|
leidend posted:Yeah my family was broke for decades going from Canada to New Zealand to Australia and back to Canada despite both parents having good jobs. But I don't remember "paying taxes in your former country" being a thing. I'm not going to pretend to be an authority on English tax code in the 1960s, but I know that the current US code states that you get to make up to a certain amount of money abroad (~$90,000) tax free, but anything after that you have to pay tax on. But you're still paying local tax on that money if they don't have some kind of tax treaty set up with the US. So, assuming that taxes then are anything like they are now, he'd have to pay tax twice on any earnings he made over the cutoff. The difference of course being that the US taxes would have been withheld from his paycheck initially and him needing to produce at least a year's worth of taxes for England. He wouldn't have had to have had any income in England at all to wrack up a decent tax bill.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 15:34 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 02:44 |
|
|
I'd assume the English aren't going to send a crack squad to bring Lane in over a few thousand quid. The problem is more that Lane wouldn't be able to go back home. BTW, I just found out that Jared Harris is Richard Harris' son 
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 15:36 |
|
|
zoux posted:I'd assume the English aren't going to send a crack squad to bring Lane in over a few thousand quid. The problem is more that Lane wouldn't be able to go back home. I think the bigger problem is that Lane hasn't been honest with his wife. She is probably also going to be in trouble for Lane's inability to pay.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 15:54 |
|
|
He could probably go to the partners and explain his dilemma and get a loan from them, but, you know - that stiff upper lip! I'm worried about Lane.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 16:47 |
|
|
Maybe he'll be forced to sell his share.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 16:52 |
|
|
Can anyone tell what Lane's lawyer says in the first scene? Something like: "The Hansard procedure negotations have concluded, and" Is that right? Edit: Okay, I found it. quote:26. The appellant still failed to comply with the section 20(1) notice and at a meeting between the appellant and his accountant and officials of the Revenue the officials adopted what is termed "the Hansard procedure" whereby one of the officials formally read out to the appellant the reply of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a Parliamentary Question on 18 October 1990 which was in the following terms: Kind of like the IRS, I guess. They generally let you off the hook if you pay your bill and penalties before being indicted for tax evasion or failure to file, even if you're years behind. kylejack fucked around with this message at May 24, 2012 around 16:57 |
| # ? May 24, 2012 16:52 |
|
|
Poor Lane. There's undoubtedly a difference in class attitude--and general attitudes of the time--but I would be livid if my husband let me go on freely burning more than we can comfortably afford while he turned in despair to shady loans, embezzlement, stealing from blind factory workers, orchestrating casino heists, et cetera. But again, time and class makes a difference--I suppose it is just upholding your end of the deal and plastering over the cracks. Poor, helplessly-British Lane is extra quietly desperate. I was nervous already just with the fact that he was ineffectively perving on Wallet Girl and stole her photograph. Now there's a bigger spikier toothier ghastlier machine closing in on his character. As the one who keeps picking on Megan and catching hell for it, my confidence in their ultimate doom has doubled with this episode. Though Don is far from being a master of his own psychology, I want to believe he thought this union out based on what he knew he could respond to in a spouse this time around, and that sharing the same passion and workspace was essential. So, yes, it is important that he proposed to a woman who wanted a career in advertising, doing what he does. It is a deal-breaker when she wants to divide herself from that office life, as is becoming painfully obvious now. Don't you think a man who just survived a divorce would have paused to think, "Okay, am I certain I can make this marriage different?" before he proposed? Don't you think having a partner in the office, sharing a passion for what they do, was a huge deal to him? Even if he wasn't considering just his ability to remain faithful by being in her line of sight all day, there was the matter of having a real connection with his spouse he has been missing for years. He came home every night to a woman who had little idea what his struggles really consisted of and could never really connect with him beyond supportive wifely niceties ("I'm sure it will be fine" "You'll do great"). Yes, although he loves Megan madly and is trying to be supportive of her aspiration, it is only a matter of time before he slips up somehow. At the beginning of the season, I was seething, "Don't you dare mess this one up, Draper" while he weathered the night at the brothel bar. Now I think I could actually empathize if he strayed for emotional reasons. Don has gone after a lot of women, yes, but we're watching him having escaped from an Italian-speaking model Betty Draper to a French-speaking actress Megan Draper, when the kind of woman he wanted to absolutely lose himself in were those at odds with Society like Dick Whitman, and one who was right beside him as Don Draper: a beatnik artist, a Jewish heiress who could put him in his place with just her devastating wit, a free-spirited elementary school teacher, and a career-oriented  One more thing: Whoever divined the complex recipe for Megan's oven-kept pasta earlier in the thread didn't notice that she asked Don if he would want any cheese, not more cheese. It was plain goddamned pasta--not even butter or oil on the wall where Megan took her brave progressive wine-drunk stand against Don's late-drunk poo poo. Bloody hell. At least she had the self-awareness to leave the wavery "I cooked ALL DAY" out of her performance.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 17:20 |
|
|
Liebfraumilch posted:As the one who keeps picking on Megan and catching hell for it, my confidence in their ultimate doom has doubled with this episode. Though Don is far from being a master of his own psychology, I want to believe he thought this union out based on what he knew he could respond to in a spouse this time around, and that sharing the same passion and workspace was essential. From the beginning, I didn't think their work situation would last mostly because it was so imbalanced and weird. At least half of why he wanted her there was so she would always be sexually available to him. Is that how a healthy relationship works? For all that he seemed to respect her talent for advertising and selling to clients, it seemed very much to me like that was just gravy on top of the fact that he could always have her within reach, that she always knew what was going on in the office, that she was obviously able to sympathize with everything, etc etc. Then again, even if their work relationship and conduct was like, completely sensible and ethical and aboveboard, if he can't hack being away from her most of the day-- which is what most people need to deal with in a relationship-- they are indeed already doomed, and not because she wasn't trying hard enough to stick close to him. Having to be with your partner nearly every moment of the day to be sexually and emotionally faithful to them is a personal freaking problem, not some failing on the other person's part. Lastly, as you might have guessed, as much as I empathize with Don for feeling Megan was rejecting him when she decided to bow out of working in advertising, I think he needs to get over it. The fact that someone doesn't want to work in your industry doesn't mean they hate you for working there. It doesn't mean they can't share in your triumphs, praise and admire your good work or listen to your worries and problems. It doesn't mean you can't have a real connection. It means they don't want to work in your bloody industry. That that might be an actual dealbreaker for him is absolutely freaking ridiculous, and I'm tired of people treating it like it isn't. If my boyfriend came up to me being seriously angry because I'd rather work in publishing than work with him in IT, I'd dump him and count myself lucky to have escaped a real crazy.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 17:58 |
|
|
The Sterling Cooper partners got a lot of money when PPL bought Sterling Cooper, but Lane was just a fairly low-level accountant at PPL, so he wouldn't have had a huge personal fortune. Then he had to put down some huge sum of money to start SCDP- that probably took a huge chunk out of any of his personal savings. I wouldn't be surprised if the partners were taking a lower-than-market salary as well, just to make ends meet. They've been hinting that he's broke for awhile now.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 18:06 |
|
|
Liebfraumilch posted:One more thing: Whoever divined the complex recipe for Megan's oven-kept pasta earlier in the thread didn't notice that she asked Don if he would want any cheese, not more cheese. It was plain goddamned pasta--not even butter or oil on the wall where Megan took her brave progressive wine-drunk stand against Don's late-drunk poo poo. Bloody hell. At least she had the self-awareness to leave the wavery "I cooked ALL DAY" out of her performance. I think a lot of people are just going nuts over a prop. It's just a plate of dinner. Maybe it's just a plate of spaghetti because the scene was never supposed to be about what kind of dinner Megan made and because you can get an impressive effect out of spaghetti noodles going flying. That plate isn't supposed to be symbolic. There's not deeper meaning in the dish Megan cooked. It's not a sign that Megan is a terrible housewife because she made a meal of plain spaghetti noodles. This isn't Lost, where some spergy minor detail might turn out to be vitally important. People in these threads nitpick the weirdest goddamn things.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 18:34 |
|
|
thefncrow posted:I think a lot of people are just going nuts over a prop. It's just a plate of dinner. Maybe it's just a plate of spaghetti because the scene was never supposed to be about what kind of dinner Megan made and because you can get an impressive effect out of spaghetti noodles going flying. That plate isn't supposed to be symbolic. There's not deeper meaning in the dish Megan cooked. It's not a sign that Megan is a terrible housewife because she made a meal of plain spaghetti noodles. This isn't Lost, where some spergy minor detail might turn out to be vitally important. I assumed it was something plain and easy so that in the case of reshoots it would be easy and quick to do. They would not have to clean the wall they would just sweep up the broken plate and place the noodles on a new one.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 18:43 |
|
|
thefncrow posted:I think a lot of people are just going nuts over a prop. It's just a plate of dinner. Maybe it's just a plate of spaghetti because the scene was never supposed to be about what kind of dinner Megan made and because you can get an impressive effect out of spaghetti noodles going flying. That plate isn't supposed to be symbolic. There's not deeper meaning in the dish Megan cooked. It's not a sign that Megan is a terrible housewife because she made a meal of plain spaghetti noodles. This isn't Lost, where some spergy minor detail might turn out to be vitally important. The plate of pasta, and all the noticeable elements about it, can be read as symbolic because it is an element that exists inside a narrative work. In fact, considering this is the second major blow-up between Don and Megan that involved food, we're well on our way to a motif here. That being said, it's interesting how again there are people reading this scene and Megan's food choices as being yet another damning aspect of her character, as if she had prepared some elegant haute cuisine that it would make her argument about Don's absence somehow stronger.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 18:53 |
|
|
kylejack posted:Are you the head of TV for a Manhattan advertising agency? This is a minor point, and a bit late perhaps, but in the scene where Roger bribes Harry for his office, Roger says that the 1100 bucks is monthly salary. Assuming he was referring to roughly Harry's wage and not some average figure, the 500 bucks he gave was the disposable part of his monthly income. While I wouldn't lend anyone more than  , I'd easily give as much (proportionally) to get a friend out of a cult, and I think that so would most of you. Harry's a dork and a bit of an rear end in a top hat, but hardly a horrible, uncaring person.My take on Megan's meltdown was that while she's fully justified being upset with Don, throwing the plate was way over the top. I could see it if he was doing that all the time and she finally snapped, but Don's been on his best behavior so far from what we've seen, and he could've been on a meeting/dinner with a client, for all she knew. Again, not saying Don was in the right, but also considering this was before cell phones, I don't think it's quite a  incident.PS. What's the ANP/A&P that Peggy mentions? Is there anything to it beyond also following the X&Y formula?
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 21:38 |
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:PS. What's the ANP/A&P that Peggy mentions? Is there anything to it beyond also following the X&Y formula? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gr...fic_Tea_Company kylejack fucked around with this message at May 24, 2012 around 22:04 |
| # ? May 24, 2012 22:02 |
|
|
JaundiceDave posted:I disagree Yeah, I think her emotions have been completely realistic and well-performed. I even felt a little bit guilty along with Don when he came home drunk and late with no indication of where he was, because Pare's performance sold it. I like that Megan doesn't put up with Don's bullshit, and that she can stand up for herself and basically tell him "your dick doesn't solve all of our problems". I loved that Don actually listened to her and (drunkenly and reluctantly) sat down to eat.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 23:10 |
|
|
Liebfraumilch posted:As the one who keeps picking on Megan and catching hell for it, my confidence in their ultimate doom has doubled with this episode. Though Don is far from being a master of his own psychology, I want to believe he thought this union out based on what he knew he could respond to in a spouse this time around, and that sharing the same passion and workspace was essential. Then why didn't it work out with Faye? You realize that Don proposed to Megan without knowing much about her, right? You keep bringing up this idea about how Megan somehow shifted the terms of their marriage by not wanting to be apart of advertising, but the extent of her professional career up to the point that Don proposed to her was her saying "I want to do what you do" that's it.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 23:29 |
|
|
To my mind, if the writers really were/are pushing a "Don won't be happy with someone who doesn't share his passion for advertising" thing, that seems like it's a setup for an endgame Don/Peggy pairing (or maybe a 'Peggy shoots Don down' thing, I dunno). Edit: yeah, people would yell about it... but people also yelled when Don picked Megan over Faye.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 23:35 |
|
|
passionate dongs posted:Then why didn't it work out with Faye? Faye hated children. Megan got along with them. He wanted a better mom for his kids than Betty and for them to have a better mom than he had.
|
| # ? May 24, 2012 23:38 |
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:To my mind, if the writers really were/are pushing a "Don won't be happy with someone who doesn't share his passion for advertising" thing, that seems like it's a setup for an endgame Don/Peggy pairing (or maybe a 'Peggy shoots Don down' thing, I dunno).
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 00:21 |
|
|
Hoops posted:Never ever happening. You've got one piece of theory pushing towards it, but you're ignoring the four and a half years of evidence pushing away from it.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 00:30 |
|
|
I see their relationship ending more like Lear and Cordelia than David and Maddie.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 01:59 |
|
|
Nate RFB posted:Maybe he'll be forced to sell his share. To Peggy!
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 02:15 |
|
|
Liebfraumilch posted:Poor Lane. There's undoubtedly a difference in class attitude--and general attitudes of the time--but I would be livid if my husband let me go on freely burning more than we can comfortably afford while he turned in despair to shady loans, embezzlement, stealing from blind factory workers, orchestrating casino heists, et cetera. But again, time and class makes a difference--I suppose it is just upholding your end of the deal and plastering over the cracks. Poor, helplessly-British Lane is extra quietly desperate. I was nervous already just with the fact that he was ineffectively perving on Wallet Girl and stole her photograph. Now there's a bigger spikier toothier ghastlier machine closing in on his character. I think part of his motivation is his hatred of Pete. If he sells his shares, who's going to jump on them? There's no way he's letting himself be outranked by that guy. Also, stealing from blind factory workers is awesome so long as there's a good song and dance routine to go with it.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 02:50 |
|
|
This is the first season of Mad Men where the winds of change are truly felt. Last season, we were all raving at how Peggy went to this underground club and befriended a lesbian; now, even Peggy looks outdated when put up against Megan. And Don seems like he's 70 years old in today's currency. I'm not criticizing Don, more drawing the attention to the fact that being 40 in the 60s was being old already, whereas today the forties are considered the second youth. I did enjoy the pasta derail in the thread. My father used to cook himself spaghetties that only consisted of pasta, garlic and butter. It looked drab from afar but it sure was tasty, and I've used this trick on tight schedules, only adding fresh parsley. You all saying that Lane is out of the show, I respectfully hope that you're dead wrong. 
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 05:02 |
|
|
One character cooked a meal for her spouse that, upon initial examination, looked bland. Her spouse showed up several hours late, drunk, without having called or otherwise contacted her. A debate will spring up over who was in the wrong here.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 06:04 |
|
|
zoux posted:BTW, I just found out that Jared Harris is Richard Harris' son He's also playing Ulysses S. Grant in Steven Spielberg's Lincoln and I see the resemblance: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3991910144/nm0364813 and http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_z2o-A5Po6...s1600/Grant.jpg
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 09:57 |
|
|
Tender Bender posted:One character cooked a meal for her spouse that, upon initial examination, looked bland. Analyzing the loving grease marks on the wall is totally spergy, but I think it's fair to say the character did the task for bullshit reasons. Regardless of the quality of the dish, that's just not who she is. And as much as I think Don is a piece of poo poo, I don't blame him for being caught flat out against such a pretentious display.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 10:32 |
|
|
Tender Bender posted:One character cooked a meal for her spouse that, upon initial examination, looked bland. Well said.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 13:01 |
|
|
Tender Bender posted:One character cooked a meal for her spouse that, upon initial examination, looked bland. You forgot that one spouse has a history of sleeping around and that his spouse heping him cut back on his drinking.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 13:04 |
|
|
Former Human posted:He's also playing Ulysses S. Grant in Steven Spielberg's Lincoln and I see the resemblance: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3991910144/nm0364813 and http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_z2o-A5Po6...s1600/Grant.jpg Professor Moriarty worked his way into the American Civil War?!
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 13:25 |
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:You forgot that one spouse has a history of sleeping around and that his spouse heping him cut back on his drinking. No you see, clearly the other spouse was wrong for cooking such a bland meal. This is a family connected to the advertising business, surely every meal has to include nothing but the most photogenic and appetizing foods, all laid out meticulously on the table.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 13:48 |
|
|
Megan at least had the good sense to express her anger while keeping all food inside the house, whereas Pete probably killed someone with that 15 pound turkey he sent plummeting out into the abyss.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 13:53 |
|
|
Found on a Flickr album of old paperback book covers. This one is from 1962. Hello Joan...
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 14:01 |
|
|
Written by Ken Cosgrove's latest nom de plume.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 15:30 |
|
|
Tender Bender posted:One character cooked a meal for her spouse that, upon initial examination, looked bland. So I tried looking up some American pasta dishes from the 60s and the two I found were "dump this can of poo poo in and cook till mushy" type recipes. I'd say she was doing Don a favour.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:31 |
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Written by Ken Cosgrove's latest nom de plume. Are you dense? It clearly says "Peggy" on the front. 
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:37 |
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Written by Ken Cosgrove's latest nom de plume. Ken would never use a woman's name
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:38 |
|
|
It's too bad that book by Dave Algonquin doesn't exist. I really want to read it.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:39 |
|
|
kylejack posted:It's too bad that book by Dave Algonquin doesn't exist. I really want to read it. it'd just be a short story, but yea.
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:52 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 02:44 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2012 19:53 |
|
