Heard this morning's broadcasting featured intellectual income's confusion if calculation is based on total $45,000 savings.(中文附后）
My response: $45,000 is an impossible number for calculating budget savings to generate $5000 monthly intellectual income.
Even for just a monthly salaries expense, the budget would be way over $45,000 for over 100 researchers whose monthly income is over $3000 each, some researchers' are much over. And salaries only is not enough to have a research lab functional. To have a lab to do "research as usual" need to have lab test related solutions, office space to host researchers and instruments, various paid supports to help lab keep fully functional and productive, etc. All these would be counted as savings from budgeted spending if a fully functional lab is no longer needed for a research. Rents may excluded during leasing time if office space is rented. In budget calculating, rent is calculated even for self owned facility since this office space can be used for other research projects (that may need to rent lab space) or to be rented out to make profit.
That was, may still is, the huge problem I had (have) with this radio program, featured are authorities alike being judgmental on everything that is not their professional knowledge at all or not their associated matters a bit. Do not know why they are featured to have this kind authority sayings, maybe from producing team's efforts to probe what caused real frustrations.
This is the similar problem I had (have) with Chinese Foreign Department. They are foreign language majors in Colleges, they had been accusing my achievement on Computer science and Basic medical system knowledge(基础医学) as if they are the real authorities on all these professions. I had been in the same classrooms with medical major students in Shanghai Medical University for 3 years which can be easily verified is the huge problem I had with Chinese government's judgmental on my achievements from my 20 years living abroad life (I left China in 1996). They even announced on the radio program to impress worldwide Shanghai Medical University never even existed as a Government. This is the same medical school now call Fudan University Shanghai Medical School.
----August 31st, 2017
Heard this morning's "impossible this or that" is out of the doubts if these money distributed in intellectual income's name is actually donations from 1989 Student Movement that collected from Chinese streets.
My response: The confusion is from why Albert Gore should receive any intellectual income from Viagra (Blue).
Heard tons of rumors in Chinese community about Albert Gore may have taken those donations transferred to U.S. as his own money.
I was the person reported to Chinese government in April or May of 1989 about those donations on the streets. Whoever collected those donations won't let me touch this money is a true statement.
The huge problem I have with Albert Gore is I have been accusing him spent my money without my willingness. This rumored $5000 monthly income from Viagra(blue) deposited to Albert Gore is one of the items I called Law enforcement's help, rumored all these checks have been titled in my name (Min Fang). I am not willing to provide for Albert Gore and/or his relatives and/or his woman (women) and/or his child (children).
My intellectual Income is my own making from knowledge I contributed. My intellectual Income has nothing to do with 1989.
All my inheritances were entrusted before 1949. My inheritances has nothing to do with 1989.
----August 31st, 2017
Heard Intellectual income cause a lot of confusion about why this much even among government employees.
My response: Nobody doubted that I contributed my knowledge and I deserve some intellectual income for what I have contributed, the confusion is why this much.
That is the reason I am doing my best to explain what I know about how this might be calculated. I have no problem for authorities on this matter to take a look at "why this is my (Min Fang's) share and why this is the number".
I heard some did take a look at this matter and did expressed "DO not underestimate what intellectual income can contribute to a family's finance."
----August 31st, 2017
Heard this morning's argument on difference between salary income and percentage based bonus calculation plus base salary income.
My response: It is very common among salesperson to have base salary plus sales incentive that is calculated by percentage of sales achieved.
Financial managers incentives are similar to salesperson commission calculation to encourage good investment returns.
I do not know how intellectual contribution earned income divided into salary income category or percentage calculated income category, other than there are two tax rates in U.S tax collecting. Salary category applicable to income tax rate (federal 28%, state 5% etc.), and intellectual Income applicable to federal income tax rate 10% and state income tax rate (5%).
Tons of intellectual contribution earned incomes like Medical Doctors earned or College Professors earned, etc. are salary category incomes.
----August 31st, 2017
**Heard the issue is if the total amount of my intellectual income can be "compromised" among research or pre-market team members, why not everyone else.
My response: My intellectual income total amount is one-person's very cleared number instead of a team's total number is a true statement.
Like Viagra(blue), my intellectual income is what my contribution has saved for budgeted research spending, total amount is very easy to be identified as my contribution. Research or Pre-market are all teamed up as group contributions to calculate the total amounts of rewards. Pre-Market is the group to responsible for further clinic research and apply for FDA approval.
My other intellectual income situation is patents. My contribution is concept, each research team's effort to materialize it to become a prototype or a model and pre-market team to do some further research, etc.
All my intellectual income has similar situation that total available amount for reward is never enough to correctly reward each member of teams like research or pre-marketing team. I have no problem that my reward was put either with research team or pre-marketing team to improve the total reward size for that team . My reward share is comprised but very limited.
But why everyone else? Who are these law or legal matter "voluntary" PhD professionals can have this authority tone to address legal matters?
----August 31st, 2017
听说了今天早上的广播提到了智慧产权的高收入是基于只有美金4万5千元的预算节约的这份疑问。
我的回应：一共只有4万5千美金的预算节约是没有可能产生每月美金5000的智慧产权收入的。
就算是只计算一个月的工资，超过100个研究人员，每个研究人员的每月工资都大于3000美金的预算工资总和都远超过4万5千美金，有些研究人员的月工资还远远大于3000美金。光支付研究人员的工资是不可能维持一个实验室的研究工作的。要能让一个研究室可以如常运转，就必须要有实验用的溶剂试剂，实验室办公场地安置实验仪器和实验人员，各种各项的付费服务来协助实验室的正常运转及保障实验成效，等等。当一个实验室的常规运转已不再需要时，所有这些都是被算成是实验室预算支出的节省部分。在租约期间的房租可能不包括在节省部分。在进行预算支出的数额计算时，房租支出是需要计算在内的，就算是自己的房子都会计算，因为这房子是可以用来进行其他课题的研究的， 而这个其他的课题组可能会需要租房子，或者这房子本身是可以出租盈利的。
过去曾今，现在也可能还是我对广播剧的很大一个抱怨就是：他们把一些非专业人员非相关人员请到广播剧里对这对那指手画脚的好像很权威的样子。不清楚为什么他们被请上广播剧做这种权威似的表态，也许这是广播剧节目组在探究真正的矛盾究竟是什么。
我对中国外交部的抱怨和此类似。他们都是大学里英语专业毕业的，却是对着我指手画脚的说我没有可能在电脑科学上有成就，没有可能学过基础医学，好像他们会说英语就精通了所有上至天文下至地理的一切专业知识。我是在上海医科大学里和医学系的学生同一个教室上课三年这一点是很容易被查实的情况下，他们在广播剧里还以中国政府的名义进行宣布造成全世界的印象认为上海医科大学这个学校从来就没存在过。这个上海医科大学就是现在的复旦大学上海医学院。我是1996年离开中国的，那些被中国政府指手画脚说成就没可能真实的全是我在美国工作生活了20年期间的工作成就。
----2017年8月31日。
听说了今天早上的“没有可能这个没有可能那个”是因为怀疑这些钱是1989年学运时的街头捐款以智慧产权收入的名义发放。
我的回应：这些怀疑就是因为阿尔伯特·高尔每个月有收到的我在伟哥（蓝片）的智慧产权收入，传言是5千美金一个月。
听说华裔社区一直有传言阿尔伯特·高尔把从中国转出的1989年的捐款当成自己的钱。
我是当年在1989年4月或5月时向中国中央政府举报街上收集的捐款去向不明的那一个。不管是谁收集了那些街上的捐款都不会让我碰那笔钱确实是一句实话。
我一直就在指责阿尔伯特·高尔违反我的意愿花了我的钱。这个传言中的5千美金一个月的伟哥（蓝片）给存入阿尔伯特·高尔的私人账户就是我报警内容的其中一项，传言所有这些每月的支票抬头都是我名字的英语拼写（Min Fang)。我不愿意支付金钱供给阿尔伯特·高尔和/或他的亲戚和/或她的女人（们）和/或他的孩子（们）。
我的智慧产权收入是我投入自己的知识而产生的收入。我的智慧产权收入和1989年一点关系都没有。
我所有继承的财产都是在1949年前就已信托。我所有继承的财产都和1989年一点关系都没有。
----2017年8月31日。
听说了智慧产权的收入造成包括政府雇员的疑问：怎么会这么多？
我的回应：没人怀疑我确实有一些知识智慧的贡献，也都认为我确实应该会有一些智慧产权的收入。疑问在于：怎么这么多？
这也是为什么我一直是尽力解释我所知道的一些如何计算的背景知识。我从不反对这些问题的权威机构看一看查一查“为什么这是我方敏该拿的，为什么是这个数字。”
我听说有些是看了，他们看了之后的感叹是：“别低估了智慧产权收入对一个家庭的财务所能产生的贡献。”
----2017年8月31日。
听说了今天早上的争议牵涉到了工资收入和基本工资加按百分比提成的收入之间的差别。
我的回应：销售人员很普遍都是拿基本工资加按百分比计算的所实现销售的提成来作为收入的。
财务经理也是类似计算以鼓励好的投资回报。
我不清楚如何将智慧投入所挣到的收入分为工资收入及智慧产权收入，就知道在美国交税的时侯有不同。工资收入在美国交纳收入税（联邦28%。州税5%），智慧产权收入在美国交纳联邦智慧产权税10%及州税5%。
很多的智慧投入是属于工资收入在美国是交纳收入税的，像医院医生的工资，大学的教授的工资等等。
----2017年8月31日。
**听说了问题在于既然我的智慧产权收入可以在研究或者新药报批团队里“容让"，为什么就不能在任何人当中都“容让容让？”
我的回应：我所有的智慧产权收入是很明确的一个人的数字而非团队数字是真实。
就像伟哥（蓝片），我的智慧产权收入是我对研究经费的节约做出的贡献，数字很明确也很容易计算我的贡献应有的奖励金额。研究或者新药报批都是团队贡献，奖励也都是以团队确定奖励总额然后再在组员里分配。新药报批就是负责进一步临床研究及向FDA申请新药生产许可证（准批证）的团队。
我其他的智慧产权收入就像专利。我的贡献就是概念，每一个研究团队的贡献就是把我的概念变成模型或原型，再有新产品上市准备团队做一些进一步的研究等等。
But why everyone else? Who are these law or legal matter "voluntary" PhD professionals can have this authority tone to address legal matters?
为什么所有人都应该从我的收入里分点儿钱？ 哪一个是法津或法津事物博士级别专家, 怎么都是指手画脚的好像很权威的样子?
----August 31st, 2017