Yeah it is so absurd. The going cost of a politician in local California politics is on the order of $30-60k a year. Very inexpensive when they vote on policies shaping billions of dollars worth of sales.

Clerky is great, Stripe is really buying all of the great product companies. I feel like with Clerky and Stripe Atlas they, Stripe now controls all of the early incorporation infrastructure now. This feels deeply problematic.

I've used https://delawareinc.com/ to incorporate several companies over the years, and always had a good experience. Their website looks pretty old-school but it works well and their service is very prompt.

So I wouldn't Stripe controls all of the early incorporation infrastructure – just the flashy stuff (which I'm sure is great too).

(disclaimer: former Stripe employee)

Yeah, it's not even close. Stripe Atlas is a very small part of the market. It doesn't mean the product isn't good but every year, over a million new businesses that are formed and of those that are incorporated, I'd guess that a very small fragment are incorporated through Stripe Atlas.

Most businesses in the state I live in, as well as the states around me (what someone in SF or NY would call flyover) are handled by a registered agent (trivial, not even in a fee to become an agent in most states, just a valid local address) or the owner.

tbh I still don't understand why anyone bothers paying anyone or anything to do the paperwork, it's not like Federal taxes

Why would you pay someone to do Federal Taxes? Are they difficult to do in the US?

Yeah, few things are as complex for a business in any industry that has ever gotten caught in the nation's political sights. For example, if you provide some sort of VoIP service, there's levels of nested rules that fill books, in part due to the breakup of the Bell System later coming into full contact with the internet. Plenty of carve outs, loops, and all manner of grandfathered elements for everyone.

The only thing more complicated than Federal taxes is environmental regulation. Everything else is simpler.

> controls all of the early incorporation infrastructure

You don't need to rely on Stripe to do anything. There are other payment gateways, and you can file things yourself (or hire someone).

Do they make things very easy and accessible for a smaller fee than doing it yourself, yes.

In fact Atlas and their push to be a C-Corp is a bad play for us small timers

A C corporation can still make a lot of sense for a small business depending on the nature of the business and the interests and needs of the owners.

C corps can offer a lot of advantages in terms of shareholder and employee benefits, particularly around healthcare, and QSBS is a huge benefit for qualified businesses and owners who might one day sell the business.

...unless you're based in a jurisdiction like the UK, where an LLC may not get the same tax treatment as a C-corp (Ltd companies being the norm here).

What are some good alternatives to Stripe for people to pay for your stuff?

Unsure how much I trust my searches for this kind of stuff on the web lately

Adyen is similar to Stripe, and it's an European company. But they select their customers, so you need to contact them, you can't sign-up "diy".

> Stripe now controls all of the early incorporation infrastructure now. This feels deeply problematic.

Lol, no.

Firstbase, Doola, Capbase. Not to mention all the old school cos that will help you incorporate in their state.

I actually do not know if this is true.

Vaping is not healthy but there is a lot less material inhaled. No fine particles which do real damage.

So vaping is still unhealthy but less than smoking plant matters.

I do not disagree, but can you cite the studies proving this?

Also proof that people did die from respiratory failure due to propylene glycol inhaling?

You shouldn't ask for disprove studies if you don't provide proof studies.

>You shouldn't ask for disprove studies if you don't provide proof studies.

My point was that we don't know what the long-term effects of vaping are. Because there hasn't been time for the longitudinal studies that will tell us what those effects are.

I requested studies refuting those claims because I know they don't exist. I also know that studies confirming such claims don't exist either.

Making the statement that "...vaping is still unhealthy but less than smoking plant matters" is disingenuous because we have no idea what long-term (note that qualification) effects vaping does or does not have.

It might be that vaping increases human lifespan by 80%. Or it might be that vaping decreases lifespan by 25%. Or it might be that vaping either causes or prevents dementia. We just don't know. It may be that none of those things apply. Who knows? Not me. And not you or anyone else. Yet.

Because vaping hasn't been widely used for long enough to make claims about its long-term effects.

My claims are just as valid as yours ("...vaping is still unhealthy but less than smoking plant matters").

That was my point. My apologies for expecting you to make the conceptual leap and understand the above by making similarly unsupported claims as the one you made. I guess that wasn't the best way to do so. I'll try to do better in the future.

I hope I've cleared up your confusion.

Im not confused. A lot of the context you are inferring is just in your mind.

It's funny to see someone invent a narrative then have a conversation with himself while trying to gaslight another person that they invented the narrative.