[QUOTE=rajah sulayman;926458]Honestly, I think we've gotten to the point where we're splitting hairs on this. The whole sentiment behind the statement was that taking "$200 jobs" devalues the industry. QUOTE]

See, this is where people get screwed up. The photographer does not choose his/her value, the client does. So saying "don't undervalue yourself" is misguided advice, because you have little control over it.

Anyone who has taken an intro to economics course knows that low barriers to entry will ultimately lead to no profit. If a business starts up and makes a profit, it isn't long before someone else says "me too!". If it's easy to get into the industry, more people will enter. This increased competition will cause prices to drop to the point where little or no profit is made. For more information, see the computer industry from 1980 to 2002.

Low barriers to entry are what's causing the decline in profit in the industry...not photographers charging too little. That's just a by-product.

And yes, your information on taxes was way off. I have an LLC for my photo booth business, and we're taxed as a partnership (owned by me and my wife), which basically means we just add the income to our tax statement. Starting an LLC costs a whopping $60 (your state may vary). If photography is a side-job, you get health insurance through your other job...or through your significan other if you are married (most professional photographers I know are married). Business insurance is only $300/year for me, and that covers all my equipment and $1M in liability.

Maybe we should have an honest thread about the true start-up and maintenance costs of photography...seems like there is a lot of misinformation out there.