Nail Rat posted:

It's very clearly just because of discrimination, and he even says as much in his comments that he didn't want to work with a depressed person. I am leaning towards something like 80% it's a troll.

"I discriminated. I'm being accused of discrimination. Do they have a case?" is veering hard into STDH

brugroffil posted:

30 day probe for leon, this thread will suffer

canyoneer posted:

http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#FRNs

quote:

There is no requirement to apply for (or use) a Social Security number.

The Social Security Act may not require people to apply for Social Security numbers, but the Internal Revenue Code does.
...
The claim that “Only persons who have contracted with the government by applying for a governmental privilege or benefit, such as holding a Social Security number, are subject to tax, and those who have contracted with the government may choose to revoke the contract at will,” has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included in certain collection-related submissions.

quote:

I have revoked my consent to be a taxpayer.

The flip side of the claim that “the income tax is voluntary” is the claim that you can “unvolunteer” from the tax system.

Needless to say, the courts have not been impressed.

“Sasscer contends nevertheless that he is a ‘non-taxpayer’ due to his decision to rescind and revoke his consent to taxpayer status. Specifically, he refers to a letter and affidavit filed with the IRS on April 13, 1985. In the letter, Sasscer proclaims that he is a ‘freeman, a free sovereign individual.’ The attached Affidavit of Revocation and Recission declares that Sasscer is not ‘and never was a “taxpayer” as that term is defined in the Internal Revenue Code, a “person liable” for any Internal Revenue tax, or a “person” subject to the provisions of that Code.’ This well-worn argument has been uniformly repudiated by the federal courts. The federal income tax is not voluntary, and a person may not elect to opt out of the federal tax laws by a unilateral act of revocation and recission.”
...
The claim that “[a] taxpayer may ‘untax’ himself or herself at any time or revoke the consent to be taxed and thereafter not be subject to internal revenue taxes” has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included in certain collection-related submissions.

quote:

Wages are not income.

As unbelievable as it might sound, some tax protesters simply think that the income tax doesn’t apply to wages.
Consider these statements by the United States Supreme Court:

“[T]he earnings of the human brain and hand when unaided by capital ... are commonly dealt with as income in legislation.”

Stratton’s Independence, Ltd. v. Howbert, 231 U.S. 399, 415 (1913).

“There is no doubt that the statute could tax salaries to those who earned them....”

Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111, 114 (1930).

“[The tax code] is broad enough to include in taxable income any economic or financial benefit conferred on the employee as compensation, whatever the form or mode by which it is effected.”

C.I.R. v. Smith, 324 U.S. 177 (1945).

“Wages usually are income ....”

...

So where do tax protesters get the idea that wages might not be income?
Often from a series of incomplete and misleading quotations from irrelevant cases.

“It is to be noted that, by the language of the Act, it is not salaries, wages, or compensation for personal services that are to be included in gross income. That which is to be included is gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal services.” Lucas v. Earl, 281 U.S. 111 (1930).

The above quotation is not from the opinion of the Supreme Court, but is one of the arguments made by the taxpayer, who lost. (Older reports of Supreme Court decisions printed summaries of the arguments of the parties before the text of the court’s opinion.) The Supreme Court ruled against the taxpayer, holding that the taxpayer was liable for the tax on his salary and stating that “[t]here is no doubt that the statute could tax salaries to those who earned them....” 281 U.S. at 114.
...
The claim that “[w]ages, tips, and other compensation received for the performance of personal services are not taxable income or are offset by an equivalent deduction for the personal services rendered, including an argument that a taxpayer has a “claim of right” to exclude the cost or value of the taxpayer’s labor from income or that taxpayers have a basis in their labor equal to the fair market value of the wages they receive,” or similar arguments described as frivolous in Rev. Rul. 2004-29, 2004-12 I.R.B. 627, or Rev. Rul. 2007-19, 2007-14 I.R.B. 843, has been identified by the IRS as a “frivolous position” that can result in a penalty of $5,000 when asserted in a tax return or included in certain collection-related submissions. Notice 2007-30, 2007-14 I.R.B. 883.

canyoneer posted:

https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3817963

The GBS version of this thread has some really depressing stories

Zo posted:

what about calling everybody a racist non-stop? can we get a bright line rule there or is it sort of a play by ear type of thing?

therobit posted:

Most people will not need that type of insurance, and I bet most of the people buying are high risk so I can't imagine the premiums are low enough to be worth it. And of course the article says a lot of the policies exclude pre-existing conditions.

potatoducks posted:

Should have gone to the sharing economy model where you place an order on an app and some uber driver arrives and makes you a smoothie.

Solice Kirsk posted:

BITCOIN SITUATION INCOMING!

I've gone back and forth about posting this so I have to be a little careful here, but we had a new client call in today asking if anyone was familiar with Bitcoin. One of the other bankers popped his head into my office and said "Hey Solice, you know about that stupid internet money thing don't you?" so I got the call. He didn't want to talk on the phone about it, but when he came in he pulled up an online wallet he had with.....a lot of Bitcoin in it. Apparently back in 2012 he sold his car to a friend who couldn't pay him in cash so gave him quite a few Bitcoins. He totally forgot about it until he was cleaning out spam emails and noticed a bunch of "statement from your **** Wallet." He's loving terrified of losing these now. The plan we're going with is to sell them off in batches of about 50, wait for the cash to hit the wallet, and then transfer the cash to an account we're gonna open just to catch these funds, rinse/repeat until they're all sold (or stolen/lost). The first sell we placed seems to have gone through and been filled so now we're just waiting the 2-3 business days for the cash to hit the wallet (fingers crossed for him). Should be coming sometime around next Weds.

This is my first time ever working with them in real life so I'm curious if the money is going to really drop in or not. I already told him since these aren't regulated that if he gets any real cash out of them then he should consider it a huge plus and that if even only this first trade works that he's waaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of the game since the car was only worth like $6000. I'll let you know if it works. I'm really curious myself.

I'm preemptively putting it in this thread because I just know something lovely is going to happen. My moneys on the sell showing filled, but then him getting an email saying it actually didn't and us trying this over and over again until he winds up having to sell them one at a time.

Solice Kirsk posted:

The wallet he's got is apparently FDIC backed

Hoodwinker posted:

The car he traded the coins for was worth $6k. His first trade of 50 coins would be worth about $240,000. And as much as I'd love to see bitcoin brought low, there are many millions of coins floating around. This dude trading his in probably won't have a dent.

Craptacular posted:

Going by the chart here, bitcoin was worth anywhere from $4.27 to $13.70 during 2012. So the $6k car would have sold for somewhere between about 440 to 1400 BTC which would have a current value of $2.1 to 6.7 million. However, the largest bitcoin wallets have hundreds of millions of dollars worth of BTC in them (ignoring the fact that liquidating one of those wallets would have a huge effect on the $/BTC exchange rate).

Kanish posted:

Want to make reading BWM stories your career? The IRS is hiring for adjudicators to help determine security clearances for federal work!

https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/478482400

Solice Kirsk posted:

So I guess there's no such thing as a weekend for the BTC market because I just met with him again a few minutes ago. Trade was stopped as it exceeded his daily limit. Looks like we're gonna be doing this in $10k chunks (he has a 10k daily limit on all activity in the account). So we have to do a sell for 10k a day and then set a day aside to transfer the cash out. Eventually he'll just be placing a sell one day and a transfer the next. Gonna take a long time to get his cash out. The stories of it being a pain in the rear end are starting to make more sense. Take two!


The cash positions are FDIC backed and not the actual coins in the wallet. I'll read through that thread, but legally I don't know where my footing is on that. I like this guy, but getting fired for suggesting he look into this stuff wouldn't be worth it. We just fired a banker for telling a client to leave his 401k in a TDF (banker wasn't licensed). This firm is harsh on stuff like that, and if this dude comes in saying some software I suggested didn't stop his wallet from being stolen then I could be out on my rear end.

22 Eargesplitten posted:

Is this about the money limit to avoid paying taxes, or something else? Is it illegal to make transfers that could be used to avoid taxes if you pay the taxes anyway? It seems like getting paid in cash at work but reporting it on your taxes anyway. Or is it that there's some sort of requirement on the exchange's side that you the customer could be held responsible for them failing to meet?

At this rate, assuming the bitcoins are currently worth 3 million, it would take 600 days to cash out. If Bitcoin increases, it could take even longer.

I really hope this guy gets a financial advisor and becomes one of the only GWM things to ever come out of bitcoin. He pretty much gave a friend a $6,000 car because he didn't expect the digital fun money to ever actually be worth anything.

Solice Kirsk posted:

CTRs only have to be filed for cash transactions. Electronic fund transfers and automatic clearing house transactions don't need them.

Solice Kirsk posted:

You're mistaking a cash position for currency.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

They are really trying to up the numbers and collect.

Motronic posted:

I present the thread with more weapons grade BWM to get it back on track:

Wife Cheated / Is Leaving I'm Screwed
https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/70s4yy/wife_cheated_is_leaving_im_screwed/

hell2pay posted:

Can you get a student loan to cover the buyout of both or at least one car?

debt2set posted:

I'm not sure, but I think the debts go entirely into her name after the divorce.

SquirrelFace posted:

Well I think that in most states any debt or assets acquired in marriage are jointly owned so he's only responsible for half technically.

My cousin got burned by this with her lovely ex. He had massive debts when they got married and she worked her rear end off to get them all paid down. Once they separated, but before they filed any divorce paperwork (they were broke obviously), he wracked up over 20k in CC debt. He then filed bankruptcy and they all came after her. She had to file bankruptcy to get out of that.

http://www.askamanager.org/2017/09/my-coworker-keeps-asking-everyone-for-loans.html posted:

Since last holiday season when my office hired Cersei, she has quietly hit up almost everyone in our small office for various short-term personal loans...My colleague Sansa, who fell for one of her sob stories, lent her the $1,000+ amount and waited through months of flimsy promises before it was repaid.

Motronic posted:

Can't rent an apartment because of bad credit, even though we make plenty of money

Folly posted:

You're self-insuring collision and comprehensive, not medical or liability.

Not sure what you're point is about the credit. This plan isn't about how to get financing, it's about how to avoid financing a second car.

paragon1 posted:

It's like they stopped listening before the teacher got to the "without representation" part of the slogan.

moana posted:

rotaryfun posted:

It can't happen if you give your kid Tylenol and wait for them to cool down instead of going to the hospital... is all my point is.

rotaryfun posted:

Everyone has the privilege to work and find a decent living. The only thing holding them back are their own reservations, lack of motivation, or previous lovely life decisions / responsibilities that have pinned them down to a specific lifestyle trap. At which point it becomes the peoples of "privilege" job to support.

rotaryfun posted:

I really hope you guys understand that I certainly wish the best for the child and his family and that the mom gets her poo poo straight and the child some care that he certainly needs and deserves. Ultimately it's the mother and father failing the child.

In all of this, my point is that some effort is needed in part on all sides. Cruel reality is that more effort is needed from the mother. Even crueler reality is that it's the child that suffers.

rotaryfun posted:

I am a white male who is the son of a retired enlisted navy man and stay at home mother. Life included moving every 3 years to military bases in Corpus Christi TX, Pensacola FL, Norfolk VA, and Annapolis MD (this place is definitely a place of privilege).

Please, continue to tell me about my life of privilege on a single income enlisted mans salary.

That was something to read though.

Photex posted:

i'd like to note the word privilege showed up 58 times last page, so uh..good job?

canyoneer posted:

Yeah, the carnival/fair/circus carnie scene isn't what it used to be.

cowofwar posted:

This is the dumbest reoccurring derail. Different arrangements are appropriate for different people with different needs and preferences. There is no one best way to conduct any aspect of any relationship, the only generalized advice is that all decisions must be communicated in advance and agreed upon otherwise emotional strife is a guaranteed outcome causing some aspect of relationship failure.

Krispy Wafer posted:

It's getting rapidly to the point where a White, healthy man who can't find a job just isn't looking.

And note I said White. And male.

BarbarianElephant posted:

The London Stock Exchange can trace it's origins back to a place called "Jonathan's Coffee House" in the 17th century (where early stockbrokers met to do business), so it's not without precedent that a trivial place becomes surprisingly important in finance.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan%27s_Coffee-House

FrozenVent posted:

Guys, seriously. Stop closing the drawer on your dicks.

Jacob Hugart, St. Paul, Minn. with 5 kids posted:

"Have two incomes, and one is essentially dedicated to daycare, or have one income and a stay-at-home parent."

"The ones where both parents are working seem to be doing fairly well," he says. "They will remodel a kitchen. They have multiple cars. The ones who are trying to do the one-parent thing — there's a stretch. They're like us."

Hugart says he makes enough to meet his family's day-to-day needs, but bigger and unexpected expenses are a squeeze — such as his son's college funds or, Hugart says, a recent roof repair: "We ended up cashing out an IRA in order to pay for that because the other alternative was to put it on a credit card."