rehmwa

I guess non-sterile - it's terribly unfair, perhaps women past menopause should get a tax credit of some kind. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

why thank you (but I get your point, Kelp put forth that minimizing the shock to the system would require phase in - I agreed, other than I don't think the current system has that long a concentration span nor the public that much tolerance for pain of any kind......) I think that government involvement in social engineering is WAY over the top. But I agree that it might be a necessary evil and TINY tweaks here and there are unavoidable - but the sledgehammer approach of today is clearly a total system fail despite the best of intentions (in many cases anyway - there's still blatant self interest examples out there anyway). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

we could then take old people and dehydrate them and use the resulting powder for low cost energy drinks, and as substrate for various materials why would it be too expensive? you didn't do the math did you? Or does Canada pay people to have sex? I'm sure it's very complicated. Or are you insinuating that having a simple tax system would drive a massive trade imbalance? you're hiding a lot of assumptions behind your question, could you flesh it out a bit? (of course, this is all just a discussion in idealism - so strawman away all you like - but it sounds like you prefer government interference in reproduction then? perhaps you want to require the family unit to be restricted to just one man and woman of child bearing ages? and massive credits for upbringing, etc etc etc.... help, I need more strawmen to counter this in depth argument.....!@@!!!) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

not at all - when the rules are simpler, there are just fewer ways to game the system, and those are more easily identified - nothing more insidious than that ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

and those individuals, rich and otherwise (everyone will do what they can though you only blame one class) - will be much more clearly identifiable as they try when there's a lot less to hide behind ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

if you hit everyone, then it's palatable - but the biggest shock to anything that's remotely "fair" will 'hurt' about everyone and anyone - or at least be sold as such - you don't really find out until all the plusses and minuses get tallied up on an individual basis. If someone is situated that they CLEARLY get a lot more plusses than minuses without doing the math - then it's likely they were unfairly preferenced (the converse is true too), so it's hard to feel sorry for them..... Kelpy is right, a phase in over time is the least shocking, but do you think any Congress has the commitment to stick to any plan over 2 years long? So rip the bandaids off at once is the only way it'll really happen. Then the question is do we survive the shock long enough to adjust, or do we cry that it hurts too much and put the bandaids back on and eventually resume our march to becoming Greece and co? (I'm being generous, I think 2 years to commit to anything is out of scope for congress critters or a president) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

5 minutes? nonsense "O.K. now you'll be coming out here and you'll be doing a stable fall face down frog modified. Now out here comes the static line 'cause it goes like from this to here see, and then the pilot chute will open and it'll pull the bridle out and then the main canopy will be open see, 'cause they're all connected, and then you'll be down here and you'll be looking up here at the WDI indicator and you'll also going to check for Mae West and if that's not there then you need to check here for 4 panels and a hole. Then when you come down you're gonna find the piece and you're gonna land over here and you're going to get in this position - except you don't wanna do that - because that means you're in trouble, so what you want to do is you wanna get right here and then you're gonna come round here and you're gonna fold up and you're gonna do a toggle and jettison and always watch the horizon O.K?" ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I would certainly be in favor of letting the market dictate what they make in terms of supply and demand. Seems that if you take away the tax exempt status, you'd get fewer volunteers and then the pay to attract them would increase without pre-emptive intervention. Stop fiddling with the knobs. Let it happen. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

not 'discouraging' or 'encouraging' anything - just saying the government can stay out of it and let whatever needs to happen....happen. When everyone has the same rules to live by. If 'better results' come from concentration, then the industry surrounding that concentration should naturally result in the ability to support it - even if the population has to live under the same rules as everyone else. If not, then clearly the better results weren't.......'better' enough. I'm operating under the assumption that - If it has to be propped up, then it's broken - certainly many here disagree with that assumptions when they really want their favorite project propped up I have to acknowledge one thing - without the space program we sure wouldn't be able get no Tang anywhere. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

It wreck havoc on the school systems until an entire generation of people died out. . That was in mockery mode to agree with Billvon that everybody is happy to implement on the "other guy". So I have to stay in character.... I agree a phase in is always better than shock when the problem is so huge and widespread to affect a substantial portion of the population. (Once the affect is ABOVE a certain threshold, well then the effect mitigates since the pain is shared equally......) But could we accelerate the process by encouraging that entire generation to die out faster?? perhaps through tax credits ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I was really in a mockery mode, but you always have good comments. So I'll response for discussion seriously: So what if the "intent" is really to just give every citizen the SAME thresh hold? If the big city populations get hit in a non-uniform way, then the discussion is really about what's wrong with the economics of big cities and would it be a net benefit, at that point, to let the chips fall vs trying to salvage what could be indicated by this very symptom, as a flaw in an artificially propped up urban structure. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

WHAT??!! If you delete the mortgage deductions thousand of real estate agents will be put out of work. If that happens, then thousands of car accidents will be avoided (due to terrible real estate agent drivers running lights, speeding and driving while digging around in boxes in their back seats while driving) over the next decade further putting body shops out of work. why do you hate hard working car shop employees and their sick and needy children? won't someone please think of the children? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

You're trying to make a statement relative to the status quo, not the point for that matter - If you cogitate a little more, you agree it pretty much takes the shells away and certainly wouldn't help the rich if they have to pay the same on investment income like every other kind of income. But also not the point. Point is a simple set of rules everyone lives by. My opinion on the "short term" outcome? I'd think the net winners would be the working middle class but not by showing preferences, but by having the same rules in place for all. So my personal bias is that today middle class is being screwed over by both ends. But I'll admit it's just my personal and subjective bias. the goal should be to take the shells away - not to benefit the middle class explicitly - but someone will still make a class warfare debate out of it - even when the goal is to get away from that very pointless discussion ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

it's difficult isn't it? the only "fair" solution, I guess, will be the one that upsets everybody if someone makes $100,000, and has $20,000 in deductions and pays 25% income tax would pay ( (100,000-20,000) x .25 ) = $20,000 I suspect if we could just start with no deductions and a 20% tax rate, then maybe people would figure out that this is a giant shell game that really does just take money from the middle class and gives it away to the very rich and the very poor in trade for votes and power. Edit for those more obtuse to see it without a narrator: math on the "if" statement ((100,000 - 0) x .20) also equals $20,000 ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

a friend linked this on facebook - don't know how true it is http://www.salon.com/2012/12/03/homeless_man_gifted_boots_by_cop_has_already_sold_them_on/ ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure, no problem ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure - another example of special treatment on those dollars. STOP IT clear example of why this is VERY hard to do - some special treatment is MUCH more popular than others. that's why a clean slate approach is likely the only one that fixes the problem rather than just be more exercises in special treatment policies ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I like this. When I teach, it takes as long as it takes. I've done classes of 6 in under 4 hours with great results. I had a class of 2 guys that were just super sharp and had them up for picture perfect Cat A's in about 2-1/2 hours. (and if something had gone wrong, I'm confident they could have handled it fine in accordance with the training given) I've done much longer classes with fewer students because it just takes that long to get to a point where I think they have the info. It's a bit annoying when someone says "any class under (xx hours) won't turn out" is a bit to glib for me to take the comment seriously. Even when it's from people I respect quite a bit. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I see your point - you are isolating just one group that abuses power that you are focused on, but you are missing mine. I don't care where the political bullying comes from (the subset of corrupt rich, well meaning zealots with ideological agendas, etc etc etc, I acknowledge that they come from anywhere, and abuse of power for the sake of getting special treatment is wrong regardless of the origination), it's not a matter of finding just one target group and ganging up on them. It's a matter of cleaning up the rules. In the end, the rules are made by congress, and special tweaks are never in terms of 'fairness' but always about preference. that should be limited to a very severe extent. a good start is an extremely simple and one size fits all tax code. The philosophy of "they get their special rules, so I want my special rules" is pointless and propogates/exacerbates the problem. the philoshophy of "they get their special rules, let's delete those special treatments" is a better fix. Kallend is very close with "they get their special rules (low taxes on investment income), let's delete those special treatments........except where it might hurt some other group that I'm favorable to, let's keep treating them special" close, but not close enough. Then the discussions become less about just eliminating the special treatment, and more about social manipulation of just another kind. but, a lot of people think government's role really is social manipulation of whatever they like..... (though i really hope the trite/obtuse response of "But, you do want government to treat groups differently, you don't want murderers treated the same as you, do you? HUH? DO YOU?" but he's not posting today for some reason) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I know that's dogma for many, but you can't say that like it's fact IMHO - currently, the bullies are congress and they are being encouraged by whatever voting group they are pandering to (cynical position) - or whatever subjective social experiment they are trying to favor (position that assumes they mean well but are just idiots). It really doesn't favor any class, but it does let congress create a lot of artificial conflict between subjectively defined groups that they can then work and cash in on. You also noted "encourage a middle class" - again that nasty habit to want government to experiment socially along subjective lines - well meaning of course . IMHO - a middle class will always be there, with or without 'encouragement' by uncle sam. Probably would be there much easier if he just stops picking at it. Edit: here's the test - you have 20 people and you know nothing about them. You can't see them, you don't know what they do, what they make, where they are from, what color they are, gender, etc etc etc. Now, go make up a set of rules for them that's direct, doesn't have a lot of if/then statements. If you look at those rules, and it doesn't seem 'fair' at that point, then it's too complicated. Any caviat that points at "this demographic", "that social strata", etc etc is by definition unfair and unequal treatment. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

nonsense - genetically, they'd have to be tiny. Easier for them to retract and hide during landings. also, jet cockpits are very confining, so also for comfort ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

so what - either the local people pay them more, or they leave to where they can afford it. The economy is a funny thing - leave it alone, and it self adjusts ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

you see, you get bogged down when you start picking at all the little details - details that are all examples of trying to socially manipulate things that should be guided by free choice without government attempts to control (or 'mitigate' if you will) scrap the whole thing - no exemptions, exceptions, penalties, credits, or deductions a single, very small exemption (or none at all). every dollar after that taxed at one rate there's a giant adjustment as a result - no kidding. trying to manage that is also just playing favorites let the chips fall ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

this is a great comment - The first amendment means the government can't restrict anyone's right to free speech. It means the government can't bully those not able to protect themselves enough to defend their own rights. The 1st doesn't GRANT the right to the citizens, the 1st means it's our duty to protect the inherent right (doesn't matter if individuals believe it's inherent by diety or nature or whatever, only matters that we believe it's ours undisputedly) In the private arena, we're able to protect it only in the manner that we can arrange for ourselves. It's necessary in that in a society of justice everyone has rights and the strong and the weak should join together to protect those rights. having it codified certainly does keep our rights from being eroded by smug government powerful wackos that think they know how to run society better than members do by direct participation. the scary bit will be the current trend of 50% of the people trying control the other 50%'s thoughts and speech through PC thuggery and constant attack and intimidation, especially now. That's the real erosion - government edict won't protect from mass organize bullying. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

that seems unfair, not more fair - taxing people differently (for those that can't have a discussion that doesn't involve social manipulation - which is the reason taxes are so crappy and intricate since government has folded in all sorts of things into the code that they should just butt out of - geographic considerations like this would promote overdensification in areas that simply need relief from population pressure, not amplification. Once again, demonstrating that good intentions via manipulation of the market by government will always have negative effects. Stop trying to play favorites, it's tearing apart the country) If we MUST depart from this simplicity and have an initial exclusion - then keep it absolutely MINIMIZED and the same for everybody. Kallend's got the first part right - all forms of income, in the end, is just money. Tax it all the same. Though I'd rather avoid the emotional rant about calling it "working for a living" vs other. I know day traders that 'work' a hell of a lot harder than a lot of tradesmen that would claim they "work for a living". I don't really care how you get your income, but I'd just prefer that every dollar everybody makes is taxed the same as any other regardless of it's source or your current baseline situation for that matter. Or if it's your first dollar, or your last dollar you make that year. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants