KaskadskyjKozak

Poor Ivan Reek

Thanks for the TR KK. Were you regretting here not having run the ridge to Raven Ridge from Bigelow? Yes, good catch - I fixed that. I have been planning to climb Hoodoo and Raven Ridge with my kids. I've heard that from that side (Libby Lake) you have to ascend a sketchy gully, but thought I'd check it out. This is partly why I was not thinking about Raven Ridge on this trip. The linkups are endless here (Cheops is close too)

you are all fucking weird

Trip: Bigelow, Switchback (Cooney), Martin Date: 5/30/2015 Trip Report: What do you get when you cross 4 twisted folks with a backup plan to attack the North Cascades? Yep, that's the route. It was beautiful, in a sick, self-flagellating kind of way. Our itinerary? On Saturday we hiked from the TH to Upper Eagle Lake. It is snow-free until within a mile of the lake. We found a dry tent platform or two at an established site, no problem. After setting up tents we summitted Bigelow easily, hung out there a bit, then went to camp for dinner. On Sunday we hiked to Boiling Lake via Horseshoe Pass. We ascended the saddled S of the lake and contoured between 7200 and 7300 until we were under the W ridge leading to the summit of Switchback. We ran that ridge to Martin. It's about 80% snow-free. Our descent was where the minor shenanigans occurred. We basically cruised across the W face of Martin starting just below the summit and making a beeline for the col above Boiling Lake. Lots of mountain porn, but it felt as though we were shitting the whole way. The slope had plenty of snow, plenty of postholing, interspersed with talus. At places the snow was thin enough to threaten ankles and shins. From the saddle above Boiling Lake we retraced our steps. We had considered different descent options, a loop deproach (with carrover), etc. My only regret is not tagging Raven Ridge while on Bigelow. We had not planned for that and didn't realize how quick it would be to run over the ridge to Raven Ridge. View from camp: Upper Eagle Lake, E face of Bigelow http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_032.JPG Upper Eagle Lake from Bigelow's SE slopes http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_013.JPG Team on Bigelow: http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_019.JPG Exploring Bigelow's sweet summit: http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_024.JPG View back to Switchback (Cooney): http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_048.JPG Ridge run from Cooney to Martin: http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_051.JPG N Cascades p0rn: http://cascadeclimbers.com/plab/data/500/medium/Sawtooth_Slam_050.JPG Gear Notes: No tech gear. Approach Notes: Cruiser

It's really amazing to see how quickly you tend to excuse high ranking officials from Republican Party, who commit horrible crimes- like child molesters. How fucking easy and convenient. If they are guilty, they should die immediately. Yeah, that's excusing. FOAD, clownpuncher

It's a long list: Hands off our..... ...and a list of Democrats: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f4c_1254342072 As I said, people suck. I hold out hope that Jim actually is being a troll with his first link and barb. But i'm not so sure with his partisan blinders we can all agree that all convicted pedophiles should be executed immediately, right? Or will libtards wring their hands about even a R's bad childhood or whatever social ills caused this "sickness" and demand "treatment"?

"another" - besides Mark Foley, who else are you referring to? Do you have rogues gallery of your own to post in response to FW? People suck. Pedophiles should all be euthanized. Speaking of pedophiles: pedophile house

he was making a joke

I think this actually is in the Democrat's platform this year, so you are correct!!

Well, it appeared you didn't know about some of these tax implications. Making more money doesn't just mean your marginal rate goes up for the additional income, it means you can save less (interest free, with a tax advantage), take less on child tax credit, claim less deductions (mortgage, real estate taxes, etc). A lot of this surprised me over the years as I thought the big hit for the better-off was just a higher marginal rate. I even wondered if a rich person could just buy a multi-million dollar mansion and take the real estate tax on that as a deduction (could be tens of thousands in taxes on huge estates) - nope. But if you listen to the media (and D talking points) they make it sound like people with more money somehow escape paying taxes. "they don't pay a fair share" is the mantra. Well I don't see it.

Like I said - it was an emergency funds account. 6 months salary savings. I can't contribute to a Roth IRA - if you make too much, you are disallowed. 401k has a cap too, and that cap is affected by how much your fellow employees contribute. Last year I max'd out but then got 3K back because others did not participate enough. I then got taxed on that check back as normal income the next year. I don't think you can contribute to a Rollover IRA (where you move 401k funds if you leave a company), but I could be wrong on that. I learn the minimum I have to about this stuff, as I am not interested in it that much. I put he money in and mostly forget about it, rebalancing every 12-18 months. Here's the info for Roth limits in 2014 if you are single: Single $114,000 or less $5,5002 $114,001 to $129,000 Begin to phase out Greater than $129,000 Ineligible for a Roth IRA In other words, if you make $129K a year and are single, sorry, you can't take advantage of this program as you try to save for your future. Hope you have a 401k in this case. The limit is higher for married filing jointly, but the cutoff is still under 200K

you may have a point when it comes to hidden taxes like gas tax. But our biggest state tax source (sales and property) may not be as big as one thinks. sales tax is around 8% but only on things you buy in state and non groceries. sales tax is also tax deductible so one can lop off about 20% from the 8% tax rate due to federal tax refund. I didn't keep track of everything spent but there is a estimator in the fed tax code. don't remember the exact numbers but I recollect that the amount spent on sales tax was not that great, maybe around $1,000. And of course I got back 1/5th of that so I gave about $800 to sales tax. property tax was around $4000 but once again I got back 1/5th of that so I paid about $3,200 to property tax total is about $4000 to the state for those two sources of revenue. (after fed tax deductions accounted for) this is about 3% tax on income. not that much but I live outside of the city so my property tax is much lower than some. maybe you should move? FW is right - it all adds up. It could be worse, so I'm not agro about this. I do think most higher-wage earners pay a fair share already. There are ultra-rich and large corporations that work loopholes to pay way too little, and that's BS. Personally I'd just like to see some kind of upper limit on taxes - a flat upper limit for all taxes combined, and it should not exceed 25-30% of your income no matter how much you make. I want a government that lives within its means. And yes, expensive wars are living outside our means! (I'd support a special war-tax) Gene, one thing about capital gains - if you try to exercise stock options of the ISO variety, you will have to buy and hold those shares, and pay up to 28% on AMT for them. If you make a lot of money on such options its a matter of risk-taking, luck and timing because that 28% would come out of the difference between the strike price and the market value on the day exercised. The cap gains would be taxed against the delta from the exercise price and market value when you sell - and by waiting a year, you do take a risk! Imgaine you have options with a strike price of $5 per share, and the company goes public and they are worth $20. You exercise 5000 shares and hold them (ISOs). That means you have 75000 dollars of AMT income and you could pay up to 28% of that in taxes and have to cover that with other funds! Then you wait a whole year and the price is now $25/share, ok, now you get cap gains on 25K of income - and that is a lower rate. But don't think you just get that 10 or 15% tax on everything. And if by holding those shares a year, the value goes down... well your risk did not pan out, and although you might get some of the tax back, well, there's no guarantees in this game. If you don't want to take that risk or you have NQSO stock options, then you do a cashless exercise and you are taxed on the proceeds as if it were normal income. So, if you are in the 25% tax bracket, then you are taxed at 25% up until you hit the next bracket - for those funds. 28%? 33%? Same story. There's no escaping this for a normal person with this kind of income. As for investments. I made the mistake of simply rebalancing funds in a personal investment account and got hit with some short term gain taxes. All I did was frigging rebalance - I did not cash out. But because I "sold" shares, that sale got taxed. I then had to sell funds to cover that gain. Kind of lame. That money is being put away to pay for retirement, take care of emergencies, or pay for kids' college. It used to be in a low-interest savings account but the interest rate dropped so low I moved them out maybe 6 years ago. It's not like I'm using that money to buy Louis XIV and light cigars with 100 dollar bills.

I always thought tax and spend was better than borrow and spend anyway. And I always thought spending within your means was the best. You shouldn't have to raise taxes to do it. That should be the exception not the rule, and a very rarely exercised exception that gets reversed eventually. Neither R's or D's have spent within their means. R's typically just run deficits. D's run deficits and raise taxes. I'd prefer we just don't run deficits. I could fully respect a national debate on the role of government and how big it should be, then allow the administration that wins over the voters to slice that relatively fixed-size pie how they see fit. An R administration could spend more money on the military and whatever else they spend it on. A D administration could spend it on social programs and whatever else they spend it on. But the pie is fixed, and not burdensome. Yeah, wish in one hand, shit in the other...

while the definition of middle class is vague and varies, I think that income of excess of $200K/yr puts you well beyond the middle class for all of US except NYC and San Fran. I think $70K/yr is a bit beyond most people's def of middle class. I meant to say middle class, on the upper side of middle class, and yes it is vague. Look, we live in an expensive area here. If you live in a decent neighborhood in Seattle, N Seattle or the East side, it's not too hard to spend 600K on a home (or more), cost of living is expensive, taxes are higher ('cos your home is worth more) - all for something that is the same quality, square footage, etc as a home elsewhere but at twice or three times the price tag. A middle class salary of 60K might work just fine elsewhere and require making 120K or more here. It's apples to oranges. We're not quite SF or NY but we're not exactly an average place to live in terms of cost of living.

Maybe I am making more than $218K. You do realize we have a high-tech industry and high cost of living up here in Amazonia/Microserfia/Expedia/Google-FB-in=WA land?

please offer something to support this. According to historical data, the fed tax rate is the same since 1987. Granted they assume you qualify for some tax credits (notes 2,6 and 8) but they over all affect to tax rate is not that high to say that taxes went up a lot. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=226 This chart is rather confusing so maybe I am in error. are you talking about property taxes or other medicare taxes under Obama term? I'm just talking about federal income tax. Dig out a copy of the 1040 instructions for 2008 or 2009 and compare it to those for 2014. Near the end are tax tables, and after them charts for the higher marginal rates. In addition Obama has limited deductions. Those are spread out in the instructions and harder to pull out by comparison but they are there.

please offer something to support this. According to historical data, the fed tax rate is the same since 1987. Granted they assume you qualify for some tax credits (notes 2,6 and 8) but they over all affect to tax rate is not that high to say that taxes went up a lot. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=226 This chart is rather confusing so maybe I am in error. are you talking about property taxes or other medicare taxes under Obama term? I'm just talking about federal income tax.

Taxes went up - a lot for middle to upper class folks. Tax, and spend (or at least don't cut spending) (Barry) Yep, it's misleading (intentionally) to keep war expenses on a separate expense ledger. (Dubya)

WTF does that mean? Libtards promise a load of bigger government and increased spending, and they usually deliver. What exactly do they lie about to get elected? Well, "if you like your doctor, you can keep him," and "if you like the insurance you have you can keep it" come to mind. "Read my lips..." "No nation building..." It cuts both ways

WTF does that mean? Libtards promise a load of bigger government and increased spending, and they usually deliver. What exactly do they lie about to get elected?

I'm not so sure I agree with that. I think the purpose of education is to train your mind and habits, to learn about your outside world, and about the species homo sapiens. Some stuff you learn will have little effect on "skills" relevant to daily life, but they all should add to one's quiver as a functioning, thinking human being.

In my industry we have to hire more and more folks who have immigrated because we have to. I'm not as optimistic as you about our system.

My son was recently unable to finish a book he chose to read and write a report on (the Fellowship of the Ring). Just no attention span. In the end I worked it out that he could read the Old Man and the Sea instead. At 125 pages, and with very simple language I figured he could wrap that up in a couple of days. It took more like 12 and was like pulling teeth. I read the entire Lord of the Rings series in 5th grade. He's in 9th. I definitely see a shift in the ability of kids to read, focus and sit still. But then again doesn't the older generation always say the younger one is lazy and lost? :0)