CanuckInUSA

When I was a kid around 9 years old I played on a hockey team that won games and lost games. One day we traveled to another part of the city to play an exhibition game against another team. I just assumed this game would be like the rest (what did I know I was just a kid). This other team beat my team 9-0 and I was devastated. It wasn't the first time we lost a game, but it was the first time we got dominated as badly as we were. Guess what? I got over it. Losing 9-0 never left any permanent scars. I also played on some football teams, but in this case I came from an area of the city that was known to produce good players (mainly because we had good coaches) and I was on the winning end of many 72-0 games. Oh winning is so much better than losing, but lessons are learned faster when some losses are thrown into the mix. There is nothing wrong with losing if you can learn something from the experience. Society is definitely getting softer when it comes to shielding kids from losing. Whoever told you life would be easy was clearly lying to you. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I have worked from home as a software developer on more than one occasion and there are pros as well as cons to working from home. Pros: - As a developer I may not always be 100% productive when the traditional business world tells me I should be productive. If I can do some of my best work at 7 pm, or 11 pm, or 2 am, why should I be forced to work at 9 am. The bottom line is that I have work to do and it should not matter when I do it, just as long as I do it. So on the pro side, working from home allows me to be the most flexible to work when I am the most productive. - Working from home allows me to take breaks during the day and do things like quick household chores or my favorite a five minute power snooze in the middle of the afternoon and I never need to explain myself to my boss just as long as I get the work done at some point in the day. - Working from home means I can save time and money not having to commute to and from the office which becomes an even bigger benefit when I do not have to commute during the middle of a winter blizzard. Cons: - Sometimes I do need to collaborate with my peers for myself to properly do my job and it is so much easier to do this when we are all in the same space. Sure I can message someone when I am home, or call them on the phone. But it is easier and more efficient when I can do this in person. - It is easier to slack off at home and you really need to be disciplined with your work ethic. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Why yes he was a career banker, former head of Goldman Sachs prior being nominated as Treasury Secretary by GWB. What is your point? What does this have to do with the banks asking for a bail out which you are claiming? Some of the banks were in trouble, others were not. For those who did NOT need the help, they were still forced to take the bail out. Please professor, stick to the facts. We know you are lying whenever you try to tell us that the bankers demanded a bail out. Indoctrination may work on young and impressionable minds, but your indoctrination techniques will not work on people who have been around the block a few times. You know I am not happy with what was allow to happen in the financial sector which lead to the melt down in 2008. I am not a banker, nor do I support bankers. But I don't go around internet forums spewing lies about what transpired. Obama campaigned on the idea that he was going to clean things up. But has he done anything to change what goes on at Wall Street? No he has not ... nada ... nothing. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

The bailouts were forced upon all the banks by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. They had no choice in the matter. If you want to whine about bailouts at least get your facts straight. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Of course Obama has nothing to do with the economic collapse in 2008 (Reagan, Bush, Clinton and GWB all had a hand what resulted in 2008). We all know Obama was given a shit sandwich when he took over in 2009. But he ran on a platform that he would fix things. There is a reason why businesses are not hiring right now and that's because they do not trust Obama. You should not worry too much about a title on a DZ.COM thread that you think is full of lies, and not worry too much about what anyone says around here. But you should be asking yourself why does business not trust Obama. We all know GWB was NOT a fiscal conservative, but Obama is making GWB look like a fiscal conservative with his record spending, his desire to not honor trade agreements with America's existing trading partners and his desire to build walls. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Having spent 8 years living and working in Colorado via a series of temporary NAFTA TN-1 work visa from 1998 through to 2005, I encountered many Border Control and INS agents along the way. Crossing the border was never an issue when my TN-1 was in date. Also whenever I needed to apply for a new TN-1 I would tell the Border Patrol person I needed to see an INS agent so the Border Patrol people never gave me problems. However as the years progressed INS went from being nice to me to being complete shit heads. Around the year 2002 I applied for a TN-1 at the Alberta/Montana Sweetgrass border crossing and the fellow who processed me was nice and professional. However in 2004 I crossed the same border and met with the exact same INS agent and he was a complete and utter asshole to me questioning my qualifications. Good grief my entire border crossing and visa application history is in his computer system, can he not even read that two years earlier he himself issued a new TN-1 visa to myself and yet here he was questioning whether or not I was qualified for the visa? He did eventually give it to me, but it was a clear power trip he was on. I don't know, yes the US has the right to decide who they let into their own country, but it sure makes no sense how the entire southern border is ignored while they are complete and utter ass wipes on the northern border. If the US wants to build their fence to keep us Canadians out, I know which side of the fence I will be on. Never thought I would see the day when the US made an enemy out of myself. I thoroughly enjoyed my time in Colorado (some of the best years of my life), but America needs to open up their eyes. We here in Canada have a pretty good thing going and because of this we are not in the same rush as some of the Mexicans in terms of becoming illegals. "Mr Obama do NOT build your wall" - said in my best Ronald Reagan voice. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Paulson Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Oh dude that is a memory I could have done without. It is almost as bad as this. The supplied link is safe for work in that there is no nudity, not safe for work if you vomit easily. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Oh please educate us oh mighty one, great indoctrinator of young and impressionable minds on how your wealth tax will work. Will the wealth tax only apply to the ever so hated 1% of the population? or would it apply to everyone on some sort of scale? If it does not apply to everyone, then it is clear the whole goal is a simple transfer of wealth scheme. You are the one who is lobbying for this wealth tax, the floor is yours professor. Tell us inferior minds how it will work. Tell us how ample supply and little demand can be ignored. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

If I had the skills and tools to quickly make a Reagan CGI video of him saying "Mr Obama [or whoever the next president is] don't build this wall", I would. But it was much easier/quicker just to search for this historic Reagan speech. I would like to know one thing (not directed at any specific person here), would this new wall be for keeping people out or keeping them in? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

How many people old enough, remember this historic speech? Short Version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLBsOz8lPhI Longer Version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjWDrTXMgF8 Oh how times have changes in the last 24 years. http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110929/us-canada-border-proposed-fencing-110929/20110929/?hub=EdmontonHome Looks like some people in the USA want to build a wall around their own country. I have always thought of myself as a friend of the USA, but this is over the top. Building walls is no fucking solution. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I am glad someone is seeing the problems with this wealth tax. BTW ... I wonder how many Americans are aware that under the current laws, US citizens must file an income tax return every year regardless of where they live in the world. There is a big kerfuffle right now north of the border as the IRS has been hounding a number of people for money who were not aware of this law. If a wealth tax was to replace the income tax would the IRS still demand all US citizens file some sort of wealth return? which of course would result in the US Government confiscating more assets from people who do not even live in the US. Kallend's famous argument is that the wealth tax is to pay for the USA's new just society, but these people do not even live in the USA. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I can't even believe people are still talking about this wealth tax nonsense. There are so many holes in it, it is not even funny. Most people who have any sort of net worth do NOT keep currency in their mattresses. Most don't even keep that many funds in their bank accounts. Most are tied up in investments. You know real estate, stocks, bonds, automobiles, airplanes, boats, precious metals, art, etc, etc, etc. In order to pay the government the wealth tax these assets must be sold. But the market would be flooded with assets to the point where the prices would tank. You know lots of supply and no demand. Would the government demand their taxable assets valued before or after the markets tanked? On top of that it would not promote people to be fiscally responsible with their finances. Who would want to pay off their debts if that meant having to give the government more money in the form of wealth taxes? More people than even exists today would be living paycheck to paycheck and a loss of income would result in more foreclosures resulting in more real estate flooding the market with little to no demand. How about severely controlling government spending, close some loop holes in the existing tax laws and maybe some modest increases to consumption taxes? Not so high to drive people to the underground economy, but high enough to help a little with the revenue side. Of course without cuts to the bloated governments at all levels, no amount of new taxes will ever stop the bleeding. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Just so that there is no confusion here, I do agree that property taxes are a form of a wealth tax. However presently they are only applied to service municipalities. They are not applied to service the other two layers of government. However the "Wealth Tax" that the professor is calling for is nothing more than a call for a "Class Warfare Wealth Transfer". Under the professor's plan only the rich would have their assets seized from the government since the poor have no wealth to seize. The disproportion of people who actually pay taxes versus those who pay no taxes will only grow when governments expand their seizure of wealth above what they already take in property taxes. I am not a fan of consumption taxes (ie: sales taxes) but they are the fairest form of all taxation. The rich will pay more consumption taxes because they have more disposable income. But as long as these consumption taxes are not too high to drive people into the underground economy, they are applied to everyone and people actually have a choice to decide "Can I afford to pay the taxes on the product/services I am about to consume". But the socialist are not really in favor of using only consumption taxes because it gives people choices. No they would rather just go seize the assets of the ever so hated rich people and if they can pile on some additional consumption taxes on top of seizing assets all the better in their minds. Oh and what is lost in all of this, many governments continue to refuse to cut their spending. Case in point not only the US Federal Government but also Toronto's municipal government. But as I said in an early post, Toronto is not the only out of touch civic government. Here in Calgary with our Purple Mayor, our city is run by a bunch of new morons even after we voted out all our old morons. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Yes there are existing property taxes which are based on the assessed value of someone's real estate and under the existing system these property taxes are used to help municipalities pay for some of their services. Our property taxes do NOT go towards the Federal governments. But that is not good enough for the resident Leftist professor. He is calling for something even greater. He wants all wealth taxed to pay for the exponentially growing Federal bureaucracies. I'd prefer taxes to be based on wealth. - Kallend (post #197 of this thread) What is wealth? Wealth is not income. Wealth is assets. Assets that as long as they were obtained through the legal channels have been purchased with money that had already been taxed. But that is not good enough. He wants the government to effectively begin seizing assets from people. He says he will only go after the rich, but what is rich? If someone practices good fiscal discipline all their life and manages to save a million or more in assets (which have already been taxed), is this person all of a sudden deemed to be rich? There is no end to the desire by some to implement their "Wealth Transfer". Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Not as absurd as your desire to transfer wealth from the people who have already paid taxes, to pay for your unionized "Jobs for Life" Big Government public service. Tell me professor, did you manage to indoctrinate any young and impressionable minds this week into your Leftist "Wealth Transfer" agenda? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

At least in any jurisdiction I have ever lived in, property taxes are applied at the municipal level to pay for services at the civic level. They are not paid to national governments. So what are we to do now, have the "Wealth Tax" applied at two levels, maybe all three levels of government? How far do people want to go with the "Transfer of Wealth" agenda. Everywhere I look all I see is poorly run tax and spend governments at all levels. Nationally, State/Provincial and local municipal governments. Dude I do not know if you actually live in TO or some surrounding city but I was reading yesterday how Toronto's city council could only come to an agreement on cutting about $30 million from it's deficit (what was it $500 million or is it $800 million ... you can just not get a clear answer from anyone). So Toronto has decided, no we refuse to make any meaningful cuts to our bloated municipal government because god forbid all those "for lifers" they have on the municipal payroll would not get the entitlements they feel they are entitled to. Screw the tax payer, time to raise taxes again. Oh and not to pick on Toronto, Calgary where I live is equally being run by idiots. We just cleaned house with a election last year and the new blood is acting just as bad as the old blood we just turfed through our so called democratic process. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I am just responding to the last post of this thread, my comments are not directed at one specific person. Taxing Wealth is beyond comprehension and just reeks of the "Wealth Transfer". In many cases when you are taxing wealth you are punishing people who have good saving and good investment habits. Let's look at two examples: 1) John Q Public has been brought up thinking "Live for Today" and Mr Public has lived a very exciting vibrant life. He has a good income and wastes no time spending his income on fine clothing, fast cars, even faster women and is mortgaged to the hilt try to keep up to the Jones next door. John Q Public is really only living a few paychecks away from financial ruin should his source of income dry up. Sound familiar? There are millions and millions of Mr Publics out there who have little to no wealth despite the lavish lifestyles they have lived. Well at least when he dies, Mr Public will know that "He Partied like a Rock Star". 2) I would like to introduce you to John Doe. John Doe makes the exact same income as John Q Public, but Mr Doe was brought up differently. Mr Doe was brought up to not buy things on credit whenever possible, Mr Doe was brought up to live within his means and keep his debt at a minimum and if at all possible have no debt at all. Mr Doe was brought up to save for a rainy day. Yes Mr Public may have lived a more exciting more vibrant life than Mr Doe, but upon reaching middle age while John Q Public has little to no equity to his name, John Doe might actually have a small fortune due to his sound fiscal discipline. Both men earned the same income, but under the "Tax the Wealth" plan, Mr Public has nothing to tax while Mr Doe has assets in the millions that can be taxed. But how is he supposed to pay his taxes? By selling off his assets? And who will be around to buy these assets? The longer the plan is in effect the less wealth there will be. The less buyers out there to purchase these assets means the more the assets depreciate and the more Mr Doe is punished for having good sound fiscal discipline. It is simply mind boggling where the Left wants to take things with their "Wealth Transfer" ideology. The existing income tax laws can be improved by reducing some of the loop holes. Some deductions make sense to promote economic activity while others are simply a case of satisfying the pigs at the troughs. Consumption taxes (while never popular) are also another viable option as at least it gives people the choice when and where they decide to consumer products and services and whether paying the taxes is something they can afford. But taxing people based on their assets is wrong wrong wrong. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I am not of the mindset that people should be allowed to sue employers for not hiring them, but I do NOT approve of the practice where some employers are passing over unemployed candidates and only looking at candidates who are looking to jump ship from one organization to another. In many circumstances being unemployed these days is beyond the control of a lot of people. For crying out loud, hire the most qualified candidate. Do not discriminate based on gender, race or whether or not the candidate is presently unemployed. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

It's not about balancing the budget, it's all about wealth redistribution. The modern day Robin Hood. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

The US Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. There are simply not enough filthy rich people to solve government spending issues through "Tax the Rich" rhetoric. But it sure makes for a good talking point when engaging in class warfare doesn't it. It's none of my business how much wealth someone has. It is my business when governments are spending beyond their means. Everywhere you look we have politicians spending money like there is no tomorrow. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Well yes of course one does not need to be "rich" to fly. One only needs some disposable income and yes sacrifices can be made certain areas of life to help free up some disposable income for one's hobbies. $38/hour dry for an Archer is good ... then again you said dry. I never used to rent dry, I always rented wet. At the club I used to fly at in Colorado back in the 2001 - 2005 time frame I believe they were renting out an archer in the $50/hour wet range (I forget the exact prices), basically 152s were unheard of in CO due to the altitude, older 172s would go for about $45/hour wet, the archer while the same performance as the 172 was a little more expensive. But in CO if you wanted to fly over the rocks (mountains) you needed a minimum of a 182 and/or a Dakota which was in at least $70/hour sometimes as high as $80 (oh and modern 172s were also in the $70/hour). Definitely not a cheap hobby but I will forever remember those solo flights I made into the Colorado Rockies with a big smile on my face. Back on topic ... I always laugh when an airplane owner whines about rich people. Talk about being out of touch with reality. Yes there are some filthy rich people in this world and yes society would not fall apart if the filthy rich people were made to pay more. But two things to remember: 1) When taxes are raised, people who can avoid the new taxes will avoid them and it's not just rich people who avoid taxes. When consumption taxes are raised too high, poor people flock to the underground economy while when any sort of taxes are raised too high, rich people move their assets to other countries. Raising taxes too high too fast will have an adverse effect on what was trying to be achieved. You end up with high taxes that actually bring in less revenue because the tax payer base ends up shrinking due to less "legal" economic activity. 2) There are simply not enough ubber rich people to deal with the structural deficits the US government is in. How many times do we need to say this. The US Government does not have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem. But all we hear about is "Tax the Rich" rhetoric. It would be nice to see a serious attempt to cut spending (this includes military spending), but we never do see it. Once again it is simply hilarious when an airplane own whines about rich people. I own a 14 year old Porsche 911 (which is worth less than most brand new cars). In the eyes of some people, I am rich because I own a Porsche and they are not 100% wrong though they may be mistaken about the value of my car. My car is purely for fun as it is not my daily driver. But damn you should see how much fun it is on the race tracks. It's not the fastest car out there but definitely not slow. People who own airplanes need to face up to the facts that they are rich. They may not be as rich as the ubber rich, but they are rich. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

I wish I was rich enough to own my own airplane (if you can believe it I am a certified SEL pilot, I am just not current anymore). But people who own airplanes need not worry about me. I won't hold it against them. Their personal wealth is none of my business. I do not seek to socially engineer rich airplane owners into something that they are not. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

High: I am still here and occasionally do some cool things. Low: Holly is not here with us. PS: for those who never got a chance to meet Holly trust me when I say she was one of a kind and was very much liked and admired here on these forums both when she was stirring up shit as well as when she was spreading her love. I will never forget the first time I met her in person on an airplane at Eloy. Despite being complete strangers, she treated me like we were long time friends. BSBD Holly we miss you and to everyone else "Party like a Rock Star" - Holly Kish. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

My father (who I was not all that close to since he divorced my mother soon after I was born) and my uncle both died of nasty cancers a few years ago. Watching both men go from healthy middle age men to dying nasty deaths thanks to their respective cancers made me never want to go what they both went through. Unfortunately I had to sell my JVX 87 because I just can not stay current enough up here in the frozen north. But there are a couple of replacement hobbies where the adrenaline rush is similar. But the few years I had on the competitive swooping circuit will always be remembered fondly ... as long as alzeihmers does not set in. Enjoy your swoops. I watched the video of a 2011 competition from my former DZ in CO and the guys and girl (Jessica E) are all doing awesome. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over