It turns out that the "lenient dress code" for women is basically that women are allowed to wear sleeveless dresses. So there's no real need to be concerned about how women are dressed in the House.
@FinneousPJ You said that, but you also went on about how women have to dress appropriately. It's hard for "Is this an excuse for harassment? Of course not." to stand out when bracketed by "The fact is there are women who do not understand what is or is not appropriate for the office." and "Should these women be more aware of proper dress? Certainly."
It seems to me that the rules attempting to bar local and State attempts at maintaining Net Neutrality give away the entire game. There is NO reason to include those provisions unless the telcom companies are gearing up to loot the public wholesale.
It turns out that the "lenient dress code" for women is basically that women are allowed to wear sleeveless dresses. So there's no real need to be concerned about how women are dressed in the House.
@FinneousPJ You said that, but you also went on about how women have to dress appropriately. It's hard for "Is this an excuse for harassment? Of course not." to stand out when bracketed by "The fact is there are women who do not understand what is or is not appropriate for the office." and "Should these women be more aware of proper dress? Certainly."
@BelleSorciere Yes, both men and women have to dress appropriately at the office. Why is this a problem suddenly? Ridiculous.
It turns out that the "lenient dress code" for women is basically that women are allowed to wear sleeveless dresses. So there's no real need to be concerned about how women are dressed in the House.
@FinneousPJ You said that, but you also went on about how women have to dress appropriately. It's hard for "Is this an excuse for harassment? Of course not." to stand out when bracketed by "The fact is there are women who do not understand what is or is not appropriate for the office." and "Should these women be more aware of proper dress? Certainly."
@BelleSorciere Yes, both men and women have to dress appropriately at the office. Why is this a problem suddenly? Ridiculous.
It's not a problem, but it turns out the women in the House are in fact dressing appropriately.
It is a problem when we're focused like a laser on how women dress.
Net Neutrality will be dead in a few hours. Mark my words, within 5 years, every person in this thread will begin to be extorted by telcom companies. It will start with companies like Netflix and Amazon, and then the shakedown will reach us. And anyone who believes companies like Comcast when they say nothing will change are out of their mind. They are about to become the Gambino Family of the internet. Brought to you 100% as a result of Republican governance.
Not everyone. I am pretty sure us Canadians will enjoy high-speed internet with those from Europe and Australia.
According to CNN's tax calculator the current tax bill will make my after-tax income go up by 3.9% in 2018 and it will stay up until 2026, at which point it flip and my after-tax income will decrease by 0.3% (in between those two dates we lose the children for tax purposes as they graduate college, start careers, and begin filing their own taxes). The numbers presented represent the demographic group based on the selections you make and do not reflect changes to individual tax returns, of course. There is a link to the open-source tax calculator they use at the end of the article.
*************
A male who is a predator will make unwanted advances towards women no matter how they are dressed. He isn't interested in the clothing.
*************
Like I said, a future Administration and FCC can put Net Neutrality back into effect as easily as the current FCC cancelled the rules. The vast majority of Internet users aren't going to notice any significant difference between now and a year from now.
According to CNN's tax calculator the current tax bill will make my after-tax income go up by 3.9% in 2018 and it will stay up until 2026, at which point it flip and my after-tax income will decrease by 0.3% (in between those two dates we lose the children for tax purposes as they graduate college, start careers, and begin filing their own taxes). The numbers presented represent the demographic group based on the selections you make and do not reflect changes to individual tax returns, of course. There is a link to the open-source tax calculator they use at the end of the article.
*************
A male who is a predator will make unwanted advances towards women no matter how they are dressed. He isn't interested in the clothing.
*************
Like I said, a future Administration and FCC can put Net Neutrality back into effect as easily as the current FCC cancelled the rules. The vast majority of Internet users aren't going to notice any significant difference between now and a year from now.
Much like has been predicted. A minor cut initially, going down each year, and a PERMANENT increase starting in 2027.
A byproduct of the Net Neutrality ruling today may be this: those prone to see conspiracies may now think any slowdown on their favorite website or streaming service is a result of this decision. And they wouldn't be crazy for thinking so, even if it isn't true. Because there will be no way to tell, because the companies will wield this power. I HOPE people think this. It is the only thing that will prevent it from happening everywhere. As a matter of fact, I would encourage anyone who experiences ANY major internet problems from this day forward to call their provider and ask point-blank if this is a result of them abusing their new power, if only to make it crystal clear we won't stand for it. Two sides can play dirty pool if necessary.
So far there have been only two deaths as a result of protests over Trump's Jerusalem move, which is less than I feared. Hopefully the protests will either subside or at least remain largely nonfatal.
So far there have been only two deaths as a result of protests over Trump's Jerusalem move, which is less than I feared. Hopefully the protests will either subside or at least remain largely nonfatal.
Hopefully, but I suspect anger is a brewin and a buildin even more, somewhere round there. I'm still waiting on the final results of the Taylor-Force Act voting.
Remember when Comcast was charging Netflix more because there was no net neutrality and also Verizon tried to extort them as well and when they didn't pay up they throttled their bandwidth? We will be getting more stuff like that again.
The average person won't notice? They will. These types of things will be happening all the time. Will they connect this with Republicans? Approximately 32% of Americans will blame it on the Hillary Clinton administration.
If I were making $500,000 I could probably deduct and/or shelter $200,000, so paying 39.6% on $300,000 is a tax bill of $118,000 (minus the amount I had already paid when I receive my monthly pay stubs). I could still live quite nicely on $381,200 and my CPA would thank me when I settle the bill. If I were making $50,000,000 I wouldn't worry about the taxes at all--I would just have my CPA show me the completed documents and e-sign them via the computer I have in my winter vacation house in Nice.
Taxes aren’t calculated this way. Because of the marginal rates, everyone is taxed in steps. You pay the rate for the amount of income applicable to that rate.
In the above example, $300k doesn’t even get you into the top bracket. Amazing, right? The top bracket is reserved for income over $1,000,000.
Because of the 39.6% top bracket, I assumed we’re using the House’s proposed brackets.
Donald Trump Jr. is claiming that Ajit Pai is Obama's FCC Director. This is disingenuous horseshit. Trump named him Chairman when he was elected. The ONLY reason he was appointed to a spot on the 5-person panel by Obama is because there is a rule that no more than 3 members at any given time can be of the same political party. Mitch McConnell was allowed to recommend Pai, and Obama, in accordance with a long-standing tradition of letting they other party's leaders pick those spots, appointed him. This has been the way it works for DECADES. Again, Obama's FCC Director ushered in Net Neutrality regulations in 2015, after getting and responding to massive public pressure. Obama's FCC Chair was named Tom Wheeler. This is a verifiable FACT. It is also a fact that Tom Wheeler wasn't there today, and that Ajit Pai was. The right-wing in this country is living in a totally alternate reality. I sincerely hope this little lying prick gets indicted:
If they're gearing up to throw Ajit Pai under the bus and preposterously blame him on Obama, Mike Flynn style, that seems like an overall positive development.
If they're gearing up to throw Ajit Pai under the bus and preposterously blame him on Obama, Mike Flynn style, that seems like an overall positive development.
Ajit Pai is one of the most obvious whores for the industry that put him in his power that I have ever seen. He gives off the same vibe as Martin Shkreli, a sociopathic asshole gleefully enjoying screwing everyone over. You can tell by listening to him how much he gets off on it.
I don't get it... Is he saying that those complaining don't understand it and can't explain it in detail, because if that's the case, I can link him to some YouTube videos of people doing just that.
And after tonight, he'll have to pay good money to actually watch them as his Internet gets throttled unless he pays the YouTube premium.
I don't get it... Is he saying that those complaining don't understand it and can't explain it in detail, because if that's the case, I can link him to some YouTube videos of people doing just that.
And after tonight, he'll have to pay good money to actually watch them as his Internet gets throttled unless he pays the YouTube premium.
He's lying on purpose. Because as I've said many times, he and his family have FAR MORE contempt for Trump voters than any liberal in this country. Because they expect them to swallow the lies (and in this case, utter fantasy) whole.
Taxes aren’t calculated this way. Because of the marginal rates, everyone is taxed in steps. You pay the rate for the amount of income applicable to that rate.
I am aware that taxation is a stair-step function; I was merely throwing out quick and dirty--albeit inaccurate--numbers to illustrate the point you made more clearly than I did, that truly upper-income folks will still not feel any sting of increased taxation. I did technical support for QuickBooks for a few years so I had to familiarize myself with taxation (Federal and payroll), locating the current year's tax table online (I had it marked as a favorite in the browser), journal entries, and the correct way to calculate and expense the cost of goods sold. At the time I thought I would go back to school, take some accounting courses, get a third bachelor's degree, and pass the CPA exam. I never pursued that evil plan, though.
No one actually thinks Pai is an Obama appointee, do they? @deltago If Trump's Internet access gets thottled unless he pays a YouTube premium that would probably come out of the White House Operations budget instead of his personal accounts. You and I would be paying for it, not him. (technically not true but it fits)
oh, before I forget: that guy who intentionally drove his car into protesters in Charlottesville, killing a young woman, has had his charges upgraded from second-degree murder to first-degree murder.
I did technical support for QuickBooks for a few years so I had to familiarize myself with taxation (Federal and payroll), locating the current year's tax table online (I had it marked as a favorite in the browser), journal entries, and the correct way to calculate and expense the cost of goods sold. At the time I thought I would go back to school, take some accounting courses, get a third bachelor's degree, and pass the CPA exam. I never pursued that evil plan, though.
Heh, that is MY evil plan I am currently implementing. I am the sort of twisted person who likes accounting, it seems.
A Russian hacker has confessed to hacking the DNC on orders from the FSB. But I'm skeptical. It seems pretty out of the blue, and it seems like this isn't the sort of thing Moscow would allow out of a Russian courtroom, since Russia has denied any role in influencing the 2016 election. Also, U.S. intelligence agencies didn't attribute the hack to the FSB; it was a separate group.
The alt-right is either completely silent on the issue of Net Neutrality, or marching in lockstep. Considering their presence is almost entirely based online, it again shows a movement that has descended into nothing but an endless parade of cynical nihilism.
Newly appointed polish Prime Minister shortened his presence during first EU summit. Why? Because he is invited to pre-Christmas celebrations by his party and apparently summit is less important than that.
Just ordered food from a fast food place I frequent and the prices just went up.
The manager told me it's due to Ontario's minimum wage increasing in the new year.
I honestly wished people realized this. If cost to employ people rise, the cost of the products will also go up. This will happen everywhere, not just the local fast food chains.
That's ok to the government as they get to collect more tax on products. It's not ok for people who make just over minimum wage sonce they do not get an increase to off set these costs.
Its a scam to buy votes and it is frustrating that people believe this is going to be a good thing for people making minimum wage. It's not.
Just ordered food from a fast food place I frequent and the prices just went up.
The manager told me it's due to Ontario's minimum wage increasing in the new year.
I honestly wished people realized this. If cost to employ people rise, the cost of the products will also go up. This will happen everywhere, not just the local fast food chains.
That's ok to the government as they get to collect more tax on products. It's not ok for people who make just over minimum wage sonce they do not get an increase to off set these costs.
Its a scam to buy votes and it is frustrating that people believe this is going to be a good thing for people making minimum wage. It's not.
I honestly don't know why more people don't realize this. Businesses will always pass on the extra payroll costs to the consumers. If you want more REAL wealth the only way is to work more hours or get a better job. Cost of living increases or raising the minimum wage will get drowned out by inflation...
Yes, but not much. I would presume a chat with the manager would be over, say, a $10 order becoming a $12 order (or more), not $10 to $10.50 as the article indicates.
Then again, I might just be suspicious due to a track record of dishonesty on issues like this. There are, sadly, a number of examples to draw upon--airlines added a fuel surcharge when gas prices spiked a few years ago, and then kept the surcharge long after prices had come back down. Every time there's a hurricane within 500 miles of the refineries on the Gulf Coast, gas stations will hike prices in anticipation and keep them high long after the hurricane (and its effects) have passed. A number of employers tried to cut back or eliminate health care benefits for their employees, citing Obamacare costs--before it went into effect. (That's not to say there aren't actual costs for businesses w.r.t. Obamacare, just that many were jumping the gun and scapegoating it as an excuse to gut employee benefits.)
Nowadays when I hear a business try to pass along a cost to me and they blame Policy X, they no longer receive the benefit of the doubt.
Comments
@FinneousPJ You said that, but you also went on about how women have to dress appropriately. It's hard for "Is this an excuse for harassment? Of course not." to stand out when bracketed by "The fact is there are women who do not understand what is or is not appropriate for the office." and "Should these women be more aware of proper dress? Certainly."
It is a problem when we're focused like a laser on how women dress.
*************
A male who is a predator will make unwanted advances towards women no matter how they are dressed. He isn't interested in the clothing.
*************
Like I said, a future Administration and FCC can put Net Neutrality back into effect as easily as the current FCC cancelled the rules. The vast majority of Internet users aren't going to notice any significant difference between now and a year from now.
A byproduct of the Net Neutrality ruling today may be this: those prone to see conspiracies may now think any slowdown on their favorite website or streaming service is a result of this decision. And they wouldn't be crazy for thinking so, even if it isn't true. Because there will be no way to tell, because the companies will wield this power. I HOPE people think this. It is the only thing that will prevent it from happening everywhere. As a matter of fact, I would encourage anyone who experiences ANY major internet problems from this day forward to call their provider and ask point-blank if this is a result of them abusing their new power, if only to make it crystal clear we won't stand for it. Two sides can play dirty pool if necessary.
The average person won't notice? They will. These types of things will be happening all the time. Will they connect this with Republicans? Approximately 32% of Americans will blame it on the Hillary Clinton administration.
In the above example, $300k doesn’t even get you into the top bracket. Amazing, right? The top bracket is reserved for income over $1,000,000.
Because of the 39.6% top bracket, I assumed we’re using the House’s proposed brackets.
(90k*0.12)+(170k*0.25)+(40k*0.35)= $67,300 tax owed (minus paycheck withholding)
Of course, the point is still valid. People making mid-6 figures will be all right under any of these plans.
And after tonight, he'll have to pay good money to actually watch them as his Internet gets throttled unless he pays the YouTube premium.
No one actually thinks Pai is an Obama appointee, do they? @deltago If Trump's Internet access gets thottled unless he pays a YouTube premium that would probably come out of the White House Operations budget instead of his personal accounts. You and I would be paying for it, not him. (technically not true but it fits)
oh, before I forget: that guy who intentionally drove his car into protesters in Charlottesville, killing a young woman, has had his charges upgraded from second-degree murder to first-degree murder.
I don't know what to make of it.
Haha so funny that his loyalties are to Verizon and Sinclair Broadcasting and not the American people right?
It's clear to me he is pointing out to his future employers that he's their boy. He wants them to remember it after this gig is up and he's looking to a nice 7 figure salary.
https://gizmodo.com/leaked-video-shows-fcc-chair-ajit-pai-roasting-himself-1821134881
The manager told me it's due to Ontario's minimum wage increasing in the new year.
I honestly wished people realized this. If cost to employ people rise, the cost of the products will also go up. This will happen everywhere, not just the local fast food chains.
That's ok to the government as they get to collect more tax on products. It's not ok for people who make just over minimum wage sonce they do not get an increase to off set these costs.
Its a scam to buy votes and it is frustrating that people believe this is going to be a good thing for people making minimum wage. It's not.
tl;dr, the manager's full of it.
Then again, I might just be suspicious due to a track record of dishonesty on issues like this. There are, sadly, a number of examples to draw upon--airlines added a fuel surcharge when gas prices spiked a few years ago, and then kept the surcharge long after prices had come back down. Every time there's a hurricane within 500 miles of the refineries on the Gulf Coast, gas stations will hike prices in anticipation and keep them high long after the hurricane (and its effects) have passed. A number of employers tried to cut back or eliminate health care benefits for their employees, citing Obamacare costs--before it went into effect. (That's not to say there aren't actual costs for businesses w.r.t. Obamacare, just that many were jumping the gun and scapegoating it as an excuse to gut employee benefits.)
Nowadays when I hear a business try to pass along a cost to me and they blame Policy X, they no longer receive the benefit of the doubt.