I agree. But the parent can still get child support from the other parent until age 18. Guess, because in all intents and purposes they feel an 18 yr old should be working. I think you STILL can claim them if they are disabled.
I find that really interesting. I've always wondered about where increases in work efficiency are actually seen. If 4 people can now do the work of 5, does the company eliminate one position and have more profit for the executives? Do they share the salary from that eliminated position over the salaries of everyone in the company? Do they simply allow everyone to work 80% of the time at the same pay?
Which is most fair? Of course, I'm guessing there will be no concern for the person whose job is eliminated from the conservative side of the board in order to increase the executives' pay.
>> Don't you know, that's the conservative way of thinking! Conservatives think those beneath them should go without, because they aren't successful like them. The more I read posts from them and their entitlement proclamations the angrier I get.<<
Not at all. You say that like you think only wealthy people are conservative which isn't true at all.
Conservatives think that in order to get ahead you should live conservatively.
So maybe you meant to say: Rich people think those beneath them should go without.
I think most people should go without what they can't afford. You shouldn't live like you are rich person if you aren't one.
That being said you probably don't even realize that there are plenty of rich people who don't even live like rich people.
All income levels can be wasteful and find ways to save.
If you can't see that then you're selling yourself short.
>>I wanted to take advantage of a program for woman over 55 in getting job training, well, my Dh made too much, so I didn't qualify.<<
And I'd be all in support of allowing you to qualify for a student loan to complete your retraining. But frankly I'm glad to know they reserve the freebies for those who are actually poor. And even for the poor ones, they should be required to repay their handout to some extent, which if they had character, they'd be happy to do as they'd be grateful for the opportunity that was given to them.
Pages
I in no way blame anyone here for my choice.
It's funny, my husband was offered a different position in the same company to go work in the UK for two years.
Yes you are right.
I find that really interesting. I've always wondered about where increases in work efficiency are actually seen. If 4 people can now do the work of 5, does the company eliminate one position and have more profit for the executives? Do they share the salary from that eliminated position over the salaries of everyone in the company? Do they simply allow everyone to work 80% of the time at the same pay?
Which is most fair? Of course, I'm guessing there will be no concern for the person whose job is eliminated from the conservative side of the board in order to increase the executives' pay.
My Blog--Another Day Another Grey Hair
Create your own family sticker graphic at pYzam.com
>> Don't you know, that's the conservative way of thinking! Conservatives think those beneath them should go without, because they aren't successful like them. The more I read posts from them and their entitlement proclamations the angrier I get.<<
Not at all. You say that like you think only wealthy people are conservative which isn't true at all.
Conservatives think that in order to get ahead you should live conservatively.
So maybe you meant to say: Rich people think those beneath them should go without.
I think most people should go without what they can't afford. You shouldn't live like you are rich person if you aren't one.
That being said you probably don't even realize that there are plenty of rich people who don't even live like rich people.
All income levels can be wasteful and find ways to save.
If you can't see that then you're selling yourself short.
>>I wanted to take advantage of a program for woman over 55 in getting job training, well, my Dh made too much, so I didn't qualify.<<
And I'd be all in support of allowing you to qualify for a student loan to complete your retraining. But frankly I'm glad to know they reserve the freebies for those who are actually poor. And even for the poor ones, they should be required to repay their handout to some extent, which if they had character, they'd be happy to do as they'd be grateful for the opportunity that was given to them.
<>
Hmmmm, called getting a job and paying taxes.
Pages