Sh 900 2 2005-2023

The top answers are so bad that they merit a response.I see many communists rehashing the well worn statement along the lines of “NO, businesses only care about profits not people”. Yeah yeah we know. The reality is the following.First things first, all resources in society are limited. Land is limited, food is limited, timber is limited, especially a person’s time is limited. Therefore, as humans we have to decide how we will use all of these limited resources. Considering that there are millions of products we could potentially create out of just a few hundred raw resources, this is very complex. How could we possibly know what and how much of something to produce? Well we have to usePRICES.What are prices in the first place? They are nothing more than signals to society. They tell producers what society wants and how much of it they want. If a business generates an evil profit it is because it is fulfilling the needs of society. If a house building company generates a profit it is because they are supplying a roughly correct amount and quality of shelter to the masses. If it were losing money then that is the way of society to tell the home builder company that they are not using resources efficiently and are not supplying enough or good enough housing to the masses, therefore, they go out of business, or must change their ways so as to satisfy the needs of the masses better. If they do change their ways and organize societies’ limited resources better, then people buy from them more and they are rewarded with profits.Profits are not evil any more than losses are evil. They are simply empirical ways to know if limited resources are being used the way society needs.So on to the welfare question.Without even explaining the immorality of stealing peoples money to give to others, I ask the question, is it even possible for government to ensure the welfare of citizens? Further (and the most important part), how does the state know how much shelter, food, medicine, etc. to give to people if there is no profit or loss system? Think about it, it takes hundreds if not thousands of inputs JUST TO MAKE A PENCIL. Each of those inputs (rubber, wood, graphite, machining, transportation), has their own set of prices (determined by profit and loss) which all is taken into consideration to determine the final price of the pencil. Do you ever notice that we never have a shortage of pencils? For that matter do you ever notice that there is a shortage of bread, or meat, or cars, or electricity? You can thank the free market and the profit-loss system for that.Now on the contrary do you ever wonder why in socialist paradises such as Venezuela, Zimbabwe, the USSR, and Communist China, people are or always were starving and died of basic things like fevers? Do you wonder why around 100 million people died in socialist countries just in the 20th century? All of these countries had universal welfare, what happened? Simply, without any profit and loss system as inherent in capitalism, they had no possible way of knowing what and how much of things to produce. The result? Mass starvation. Even though these before mentioned countries are incredibly rich in natural resources and farmland.Now many will say, “yeah but we aren’t proposing full socialism we just want the government to provide basic stuff, you know mixed economy and all that”. this doesn’t make the basic economics go away. The government doesn’t rely on the profit loss system, they rely on a system of coercion and taxation. this means that they don’t have a profit or a loss, they just have huge budgets and abstract “goals”. Efficiency and consumer demand doesn’t even fit into the calculation and therefore the “welfare” they provide will always be progressively more expensive and lesser quality. Don’t just take my word for itThe sadly funny thing is that poverty steadily declined in the “horrible” capitalist days of the 19th and early 20th centuries, whereas, with the introduction of the modern welfare state in the U.S. the poverty rate has stagnated in spite of the enormous and ever increasing budget we throw at the so called “war on poverty”. Why? Again, because economic calculation for the state is impossible and therefore they can never know what, how, or how much of something to produce, in this case, welfare.Contrast this to capitalism which decades ago eliminated the kind of grinding poverty that plagued mankind for centuries (at least in the west where it has most thoroughly been implemented), and continues to lift humankind up to more elevated standards of living today. Just remember that if you enjoy having an abundance of food, shelter, clothing, etc. it is thanks to the profit-loss system that enables companies to empirically know how much you need of something. Paradoxically, however, the more government “welfare” we have the more we will need.If you want to read more in depth about the subject go to Emerging| All Things Liberty and Art

The things I’m taking into consideration are the following: -Access to military hardware stationed within a state-Access to oil and oil refineries-Access to ports on defensible waterways for supplies coming from abroad (I’m assuming the lack of foreign intervention is limited to military action; trade is still constant, as in previous US domestic wars)-Domestic agriculture and water supplies-Natural barriers After all of this, a matter of prime importance I take from Alexander Hamilton is the ability to borrow money.  Credit is of prime importance to a war effort.  Fiat currency would collapse overnight, and the ability to establish new capital and monetary markets to get lending moving again would be of major importance. I’ll start from my own home state of WA.  The first thing to do would be for WA to hit AK. They're the only state in position to do so, and they would need to get a hold of the oil resources to remain standing. WA is home to three supercarriers, while CA only has one now. So taking Alaska would be fairly straight forward, especially given the reliance of Alaska on shipping to survive and the high proportion of the population near the coasts. This would put WA in position to quickly seize HI and its naval resources--an onslaught that HI could not resist--and thus put WA in position to gain control of all naval assets in the Pacific, including the supercarrier George Washington based in Japan. Controlling Oregon would only be valuable insofar as it was necessary to take control of the Columbia River, but Idaho is a second consideration after the short-term goal of domination of naval fleets. Idaho expands arable land, and covers a border with a major population center on it. California's biggest first concern would be controlling its water supply, so the bulk of its immediate effort in the outset should be directed to the Colorado river, with strategic interest in taking nuclear and petrochemical resources in NV, UT, and CO, with Arizona subdued to protect the Colorado River access. The big power that I feel is underestimated is Virginia. It has massive naval resources, including the best shipyards and the Pentagon with all of its resources. Their navy would very quickly subdue the massive coastal exposure of MD, and WV would be an obvious and relatively easy way to secure coal--those would both go quickly. It would then turn its attention to control of the Delaware river, where it would easily put the squeeze on Philly. Taking PA would be a good access of manpower, agriculture, industrial capacity, and natural gas. All would be important. Expansion to the south includes the tough nuts of NC and SC (with Fort Bragg, Camp Lejune, and the Naval Weapons Station). Fighting inland means trying to trek across the Appalachian Mtns. But most signNowly, no VA military would choose to fight southerners over shooting Yankees. So north it is. Meanwhile, NY, for all its strengths, is very, very vulnerable. NYC is a huge indefensible liability. Their interest would rapidly turn to two thinks: taking the low-hanging fruit of Vermont to secure the Hudson/Lake Champlain before Mass does, and getting the oil refineries of New Jersey. They may cross with MA a bit taking CT and RI to make sure Long Island is less exposed, but they'd win if Mass tried. MA may be better off taking the short-term gains of NH and ME (ME was once a part of MA, after all). But NY could not defend the shipping lanes to NJ very long. VA would move up the Delaware and perhaps the Susquehanna, and with PA secure, would put the squeeze on NJ by first striking the Capitol on the Delaware. NY would hit NJ from across the sound. NY would start sending children and seniors upstate out of NYC, and use its massive manpower for a land strike against VA by invading PA from the north. NY would also be able to use its massive gold deposits for collateral to get international financing. At about this point, VA would start sending its navy up the coast and begin a blockade of NY Harbor. NY would not last long. Further inland, Kentucky has two great resources (Ft Campbell and Ft Knox) but two huge liabilities (low population and landlocked). First they’d sucker-punch Tennessee to swell their ranks, then they’d go after Ohio to get access to shipping and lending from abroad. It would be brutal, but when Kentucky won, they’d be ready to start hammering at Indiana and Michigan immediately. Texas would consolidate by first hitting NOLA (as described by others). Succeeding there, they’d use their air force and conventional army forces in a grand march north to pick up all of those square states that always go red. With oil and oil refineries and both a solid harbor and international border, when the US currency collapsed under the scenario (a guarantee), few would be able to get financing from abroad. Texas would be an early favorite and have solid credit. So they’d push all the way up, seeking to secure both grain and the grand prize of the northern plains: the Bakken formation of oil in the MT/ND region. Bakken would also be Colorado’s goal. With NORAD, air force strength, and mountain seclusion, oil would be one of its biggest concerns. TX wouldn’t strike straight into the Rockies, because it would be a waste of resource. So as Colorado succeeds in taking WY and UT (also having petroleum plus cattle and copper and coal), they’d try to hit MT and ND before TX could. That’d be hard, because TX would be surging up the plains. WA would hit California in its Achilles Heel, with control of the sea making an inability for CA to draw credit or protect its shipping lanes. Though they’d take NV and AZ fairly easily, and though they have some oil and many refineries, if WA took AK and HI, WA would be in the cat bird seat to secure US military resources in Japan and S. Korea, much of which they’d bring home. By putting pressure on CA, their oil would run dry and their military would come to a grinding halt. Knowing that trying to wait out a siege would waste valuable time while Texas was growing stronger and stronger, their resolve would wane. For the sake of avoiding a fall to Texas, CA would instead fall to WA. NM would be the no-man’s-land that everyone wouldn’t bother to touch. All liability, not much advantage. Given that we’re assuming a conventional war, the nuke resources wouldn’t be worth all that much. Illinois would strike first at Wisconsin and then at Indiana. They’d be at a point of fighting the Kentucky forces in the middle of Indiana when Texas would take them by storm—first securing MN, then taking WI from IL, and then moving low draft boats to Lake Michigan to start shelling Chicago. It wouldn’t take long for them to fall. Not yet mentioned is Florida, which is also far stronger than is properly appreciated: air force, lots of navy, open supply lines, ability to drill in the Gulf. They’d be the only ones in a position to try to strangle TX at NOLA, but there’d be no point in the early rounds. First they’d bypass Georgia and hit the Carolinas for their military capacities, then hit the boggy Mississippi and Alabama (more difficult for Texas than its worth this early), and Georgia would be crushed easily by encirclement. So consolidating: WA takes basically everything west of the Rockies, Texas takes the full plains and Mississippi river, CO has the northern Rockies with WY and UT with skirmishes against TX in MT and ND, KY takes OH, TN, IN, and MI, FL takes MI, AL, GE, NC, and SC, and Virginia subdues NY to take everything else. Texas now loses its main advantage by having borders exposed to all major players except VA. They fight WA for CO, WY, and MT, with WA quickly taking UT from CO once they begin to press inland. Texas also fights KY for control of the Ohio River Valley, and they’ve been drained by their first major fight in subduing IL. KY and FL strike a détente (because FL has all the strength and knows VA will take care of KY for them), and while KY puts pressure on IL (now controlled by TX), FL strikes at MO to cut the Mississippi and disrupt the flow of control, all while finally launching its blockade of NOLA. Now VA is ready to press inland, and they start in OH. KY is overextended already, and VA’s northern block presses east, quickly consuming the remnants of KY. TX briefly makes headway in Indiana, but can’t consolidate—FL and WA are increasing the pressure. At about the time that TX makes a major victory and secures most of CO, they lose NOLA to FL, and MO falls shortly afterward. It’s a devastating blow. But it isn’t long before VA antagonizes FL and draws them into a full naval confrontation. TX rapidly regains what it had, and starts the long overland push through the Deep South. WA has good consolidation, but can’t make inroads past the Rockies. TX makes headway in WY and MT, while dog fighting occurs over NM between the rival air forces of CA (controlled by WA) and TX. As VA manages supremacy over FL (the battle to take Florida becomes among the bloodiest and most devastating of any in the war), the remainder of the South quickly falls under its control. It now has the full eastern seaboard. Final result: VA. Both WA and VA hammer TX, and once weakened, only VA has the clear route to subdue TX completely and regain the states. After that, the WA Pacific theater is doomed. The East has control of more money, more forces, more oil, more everything. It’s a long and bitter war of attrition, but the peaceniks on the West Coast don’t have the fight in them. VA wins. And so ironically we see that the battle was won when Jefferson sat Hamilton and Madison down to dinner to negotiate an agreement to help resolve the impasse in Hamilton’s move to have the Federal government assume all Revolutionary War debt held by the states, with Hamilton agreeing to bargain the nation’s capital for the sake of the funding scheme.  It was agreed that night that the capital should have a temporary home in Philadelphia for 10 years, then move to a permanent site on the Potomac.  Madison would free up some votes to pass the assumption initiative. The Virginians had the goal that the southern sensibilities of the region should dominate the Federal government and shape its character—a stark reversal of what the nation seemed to be developing into under Hamilton’s vigorous administration in which he essentially assumed the role of a Prime Minister under the generally aloof Washington.  And for the next half century and some change, the Federal Government did fall under the sway of the South.  The Bank that Hamilton had founded did not see its charter renewed, and the Jackson Democrats became the major drivers of the early 19th century.  But in time, the direction of influence reversed. Today, rather than VA imparting a Southern perspective on DC, DC asserts a Federal character and national sensibilities to the Old Dominion.  It is now the natural seat of power for the nation.

You must determine your New York State residency status. You need to answer these questions:Did you live in an on-campus apartment or an apartment or house off-campus in New York State in 2012?Did you maintain, or rent, the on-campus apartment or off-campus residence for at least 11 months in 2012?Were you physically present in New York State for at least 183 days in 2012?If the answers to all three questions are "Yes", and you were not a full-time undergraduate student (which as an F-1 OPT I assume you were not), you are a New York State resident for tax purposes. Otherwise you are a nonresident.You file Form IT-201, http://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/curren..., if you are a resident of New York State, Form IT-203, http://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/curren..., if you are not.

Just give a call to the Personal Income Tax Information Center at 518-457-5181.They will ask you to report it as W-2 and attach scanned copy of your 1042-S. They will also make a note about that is how they asked you to report it.So, dont just report 1042-S as W-2. Give them a call first.

As Sarah said, leave it blank or, if it's a free-form text field, put in "Freelancer".If you put in $50k and they were thinking of paying $75k, you just lost $25k/year.  If you put in $75k, but their budget only allows $50k, you may have lost the job on that alone.If you don't put in anything, leave it to the interview, and tell thm that you're a freelancer and adjust your fee according to the difficulty of the job, so there's no set income.  If they ask for how much you made last year, explain that that would include periods between jobs, where you made zero, so it's not a fair number.In any financial negotiation, an old saying will always hold true - he who comes up with a number first, loses.  Jobs, buying houses - they're both the same.  Asking "How much?" is the better side to be on.  then if they say they were thinking of $50k-$75k, you can tell them that it's just a little less than you were charging, but the job looks to be VERY interesting, the company seems to be a good one to work for and you're sure that when they see what you're capable of, they'll adjust your increases.  (IOW, "I'll take the $75k, but I expect to be making about $90k in a year.")They know how to play the game - show them that you do too.

Somewhere on that form should be a blank for routing number and account number. Those are available from your check and/or your bank statements. If you can't find them, call the bank and ask or go by their office for help with the form.  As long as those numbers are entered correctly, any error you make in spelling, location or naming should not influence the eventual deposit into your proper account.

Hi,Towards the front of your Immigration Form there is a check list. This check list explains the documents you will need to include with your form (i.e. passport documents, proof of funds, medical information etc). With any visa application it’s important to ensure that you attach all the required information or your application may be returned to you.The forms themselves will guide you through the process, but you must ensure you have the correct form for the visa you want to apply for. Given that some visa applications can carry hefty fees it may also be wise to check with an Immigration Adviser or Lawyer as to whether you qualify for that particular visa.The form itself will explain which parts you need to fill out and which parts you don’t. If you don’t understand the form you may wish to get a friend or a family member to explain it to you. There is a part at the back of the form for them to complete saying that they have assisted you in the completion of it.If all else fails you may need to seek advice from a Immigration Adviser or Lawyer. However, I always suggest calling around so you can ensure you get the best deal.

You indicate this is a Delaware C Corp so check corporation and you will file Form 1120.Check that you are starting a new corporation.Date business started is the date you actually started the business.  Typically you would look on the paperwork from Delaware and put the date of incorporation.December is the standard closing month for most corporations. Unless you have a signNow business reason to pick a different month use Dec.If you plan to pay yourself wages put one.  If you don't know put zero.Unless you are fairly sure you will owe payroll taxes the first year check that you will not have payroll or check that your liability will be less than $1,000. Anything else and the IRS will expect you to file quarterly payroll tax returns.Indicate the type of SaaS services you will offer.

To obtain a copy of an arrest report, you may request it through the mail or in person at our customer service window located at 1400 S. Lamar St. You will need the name of the person arrested, date of birth, sex, race and the date of the arrest.

You can get reports of accidents that occurred in the last 30 days. You may request a report in person or by mail. To make a request in person, go to the precinct where the accident occurred. You should bring a valid form of picture identification, such as a driver's license or passport.

Can I Look Up a Police Report Online? You can obtain some police incident reports online. ... Your best bet is to call or visit the law enforcement agency that made the police report you want to look up. Have the identification number or the relevant time, place, date and names.

Online. You can purchase a copy of your report online for a ×7.50 fee. ... In Person. For a full report, you must go in person to HPD Records Division at 1200 Travis St., Houston, TX 77002. ... By Mail. You may also request a copy of your report by mail.

Online: The easiest way to get a copy of your police report is by going online. You just have to know where your accident occurred. ... Mail: You can also mail in a formal request and a check to the appropriate police department. ... DMV: The Traffic Accident Report is available through your local DMV.