A large % of cases are unrelated to MSM and those cases are growing on their own, and it's a substantial % of your chances of getting sick as random member of public, basically?
> A response is asking how the tax authorities intend to audit the college student who earned a few hundred working for a moving company, paid in cash? Even if they get audited, good luck proving it.
The biggest problem with the IRS is that you are guilty unless proven innocent. The IRS wouldn't have to prove you got paid in cash. The kid would have to prove that they reported the income or didn't get the income.
If the policy change was: "make reporting easier, mistakes (by IRS or taxpayer) less likely and rigorously enforce cheats" that would be for superior. What the current law essentially does is create incentives to assume a lot more people are guilty and see how many can prove otherwise.
So what you're saying is, the IRS is going to go around saying 'I think you worked for a moving company, got paid in cash and then spent the money in cash, prove you didn't!' and the college student obviously can't and that's that? Man, ya got me?
More mundane than that - college student claimed they got paid $100, IRS makes mistake with decimal and demands you prove that you didn't actually get paid $10,000.
The most common case, however, is tipped positions. When I was much younger I knew 3 servers that got audited. Maybe they lied - but there is no way the IRS accusations on what they didn't claim were actually true.
I mean I have an ongoing IRS situation where they didn't carry over an overpayment from one year to another year, and thus think I owe the money to them plus interest and penalties, and you literally can't get someone on the phone to explain and our letters go unanswered so whole thing is in semi-permanent limbo.
But thing is, adding more agents would HELP my situation, and that of the good senator from East Virginia.
It could - but as Tyler pointed out in the post you linked to, they've attempted to fix similar issues before and failed. There are a lot of ways to spend money, very few government programs have a history of placing emphasis on 'getting issues resolved quickly and efficiently.' It strikes me as somewhat unlikely that is going to be the net effect of an influx of cash.
I'm curious about the Australian lab hydrogen + oxygen + catalyst project.
Hydrogen combustion with regular Earth air burns at something like 2000C, and this project says it achieves 700C. Maybe the improvement is that not all the hydrogen is lost with this process and can be fed back in? But their website says nothing like that: https://starscientific.com.au/applications/
"Within minutes of the hydrogen interacting with the catalyst, HERO® safely reaches temperatures of more than 700 degrees Celsius.
The larger the surface area of the catalyst and the more hydrogen available, the more heat is generated. The only by-product is pure water."
That sounds like combustion with extra steps?
Maybe regular hydrogen combustion is too hot to swap in directly with a coal plant? Some quick Googling tells me these operate with a steam temperature of about 600C, but it's hard to pin down how hot they burn their coal.
But steam loops already have techniques for mediating burn temperatures and steam temperatures.
Maybe this technology is supposed to be cheaper than adjusting a steam loop to accommodate burning hydrogen?
What would you consider out of hand? In terms of number of total Monkeypox cases, overall situation.
A large % of cases are unrelated to MSM and those cases are growing on their own, and it's a substantial % of your chances of getting sick as random member of public, basically?
> Also get rid of the new menu bar on the left that’s taking up a huge amount of space for no reason
1. Click "Settings"; the "Quick Settings" bar will come up on the right side of the screen
2. In that bar, go to "Apps in Gmail" and click "Customize"
3. Deselect everything, which will make the extra left-side menu disappear
> A response is asking how the tax authorities intend to audit the college student who earned a few hundred working for a moving company, paid in cash? Even if they get audited, good luck proving it.
The biggest problem with the IRS is that you are guilty unless proven innocent. The IRS wouldn't have to prove you got paid in cash. The kid would have to prove that they reported the income or didn't get the income.
https://www.lataxattorney.com/burden-of-proof-in-civil-tax-litigation.html
If the policy change was: "make reporting easier, mistakes (by IRS or taxpayer) less likely and rigorously enforce cheats" that would be for superior. What the current law essentially does is create incentives to assume a lot more people are guilty and see how many can prove otherwise.
So what you're saying is, the IRS is going to go around saying 'I think you worked for a moving company, got paid in cash and then spent the money in cash, prove you didn't!' and the college student obviously can't and that's that? Man, ya got me?
More mundane than that - college student claimed they got paid $100, IRS makes mistake with decimal and demands you prove that you didn't actually get paid $10,000.
https://twitter.com/senatorshoshana/status/1556275180804218880?s=20&t=ydFWJ7sJepuhsttRmLO9Zg
The most common case, however, is tipped positions. When I was much younger I knew 3 servers that got audited. Maybe they lied - but there is no way the IRS accusations on what they didn't claim were actually true.
I mean I have an ongoing IRS situation where they didn't carry over an overpayment from one year to another year, and thus think I owe the money to them plus interest and penalties, and you literally can't get someone on the phone to explain and our letters go unanswered so whole thing is in semi-permanent limbo.
But thing is, adding more agents would HELP my situation, and that of the good senator from East Virginia.
It could - but as Tyler pointed out in the post you linked to, they've attempted to fix similar issues before and failed. There are a lot of ways to spend money, very few government programs have a history of placing emphasis on 'getting issues resolved quickly and efficiently.' It strikes me as somewhat unlikely that is going to be the net effect of an influx of cash.
I'm curious about the Australian lab hydrogen + oxygen + catalyst project.
Hydrogen combustion with regular Earth air burns at something like 2000C, and this project says it achieves 700C. Maybe the improvement is that not all the hydrogen is lost with this process and can be fed back in? But their website says nothing like that: https://starscientific.com.au/applications/
"Within minutes of the hydrogen interacting with the catalyst, HERO® safely reaches temperatures of more than 700 degrees Celsius.
The larger the surface area of the catalyst and the more hydrogen available, the more heat is generated. The only by-product is pure water."
That sounds like combustion with extra steps?
Maybe regular hydrogen combustion is too hot to swap in directly with a coal plant? Some quick Googling tells me these operate with a steam temperature of about 600C, but it's hard to pin down how hot they burn their coal.
But steam loops already have techniques for mediating burn temperatures and steam temperatures.
Maybe this technology is supposed to be cheaper than adjusting a steam loop to accommodate burning hydrogen?