Gary_Yngve

i listed a few options, so i'll assume all of them are it. why? what do you need your estate for once you're dead? don't you think your kids should earn their own incomes rather than be deadbeats like paris hilton?

KK and others, What if there were a law that estates worth more than $100mil were taxed by 75%? would you be for or against? certainly you wouldn't be directly affected by it. from the selfish point of view, wouldn't it be better to tax not you, rather than to tax you? i guess what i don't understand is if you have a fundamental moral objection to the estate tax or rather an objection to such a tax when it affects you. do you see any difference between a higher income tax vs. a lower income tax plus an estate tax?

you can try burning a self-contained knoppix linux cd on another machine and booting up into linux. then you can potentially copy the files to elsewhere before you do something like reformat. you can also try borrowing someone else's keyboard and mouse and plug them into your laptop... sometimes that will work

So KK, I think you missed half my argument from before. Instead of paying say 30% income tax per year (I'm grossly simplifying), what if you instead could opt to pay 15% income tax per year plus 50% of your estate (to account for interest accrued and income spent on transient items/services)? Or on the contrary, what do you think of a tax bracket of say 50% for the portions of annual incomes exceeding ten million dollars? Feel free to fudge some of the numbers.

I disagree that it's greed. It's all about finding fair proportions (and we agree to disagree on what constitutes fair). I see nothing wrong with saying let's use an estate tax in lieu of higher income taxes. The estate tax is the ultimate in progressive taxes (has no effect on 99% of Americans). Furthermore, the person can live his/her life with a more comfortable amount of cash, because rather than being taxed up front for that income, the tax is happening afterward. For that matter, what if the tax system were such that you didn't pay any income tax, but rather your assets were taxed upon death? Let's not look at the feasibility of maintaining steady cash flow or the implementation.. but would you consider it fair? The problem is that the concept of an estate tax has been made to look evil by calling it the "death tax."

without government, there wouldn't be highways, the internet, police/courts/jails... all these things are essential to people being able to scale a business's growth.

You forget that people only obtained such property through help from the very same government!

And furthermore there are clauses meant to protect small businesses and farmers. Warren Buffett is actually a proponent of the estate tax. Regarding double/triple taxation being unfair, you must be opposed to sales taxes then too.

You're clouding the issue. The tax reforms of 2001 and 2003 were far more complicated. (I agree on the reforms regarding retirement accounts.) For example, there were cuts on capital gains taxes and changes on how investments and depreciation is handled. These changes benefited the rich far more than just linearly proportional to their income. And what do you think of the estate tax? Do you think it would be fair for Paris Hilton to inherit hundreds of millions tax-free and basically be a deadbeat? What's the difference between a homeless person and Paris Hilton in terms of contribution to this country?

I do agree with you here. We're rat-holing, but what do think of: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html

Ok, let's leave it as being a dick, i.e. considering yourself entirely over the common good. The book does a good job of defining what the authors feel American patriotism is:

Here are some bad influences: -the notion of looking patriotic vs. acting patriotic, much analagous to those who look Christian but do not act Christian -the destruction of privacy, e.g. the patriot act. the unchecked invasions allowed there are entirely unnecessary due to the secret courts that allow after-the-fact warrants. if you want to talk about alienating and attacking, let's look at the name "Patriot Act." -on 9/12, everyone in the world felt sorry for us and was on our side. we totally sullied our reputation since then. we went into iraq based on lies, refused to admit mistakes, and let al qaeda escape in Afghan/Pakistan. Furthermore our refusal of Kyoto protocols was an embarrassment. -In many cases, the right twists arguments into "you're with us or you're not." Everyone needs to accept that change and questioning is essential to survival in a dynamic world. -Tax cuts in combo w/ higher spending and a war is silly. Furthermore I feel the tax cuts focused on the wrong people. -Don't even get me started on Enron. For that matter I find it sickening that gas is as expensive as it is while simultaneously the gas companies are making record profits. What else can you call that but greed?

Greed is pretty well defined as one of the seven deadly sins. But fine, we can replace greed with "being a dick," e.g. being Dick.

fair enough. then they are also attacking the far left for being whiny little bitches who passively let the far right get away with it and can't look at an American flag without feeling nauseous.

Some of the things coming out of extreme sectors of the right are things that probably even FW and KK would say are bad things. But here's a couple statements that FW/KK may disagree with: -Every child deserves a reasonably equal chance of becoming successful through seizing opportunities through talent and determination. Corollary: taxes are essential to fund transportation, education, health care so that children have the chance to realize the American dream. -We must not screw over our children due to current greed, self-indulgence, and environmental harm. -Absolute capitalism and wholesome Christian values are inconsistent. -What people do in their bedroom is none of the public's business. -People need to work together to solve hard problems. People working together is called government. -It is patriotic to serve and give back to your country. Hence if you benefited greatly from prior government (blessed by successful ancestors, publicly funded education, etc., you should give back proportionally to your success (i.e. progressive income tax). The Democrats especially have been really bad about just defining tactics and how'd they vote, rather than defining their underlying beliefs, values, and morals. The Republicans have been much better on this front, though I disagree with them on many issues. It would be good for all parties to be open about their underlying foundations, rather than talk about superficial tactics that are strictly to get them elected.

I'm not sure I'd call it alienating. Certainly provocative. I can't see how it's attacking, because the authors make it very clear that this is their OWN view of patriotism, and they encourage other people to define for themselves what patriotism, their beliefs, and their views of public morality are. Anyway, I hope you don't judge the book just by its title.

My pants would be disposable after whipping onto one of those too! tangent - i remember seeing a few fixed tricams on upper castle rock. never fixed one myself.

poke. here's a great quote from Carl Schurz in 1899: I confidently trust that the American people will prove themselves ... too wise not to detect the false pride or the dangerous ambitions or the selfish schemes which so often hide themselves under that deceptive cry of mock patriotism: ‘Our country, right or wrong!’ They will not fail to recognize that our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: ‘Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.’

the newest ones have colored slings too: http://www.camp-usa.com/module/product/detail.asp?ID=214 also, there are brand-new tricams smaller than the pinkie! www.camp-usa-partners.com/Press-Releases/2008/Tricams-2008-025+0125.pdf

trillions may have exchanged hands, but that was at the expense of resources, both natural and human. those resources are either gone or have future hidden costs.

never used them, but the ultralight theme seems a little gimmicky here. though i haven't sized up a metolius #10 to a DMM #10, the weights are within 3g of each other and the DMM Walnuts are stronger. an advantage of a nut with a looped wire is that you could slide the nut back for a hangerless bolt or slide the nut back to use as a desperate sling.

yeah, if there's one thing i can't stand it's olive-colored mushy broccoli or asparagus that's been overcooked. boiling is ok for some stuff if the water is salted and it's just for two minutes or so -- enough time to soften, and the veggies are refreshed in cold water immediately afterward.

i guess you guys haven't read it. I'd be really curious what FW and KK think of it, as the authors are certainly left-leaning, but they send plenty of criticism to both the left and right.

Has anyone else here read it? It's pretty short and available online for free http://www.truepat.org/read.php#0 as well as on Amazon for really cheap. I was really impressed by both the quality of the prose and the underlying message.

don't sear at high temperatures late at night if you have neighbors and your stove has poor/no venting/exhaust