Uniformity for me, states' rights for thee

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...aid-leave-laws

Some Friday afternoon we'll hear about National Right to Work getting quietly signed into law by 45* and that'll just be that.

Wisconsin doesn't border Canada. I get why it has to have Customs, but by that same logic, Florida borders Canada because they share a waterway.

Yeah, I'm sure that resulting legislation would be "for the employees' sake".

If they actually follow through on that they'll be forcing states that are more successful economically (blue states) to adopt the failed economic policies of red states that are struggling and falling apart. It's going to be really tough on the producing classes. When will the producing classes learn, voting for Republicans/libertarians never ever pays off for you?

Yup, 20% tariff I believe. All this will do it make the end product more expensive for Americans. American lumber companies will raise their prices and promote that they are "American Made" products. Construction costs will go up, which has to greatly benefit Trump in some way, right?

And gg U.S. Parks and forests.

House hearing rescheduled for Monday, May 8th but it's only Yates and Clapper this time. Brennan is missing from the witness list. Was his testimony the most damning or something? Please tell me there's a better reason because I really dislike the games being played by these committees.

https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/stat...56635440062465

It's also notable that due to automation, this probably won't produce a significant number of jobs in the logging industry.

Yates is supposed to have some bombs to toss out, at least that's what the online rumor mill tells me.

well, she was fired for nothing more than doing her job, so i'd imagine she has some pretty relevant info to share (not trying to condescend, just throwing shade at this corrupt bunch of grifting freedom haters)

A lot of bad ideas
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/pol...#storylink=cpy

Yates supposedly has info on Flynn that will "make the WH look bad" from what I've seen so far. Not sure how illegal any of it will be or if she has anybody but Flynn in her planned testimony.

Non-physical borders are a thing. Maritime law extensively covers the topic of water borders. Your lack of knowledge or hand waving of the subject notwithstanding, technically Drumpf's tweet is correct.

/end of discussion on my part

I have the utmost confidence that Vozhd Trump's Brian in a Jar will continue to protect my interests for decades to come. Imo a lot of you have had you optimism ruined by life in Notgreat America.

So technically Toronto shares a border with the United States since I can go through US customs and immigration at their airport?

Watching those machines is amazing. Love the one that just rips all the branches off a tree.

So where exactly is the point where you cross the Canadian border and find yourself in Wisconsin?

Hint: It doesn't exist.

Is Trump pitching war on ****ing Canada now?

this is basically what I have been wary of as I have contributed in the past. I am also very worried that my Roth contributions will be taxed on withdrawal, but not much I can do if that comes to pass.

One thing I don't understand is why people would think this isn't possible. Basically every single time I have brought this up I have been shut down as being told its not possible, but for no reason other than "they wouldn't do that." Taxing roth retirement accounts with mandatory withdrawals on the gains withdrawn seems like a very straightforward way to raise taxes and taxing gains to some degree in traditional plans also seems like a very simple way to raise revenue. If they don't take away the penalties for early withdrawals they can also "lock in" certain amounts of revenue over time.

how would it be illegal? They would just be changing tax laws. There is always risk that what is promised can disappear or be reversed by the government at a later date.

I don't think this is likely to come off any worse than a tax increase. In fact, it can be spun a lot better it accompanied by some nominal headline decrease that doesn't actually have a bottomline effect.

This doesn't come up very often, but Canada is our biggest trading partner:
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade...top1312yr.html

Starting a trade war with Canada would have big effects on the economy.

I wasn't protesting anything.

Your "protest" went completely unseen and unnoticed. I'm glad you think by voting for Johnson and defending Trump you feel like a double winner.

if you're beyond the IRA deduction limit then contributing via Roth is a freeroll. It makes sense to use a Roth in this situation not necessarily because you expect the government to honor their pledge, but because there isn't really any more risk to having your money in a Roth than in a Traditional at that point. Also, a Roth effectively increases your contribution limit because the amounts are the same even though they are post-tax dollars.

Because you wanted trump to win. If you needed to rationalize voting for him instead because you thought your state was contested you would have. People are too clever by half when they don't vote or vote for a third party candidate and another half when they vote goofy because their state is not in play.

You had two legitimate options in making a big boy decision and you completely wussed out. I would absolutely have more respect for someone who voted for trump over a third party candidate.

Your protest vote literally got lumped in with people who simply didn't understand how to fill out a ballot.

It's so confusing to keep track of when we're supposed to be mad about capital income being taxed at a lower rate than income from labor and when we're supposed to be mad about people having to pay any tax at all on capital income.