|
We need to exterminate most of the wild horses and send them to a butchery to revitalize the horsemeat market. They are a non-native, ecologically destructive species in the American west. Support the horsemeat factories.
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:10 |
|
|
Why isn't that printed on a saddlebag?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
therobit posted:We need to exterminate most of the wild horses and send them to a butchery to revitalize the horsemeat market. They are a non-native, ecologically destructive species in the American west. Support the horsemeat factories. Brief reminder that rich horse ladies successfully managed to fund and promote a statewide initiative to not only make this illegal, but punishable as a crime. It also made it illegal to have horses shipped out of state for this purpose. Supporters of Proposition 6 spent $1,206,835. The top contributors to pass the measure were: Sue Maloney Stiles: $200,000 Sherry Ellen Deboer: $180,000 Sidne J. Long: $125,000 Tina Long: $125,000 Political Animals PAC: $80,927 MPL Communications, Inc.: $71,000 Friends of Animals Inc.: $63,305 Comm. for Prop 6 Sponsored by the Humane Farming Action Fund: $21,000 Humane Farming Association: $20,000 Phoebe Hearst Cooke: $20,000
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
spwrozek posted:The state of Colorado has 20 charity type things you can voluntarily donate to when you do your taxes. Here is Number 19: I mean I don't want donkeys to suffer and die as a general rule but it gets a staggering amount of money.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:It's not horses, but in the UK there is a charity called the Donkey Sanctuary whose entire purpose is caring for donkeys. They buy them, care for them, and rehome them to responsible owners. It got so successful at solving the problem in the UK that it now works internationally to save donkeys. It get almost 20 million pounds a year from people leaving it money or donating, just for donkeys. Save dat rear end, Seriously though doing taxes today and I came across someone who made a 5,000 donation to a Equine Rescue Charity or something... so yeah I find the Donkey Charity pulling in 20,000,000 that eminently reasonable. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Support the horse, so he doesn't think he saw a bee and dies. Also because he broke his leg tripping over a pebble. So he need to live in a sling until it (never) heals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
I feel kind of bad posting this, but a guy I know from High School posted this on Facebook. It's GWM in spirit, but probably going to be BWM. Just a tiny but of content to try and get us off horse taxes derail. quote:PRAYERS ANSWERED! I got a $4,000 bonus! Bullshit government took half, but my boss says I'll get it back with the refund.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Brief reminder that rich horse ladies successfully managed to fund and promote a statewide initiative to not only make this illegal, but punishable as a crime. It also made it illegal to have horses shipped out of state for this purpose. drat PAP smear campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I feel kind of bad posting this, but a guy I know from High School posted this on Facebook. It's GWM in spirit, but probably going to be BWM. The only financial adviser open on a weekend is going to be a guy who blew his own money on blow and needs a client right now to keep the party going.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:It's not horses, but in the UK there is a charity called the Donkey Sanctuary whose entire purpose is caring for donkeys. They buy them, care for them, and rehome them to responsible owners. It got so successful at solving the problem in the UK that it now works internationally to save donkeys. It get almost 20 million pounds a year from people leaving it money or donating, just for donkeys. This is the classic example of why charity has problems replacing welfare systems. Donkeys are cute as gently caress and attract lots of donations. Middle-aged schizophrenic humans aren't even remotely cute and don't attract donations. But it's rather more important *and expensive* to take care of the latter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I feel kind of bad posting this, but a guy I know from High School posted this on Facebook. It's GWM in spirit, but probably going to be BWM. It's me, I'm the bullshit government.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
How do you even gently caress up payroll to the point where they withhold at 50% tax rates and then refund all of it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Bonuses have special tax treatment. I thought it was 25%, though. E: oh, probably aggregate method
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:How do you even gently caress up payroll to the point where they withhold at 50% tax rates and then refund all of it? I'm guessing it's exaggerations on both sides. Bonuses are typically withheld at a much higher pay rate - often 28% - because payroll software is treating it as though that's your typical pay. When you add in FICA, and sometime state and local taxes, that can be or exceed 40%. He'll get *some* of that back most likely in his refund unless he's well into the 28% bracket already.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 15:43
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:p No, they're taxed higher because they aren't being taxed as regular pay. It's the supplemental wage classification that triggers it. Payroll software can all handle bonuses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
I've had bonuses withheld at 42%, but I think that includes FICA, Social Security, state, and federal deductions. And yes, you usually get about 10 to 15% of that back depending on your tax bracket.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:I've had bonuses withheld at 42%, but I think that includes FICA, Social Security, state, and federal deductions. Effective marginal tax rates for California tech workers are mid 40s, right? 33% bracket federal, 9% state income tax and that's before you even think about FICA.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Effective marginal tax rates for California tech workers are mid 40s, right? 33% bracket federal, 9% state income tax and that's before you even think about FICA. 45% is pretty easy to hit with AMT + 10% state bracket. AMT is basically unavoidable given how high state and possibly city taxes are.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:This is the classic example of why charity has problems replacing welfare systems. Donkeys are cute as gently caress and attract lots of donations. Middle-aged schizophrenic humans aren't even remotely cute and don't attract donations. But it's rather more important *and expensive* to take care of the latter. Even animal charities themselves are BWM. Most domestic animal related charities could do more good by not housing animals at all and focusing their resources on education and political action. Of course, it's easier to get donations and volunteers if you have a shelter full of cute puppies and kittens.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Bonuses have special tax treatment. Huh, didn't know that! All the bonuses I've ever gotten were adjusted so that my company paid the tax (or at least so that after taxes it comes out to a nice pleasing round number that is equal to the amount of "bonus" I was told I was getting beforehand) and while I saw the withholding on the stub I didn't bother to actually check the ratios or anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Huh, didn't know that! All the bonuses I've ever gotten were adjusted so that my company paid the tax (or at least so that after taxes it comes out to a nice pleasing round number that is equal to the amount of "bonus" I was told I was getting beforehand) and while I saw the withholding on the stub I didn't bother to actually check the ratios or anything. They aren't taxed differently, they are just withheld in a funny way. Once you file your taxes and get your refund/pay your bill, it's exactly the same as if you just had a higher salary all year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:Effective marginal tax rates for California tech workers are mid 40s, right? 33% bracket federal, 9% state income tax and that's before you even think about FICA. What is a "tech worker?" Is it only software engineers or senior engineers working for Amazon / Google / Apple / etc...? I guess I'm not very informed as to how much people make, but the handful of people I know who worked at big tech firms weren't software engineers and were maybe getting close to $190K of compensation at the senior level but that's if they could code while not technically being a software engineer. And there are obviously plenty of people who aren't at those companies but still consider themselves "tech" or people at those companies who can't code. Maybe I should be more mad about taxes, but I really don't even think about my gross pay except when it comes to tax time. My check cashes for a certain amount and that's what I budget for.. And I'm probably not leaving CA as this is where all the jobs and people and nice weather is. CA taxes may be high, but yeah, more desirable things tend to be more expensive than less desirable things. I really feel for the people who are trying to make it here who aren't so financially lucky, but I'm always confused when people making good money are furious about taxes. I make more than I would ever really need, and I'm certainly not making $190K+. I'm also happy to pay for general physical and social infrastructure. There are things I hate that the government does with my money, but that's kinda the deal I make to live in a society and I'd rather spend my time thinking about all the fun things I'm going to do with my time and money. What buffoon looks at their gross pay and is like "I should get every single cent of that!"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
IIRC, California has special legal provisions for "Computer workers". "Tech workers" include Uber drivers (Or at least they self-include in the category) so it's way too broad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
I like that California has a 1% surtax to fund mental health programs, and that it only applies on marginal above $1M. I think that's really good tax policy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Droo posted:They aren't taxed differently, they are just withheld in a funny way. Once you file your taxes and get your refund/pay your bill, it's exactly the same as if you just had a higher salary all year. Yeah bonus money shows up on your W-2 the same as your regular salary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:Yeah bonus money shows up on your W-2 the same as your regular salary. It's always been added to my gross pay. I understood the withholding to be higher as a just-in-case that the additional income from any bonus could place it in a higher tax bracket. It's sucks that it usually ties up money until a tax refund, but personally I'd rather get more back than have to send money come tax time, BWM or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Droo posted:They aren't taxed differently, they are just withheld in a funny way. Once you file your taxes and get your refund/pay your bill, it's exactly the same as if you just had a higher salary all year. This is correct.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
BWM: Not understanding how your withholding can differ from your actual tax liability.
SlapActionJackson fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:BWM: Not understanding how you withholding can differ from your actual tax liability.  Ask me why I owe the IRS $18,000 this year
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:
Why do you owe the IRS $18,000 this year?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Did you cash out a bunch of investments to buy a horseboat?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:All I have to say about that is that people who are married yet keep their financials separate are loving weird. Nail Rat posted:Your finances will magically become pretty integrated in a divorce so they may as well be integrated in marriage. And most banks set up their account options in such a way that it's more beneficial to join up the accounts than keep them separate. ie. minimum monthly balances for fee waivers, minimum balances for family investing accounts to waive quarterly fees, online banking interfaces that are just much easier to use if accounts are joined up, etc. They do this because it gives them a chance to anchor in additional business from the other spouse and their family members. So if people go out of their way to keep their finances separate, there's almost always some strange reasoning behind it. And if you're a financial advisor that dares ask them about their separated account arrangement, they flip their poo poo 99% of the time as if you insulted their mother. I've seen clients who knowingly pay two separate account fees despite the fact that a less expensive, joint option is available. Separated accounts in marriages touches a deep nerve with a lot of people. melon cat fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
melon cat posted:
My husband and I have been together since 2005. Got married 4 years ago. We're just lazy as gently caress. It's easy to keep doing the same poo poo we did before we were married. I don't see any benefit for me to go through the effort of closing a bunch of my accounts and him closing his and then doing the whole joint account thing. The last time I tried to close a bank account, suntrust tried to charge me for it. Kinda soured me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
I don't think keeping your premarriage accounts is what they mean. My husband and I have our premarriage accounts because we're lazy but we also budget off of it like it's one pool of money... because we're lazy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Keeping your accounts separate is not the same as keeping your finances separate. There are reasons to keep your own accounts, whether that is inertia or because you don't want to have your discretionary spending show up as line items on the household budget every month. We combined all our accounts and then afterward decided that having individual accounts for our discretionary spending was good, because that way we can buy things like gifts and surprises without them showing up in Mint/statements and tipping each other off. That's very different from keeping your finances separate, which would be if you don't know what your partners income/savings/debt/retirement look like and just manage your own with a huge blank spot there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
silicone thrills posted:My husband and I have been together since 2005. Got married 4 years ago. We're just lazy as gently caress. It's easy to keep doing the same poo poo we did before we were married. I don't see any benefit for me to go through the effort of closing a bunch of my accounts and him closing his and then doing the whole joint account thing. The last time I tried to close a bank account, suntrust tried to charge me for it. Kinda soured me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
My sister and her husband take the "roommates" approach to finances. She bought the house, he writes her a check for half the mortgage/the utilities every month. She pays the property taxes outright. They have their own shelves in the fridge and go through separate checkout lines at the grocery store. They're weird but it works for them. Doesn't seem to be related to a lack of love or trust or anything, they just like having their Own Stuff? I bet all this crap goes out the window when people have babies. 2 hours of sleep a night for 5 years and you're not gonna bust out your checkbook for the $1.37 milk and cereal reimbursement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:My sister and her husband take the "roommates" approach to finances. She bought the house, he writes her a check for half the mortgage/the utilities every month. She pays the property taxes outright. Unless there's a pre-nup involved, the statement "Your finances will magically become pretty integrated in a divorce so they may as well be integrated in marriage." applies perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:Unless there's a pre-nup involved, the statement "Your finances will magically become pretty integrated in a divorce so they may as well be integrated in marriage." applies perfectly. *Only valid in community property states.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 20:10 |
|
|
OnceIWasAnOstrich posted:*Only valid in community property states. Even in an equitable distribution state, it applies as a general rule to marital assets...even a personal savings account with $150k can all become marital assets if you continue to deposit or withdraw money from it after marriage. Also if the split is too uneven, a sympathetic judge can still screw you over. If you've been keeping each other apprised of your finances from the beginning, you won't have to go through the long and expensive process of discovery and can just agree to a settlement agreement. I mean, in those states - thankfully I'm in one - it's not split down the middle especially taking into account length of marriage, etc., but it is integrated. edit: and yeah, always prenup. If I ever get married again I will not listen to "that means we're just getting married to get divorced and I'm not  " because I've heard that before.
Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 21:23
|
|