built a real estate empire in Brooklyn worth $20 million during the 1980s and ‘90s, which included movie theaters that became neighborhood landmarks. Yet after he was diagnosed with dementia and considered incompetent in the early 2000s, he went through a series of legal guardians and somehow was “left to freeze to death in 2008” in a facility unlicensed to treat dementia. While he declined, his guardians had been selling off theaters and various other assets to the tune of millions of dollars.

More recently, and more reminiscent of Marla Grayson, is the case of April Parks, a former Nevada legal guardian who pled guilty in 2018 to six felony charges, including two counts of elder exploitation. The full extent of her abuse, however, was laid bare in 2017 by Rachel Aviv’s harrowing reporting in The New Yorker’s “How the Elderly Lose Their Rights.”

In that piece, Aviv chronicled how Parks amassed more than 400 wards for her guardianship business over 12 years in the state of Nevada—and how each of her wards lost “nearly all of their civil rights.” This is primarily highlighted through the experiences of Rudy and Rennie North, a couple in their 70s who on a fateful Friday morning were greeted at their front door by April Parks and three unnamed associates. Parks was the owner of a company called A Private Professional Guardian—a fact she was so proud about she had her license plate read “CRTGRDN” (court guardian)—and she arrived that day with an order from the Clark County Family Court, which demanded the Norths be removed from their homes immediately.

Unbeknownst to the Norths, Parks had filed an emergency ex-parte petition in the court, which allowed her to claim the Norths posed a “substantial risk for mismanagement of medications, financial loss, and physical harm” without their presence in the court. Indeed, they weren’t even notified the hearing was happening. Parks told the court the elderly couple was at risk due to a rapid decline caused by dementia, as based on a letter from a physician’s assistant Rennie had seen once. Rudy and Rennie had never undergone a single cognitive assessment when the court agreed Parks should move the pair into a nursing home.

It was more than three days before the Norths’ adult daughter Julie Belsche even discovered where they were, with her parents’ home being left empty, causing the daughter to tell her husband she thought “someone kidnapped my parents.”

As soon as the Norths were gone, Parks went through their house with the owner of a company called Caring Transitions, which specialized in estate sales of the assets and belongings of relocated seniors. Raiding the couple’s closets and drawers, in search of paperwork and valuables, had become routine for Parks. Within a month, Parks hired Even Tide Life Transitions to sell off most of the belongings, including two Renoir lithographs valued at $38,000.

The Norths’ case was not unique. As their daughter Julie and The New Yorker eventually unraveled, Parks had wards in nursing homes throughout the county, including 10 in the one that the Norths were relocated to. Many of these seniors were declared in need of legal guardianship in hearings that lasted less than two minutes. Prosecutor Jaclyn O’Malley would later piece together for a grand jury that Parks allegedly built a network of “hospital social workers and medical staff” who helped generate client leads for Parks’ company. In one instance in 2010, the state’s attorney said Parks was “cold-calling” rehabilitation centers in search of a 79-year-old woman who had nearly $700,000 in the bank and no children.

Culture

Why The Truth About Britney Spears Is So Elusive

By Tony Sokol

Movies

Judas and the Black Messiah Ending Shows Horrific Legacy of COINTELPRO

By David Crow

But all of this was unspooled after years of hardship for the Norths. As per the American Bar Association, guardianship is generally “permanent, leaving no way out… until death do us part,’” and the Norths seemed to face that truth when they couldn’t even hire a lawyer to argue their case.

Their daughter also reported they were “overmedicated to the point where they weren’t really there” in their nursing home.

All these seeming horrors were committed by a sophisticated engine of care that makes I Care a Lot’s Marla Grayson appear like small potatoes. Yet the legal authority of professional guardians is so protected under the cloud of sealed documents that it wasn’t stories of glassy-eyed medication or the lack of due process that actually brought Parks down. The narrowly defined felonies she pled guilty to involved perjury under oath and double dealing in her accounting—like charging her wards $100 each for the hour it took to deliver unsolicited Christmas “gifts” of cheap socks purchased from the nearby department store.

It got Parks a sentence of 16 to 40 years in prison. Still, the most egregious cases are far from the only ones to care about, and in reality there isn’t a Peter Dinklage there to bargain for each senior who may think they don’t need a professional guardian.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post I Care a Lot: Can Professional Guardians and Conservatorships Really Get THAT Bad? appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3ufAF8A

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

eliminativism · 7 years

Note

If you don't mind, I'd like to ask for your opinion on this: takimag(.)com/article/top_10_trump_myths_gavin_mcinnes#axzz4WT8GdY44

McInnes is a partisan provocateur, like Milo Yannopoulos. I wouldn’t take what he writes too seriously.

We are already beyond McCarthyism - the alt-rightists and neo-nationalists on tumblr are so far gone that they cannot read a single thing in the press they don’t like without mocking it as fake news. They are worse than feminists - and I say that as someone who has an anti-feminist with very radical anti-feminist stances for three years. You basically cannot get more anti-feminist than I am.

And I consider feminists more redeemable than people like McInnes lately.

The truth is that while the press has problems, you cannot throw everything out of the window without checking. But the “parallel media”, aka right-wing news blogs, have established themselves among their audience to provide any kind of lazy copy-pasting to show “the left media” is wrong, regardless of whether it’s accurate, as long as it reeinforces the biases of their audience. You can find whole networks right-wing blogs for anything, with vast databases of sources they built up - for the world being flat, for chemtrails being used to poison the population, that the world is cooling down and global warming is a hoax, that Noah’s flood was real, that Trump is a reasonable individual.

I have spoken against such falsehoods repeatedly, and always I have found people to be more stubborn and hostile than even a rabbid SJW could be - often from people who would love to point out how ridiculous SJWs are.

Simple fallacy: Just because one other position is wrong does not allow you to conclude your position is right.

Feminism and the new right follows the same human tendencies: The tendencies to see patterns, to see themselves as victims and deserving of more than they have etc.

The “left-wing media” is basically the right-wing’s patriarchy. Lot’s of plausible sounding platitudes with some enacdotal evidence here and there, but nothing overarching.

But maybe back to your link.

What McInnes does here is that he specifically picks a few things he can challenge to some degree and then makes the blatant statement that he is always right and the “left” is always wrong. Let’s break it down.

1) This statement by Trump has been blown out of proportion by the media, but it is also not what is really important about Trump’s assumed sexual crimes.

He has been accused of rape by three different women - a business partner, his ex-wife and a thriteen year old.

The case of the thirteen year old occurred in the 90s in connection with a party of Jeffrey Epstein, who is a good friend of Trump - a convicted sex criminal who has an investment company which is offering financial product specifically for billionaires.

Trump was never convicted - he did donate a large sum of money to the persecutor who was supposed to handle the case of the 13 year old and the case was abbandoned - so one cannot say that he is guilty.

But considering that the neo-nationalists have been going crazy over Pizza-Gate, I wonder why the story about Epstein’s parties, in which the candidates for an underage model agency of his attended, and who, according to the organiser, had to give blowjobs to Epstein’s friends, including Trump, to get “a better chance” at a modeling career, would not spark the same interest. Hmmmmmmmmmm....

https://de.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits

The case had a hearing on 16th of decembre. Maybe it is just a story of someone who hopes to get money, maybe there’s more to it. We’ll have to see what comes of it.

2) Maybe, maybe not. It would fit to Trump’s personality to mock someone for that, but I wouldn’t say that it shows a disdain for the disabled. He might have just considered it some strange antics of the reporter, without even thinking about a disability. But Trump’s dedicated enemies interpreted it in the most unflattering way possible.

3) “ I’ve been an entrepreneur my whole life. You’re pretty much looking at 12 failures for every successful venture“

This is ridiculous and shows that McInness is out of touch or lying.

Maybe such ventures with many bancruptcies is typical for a very small group of millionaire investors who are working in an American business climate where money is fast and loose.

But that has nothing to do with the normal economy. I have relatives who are entrepreneurs and business-owners, but all middle class, not upper class. Not one of them has ever grown bankrupt once. And those who do grow bankrupt in this field never recuperate - they have their debts to pay off for their whole life and hope their children don’t inherit the debts. And even if they recover, people are skeptical of making business with them further on.

Trump belongs to a financial class which is called “locusts”. They don't lose money from going bankrupt, they profit from going bankrupt. They never pay their debts - you know who stays with the debts? The small businesses Trump had contracts with, which he never payed and which he will get away with for never paying, because he can delay the court cases longer than small-businesses who barely have enough to continue to exist.

4) Everyone outsorces production to other countries when it makes sense.

That Trump does it is not the deal, the ridiculousness comes from Trump’s claim that he will bring the jobs back to America.

Yeah, he can... if the Americans are paid e.g. Chinese wages. Which will be an interesting enterprise with the costs of living in the US.

There is no system of encouragement behind outsourcing - with the additional cost of transport and the difficulty of running a business at a country you don’t speak the language of, and the often unstable legal situation in these low-wage countries, everything already speaks against producing there - but companies still do it because it makes economic sense. And it has been going on for so long that it shows it works.

Trump is not a hypocrit, he’s just a retard, like everyone else who believes that one can reverse that trend.

I mean, either that, or a Stalinist.

You would have to bring so much government control into businesses that you would basically disable capitalism if you wanted to dictate where a company can produce how much of what - and sell it for what price, if you want to keep it affordable.

I didn’t know Trump’s supporters would love to live on a kolchos, but surprises with them never end.

5) I never heard this, and I cannot say anything. Basically, if you are rich, it is easy for you to find ways to get richer. There are various ways to do that - legal and moral, or the Trump way. Both happens among that elite class.

6) This is Trump toeing the line to dehumanisation of immigrants just like the European neo-nationalists do with Muslims - they are all rapists, all criminals, it would be a better world if we would get rid of them etc. Oh, not “literally” all of them, but you know, you have to break some eggs to make an omelette...

This is just typical right-wing populism which is as old as modern politics itself. It’s not even something specific to Trump, it’s something every right-wing party does to some degree and it has been a beloved point of the Tea-Party movement, which considted of the most embarrasing American country hicks the world was ever displeased to witness on the news. McInness’ apologetics for it are laughable.

7) Well, Roe vs Wade is being attacked by many Trump fans.

I don’t really think Trump himself cares much. Trump just wants to make money - that’s what his presidency is about. He doesnt want you to bring the truth, he wants you to buy the newspapers his best friends own instead of those his friends don’t own.

If he could open a restaurant with dead fetus burgers, he would. The thing is that Trump is in bed with people who have ties to conservatism who would be interested in anti-abortion legislation. That ties in to the Republican senate keeping the surpeme court seat open for months without considering any candidate Obama suggested. Trump will suggest someone the rich American conservative establishment likes, so he lick their assholes and they can lick his.

8) Ties in to 7). If we look at Trump’s staff, he personally doesn't care about black vs brown vs white. He will just bring in anyone who will help him make money. He would appoint Göbbels for his talent of speaking to the press and he would butter up Malcolm X’s asshole if it would give him more support from the black vote.

Trump does not care about politics, he cares about $$$. He is completely amoral in that regard. And that’s how people who do care about polirics will be able to rise to political positions which would never be considered in any way fit for politics in a Western democracy. And Trump does not care what they will suggest in terms of social policies. That’s not his thing. If someone wants to build concentration camps with gas chambers on American soil, Trump would just ask “How does that sell? Do the approval numbers look good for that?” If the answer is positive, he would not care about the action itself.

That’s one of the big points about the campaign and the press coverage - people try to pin things like being against Jews of LGBT people on Trump, but it’s not true. Trump does not care. The thing is, Trump would also not care about the reverse. That is what Trump can be attacked about. He himself may not support bigotry, but if bigots would make him successful, they will be his best friends in the White House. That is the danger of Trump - not his personal views, but that he simply does not care. His lack of personal views is the danger.

9) Basically see 8). Trump will bend and break existing laws if he thinks it’s a thing that saying makes him popular. Immigration, right of assylum for the prosecuted - doesn’t matter, if it makes his voter base uncomfortable.

That’s exactly the same with Europe, Europe’s new right and England’s Brexit.

People have a “feeling” that something is wrong, they find some structure they pin their nebulous feelings to and then get agitated. Is there causality behind it? Doesn’t matter. Someone, somewhere is conspiring against me, and in my feeling of powerlessness I have to ruin it for everyone else. As I said, it’s why feminism is attractive to people with low self-esteem and a short-sighted view of society. The EU is the European right’s patriarchy or the post-marxist’s burgeouisie - people I have never met with some planned agenda against me that keeps me down, and though I cannot point to evidence or causality, enough people are talking about it that there must be something to it.

10) I have no idea what point McInness is trying to make here. If Trump wants to build a wall, he can. He cannot make the governent of Mexico pay for it. If America makes budget cuts to pay for the wall, then America makes budget cuts to pay for the wall. Has nothing to do with the government of Mexico. McInness is just rambling about a red herring.

#Anonymous #Ask

2 notes · View notes

noisyunknownturtle · 4 years

Text

Bitcoin for Business: The Tax Guide

During 2019 alone, thousands of merchants worldwide were accepting Bitcoin (BTC) as a payment method. Despite this, a lot of current and would-be merchants are confused about how to pay taxes on their cryptocurrency sales.

This guide was created by a United States business owner that advocates for cryptocurrency and a crypto tax expert to cover both practical aspects and tax tips for businesses that wish to accept cryptocurrencies. So whether your clients are asking or you desire to support the growth of the crypto ecosystem, here is the right way to do it.

Cryptocurrency tax law varies by country

Each country has its own tax rules. Some, such as Portugal and France, look favorably on cryptocurrencies, while others like the U.S. and the United Kingdom take a more conservative approach to the asset.

Related: Around the World in 2019 — A Landmark Year for Crypto Taxation

Use the guide above to understand the implications in your country. Keep in mind that a country may use one set of laws for individuals and another for businesses. For example, in Portugal, the laws are more advantageous for individuals.

The rules can also differ from one business to another. In some countries, there are different tax rules for self-employers, companies, corporations and small businesses.

In the U.S., when you receive virtual currency in exchange for performing services, whether you perform the services as an employee or not, you recognize ordinary income. For more information on compensation for services, see Publication 525, Taxable and Nontaxable Income.

Make sure you understand whether the current tax rules apply to your business. If you are not sure what rules apply to you, consult a local tax professional.

You may be able to eliminate the volatility of crypto

The volatility of crypto is an issue that affects everyone who ever considers paying with crypto, but if you have a business, you need to take a moment and think about the implications.

There are two main ways to combat volatility. First, accept cryptocurrency payments through third-party service providers like BitPay.

For a fee (as low as 1% in the U.S.), you can instantly get fiat whenever someone is paying you with crypto. Most of those companies are also taking care of the invoicing and record-keeping procedures and dealing with the mandatory Anti-Money Laundering and Know Your Customer requirements.

Taxwise, this option is also very easy: If the crypto is immediately converted into fiat, you are paying tax for regular business income.

The main disadvantage of these companies is that they cannot provide services to everyone. Depending on the type of company and your jurisdiction, you may not be eligible for these services.

The second way to deal with volatility is to either accept stablecoins or instantly convert other cryptocurrencies to stablecoins.

If you choose this way, you will need to issue the invoice for the payment yourself. There are some bookkeeping platforms that support crypto payments, such as Coinbase Commerce.

Since stablecoins are not entirely nonvolatile, when you sell the stablecoins, you will need to check your tax implications, which depend on you and your business’s country of tax residency.

Now that we’ve covered the basics, let’s get to the practical aspects.

Record every sale

The first step is easier than you think. For every sale, you need to record the sale date and transaction amount as you would for fiat.

If you use a service like BitPay that instantly converts 100% of the sale to fiat currency, then you are done. Record the final amount minus the transaction fee. Same as you would for a payment processor.

If you do not use third-party payment services, in addition to the fiat amount, make sure to record fair market value amount in crypto. For reference, $50 USD at the time of writing this article is 0.0058 BTC.

Fair market value, or FMV, is typically defined as the selling price for an item to which a buyer and seller can agree.

Cryptocurrency value is determined by the cryptocurrency exchange and recorded in U.S. dollars. However, when it comes to peer-to-peer transactions or other transactions not facilitated by an exchange, the FMV is determined by the date and time at which the transaction was recorded on the blockchain.

The amount of income you must report is the fair market value of the virtual currency in USD when received. In an on-chain transaction, you receive the virtual currency on the date and at the time the transaction is recorded on the distributed ledger.

Additionally, you will need to determine the cost basis for the crypto you have received.

Cost basis is the original value of an asset for tax purposes. For digital currencies, the cost basis is the amount you spent to acquire the digital currency, including fees, brokerage commissions from exchanges, and other acquisition costs in U.S. dollars.

If you provided someone with services and received digital currency in exchange, your basis in that digital currency is the fair market value of the digital currency in U.S. dollars when it is received. For more information on basis, see Publication 551, Basis of Assets.

The Internal Revenue Code and regulations require taxpayers to maintain records that are sufficient to establish the positions taken on tax returns.

For cryptocurrency payments, it means documenting receipts, sales, exchanges or other dispositions of digital currency as well as the fair market value of the digital currency at the time of transaction.

Cashing out

Now it’s time to “cash-out” into fiat. Because the BTC price fluctuates, each sale has a unique value in BTC.

We send the 0.0269 BTC to an exchange and sell it for 290 USD. There is a 40 USD gain due to appreciation of the Bitcoin price.

When you earn money between the time of sale and the crypto-fiat conversion, you probably need to pay capital gains tax.

It depends on the country, but in the United States, we would calculate the time between the initial sale and the crypto-to-fiat conversion.

In our example and most others, the crypto-to-fiat trade that occurred within 12 months of the crypto purchases will be considered short-term capital gains.

If you decided to hold your crypto for over a year, then the profit would be considered long-term capital gains.

Many people don’t know it, but cryptocurrency tax liability can be significantly reduced by crypto tax planning. The new IRS guidance enables you to plan your taxes by choosing which particular Bitcoin to sell.

Related: New IRS Tax Guidance Targets Crypto, and US Persons Who Use It

Therefore, you can choose to sell the same Bitcoin you purchased when the price was high now at a lower price. This can assist you in optimizing your tax liability. This tax planning method calls for the use of specific identification, a common way to calculate and plan taxes in many countries.

What about the miscellaneous transaction and withdrawal fees?

This one is straightforward. They are considered expenses, just like traditional banking or processing fees. The fees will reduce your cost basis.

What about crypto refunds?

Let’s say a customer wants to return an item and is granted a full refund. Bitcoin has gone up since its purchase. Do we refund their original amount of Bitcoin or the current USD equivalent?

This is usually a case-by-case decision, but most businesses will refund the USD equivalent at the time of purchase because the unit of account is (almost) always in fiat currency.

No matter what you choose to do, make sure you report it correctly and reduce the tax calculation consistently. Keep all fair market value records of the payment receipts and the refund.

We hope you have a bit more clarity on the tax implications for your business. Pay attention to updates as crypto tax regulations evolve in the 2020s.

The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the authors’ only and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

This article was co-authored by Or Lokay Cohen and Matt Aaron.

Or Lokay Cohen is a vice president at Bittax, a crypto tax calculation platform. Or has 10 years’ experience with regulation, managing a leading tax consultant firm. She holds a LL.M. law degree, a B.A. in communications and an M.A. in management and public policy. In her work at Bittax, Or promotes the goal of bridging between cryptocurrency to the taxation reality to enable tax reporting under a clear regulatory framework and specific identification methods.

Matt Aaron is the co-founder of Crazy Calm, a CBD coffee company based in Austin, Texas. Prior to Crazy Calm, he ran the podcast network and managed the Latin America region at Bitcoin.com.

The post Bitcoin for Business: The Tax Guide appeared first on For Crypto.

from For Crypto https://ift.tt/33ICKNy

#For Crypto

0 notes

coinfirst · 4 years