You can reform the tax code so there is no 'marriage penalty' or preference, but it still comes down to other reasons.__________________Well, I will certainly grant the emotional reasons, as I can not claim to know someone's motivations.However, all the other issues were essentially rejected as a core thing with the rejection of various ideas of a partner type classification. This was soundly rejected by the gay community, and would have had all but the direct dollar issues and the nebulous 'emotional' As far as emotional? Well it would constitute a direct acceptance of the relationship as legit and sanctioned in a very well way. So speculation regarding the emotional allows a wide range of possibilities. I personally do not think it is a particularly good idea. However, I could live with it because we just need it behind us. Frankly we have important things to worry about -- sanctioning the relationships in some way shape or form for visitation, inheritance and other non direct financial support issues should have been done already. I do understand why it was not; if I wanted full 'marriage' and i got some other 90% solution I would know my chances of success had just passed for a few generations. We just need this behind us. Same goes for abortion. pro and anti abortion folks are casting votes on what IMO is a crazy issue. They are also on both sides casting votes in conflict with other issues. I do not think that is doing us any good at all, and I believe it is a large part of why we can not come together. I wish I knew the solution. However, we need someone to be forced to act decisively either way, on both these issues IMO.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat