for the california legislation there were no "nay" votes. it's disapointing this performatively protective stance permeates both dominant right-of-global-center parties in America, but it is "all of them"
That'd be a "style-over-substance" fallacious argument. Or one could be hoping for a halo-effect to cloud the reader's opinion of their comment because some piece of software made it read like Enron-marketing-hogwash-speak.
>It will add an additional hour or two of effort to every resident of the state, even if they are below the state income threshold which is quite an externality.
Nope, that is false. The language of the bill only requires filing if tax is owed. There will be a handful of folks on the cusp who will need to calculate their AGI to determine their state tax liability but everyone else knows offhand if they need to file.
The language is "Individuals not owing tax under this chapter are not
required to file a return..."
yes? it's got sexist and classist elements and satirizes victorian culture.
i'd encourage reading it ahead of gifting (and i'd encourage grabbing it from archive.org or something, since it's 141 years old) because not all 10 yearolds are going to receive it the same way
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07498062
looks like it uses flavorings from these folks https://www.tastetech.com/