Again, tax ID. Your one company can only have one tax ID associated with it. If it's a sole (meaning one owner) prop the tax ID is that owner's SS number. If you want to have two full owners and one business, you do a partnership and you could incorporate in some way.

I live in the country. But if I'm not expecting anyone, and I'm busy then I ignore the door, which is my choice since it's my house. Our mail lady has a specific knock, so I open for her and so does Kay. It's like phone calls, if I don't know the number, I don't answer. If it's a real reason to reach me they leave a voice mail. If anyone real came to my door for a real reason, I'd know ahead of time they were coming. And if Kay comes at an inopportune time, I do ignoreots of times I don't have a choice...my four kids are 7 and under. It is not rude not to answer.

North Shore of MN (fly into Duluth) or Door County WI (fly into Green Bay).

All businesses have tax IDs. If you're a sole prop, you can't have a partner technically because the tax ID is your own SS number. Also in a sole prop you are personally liable meaning if you're sued, they can get your personal assets. What you want is to incorporate your biz and list the officers as you and DD. The biz has its own tax ID. To do this you need to get a tax ID number and you need to draw up Articles of Incorporation. You do not have to be massive to be a corporation it's just a structure.

It's pristine looking. Just some ideas.... 1. Backyard. Cut out some brush (if that exists). Make it look like there's usable space on the ground. Cost = elbow grease. 2. Add some homey touches. The line of pillows blocking the back of the sofa reads closed off. Spread them out. Toss a throw over the back of the lounge. Turn the lounge at an angle over the corner of the rug. Put a pillow on it. Get some Rustoleum HEAT resistant paint and make the FP surround black (we did that to ours at an old house.) find a few green cleaning looking topiary like faux plants and put them on the shelves. Make the coffee table a conversation area with some books. A stack of coasters. A small base of flowers and maybe an art piece. 3. In the laundry room, put in a potted plant. Faux. Greenery is peaceful and it makes homey feelings it also softens right angles. 4. Add some bath towels on the edge of the tub and a pretty soap. That reads spa and relaxing. Fold nice hand towels at the sink. Again nice greenery. Overall it's a clean home. I think you need buyers to envision cozy and conversations. Oh and get a new agent.

Setting my own family's schedule and not being beholden to any schedule except DHs job.

Maybe back into your garage, so you have full view when pulling out. This little kid in the way likely won't change. So instead, though annoying, you change. Bc better to do that than kill the ring leader's toddler. Your story is making me itch! We left suburbia to avoid all this.

On a personal note, I am turning in now and will be out for a few days. Not ignoring anybody. Sincerely, thank you for this discussion. Maybe you do not feel the same way, but despite opposite viewpoints, I do not hold any ill feelings and like that there has been a decent back and forth here between posters, which has not turned inflammatory. Everybody gets a cookie!!! :hurray: - ML

For military, then, make some sort of Federal group to oversee them as they move from Federal land to Federal land or are in retirement. And, still have checks and balnces in place for some Federal oversight. For example, the Federal Aviation Assoc. oversees all airlines in the U.S.. It would not be too tough to make a group that made sure states were not violating civil, legal and/or human rights. Regarding large scale purchasing power - you would still have that. What the Feds did, now the states would do. And there would be competition which could decrease prices. "Heh, medical supply company, you sold supplies to VA for $100, if you don't give me $100 too I will go to your competitor."

I hear you. All of what you're saying makes total sense. I just do not think an across the board sweeping tax plan to level the playing field makes sense. States need to tackle this on their own as I just wrote about in another post here. Your two cities experiencing this trend, do not need to be micromanaged by a D.C. bureaucrat, this is an issue relevant to this particular state, WV faces issues with drug overdoses, addictions, and joblessness. FL has issues with a large aging population. Every state has their"thing." A hugely viable option is to allow the states to handle their own programs to tailor them to their own citizens. If my Federal tax decreased, because programs got phased off to the states, but my state tax increased to pay for MY state's needs, I would be fine with that. I dislike the nebulous nature of Federal government taking a one size fits all approach to things and that echoes thorugh convos like this one as "tax 'em more!!!" We have 13 townships or cities in my county. A few years ago, the county decided to push a lot of decision making it had done off into the hands of the smaller locales. Brilliant! Now, my rural township does what it needs to make our 280 households function best and the city we moved from with massive infrastructure and 86,000 people does what it needs. The county was smart enough to see how each locale does best to handle its own area-specific affairs.

I think that needs to be clarified to "small Federal government" advocates. I am a firm believer in letting the locales and states deal with their own programs and needs, and letting the Federal government deal with things like the military, Interstates, National Parks, and Federal taxes, just to name a few. In the past few years, Post cereals bought out Malt-o-Meal, which was headquartered in my pervious suburb of Minneapolis. Post is HQ'd on the East Coast, I believe. So they were trying to manage Malt-o-Meal from a distance for a bit and according to a mid-level MOM manager friend, who has since moved out of state, said it was really rough to have people on the one side of the nation trying to deal with there location of offices and the plant here in MN. It is like that with Federal versus State involvement. Let each state determine its needs for its citizens on its own. AZ will be different than IA will be different than FL and on and on. Not once have I advocated for not helping those who need it. In fact, if you read up thread, you can see my whole discussion about some of what DH and I do to help out. What happens always is that one side says my side is heartless, selfish and cold, but really we want to help too, we just want to do it differently - move it to the states and stop viewing other's "excess" as the cause of others having less. You said European nations have more of a collective attitude. Well, yes. They are also much smaller in terms of population and geographic size than the U.S.. Each state here is like a whole European nation unto itself in terms of size and culture - let them operate that way. Let Texans take care of Texans and Ohioans take care of Ohioans. But, you are advocating for an office in D.C. to oversee something across 50 states that are as varied and unique as well, we posters all are here. Why? It makes no sense.

Yes. I would get rid of most deductions and simplify the tax code - to like three pages.

Great idea on the calling. Her grandma and I text each other sometimes about kid stuff. I could just ask her to text me before Kay walks over.

I think that would be dispiriting. It would be like treading water. I certainly do not thnk you are stupid or lazy. So it is about inheirated wealth. The loans I addressed (VA, USDA, FHA) are still available despite the distorted housing market, correct? So, a median income worker in your area could feasibly get one of these loans, because the existence of government meddling in housing prices in your area does not negate the existence of the buying power, via these loans, to the median income worker. But, if the government meddling has inflated the housing cost SO much that a VA, USDA, or FHA loan would never be written on these properties due to their too high price tag, then those loans are out of one's reach. That would be so frustrating. I still do not see how inherited wealth of those teachers and nurses you mentioned has anything to do with government/meddling/inflation of housing prices.

But there is not a pie, some people see all this as a pie. If someone sees someone else having more, they think they have less and the only way to get more for themselves is to take from someone else's deemed "excess." But, many do not think the finite pie exists at all, that was my previous point. Many see wealth, money, and income as infinite. And someone having more is not a threat to me, meaning that I will always have less. Someone's else's fortune \ne (is not equal) to me having nothing or little. So if I am a person who has nothing or little, I do not think the best solution lies in me taking from someone else's "excess."

Well, I agree with you. So the issue is specifically inherited wealth? Or is it raising rents? Or is it not being able to buy a basic home? Or all of the above? I have trouble understanding this one thing though, there is math out there that informs renters when it makes more sense to buy a home versus stay renting. For example, if one is paying $1,500 a month in rent, sometimes it makes more sense to put that into a "permanent roof." And, there are loans available to first time home buyers with little to nothing down. The government has made that sort of loan a reality for many people in the U.S. through the VA, USDA, and/or FHA. So there are options and programs for people to do the math and buy a permanent roof, which fulfills that basic need, provides security for longevity, and helps someone build equity (eh hem...wealth). Also, a lot of people alter their locations to make home ownership and that security a reality. There is the choice. What are a person's priorities - not saying you specifically, just a person in general? It seems like you want to have a long-term home, which I think makes sense. But you want to have all the terms for that scenario on your terms. You have a valid point that everyone in America should have housing security in their golden years (my dad's term), but you want everyone else to change (not have inheritance, not build wealth, not pass anything along) to get everyone there is what it reads like here. Is that an accurate assessment? If not, please explain.

Thanks! All good ideas. I will make up some variation of this.

I think you should find a new agent - someone more assertive. You want to look at the number of homes they have SOLD as their own listings in the past 6 and 12 months. You also want someone who communicates almost too much and is available literally anytime. Anytime. Homes sell anytime. You do not want a 9-5 agent. Brass can be off-putting for many buyers - it reads as old. Oddly, brass is coming back around... If you can, I might check out sites like www.lampsplus.com or www.lightingdirect.com and buy some new, non brass light fixtures. It is possible to find them for pretty cheap. Also, check out Hobby Lobby online for drawer and cabinet pulls...every few weeks they put certain items on 50% sale including drawer things like this. If you can swing it, consider updating your door knobs in the main living areas. Last I checked, Home Depot sells some for like $13-$20 each. Perhaps the trees are nice, but they need a prune in general and so they do not shade the house at all if they are doing that. If you care to post pics here, I am sure some of us could give ideas for staging too. Also many people think summer is the best time to sell. Well only if you want to compete with everyone else. Go off the market maybe, make some minor changes and relist in the winter.

Awhile back some of you gave some helpful advice when I discussed our next door neighbor, Kay. I have been putting some of that into practice and it is going quite well. She and my three play a lot and we had her over for dinner last night. Here is a new development and I am seeking more help at crafting a good, kind phrase for Kay. I need help setting a new boundary. We have three exterior doors: garage/mud room, front, and back/deck slider. When Kay comes to see if my kids can come out and play, she begins at the garage/mud door if the garage door is up. If no one answers (because we are busy, are not expecting visitors, cannot get to it, or do not want to answer it - oh maybe because we're pottying), she moves along to the front door and knocks. If no one answers there, she goes to the back/deck slider and peeks in and knocks more. There are a lot of windows on our main level, so unless one is in the laundry room or powder room, you get easily seen from the front and back/deck doors. The trouble is like today, I was in the kitchen with my dad talking. Kay made her rounds on the doors and ended up at the back/deck slider. Well guess what, we're sitting right there at the kitchen table and she's watching us through the glass. Awkward. I am not a person to block out sunlight for privacy, so I cannot just draw all the curtains and live in a cave. How do I kindly set the boundary that I do not want to be hunted down inside my own home because it is literally like that. She tends to put her face and hands to the glass and look in. Sometimes it has startled me. Usually if I welcome visitors, like her, I leave up the garage door so she knows we are home and we are "open" to play or say "hi." However, there have been times when she knows we are home, but the garage door is down (because we are not open to play) and she hunts around the windows for us. And it's weird...it is like being IN a zoo. Help?!

I would like to talk about pie. For one group there is a pie and its pieces inside it are finite. The pie is money or wealth and people are angry, frustrated, and maybe jealous that their piece of the pie is smaller than some one else's. So what some want to do is redivide the pie and everybody gets a sliver - the same exact sliver for everyone. The issue is that wealth and money are not finite....there is not a limited number of dollars to go around (there is actually no pie), there are an unlimited number of dollars to go around. So, for the other side of this discussion, those people say, you do not have to redivide the money/wealth...just generate more - make more dollars (not literally mint them). The U.S. is brilliant at generating more wealth (personally, and not to derail this discussion, I think we are not doing enough with alternative energies to make our nation a boat load of money and generate thousands of jobs, for example). Ironically, the programs we do have right now, are drum roll please, due to all the wealth generated in the past decades (the same wealth many here are angry at) that are being taxed then and now. Wealth generation is our friend. Dollars reinvested into companies pay for R&D, new jobs, bolstered ad and PR budgets, and the list goes on. Plus, those dollars are taxed to PAY FOR SOCIAL PROGRAMS! If everyone gets the same sliver, we take away motivation - one of the key drivers of wealth generation. When wealth generation declines, our nation's programs will not get the funding at all, or enough that they need and MORE people than now will be SOL. No one here is opposed to helping others, no one here is heartless. Some of us just do not see a pie at all. When people think we need to "level the playing field" what we hear is to take people's drive, gumption, and spirit of competition away. I just had a brain storm...maybe all this bad blood between pie people and non-pie people stems back to eliminating the gold standard. Back then, there literally was a finite amount of money and wealth. Now, our wealth is actually fake. We use worthless paper and metals along with binary code to tell us how much something or someone is worth. But what if that all went away...............

I agree. These are all things OP said.

"Excess income" and "should be allowed to have" That's alarming. According to whom? In other countries those questions get answered by crazy people at worst or at best at the slight of other demographics. I want to keep what our family makes as much as possible to do what we want with it....which incidentally IS giving it away to starving kids in other nations, to give them education and hygiene products/lessons. We are living with less than we could so others can have more. It's a rub when people want to dictate what we do with money. When you take something, in this case, money, from people who are unwilling to give it, all you do is force people into compliance with your fake rule. Is that okay? As it turns out, Americans may be some of the most generous and monetarily helpful people in the world with the billions of dollars private citizens give to charity. If you want others with less to have more, then set up successful programs that work and can take funding from donors giving willingly. Right now all the existing programs have so much red tape and troubles....there's waste, misuse, illegal activity, etc.. but people want to keep feeding that broken system. It's dumping money into pits and burying it. I don't want to be part of that any more than I have to. BUT if you can craft programs that DO work at local, boots on the ground, levels and not some D.C. Based bureau-lith which is out of touch with people, then I'd back that happily.

We already covered this further up thread. It's a non issue now. Not any longer relevant.

Dup

I said 26-35 too. DH was 29. I was 25, nearly 26. The schooling/training aspect is important. But I also believe that these years are great for travel, living on ones own, and doing things (while supporting oneself) to be an adult...budgeting, saving, getting plugged into church, and etc.. Yes you can learn these at any time, but it's amazing the mental maturity between many 18 versus older 20s. Not all, but many.