For you democrat's...

Clizby WampusCat said:

No, but I am against the way they go about it. They are requesting information to find out if you are doing anything wrong not that they have a reasonable belief that you are.

Click to expand...

It's worth pointing out that his is not a brand new polity, it's a lowering of the threshold at which transactions are reported to federal authorities as amounts in the thousands were already legally required to be flagged/reported.

Other than the freedom to commit tax evasion more easily, what freedom is this reporting abridging?

iluvatar5150 said:

eh. I trust the banks less than the government. The banks already have that information and the government can already get that with a warrant. Either way, that's not what the new rule proposes. What it proposes is merely a total of the flow into and out of the account, not a reporting of each transaction.

Click to expand...

Why? Why would my bank account be their business? If they want that, they should have evidence I'm committing a crime and get a warrant.

No, though I'm okay with something a lot closer to than than to what we have now. Either way, nobody I'm aware of is proposing that.

Click to expand...

They're doing it, proposal or not.

Open borders = more freedom of movement is like saying that repealing rape laws = more freedom of sexual partners.

AFAIK, you've always been able to call up any law enforcement agency and report a crime.

Click to expand...

Absolutely true. You've also been able to protest anyone you want. I'm sure the FBI crackdown on school board protests has nothing to do with the fact that the DOJ is directly connected to the indoctrination of children.

GOD Shines Forth! said:

Claptrap.

The use of power here is selective. Less power, less control over the invaders; more power, more control over the citizenry...by way of the invaders. Flood and dilute--and now, infect--is a military tactic of our enemies, foreign and domestic.

Click to expand...

[my emphasis]

Albion said:

Maybe a little more "figuring" is in order.

Click to expand...

I don't think so. I think the OP is for more "freedom to do what I want without consequences" than "freedom to have a good life".

The two overlap, but are not the same.

Clizby WampusCat said:

Do you support the government receiving all of your banking transactions for the year?

Are you ok with a completely open border where we have no idea who is coming in?

Are you ok with the DOJ setting up a phone line so people can call to get someone investigated by the FBI from a school board meeting with no evidence it is a chronic problem.

All of these policies reduce your freedom and liberty. How much freedom will they have to take away before you will stand up Biden and his ilk? To save our freedoms we need you democrat's to start pushing back on these policies and overreaching power grabs by the government. If you don't, then they will soon come for something you disagree with and you will be power less to stop it. Trump was right when he said "they are not coming after me, they are coming after you, I am just in the way." He did not just mean conservatives, he meant all of us.

What freedoms do you think we should fight for?

Click to expand...

I'm OK with any government laws and controls that are reasonable, including ones which restrict freedoms. If my freedom is restricted for a reasonable purpose then I'm OK with it. For example, I'm OK with laws that tell me I have to wear a shirt and shoes in a restaurant because this law, while restricting my freedom to be nude, helps us as a community to not be exposed to uncleanliness and offensive sights.

As a Christian, I trust in God and what He says in His Word and that's all that matters.

rambot said:

[my emphasis]

Click to expand...

You're smiley isn't posting on the thread but I see it in reply window.

I like it, but it doesn't change the truth of what I wrote.

GOD Shines Forth! said:

You're smiley isn't posting on the thread but I see it in reply window.

I like it, but it doesn't change the truth of what I wrote.

Click to expand...

But you forgot to also say the are raping and deal drugs then

Ana the Ist said:

Why? Why would my bank account be their business? If they want that, they should have evidence I'm committing a crime and get a warrant.

Click to expand...

To be clear: I'm not advocating in favor of the policy. I just don't think it's a big deal either way. At this point, I'm of the opinion that privacy is a myth and complaints/fights like this are akin to bailing out the Titanic with buckets.

Absolutely true. You've also been able to protest anyone you want. I'm sure the FBI crackdown on school board protests has nothing to do with the fact that the DOJ is directly connected to the indoctrination of children.

Click to expand...

oh?

Clizby WampusCat said:

No, but I am against the way they go about it. They are requesting information to find out if you are doing anything wrong not that they have a reasonable belief that you are.

I never said they were not. This is just one more piece of information they obviously do not have and want and is unnecessary.

Your assumption that I am xenophobic is just another symptom of the problem in the US. Label people as extreme if you disagree with them so you can disregard them. I have said I am for as much legal immigration as we can support. I am against allowing anyone into this country without a proper vetting process like many other countries in the world. Are you ok with someone coming into this country that we don't know who they are or what their intentions are? The government is not even trying to stop illegal immigration.

Click to expand...

But your wording was "open border" -- which as a wording is painting an extreme position. (that I think very few people have)

So, I thought you probably meant instead a more likely question, instead of that non-question.

In other words, instead of "open borders" you might have been trying to talk about the more reasonable question that is an actual one that is up, about how many legal immigrants to let in.

Currently, the Biden administration is aiming to allow 125,000 refugees to immigrate in the new fiscal year that just began Oct 1.

Is that what you meant to address?

Clizby WampusCat said:

Do you support the government receiving all of your banking transactions for the year?

Click to expand...

I don't know anything about this. Would you provide details or a source for this information? Thanks

Clizby WampusCat said:

Are you ok with the DOJ setting up a phone line so people can call to get someone investigated by the FBI from a school board meeting with no evidence it is a chronic problem.

Click to expand...

I don't know anything about this either. Would you explain the details or better yet provide a source for this information? Thanks, again.

Clizby WampusCat said:

You are wrong. I want unnecessary government oversight, let local authorities take care of threats to others when they are capable of doing that and as much legal immigration as we can handle.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but that is not unnecessary government oversight. It is the minimum oversight to maintain personal freedoms from criminal activity and domestic terrorists. And for the local authorities, sometimes they are turning a blind eye to the problem (or are part of the problem), so the DOJ is needed.

As for immigration, I think it needs to be overhauled and even streamlined so it is the preferred way to get him the country. And I think we can take in a lot more legal immigration than people think.

Who would that be?

Click to expand...

Right now, corporations. They have a hold on our data, our money, and our attention. If the government pulls out regulation corporations will pour in to fill the power vacuum the government leaves behind. Remember those cyberpunk novels? It would be like that without all the cyberwar and cool tech toys.

In the future, it can easily be any group that gets a stranglehold on a commodity or powerbase to force others to do what they want. Without the government there to break that up, the only way to do so would be violence.

And we will be back to square one again.

Pavel Mosko said:

Oh easy. It violates their campaign pledge to only raise taxes on the rich.

They are looking to go after all the 1099 type contractors who might be making a living from tax reporting loop holes to pay for their Green New Deal / Build Back Better plan that from what I can tell only rewards illegal aliens and people who have companies in Green Energy sectors of the economy, or own lots of stock in those companies.


By the way it is completely naïve to think this is all innocent! The IRS has a history of being weaponized to go after various administrations political enemies.

Click to expand...

It's not a new tax though. That income was already taxable and actually is required to be self-reported. But most people don't, so this is an additional requirement put on third parties to help enforce existing tax laws.

rambot said:

But you forgot to also say the are raping and deal drugs then

Click to expand...

How shameful to suggest such a thing! I didn't.

Infection? It absolutely follows from the Covid narrative established by the CDC, WHO, FDA, etc.

dogs4thewin said:

As to the bank issue, yes a bank can report if they suspect ( within reason) that someone has dirty money, but they have to have a good reason to believe that. Moreover, $600 is FAR from a lot of money in a single transaction that could be a house payment, a tax refund, various ligate business expenses that is NOT a lot to transfer at one time.

Click to expand...

I haven't heard anything about this until now. I don't have a source for the info. Would you share where you read about $600 transactions being reported or ??
Thanks

iluvatar5150 said:

To be clear: I'm not advocating in favor of the policy. I just don't think it's a big deal either way. At this point, I'm of the opinion that privacy is a myth and complaints/fights like this are akin to bailing out the Titanic with buckets.

Click to expand...

I get what you're saying and yes it's true that your bank knows how much money you put in the bank. It's kind of their job.

As far as I know, they can't legally share that information without your prior approval.

As for the government, not requiring a warrant for something they need a warrant for is akin to unreasonable search.

oh?

Click to expand...

Seems to be relatively new so I don't blame you for not knowing .

Panorama Education, Owned By U.S. AG Merrick Garland’s Son-In-Law, Contracted With 23,000 Public Schools & Raised $76M From Investors

Garland’s son-in-law is Xan Tanner, co-founder and president of Panorama Education. Panorama Education sells surveys to school districts across the country that focus on the local “social and emotion climate.” These surveys are then used as justification for new curriculum that some parents call critical race theory and find objectionable.

Seems like if parents protest this stuff and succeed in stopping it....Garland's SIL could lose out on millions.

Ana the Ist said:

I get what you're saying and yes it's true that your bank knows how much money you put in the bank. It's kind of their job.

As far as I know, they can't legally share that information without your prior approval.

As for the government, not requiring a warrant for something they need a warrant for is akin to unreasonable search.



Seems to be relatively new so I don't blame you for not knowing .

Panorama Education, Owned By U.S. AG Merrick Garland’s Son-In-Law, Contracted With 23,000 Public Schools & Raised $76M From Investors

Garland’s son-in-law is Xan Tanner, co-founder and president of Panorama Education. Panorama Education sells surveys to school districts across the country that focus on the local “social and emotion climate.” These surveys are then used as justification for new curriculum that some parents call critical race theory and find objectionable.

Seems like if parents protest this stuff and succeed in stopping it....Garland's SIL could lose out on millions.

Click to expand...

I don't understand the problem. Is Garland going to make money from this or what is the problem? What is Garland being accused of? What has he done?

Ana the Ist said:

I get what you're saying and yes it's true that your bank knows how much money you put in the bank. It's kind of their job.

As far as I know, they can't legally share that information without your prior approval.

Click to expand...

And all they have to do to get that approval is bury it in the fine print with the default option being "opt in." Heck, even if that wasn't the case when you first opened the account, they could change the rules after the fact in one of their annual Privacy Policy updates..

As for the government, not requiring a warrant for something they need a warrant for is akin to unreasonable search.

Click to expand...

This would seem to change the rules regarding what they need a warrant for.

Seems to be relatively new so I don't blame you for not knowing .

Panorama Education, Owned By U.S. AG Merrick Garland’s Son-In-Law, Contracted With 23,000 Public Schools & Raised $76M From Investors

Garland’s son-in-law is Xan Tanner, co-founder and president of Panorama Education. Panorama Education sells surveys to school districts across the country that focus on the local “social and emotion climate.” These surveys are then used as justification for new curriculum that some parents call critical race theory and find objectionable.

Seems like if parents protest this stuff and succeed in stopping it....Garland's SIL could lose out on millions.

Click to expand...

wait wut? Garland's son owning a company that conducts surveys and training for school districts equates to the "DOJ [being] directly connected to the indoctrination of children"?

For all the time you've spent complaining about the lack of evidence to support certain narratives with respect to racial oppression, this is what you put up to support your own contentions? seriously? lol

Hank77 said:

I haven't heard anything about this until now. I don't have a source for the info. Would you share where you read about $600 transactions being reported or ??
Thanks

Click to expand...

It was part of the American Rescue Plan. https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/...ct-lowers-form-1099k-reporting-threshold.html

Ana the Ist said:

I get what you're saying and yes it's true that your bank knows how much money you put in the bank. It's kind of their job.

As far as I know, they can't legally share that information without your prior approval.

As for the government, not requiring a warrant for something they need a warrant for is akin to unreasonable search.



Seems to be relatively new so I don't blame you for not knowing .

Panorama Education, Owned By U.S. AG Merrick Garland’s Son-In-Law, Contracted With 23,000 Public Schools & Raised $76M From Investors

Garland’s son-in-law is Xan Tanner, co-founder and president of Panorama Education. Panorama Education sells surveys to school districts across the country that focus on the local “social and emotion climate.” These surveys are then used as justification for new curriculum that some parents call critical race theory and find objectionable.

Seems like if parents protest this stuff and succeed in stopping it....Garland's SIL could lose out on millions.

Click to expand...

It appears that both red and blue states have school systems that have signed contracts with the company.

However, records posted by our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com reveal that school districts in Texas, Michigan, Florida, Indiana, Rhode Island, Oregon, Iowa, Utah, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Georgia, New Mexico, Illinois, Wyoming, California, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maine, Virginia, and Ohio all hired Panorama Education for training and/or surveys.
.....
While Garland cites threats of violence against school officials, parents and other activists say they’re exercising their constitutional right to object to school practices.

Is it anyone's constitutional right to threaten violence against someone because they don't agree with you?