Well that's pretty cool.

Entirely possible. I mentioned it as it does need to be factored in the overall decision. If the OP works overtime, the tax continues to come out of income as well.

Can you give an example?

I do and my wife is in the school system and knows what certain teachers tell there kids compared to others.

Ok boomer

I used to go fishing all the time with my Dad.

Because the freedom is focused on the child’s rights. The goal is creating a supportive environment where students can confide in teachers confidently. Otherwise kids in non-supportive homes have literally no one to turn to who won’t report back to their parents. Hell, even if a kids parents are supportive, they may still want to privately work through their gender identity before telling their parents.

With any luck!

Ironically there’s very little coverage/pushback for the dem sponsored bill to protect trans kids although it’s unlikely to pass. But id argue that the major wave of anti-trans legislation we’ve seen lately is a pushback against trans people becoming more comfortable & visible with their existing freedom. If these hills were a reaction to democrats overreaching they’d be rolling back recently passed laws. Instead, they’re taking away long-standing rights because people dared to exercise them

The parental rights bill is so fucking stupid.

If your kid changes their name or pronouns at school and they haven't already told you then requiring the school tell you doesn't negate the fact you've already failed as a parent because your kid should be comfortable going to you first.

What purpose does forcing the school tell you serve? So you can now abuse them at home?

I'm not denying that but take into account how they piggy back on on other local groups like free staters and the NH Libertarian party.

The one's that blend are the ones that concern me.

> Leave LGBTQ+ people alone

Leave the rest of us and our kids alone.

>Enough with the stupid culture war bullshit and actually legislate what we need and want instead.

What do you think we're doing?

[deleted]

I don't know what you mean by that.

They can't see it. It's their way or they'll throw every negative adjective they can think of at you. They're openly endorsing keeping secrets from parents, that's some serious dystopian BS, and to top it off, some of them are calling it "freedom". Bizarre times we're living in.

Ignoring my actual feelings on this, Both the senate and house bills on this are garbage.

Senate Bill: "Parents bill of rights" broad crappy thing, like Florida.

https://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_Status/billinfo.aspx?id=1079&inflect=2

House Bill: "No, you can't have any kind of gender affirming care except therapy under 18".

https://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_Status/billinfo.aspx?id=71

How about we leave that to the doctors, counselors, researchers, and not some clowns in Concord, thanks.

Edit: Removing "experts" because some of y'all really wanna get that big authoritarian govt D by letting them legislate things that don't need to be legislated, all because you're big mad you were asked to wear a mask and not be gross.

Yes. There are experts. They study really hard for a really long time and there are plenty of trustworthy experts. Government != Experts.

Which group are you referring to?

Thats literally what your people have suggested already. Maybe instead of having a hissy fit whenever anyone questions your bs you should just go for a walk or rant on twitter.

>If you are supporting restrictive laws, you are supporting restricting someone's freedom, even if not your own.

What do you think laws are? That's what they do. What happens in the classroom should not be kept from parents. Topics that are deemed out of bounds that have no academic value should not be in the classroom, especially sensitive topics like sexuality.

>You are quite free to teach your kids your values at home.

This is how we ended up with vouchers. Congrats.

Hey I'm also not a fan of using taxpayer money to subsidize private vehicle ownership, but we have things like on street parking and have you ever tried getting rid of those or razing the fees to better account for the actual cost of maintaining our roads and putting that on to the drivers wallet and not the base tax payer? Good luck! We unfortunately already subsidize driving and the storing private vehicles on public land at all levels. From more indirect policies like exempt SUV from safety and emission regulations by classifying them "light trucks (bigger vehicles create more damage to the roads), tariffs and restrictions on certain types of foreign import (limiting competition), oil subsidize. To more direct ones like, not having adequate gas tax and user fee costs to account for the actual cost of road related expenses (right now a ever increasing amount of that shortfall is cover by property tax and other general fund sources, this also puts the cost indirectly on local residents as large commercial lot owner pay very little on taxes on their acres of parking lots that out of town users benefit from without much of a direct payment to the infrastructure cost that supports these lots) , all the unaccounted for public costs that heavy car use requires (sewer, utilities, safety, etc that don't get paid directly by users), and the parking mandates themselves (subsidizing car companies by creating a induced demand effect, increasing constructions cost, and influencing development patterns). So at this point who should bare the cost of it and how much government intervention are we supposed to bare? At least with some centralized parking garages we can aglomerate those cost on maintenance and collect fees towards reducing direct tax burdens on locals that might not even use the facilities, and if we then removal of parking mandates we open up ourselves to less government intervention and open our towns and cities up to more creative land use, as we take away one of the biggest financial burden to construction for large and small scale projects. And it's all very geographically driven, in more rural places developers will continue to build parking and these mandates make more sense, they know that is just not going to pencil if they cant draw people in. But in urban areas we shouldn't be forcing it.

We are just not really accounting for our current reality when we create these types of mandates. I'm currently helping a client develop a small 20 unit building in a downtown abandon lot on the Seacoast. It's located on a portion of street that has 60 under utilized pull in on-street parking spots, a large strip mall parking lot that is probably in the the high 100 range in spots, very underutilized probably sits at 30% occupancy at its average peak. Next to it sit a abandoned plant and mill that has almost 400 spots that get no use whatsoever. Then we have dozens or more on-street spots on nearby side streets and a few public lots that probably end up adding 60 more spots to this total. all at 5 min walking range from our site. In a area that, other than the unpleasantness of having to walk by so many empty parking lots, is has pedestrian access to transit, groceries, public services, and entertainment. But the town still requires us to have 2 spots per unit, that's 40 more spots and will account for over 60% of the building site and will probably account for 1/3 of the budget through the site improvements needed to create a surface lot. We had a pie in the sky discussion and she would love to spread does units out to multiple buildings on the whole site and make it a bit more scaled and create a bit more of a historic street front down the length of the site if she didn't have to dedicate so much just to parking. We are trying to see if it's even possible, and if she can't fit 20 units she will not build. In a area where housing, urban rehabilitation, and putting properties back into the tax rolls is sorely needed its seem like cars have more rights to housing than people.

I'm so sick of this gross, pandering, fear-mongering culture war legislation. Isn't this New Hampshire? Isn't our whole deal to leave people the fuck alone? If you're such a shitty parent that you believe your child simply knowing an LGBTQ person exists will make them become LGBTQ, you need to realize that the blame for that is on you, not a random teacher. Parents have always had access to the curriculum in NH. They've always had the ability to opt their kid out of things. And the need for kids to be able to talk to a trusted teacher if they have an unsafe home life has always been vital. Stop shoving this faux outrage about problems that don't exist and absurd religious indoctrination down the throats of NH taxpayers, parents, and students, and just leave people alone.

I think that's how 'free speech' works. What did I miss?

Fuck yes. Send it ladies. Fishing rocks. I love fishing.

that’s awesome!!!