You buy into the fad that equal means same
equivalent (as in mathematical equivalence relation, mind you "equal" is one) would be more suited
No, even if they're in a higher tax bracket, they necessarily still have more money (as far as net income goes). That's the entire point of brackets instead of thresholds.
That's why I used "probably". (the certain events are a subset of probable events).
The cost of day care has nothing to do with taxes, so let's not make things more complicated than they need be. That one parent staying home to take care of kids is cheaper than sending kids to day care has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with that parent's earning potential and the cost of day care. Even if taxes were 0% for everyone, it's still possible that having only one parent working would be more cost effective than having both parents work if the cost of day care exceeds the income of one of the parents. Orthogonal issues.
Again, that was exactly my point.
An intelligent individual has more to learn from understanding the formal aspects of a system (as perfect or imperfect as it might be), vs. rushing to quick poor conclusions based on "slang" and ignorance.
"Dictionary definition" is not slang/street talk, AFAIK, may be I'm mistaken? With that said, I wasn't trying to redefine legally "tax evasion", or implying it was fact. If it wasn't clear enough, I'm sorry. That was my humble opinion. Let me rephrase is : doing so, in MY book is tax evasion.
It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.