Neo

Son of a gun ... I couldn't find it at Publix!

Forgive me for mentioning this again. Maybe I'm a dinosaur, but the "passion play" drama of the game within the game went away. With each result equaling 1/82 of the season, the stakes are never really high, especially for the first 77 games. I have come to appreciate 21st century hockey. However, I arranged my budget and week for Hartman and McGuire vs Quebec, Ray v Domi, the Big Bad Bruins and the Broad Street Bullies. "Ruff's sending May, Barnaby and Boughner out for the face off .... and here we goooo"! Remember "we want Ray, we want Ray ...."? Good guys v Bad guys .... Life. Hockey's sanitized. So is football -- good moves, perhaps, but every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

MODO: "Damn expensive, boys!"

I'll take a one page return. The IRS can have 100 for the code! She is not unique by any means. Good point. I do think she connects less well than most at her level of candidacy. I've always had an insincere vibe from Cruz. Equal aisle comment.

Send me an address ... I'll express mail you lingonberry if you promise baking photos! I just want a reason to go back to IKEA. My checkout person was Astrid ... talk about Norse mythology ...

When did fake become an attribute of womanhood, stereotypical or otherwise? Perhaps the same day not wanting to pay for Sandra Fluke's birth control became "denying it to her" as part of the "war on women". Perhaps it was a week or so after criticizing the President became racist. She is fake, among other things. He does have deficiencies. The gender, race, religion, of the two have nothing to do with my conclusion. Bias alert - I see this as a divide, create victims, promise protection strategy that's decades old. Yawn ... It's a use of language that repels me fiercely. She connects with people like totem poll does. I don't care what gender she is.

You, sir, are a problem solver ...

To quote Alan Shepard on Freedom 7: "I looked at those toggle switches I had to turn on cue. I looked at the dials I had to turn on cue, and I thought to myself, "My God, just think, this thing was built by the lowest bidder."" One of my favorites.

Nice. You could author Rocket Science for Dummies!

I could not find lingonberry. I did buy raspberry and peach preserves. Soon!

Threats, safety, governments, people, privacy ..... I do not envy the young because of the world they're inheriting. I fear, not knowing the stakes, they acquiesce too quickly .... My grandparents were born into a world and died in a very different one. I will die in one that couldn't be imagined at my birth. "History is filled with the sound of silken slippers going downstairs and wooden shoes coming up." Voltaire Watch these. TED is awesome. https://www.ted.com/talks/mikko_hypponen_how_the_nsa_betrayed_the_world_s_trust_time_to_act?language=en#t-783771 https://www.ted.com/talks/mikko_hypponen_three_types_of_online_attack?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_soghoian_government_surveillance_this_is_just_the_beginning?language=en https://www.ted.com/talks/christopher_soghoian_a_brief_history_of_phone_wiretapping_and_how_to_avoid_it?language=en As one speaker notes ... Orwell could never have imagined. In 2013, we asked if Snowden was a hero or a traitor. I admired his philosophy, but not his methods. I came down on the side of the government and its security organizations and considered him naive. I was naive. He is a hero. On another note - I have finished my first book on Islam. It was informative in that it pointed to history, events and people. It was less so because it had, in fact it claims, an agenda or narrative. I want to form my own narrative, of course. I'll accept the outline and know what I'm looking for in more scholarly, less admittedly biased, works. Quick and easy, a good place to start.

Very awesome ...

Write a challenge to this: "If your W2 income is $100,000, you will pay the US Treasury 23%, or $23,000, on or before April15". I can get to the $23,000 with a flat tax without software, records, receipts, a tax preparer, or a degree in accounting. With code, I have pages and pages of ways to try to get to $19,488. I'm going to be successful. I can write challenges. In fact, I'll design decisions around the challenges all year long. I'll keep records of them. I'll pass on some decisions, and make others, solely based on the tax consequences. Now, on one point I do agree with you. It IS an oversimplified approach to something that is in reality very complex. That's what I'm proposing. I call that beautiful and something that comes without cost (same pockets, same revenue) and with benefits (knowing my tax obligation all year long and satisfying it during a television commercial). I see nothing added by the complexity if the idea is to get a certain amount of revenue to the government from the appropriate pockets. To the extent fair share is designed or achieved today, it is designed or achieved under a flat tax. Fiddle with the rates to your heart's content. I am finished ... I have a view I can explain no better. I am a man of limited capacity! PS: I hope you didn't purchase a Christmas tree this year. If you did, the poor fellow who sold it to you must now figure out: Timber Standing timber you held as investment property is a capital asset. Gain or loss from its sale is capital gain or loss reported on Form 8949 and Schedule D (Form 1040), as applicable. If you held the timber primarily for sale to customers, it is not a capital asset. Gain or loss on its sale is ordinary business income or loss. It is reported on Schedule F, line 1 (purchased timber) or line 2 (raised timber). See the Instructions for Schedule F (Form 1040). Farmers who cut timber on their land and sell it as logs, firewood, or pulpwood usually have no cost or other basis for that timber if no allocation was made at the time of acquisition. Amounts realized from these sales, and the expenses incurred in cutting, hauling, etc., are ordinary farm income and expenses reported on Schedule F. Different rules apply if you owned the timber longer than 1 year and elect to treat timber cutting as a sale or exchange or you enter into a cutting contract, discussed below. Timber considered cut. Timber is considered cut on the date when, in the ordinary course of business, the quantity of felled timber is first definitely determined. This is true whether the timber is cut under contract or whether you cut it yourself. Christmas trees. Evergreen trees, such as Christmas trees, that are more than 6 years old when severed from their roots and sold for ornamental purposes are included in the term timber. They qualify for both rules discussed below. Election to treat cutting as a sale or exchange. Under the general rule, the cutting of timber results in no gain or loss. It is not until a sale or exchange occurs that gain or loss is realized. But if you owned or had a contractual right to cut timber, you can elect to treat the cutting of timber as a section 1231 transaction in the year it is cut. Even though the cut timber is not actually sold or exchanged, you report your gain or loss on the cutting for the year the timber is cut. Any later sale results in ordinary business income or loss. See the example below. To elect this treatment, you must: Own or hold a contractual right to cut the timber for a period of more than 1 year before it is cut, and Cut the timber for sale or use in your trade or business. Making the election. You make the election on your return for the year the cutting takes place by including in income the gain or loss on the cutting and including a computation of your gain or loss. You do not have to make the election in the first year you cut the timber. You can make it in any year to which the election would apply. If the timber is partnership property, the election is made on the partnership return. This election cannot be made on an amended return. Once you have made the election, it remains in effect for all later years unless you revoke it. Election under section 631(a) may be revoked. If you previously elected for any tax year ending before October 23, 2004, to treat the cutting of timber as a sale or exchange under section 631(a), you may revoke this election without the consent of the IRS for any tax year ending after October 22, 2004. The prior election (and revocation) is disregarded for purposes of making a subsequent election. See Form T (Timber), Forest Activities Schedule, for more information. Gain or loss. Your gain or loss on the cutting of standing timber is the difference between its adjusted basis for depletion and its FMV on the first day of your tax year in which it is cut. Your adjusted basis for depletion of cut timber is based on the number of units (board feet, log scale, or other units) of timber cut during the tax year and considered to be sold or exchanged. Your adjusted basis for depletion is also based on the depletion unit of timber in the account used for the cut timber, and should be figured in the same manner as shown in section 611 and Regulations section 1.611-3. Depletion of timber is discussed in chapter 7. Example. In April 2015, you owned 4,000 MBF (1,000 board feet) of standing timber longer than 1 year. It had an adjusted basis for depletion of $40 per MBF. You are a calendar year taxpayer. On January 1, 2015, the timber had an FMV of $350 per MBF. It was cut in April for sale. On your 2015 tax return, you elect to treat the cutting of the timber as a sale or exchange. You report the difference between the FMV and your adjusted basis for depletion as a gain. This amount is reported on Form 4797 along with your other section 1231 gains and losses to figure whether it is treated as a capital gain or as ordinary gain. You figure your gain as follows. FMV of timber January 1, 2015 $1,400,000 Minus: Adjusted basis for depletion 160,000 Section 1231 gain $1,240,000 The FMV becomes your basis in the cut timber, and a later sale of the cut timber, including any by-product or tree tops, will result in ordinary business income or loss. Outright sales of timber. Outright sales of timber by landowners qualify for capital gains treatment using rules similar to the rules for certain disposal of timber under a contract with retained economic interest (defined later). However, for outright sales, the date of disposal is not deemed to be the date the timber is cut because the landowner can elect to treat the payment date as the date of disposal (see Date of disposal below). Cutting contract. You must treat the disposal of standing timber under a cutting contract as a section 1231 transaction if all the following apply to you. You are the owner of the timber. You held the timber longer than 1 year before its disposal. You kept an economic interest in the timber. You have kept an economic interest in standing timber if, under the cutting contract, the expected return on your investment is conditioned on the cutting of the timber. The difference between the amount realized from the disposal of the timber and its adjusted basis for depletion is treated as gain or loss on its sale. Include this amount on Form 4797 along with your other section 1231 gains or losses. Date of disposal. The date of disposal is the date the timber is cut. However, for outright sales by landowners or if you receive payment under the contract before the timber is cut, you can elect to treat the date of payment as the date of disposal. This election applies only to figure the holding period of the timber. It has no effect on the time for reporting gain or loss (generally when the timber is sold or exchanged). To make this election, attach a statement to the tax return filed by the due date (including extensions) for the year payment is received. The statement must identify the advance payments subject to the election and the contract under which they were made. If you timely filed your return for the year you received payment without making the election, you can still make the election by filing an amended return within 6 months after the due date for that year's return (excluding extensions). Attach the statement to the amended return and write “Filed pursuant to section 301.9100-2” at the top of the statement. File the amended return at the same address the original return was filed. Owner. An owner is any person who owns an interest in the timber, including a sublessor and the holder of a contract to cut the timber. You own an interest in timber if you have the right to cut it for sale on your own account or for use in your business. Tree stumps. Tree stumps are a capital asset if they are on land held by an investor who is not in the timber or stump business as a buyer, seller, or processor. Gain from the sale of stumps sold in one lot by such a holder is taxed as a capital gain. However, tree stumps held by timber operators after the saleable standing timber was cut and removed from the land are considered by-products. Gain from the sale of stumps in lots or tonnage by such operators is taxed as ordinary income. See Form T (Timber) and its separate instructions for more information about dispositions of timber.

Anyone know if vetemjol is, here in the states, flour, wheat flour, or self rising flour? Looks like wheat flour to me.

Vietnam - you're both outsourcerers!

1). He sure as hell didn't. 2). Demand for what? You may talk in circles when you're talking about the flow of capital in the context of supply, demand, profit, jobs and utility. It is a circle.

I'm with you until the Scrooge McDucks!

I've never disagreed more. Which creates more vagaries? If your point is they exist either way, my counterpoint is that they're fewer when the pages are fewer. We let it happen, true. We may do it again, true. It's bad. I'd fix it and take the risk that we'd let it happen again and be hopeful that we learned something. I think it's reasonable that a people understand the rules under which their government confiscates its wealth. Two sentences for your consideration. First, yours: "Because the moment you make something simple, you create vagaries". Now, mine: "Because the moment you make something complicated, you create vagaries". Everyone's experiences are different, but the world's shown me more of mine than yours.

An outstanding example of job creation! Here's another. In 1976, Steve Jobs walked into his parents' garage ... he had an idea, grabbed a soldering gun, and created something people would demand .... and he would supply. He used BagBoy's $100, which BagBoy's S&L loaned to Steve on BagBoy's behalf, for material. He used Neo's IRA, which was partially allocated to venture capital by mutual fund companies on Neo's behalf, for shipping labels. He collected revenue from Dom, who used his IRS rebate check to buy a computer on his own behalf. Steve incorporated, and today his company employs 100,000 people. BagBoy, Neo and Dom ... Job creators when they get their money into Steve's hands. Ignoring mattresses, holes in the ground, and fireplaces, a dollar is spent, saved or invested. It finds its way to productive activity either way. I can think of more current examples. I had lunch with a guy yesterday ...

I believe it's more likely to than complication = correctness. I'm not proposing a change in anyone's share. You can adjust the .35 up or down. That's another conversation that's made more clear when the 23 thousand pages go away. Full disclosure: I googled after posting. The CCH tax reporter, a Bible to preparers, has 73 thousand pages. It includes schedules and explanations for PROFESSIONALS. The code as source data is much shorter. It's obscenely long, but shorter.

NO . the current system works like this: You earn $X, then you adjust X with 23,427 pages of tax code, to arrive at taxable X. You then pay .35 taxable X. Flat tax X appears on your W2 or at the bottom of your income statement.

Mr. D and The Dom: If I were to support a flat tax for simplicity, but one that was marginal to assure the same category of wage earner paid the same under its system as they do today, would it make sense to you? I am in favor of Mr D's "higher earners pay more" and in maintaining the same level of overall revenue collection for the government. My flat tax support comes from a desire for simplification, clarity and transparency. If you get a raise, sell a car, invest in machinery, or buy a pharmaceutical company, I'd like the income tax ramification to be calculable on a napkin. I am not a flat taxer as a Trojan horse to protect the rich at the expense of the poor. Example with NO numbers behind it: You earn $X, you pay .35X in income taxes. You earn $Y, you pay .20Y in income taxes. You earn $Z, you pay .05Z in income taxes. Where X>Y>Z and where .35X + .20Y + .05Z = Total Revenue Collected by IRS in 2015.

I think she'll swing back to where, frankly, she truly lives. That is, she's "hawkish" in her party. She's also more pro business than her opponents. I'm fascinated by her relationship with the President. My view - I watch the news and read the newspapers - expertise of the common man. 1). The Clintons and the Obamas don't like one another. Neither do their people. 2). She needed him to remain relevant and in the public eye as Secretary of State. 3). He needed her, his party's strongest successor candidate since day one of his administration, for his legacy (as do all Presidents who depend on legacy to preserve the direction they've set). 4). She needs him in any DOJ/FBI scenario. I hear him snickering. 5). They're symbiotic Titans with little policy common ground. 6). She ran his foreign policy, as any Secretary of State does, but with little directional influence born in her. That was their deal or she wasn't a good Secretary of State. I don't know which is true. 7). His foreign policy is (NeoVille) a mess; the dramatic break has to come here. She will be using the term radical Islam in the general election. She will be telling the world America will further its interests and she'll be telling Putin of consequences instead of lecturing him about mistakes in judgment. HRC will not raise taxes in any meaningful way. She'll defer promises for programs such as "free" college educations. She will continue, loudly, the Democratic version of social issue trespass, identity politics, by recognizing everyone's "war on everyone". 8). His popularity is waning. Happens to most of 'em. She's going to leave him, loudly, ten seconds after she's confident she's beaten the DOJ/FBI. 9). Trump informs her. He's not a dangerous idea leading the masses. He's the microphone OF pissed of masses. She'll acknowledge their concerns and not call them cable hillbillies like her former boss does. They'll not vote for her, but they'll quiet down. That's all she needs. In short, she's pretty middle of the road. My problem with her is that she's dirty, mechanical, uninspiring and divides with identity strategies. I see that last item as a real, existential (I said it), problem for America. I see it as a threat. I'd vote for Bill. I believe she's our next President.

I don't think the right's going to pivot much. That may not be a winning strategy, but it's how I see it. Do you see Trump, Cruz or Rubio pivoting? I do not. Trump and Cruz cannot. Rubio and Christie don't think they have to. Democratic talking heads are already talking about the timing of HRC's. The Republicans don't have anyone who had to move very right from where he/she started. Mitt pivoted because he had to run right to get nominated. You're not going to see a centrist Republican like Mitt, who had to primary to the right, emerge. The right's "right" is leading the field. The left's "right" is, as well. She changed for Bernie. So, I say the D.

shrader - TRULY awesome! 2For -- same. Will she go private practice or join one of the larger corporate roll ups?