Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

uh, I'm pretty sure that is false. married filing separate means each is treated the same as a single person. 

only one parent can claim children as dependents however. and I think one parent may still be able to claim head of household. but I'm not an expert here.

and clearly neither are you.

Google is your friend.  Married filing separate rates are higher than single filing rates.  I thought this was basic knowledge.  Apparently, it is not.

 

21 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

You want to Drexel, dude. 

I know you can't read and comprehend anything not in visual basic.

I went to Drexel too, and that's just gross. 

8 minutes ago, Procus said:

Okay, let's try and do this in a way where a simple minded person like you can understand.

If you're married and have the threshold income requirement - no you don't have to file jointly.  If you don't file a joint return, what kind of return do you have to file?  Would this kind of filer have higher or lower tax rates than that of a single person filing a return?

See if you can answer these simple questions.  You can do it - even YOU can do it!

lol now you're the one obsessed with tax implications with marriage.  There are numerous legal protections afforded to married couples that I've already laid out.  You then said they didn't count because they are "state issues", because you didn't realize that the 14th amendment applies to states.  Have a good day troll!

Next they will be fighting to outlaw birth control. Yes they want poor people to stay poor.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2022/04/07/blackburn-warning-us-plans-gop-outlaw-abortion-birth-control/7222285001/

3 minutes ago, Procus said:

Google is your friend.  Married filing separate rates are higher than single filing rates.  I thought this was basic knowledge.  Apparently, it is not.

 

Are they the same on the first 300k?

3 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

lol now you're the one obsessed with tax implications with marriage.  There are numerous legal protections afforded to married couples that I've already laid out.  You then said they didn't count because they are "state issues", because you didn't realize that the 14th amendment applies to states.  Have a good day troll!

Wow - you are so smart, you figured out that the 14th amendment applies to the states.  

5 minutes ago, SPIDER-MAN said:

Next they will be fighting to outlaw birth control. Yes they want poor people to stay poor.

https://www.tennessean.com/story/opinion/2022/04/07/blackburn-warning-us-plans-gop-outlaw-abortion-birth-control/7222285001/

 

TEW: "There is no right to obtain birth control!"

14 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

TEW: "There is no right to obtain birth control!"

You jest, but without really delving into the matter, I know of no such right under the law - does anyone else?

3 hours ago, Kz! said:

Thanks for the awesome correction *squints* "registered republican."  

 

13 minutes ago, Procus said:

You jest, but without really delving into the matter, I know of no such right under the law - does anyone else?

I'm actually not kidding, this should be his take if he's being logically consistent.

Griswold v. Connecticut (right to privacy in the case of a woman's right to obtain birth control at the advice of her doctor/pharmacist). This ruling ultimately struck down laws banning contraception.

Enumerated vs. implied rights...both exist.

If the U.S. ever passes a federal law banning abortion, we would be joining a list of 25 countries, like Andorra, Aruba, Egypt, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Laos, Mauritania, Nicaragua, and Sierra Leone. Of course, this is no surprise, as it just falls in line with Republicans obvious plan to turn back the clock and remake us into a 3rd-world country. Theirs are the policies of a cultural backwater stuck in a medieval, theocratic mindset.

I dare cvon to stay on topic in a thread

1 hour ago, NOTW said:

Campaign season:

Democrats:  Republicans want the Handmaid's tale, take away all rights of women and minorities and to install Trump as a dictator and destroy democracy forever.

Republicans: Democrats want to murder babies, groom your children to be gay and trans and create a socialist/communist nightmare that will result in mass poverty and death.

Libertarians: We support gay married couples owning guns to protect their marijuana plants and abolishing the IRS and Federal Reserve.

 

Revised it just a bit.

Democrats: Republicans want Civil War, the right to assassinate their political rivals, take away rights of women and minorities and to install Trump as a dictator and destroy democracy forever.

Republicans: Funny some would say we already have mass poverty and death. Thanks to wanting smaller government.

Funny, I agree with most of the Libertarians view points. 

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

You want to Drexel, dude. 

I know you can't read and comprehend anything not in visual basic.

 Visual basic 😄

Gender and Sexual Orientation are protected classes, under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment and it's not a State Issue. 

Women and Homosexuals are protected classes of people. Protected from Government discrimination. 

It's clear that Government banning abortion is discriminatory to women as a whole class. Look forward to the Court Challenges. 

1 hour ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Which again, because of EMTALA, is semantics.  If you are having an emergency medical situation, you can go into just about any hospital in the country, and by law they have to stabilize you regardless of your ability to pay, your citizenship or immigration status, etc... For all intents and purposes, people in this country have a right to be stabilized in an emergency medical situation.  

But it’s not semantics. It isn’t a right. Any number of private hospitals which don’t accept government transfer payments are completely within their right to deny you service.

48 minutes ago, Procus said:

You jest, but without really delving into the matter, I know of no such right under the law - does anyone else?

Right to control your own life, privacy etc

why abortion is a lightning rod and so divisive is that many believe it involves two lives

21 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Gender and Sexual Orientation are protected classes, under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment and it's not a State Issue. 

Women and Homosexuals are protected classes of people. Protected from Government discrimination. 

It's clear that Government banning abortion is discriminatory to women as a whole class. Look forward to the Court Challenges. 

It's certainly an interesting arguement if it can actually be made in court. 

 

Man this thing is gonna be an ish show for a while lol.

40 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

If the U.S. ever passes a federal law banning abortion, we would be joining a list of 25 countries, like Andorra, Aruba, Egypt, El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Laos, Mauritania, Nicaragua, and Sierra Leone. Of course, this is no surprise, as it just falls in line with Republicans obvious plan to turn back the clock and remake us into a 3rd-world country. Theirs are the policies of a cultural backwater stuck in a medieval, theocratic mindset.

If you think that would pass you are an imbecile

1 hour ago, Procus said:

Wow - you are so smart, you figured out that the 14th amendment applies to the states.  

considering that you didn't realize it......................

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

If you think that would pass you are an imbecile

 

It's unlikely, but I've learned to never say never in this political climate. There are definitely people in power who would gleefully vote for this. Alito's draft leaves the door wide open.

1 minute ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

It's unlikely, but I've learned to never say never in this political climate. There are definitely people in power who would gleefully vote for this.

Only the good ones!

14 minutes ago, TEW said:

But it’s not semantics. It isn’t a right. Any number of private hospitals which don’t accept government transfer payments are completely within their right to deny you service.

It is semantics.  The overwhelming majority of hospitals accept medicare.  Typically the only hospitals that don't are VA hospitals and active military hospitals.  If you are having a medical emergency and you're just a regular person, chances are the ambulance isn't taking you to a VA hospital or an active military hospital.  You'll be taken to your typical hospital with an ER that accepts medicare and therefore by law, must provide treatment to get you in a stable condition regardless of your ability to pay.

 

26 minutes ago, TEW said:

Only the good ones!

 

Lol, so in your originalist mind, no individual right to an abortion exists because it's not explicitly in the Constitution, but Congress has the right to ban it, because...reasons.

TEW's politics are never short on irony. Proclaims to be devoted libertarian and originalist, but talks like a fascist who believes that the Federal Government should legislate morality nationwide Never change, CVON