Discussion in 'News & Politics' started by Laks09, Sep 18, 2018.
yes, thats what i think
Governments doing social engineering through tax policies can be a long topic. Tax policies are not supposed to distort business decisions (the goal of the US Treasury in formulating their statutes), but they do. In lots of unexpected, and even clever ways.
anika987 has just started a new thread "What Next In Life After Kids Leaves Home ??" . Divorce is not the book/correct answer.... although that had been the popular answer in a few other recent forum threads.
When jointly tax filing pair of two individual high earners consider divorce for tax savings, they need to have their children be legal adults -- so as to eliminate the complications about custody, child support etc... Once the children are out of the house, the parents can divorce, and in some cases, when the pair's earnings are high enough, the two individual tax payers would have enough tax savings to put a couple of children through college.
I am retiring from this tax discussion now.
At a meeting with the local reps this came up. I’m in the Reddest county in the Reddest state so I was surprised by the very Red rep wanting to keep this rule because his counterparts in the senate want to keep this rule. From what I gathered from that discussion(I tuned off until my time came), this has apparently been helping the employers around here.
Yes. Anyone filing jointly is paying jointly - at least as per IRS. So yes, H4s do pay taxes from day 1. Morally this joint filing is wrong according to me. Everyone should file separately and people not eligible to work shouldn’t be filing and paying taxes. What an annoying system!
According to a recent Gallup poll, ninety-four per cent of Americans would vote for a woman for President. So why haven’t we had a female in the White House? Simple! We haven’t had the right candidate.
The electable female candidate reaches across the aisle with soft, moisturized hands. She knows how to fire a gun, but also has never held a gun, and doesn’t know what a gun is. She’s becoming a vegan, but stands behind Arby’s in its commitment to the Meats.
rest of her qualities are...continued at: LINK
Please pardon me if this has already been discussed.
Anyone for Andrew Yang?
I am rooting for the dude. I think his plans will do wonders. Given the richest nation in the world, America can feed the poor, can provide medical help for all.
Its difficult for someone with no money and no hope to get better. But give him some money ( which in turn give him hope ), he will know how to make it into more money.
Violence against women will reduce as they don't have to stick around with finances in mind.
This idea has far reaching consequences.
Good one! Easy read and so spot on. We might go an entire campaign without comments on the female candidates' pantsuit, hairstyle or dress color, but it will take a long time for women to not be held to a different set of standards. Most of the biases are not even recognized or talked about.
She knows how to change a tire, fix a 3-D printer, launch a torpedo, unlaunch a torpedo, and juggle wet bars of soap. She’s a boomer, but she has a great sense of humor about the phrase “O.K., boomer.”
She would be pleased to be the President, but she is not ambitious enough to run.
Pamela Karlan's bio:
Professor of Public Interest Law at Stanford
BS Yale University
MA Yale University
JD Yale Law School
A 35+ year law career, a recognized expert in fields such as civil rights, constitutional criminal procedure, public interest practice, voting rights, election law, Supreme Court, criminal procedure and so on.
In her prepared or unprepared remarks in the impeachment hearings, she brought up the name of Barron Trump.
During the House Judiciary Committee’s first impeachment hearing on Wednesday, one of the witnesses, Stanford University professor Pamela Karlan, made a reference to President Donald Trump’s 13-year-old son, Barron, in explaining the difference between the president and a king.
“Contrary to what President Trump says, Article Two [of the Constitution] does not give him the power to do anything he wants,” Karlan said. “And I’ll just give you one example that shows you the difference between him and a king, which is the Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility, so while the president can name his son Barron, he cannot make him a baron.”
What she did was not ideal but happens, either by design or on the spur of the moment. What I found appalling was her apology:
"I want to apologize for what I said earlier about the president’s son. It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize, obviously, for the things that he’s done that’s wrong, but I do regret having said that"
I thought a person with her background would do better in an apology. You apologize for your wrong without bringing in any related/unrelated wrongs by the other person.
Trump's tweet to Greta Thunberg:
"So ridiculous. Greta must work on her Anger Management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend! Chill Greta, Chill!"
Not presidential. But it was not bullying a 16 year old. When you choose to become the public face of a movement, you should expect to be treated like an adult. Trump treated her like he treats other adults.
It was not a smart move or a good idea on his part. It makes it even more difficult to raise worrisome points about the youth movement such as this article does. But who will read boring articles ... righteous outrage about a trolled 16 year old feels better.
Trump and his Be Best wife are hypocrites. They demand privacy for their child but he has no hesitation bullying another child and his “anti-cyber bullying” spouse not only keeps quiet but has her spokesrobot state that Greta’s fair game because she’s a public figure. Predictably disgusting behavior from this duo.
Their kid didn't choose to become the face of a movement.
Anti Trump folks using Greta as (one of their) arsenals would mean Trump would be forced to take a stance against that kid, especially when the 'evil white man' being portrayed as the capitalist boss Vs the innocent, 'my future at stake' Greta.