Peter_Puget

Pretty simple stuff you are correct, however, what I have suggested is that during the time period for which the CBO analysis covered there is not a lessening of progressivity in the federal tax structure. Thus your claim that if earlier periods are included the trand might be different is true. I agree. One can pick several time periods within the 79-01 period and come to different conclusions. I used all the data available in the recent CBO report. Honest and straightforward. You insist on comparing the top 1% to the quintiles however that is probably not a valid comparison. As a math guy you should know that. But then again there you go cherry picking. PP By the way I think I posted this before but here it is again. JEC Link

ya ya ya your putting me to sleep J_B.. Actually I graphed all the Quintiles in my first gragh today and in my last graph I graph the top 10% 5% and 1%. Clearly since you dont understand what you are looking at your argument must be most likely wrong and if correct, it is correct only by sheer luck. I'd love to read your stuff but I have found a better place to hang out..... .... the better place! Cheers! PP EDIT: I added the quintile graph agian to help you out! Notice four lines with a negative slope and one with a positive one. The positive one is for the highest quintile.

In the 1970’s phone piracy was an issue for the phone companies. One thing that surprised them was that those who were caught making free calls almost always had significantly higher than average phone bills. (I seem to remember the over $100/mos number)

I like this picture!

But you are an original I am a pale imitation!

Press ME! I made the first page of a Google search on Peter Puget!

What is it about a stong intelligent woman that scares men so much. Any ideas MArylou?

You are in fact being an obscurantist. I could care less if the richest man in America had an effective rate of zero. Such a fact while being of some interest in no way would change the fact that the federal tax structure is in fact progressive and it's become more progressive over time. (For grins I made a quick & dirty graph showing trended effective tax rates for the 10%, 5% and 1% groups - notice the positive slopes!) J_B says: "moreover, pp contradicts himself since he now says there is evidence we are now close to a flat tax system. how could a flat tax system be progressive?" What I wrote to inspire that comment- emphasis added:"As far as other taxes I posted a link of a study several weeks ago suggesting that when taken as a whole the US might be pretty close to a flat tax situation right now. I would only add the following comment: The study I refered to included Federal, State,Local and regional taxes in its analysis. The CBO report as supported by its title is concerned with Federal taxation. PP

The accuracy of J_B’s data notwithstanding he is confused or deliberately being an obscurantist. The question here is the progressivity of the Federal Tax system and whether a significant piece of information should have been included in the Seattle Times article.. I have little time but did prepare a simple graph of trendlines for table 1A in the CBO link. (see attachment) I simply would point out that the trendline for four of the quintiles is negative and for the other it is positive. As far as other taxes I posted a link of a study several weeks ago suggesting that when taken as a whole the US might be pretty close to a flat tax situation right now. I am not sure how accurate the study is but it is fuel for thought. Further just recently a study was released by a University of Kansas Prof and a Fed Reserve member. It studied the possible impact on GDP of a change to a flat tax system. This article was also not referenced. EDIT: By the way J_B claims I am making a judgement on data 30 years old. I am confused by this as the data I have introduced to the thread only goes back to 1979.

A couple of comments. 1 J-Fisher first creates a scenario explaining how my attachment is consistent with the article. The scenario is presented as fact. Of course the fact his scenario is at odds with the data shown in the link from which the attachment is taken is ignored. What he has done is simply ignore the facts. 2 When I point this out he suddenly takes exception to the data because the time series ends at 2001. Note that this date was of no importance when he was using it to support his fallacious argument. Here is his response: “Huh? The data in CBO report you linked to had data through 2001, which was before the Bush tax cuts even took effect. The article was about the effects of the Bush tax cuts. The CBO report is irrelevant to the topic.” I would note that in June 2001 Bush signed the “ Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 .” Some provisions of this act were effective immediately. J_Fisher’s comment is clearly contrary to fact. It is also off base because the topic was in fact the Seattle Times Article. I believe that any responsible article would mention recent trends in progressively. That this CBO report was ignored shows poor reporting. The impact of future changes in the tax code are simply speculation and should be taken as such. For example at the site linked by J_B is a wonderful write-up that contains the following quote: “Second, after Bush cut taxes for his rich friends , unemployment actually increased over the previous year.” I think that it is clear from the data that in 2001 the federal tax system had become more progressive. Typical BS from a J_B link. Most on this site are pretty young and won’t remember the screaming that went on over the Reagan tax cuts. Look over the data. The undeniable trend is to greater progressively. PP

Ah selective analysis. Look at my original link: it shows effective tax rates! Quote form my comments on the Seattle Times article: In today's Seattle Times. Note that the report I linked above is not referenced at all. Seems as tho the progresssive nature of our tax system has in fact increased.

RP/HB Brass nuts - Broken cable strands. RP/HB Brass Nuts – Deformed wedge from fall Wired Nuts Various Brands – Kinked/broken cables Old Style TCU – Blew up in fall Forged Friend – Cam deformed (flattened curve) in fall Various Carabiners - hairline cracks Various Carabiners – Loose pins Tricam – hairline fracture.

well i had mark and colorado correct

Hall of Mirrors starts out with a two pitch climb Misty Beethoven that I think was put up by Mark Rolofson. Anyway I did it back in the days of EBs and the EB rubber would literally squeak on the polished granite. Modern rubber seems to have lost the “squeak”. If I remember correctly TP has some small edges and is not a pure friction route.

Where did that come from? Summary from data presented two posts above.

Piece of %$#@ Article In today's Seattle Times. Note that the report I linked above is not referenced at all. Seems as tho the progresssive nature of our tax system has in fact increased. See attachment on the post directly above.

See attached summary.

Once a long time ago I was belaying a friend on an 11c crack in the Valley. He climbed up past the crux decided he needed a piece or two he left on the ground. He then down climbed the route including the crux and climbed back up to finish it. I say it was an onsight and brilliant climbing to boot.

Given that choice I'd go with 9+

Link PP

Why don't you suggest a better rating? Are you saying that TP is 5.12?

Sorry but I thought this was a good read and the registration process at the LA TImes is a pain. EDIT: Rubin is fluent in both Arabic and Farsi. LA Times , April 4, 2004 By Michael Rubin, Michael Rubin is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and was a governance team advisor for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. WASHINGTON — Last summer, as Iraqis sweltered outside, the Coalition Provisional Authority met in the marbled corridors and air-conditioned offices of one of Saddam Hussein's former palaces to hash out how to fund political parties. The State Department was adamant, insisting that the CPA should maintain "an even playing field" and should not favor one party over another. Parties affiliated with the Iraqi Governing Council's militant Islamists and liberal secularists should receive the same treatment. There should be no special consideration given to groups seeking to unite Iraqis rather than dividing them by ethnicity or sectarian affiliations. This may sound like the way to ensure fair elections. But while the CPA has maintained its neutrality, our adversaries have shown no such compunction. Until recently, I worked for the CPA, living in a nondescript house outside Baghdad's Green Zone. I traveled the country with Iraqi friends, paying spot checks on borders, political parties, shrines and markets. Because I was not in a convoy or traveling with heavily armed guards, Iraqis could easily approach me. Professionals, politicians and religious figures telephoned at all hours for meetings, knowing they would not have to wait at the fortified gates of the palace complex. I quickly learned that most political business in Iraq happens not at Governing Council sessions, but in private homes between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m. One February evening, a governor from a southern province asked to see me. We met after dark at a friend's house. After pleasantries and tea, he got down to business. "The Iranians are flooding the city and countryside with money," he said. "Last month, they sent a truckload of silk carpets across the border for the tribal sheikhs. Whomever they can't buy, they threaten." The following week, I headed south to investigate. A number of Iraqis said the Iranians had channeled money through the offices of the Dawa Party, an Islamist political party, led by Governing Council member Ibrahim Jafari. On separate occasions in Baghdad and the southern city of Nasiriya, I watched ordinary Iraqis line up for handouts of money and supplies at Dawa offices. The largess seems to be having an effect: Polls indicate that Jafari is Iraq's most popular politician, enjoying a favorable rating by more than 50% of the electorate. The CPA's evenhandedness may be well-intentioned, but to a society weaned on conspiracy theories, the United States' failure to support liberals and democrats signals support for the Islamists. Equal opportunity may exist in Washington, but not in Baghdad. Why, Iraqis ask, would the CPA ignore the influx of Iranian arms and money into southern Iraq if it had not struck some secret deal with Tehran or did not desire the resulting increase in militancy? Why would the Iranian border be largely unguarded a year after liberation? Iraqi liberals are especially sensitive to signs of support for Shiite politician Abdelaziz Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, whose visit official Washington welcomed in January. Students affiliated with the Badr Corps, Hakim's militia, roam Basra University, forcing women to wear the veil. Signs proclaiming the supremacy of Hakim are affixed to doors across the university, and professors say they are afraid to remove them. In Nasiriya and Karbala, Iraqis lament they can no longer speak openly, lest they become the subject of retaliation by Iranian-funded gangs. While Sens. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts and Carl Levin of Michigan demand yet another government audit of the Iraqi National Congress (previous audits have found no wrongdoing), radical clerics find their pockets full, their Iranian sponsors more interested in mission than political cannibalism. Last month, I visited a gathering of urban professionals in Najaf. They repeatedly asked why the CPA stood by while followers of firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtader Sadr invaded homes, smashed satellite dishes and meted out punishment in ad hoc Islamic courts. We may dismiss Sadr as a grass-roots populist, but his rise was not arbitrary. Rather, his network is based upon ample funding he receives through Iran-based cleric Ayatollah Kazem al Haeri, a close associate of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In signing the bill authorizing $87.5 billion for reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan in November, President Bush called the massive campaign to rebuild both nations "the greatest commitment of its kind since the Marshall Plan." There is daily progress. Shops have opened. Roads are repaved. But, the CPA remains hampered by a strategic communications strategy geared more toward Washington than Iraq. American newspapers may report our $5.6 billion investment in Iraq's electrical infrastructure, but what Iraqis see are signs such as a billboard of Hakim, the radical politician, affixed to a newly refurbished Ministry of Electricity office in Baghdad. On March 26, a team of United Nations election specialists arrived in Baghdad to prepare the country for elections following the scheduled June 30 transfer of sovereignty. Iraqis may welcome elections, but it would be an abdication of American leadership if we do not support our allies, especially as Iraq's neighbors fund proxy groups and radicals with goals inimical to democracy. We should not be more willing to help our adversaries than our friends. Democracy is about not only elections, but also about tolerance, compromise and liberty. Twenty-five years ago, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, declared "the first day of God's government." In a rushed referendum supervised by armed vigilantes, Iranians voted for theocracy. For a quarter century, they have struggled to undo their mistake. It would be a betrayal of Bush's vision as well as 24 million Iraqis if we replicate it in Iraq.

I never keep records myself but a couple of times I have contacted people out of the blue about routes they did back in the “Golden Age” of big walls and have been surprised that they sent me photo copies from fairly detailed journals. Same thing happened once before going to Zion years ago. I wonder what % of climbers actually maintains a fairly comprehensive journal.

read this

Good route. Someone go clean it again. Picture by Lancegranite