DrewEckhardt

It's the government fulfilling its promises. They take up to $13,000 a year (and increasing) now from workers now in return for a pension replacing as little as 25% of pre-retirement income up to the cap with nothing going to workers' heirs when private investments of the same amount could replace 75-100% of pre-retirement income with the left overs helping descendants with their retirement. Otherwise Social Security is just a sleazy way to justify a 40% Federal marginal tax rate on the middle class (25%, + 12.4% for both halves of Social Security, + 2.9% for both halves of Medicare) . As a some one who had investments totaling a few million dollars because I set aside at least $16,500 a year in 2011 dollars in retirement accounts which required decades of living in a smaller home, driving older cars, taking fewer less extravagant vacations, and buying fewer toys I'd be pissed supporting people who decided they'd rather live large for fifty years than invest in a better future for themselves. Two million bucks is only enough to safely draw $80,000 a year in retirement which isn't sufficient to continue a decent middle class lifestyle in places which are pleasant to live. If we knew up front (like 50 years before retirement when we were starting our careers) we could have planned for Social Security's absence and made more sacrifices like putting our children in day care instead of having one stay at home parent, having them mortgage their future for higher education instead of getting gifts from us, living in even smaller homes, driving even older cars, etc. Getting that sprung on us would be rotten.

That's not very likely. Most people I know wouldn't find writing that sort of application interesting. The last time I whored myself out for work which may be uninteresting in 2004 I ran $105 an hour. Feeling good about thwarting Sky Ride isn't worth that much money. And there isn't enough market growth potential to make it a worthwhile commercial endeavor. If you want to protest I suggest a market alternative: get a white board (less than 1/10th the initial software license deposit for a nice steel 4x8' model plus freight) and dry erase markers, yellow legal pads, and some sort of accounting software like Quicken. Or you might find some university students looking for practical experience (needed to get a paying job) without a paycheck.

Only if state law in the jurisdiction where you were convicted allowed for imprisonment for at least one year plus a day, even if you got probation. Alcoholics who have not been convicted of felony DUI (conviction in a state that only allows one year in jail is OK) are not prohibited from owning guns because the law specifically says "controlled substance" which is legally defined to exclude "distilled spirits, wine, and malt beverages".

It's going to dramatically increase the price of handgun ammunition by requiring us to buy our ammunition from retail outlets with high overhead instead of having it shipped from warehouses located in inexpensive states.

No. Government policy is pro big business, as in billions. If that wasn't the case, universal health care would have taken the form of not-for-profit government insurance instead of the requirement to buy insurance from for-profit companies. If that wasn't the case, the government wouldn't be in the business of buying or guaranteeing 2/3 of the mortgages written (with the loan originators and servicers collecting the profit and largely able to ignore whether the borrowers can repay the money) thus driving up the cost of housing for everyone. If that wasn't the case, the government wouldn't be making special exclusions in the bankruptcy code for private student loan debt which facilitates companies loaning students more than they can repay thus driving up the cost of education for everyone. If that wasn't the case, the government would be allowing huge car companies and banks to fail instead of diverting our tax dollars to them. Government is all about (big) business and power for the politicians. "liberals" are as pro-business as "conservatives", with guys like Bill Clinton appointing guys like Goldman Sachs co-chairman Robert Rubin as Secretary of the Treasury . Skydiving is NOT big business so you can step on it without pissing people off and gain a little power regulating it. A blue collar salary used to be enough to own a home, have two new cars, maintain a stay-at-home wife, and even send your kids to college. Pro-business "liberals" and "conservatives" are responsible for changing that. This can't change until "liberals" and "conservatives" realize that both their friends and enemies are teaming up against them.

No. It's not the accuracy into a wide open field that you're worried about (that's easy). You're sizing your canopy for landing at dusk with a low turn to avoid unseen power lines to a down-wind landing on asphalt (think about what happens on the sunset load when the cute chicks flash the pilot for extra altitude and some one in your group gets hypoxic and gets their foot caught on the seatbelt so you take forever to climb out and have a long spot). Things seem to happen much faster, you may not stay flat enough in the turn to avoid a painful impact, and you won't get away with running out a landing where you didn't flare all the way. Buy used gear. Switch to a 150 after 100 total jumps if you're comfortable doing all of the things in Bill von Novak's checklist and still want to. Another 70.

Passing such legislation would make us feel better but make the problems from a lobbyist and power hungry financial elite controlled legislature worse without real financial benefits to the tax payers. When California imposed term limits our experienced legislators were replaced with inexperienced ones who relied more on private companies and organizations to write legislation than their pre-term limit predecessors which is the opposite of what we want. The average successful senate campaign costs $10,000,000 to secure a job paying just $174,000 a year which is far less than a Senator could earn as a business executive in charge of far less money or as a law firm equity partner. The small compensation package means that legislators are members of the financial elite class who don't need to work and are likely to taking the job for power. Shrinking the pay package worsens that situation. The average annuities for retired members of Congress under the current FERS system runs about $37,000 a year. With $3,000,000,000,000 budgets that just doesn't matter. Social security benefits are progressive, with higher wage earners seeing as little as 25% of their pre-retirement income below the wage cap replaced which makes it non-viable as a retirement vehicle. All smart middle class people who want to retire and remain middle class are setting aside enough that Social Security is not a significant component of their retirement. "Forcing" congress critters to take Social Security instead of their FERS plan isn't going to provide real motivation to make it better. Base salary for legislators is about .003% of the budget. It doesn't matter. All decent jobs offer group plan participation paid for with money not subject to income tax, social security, medicare tax, or payroll tax. Get rid of that and you have one more reason that legislators need to come from the financial elite. Serving in Congress means accepting substantially less income than you (as an experienced lawyer or business person with the right sorts of contacts) could in private industry in exchange for substantially more power. Changing that would require competitive pay/benefits so serving in office isn't a financial step backwards for people who might otherwise consider it and campaign finance reform which means it doesn't take $10,000,000 to get there.

Because it hasn't been long enough for the investors who bought many (not necessarily most, because government sponsored entities own or guarantee half the country's mortgage debt) of the loans to forget the shenanigans surrounding the debtors' abilities to repay (which is bad given structure job market problems, decreasing real earnings, increasing housing costs due to government market manipulation, increasing education costs due to government market manipulation, and increasing health care costs due to government market manipulation plus a refusal to turn it into a non profit endeavor like first class mail so corporate profits could be preserved). Debt to asset ratios are a separate problem which can be solved by legislators' or executive branch appointees' pens and compatible accounting. For instance, we could let banks claim that their assets are valued at their last sale price and there wouldn't be any problems especially where those banks maximized profits by packaging and re-selling the vast majority of the loans they originated to investors. It doesn't matter. Voting Democratic makes no difference because I live in a solidly Democratic area - they'll win anyways . Voting Republican makes no difference because I live in a solidly Democratic area because they'll loose anyways. And my primary vote isn't going to oust an incumbent.

Then charter a private plane. Problem solved.

No, that was as bipartisan as it gets with a near unanimous senate and solid veto-proof house vote. 98 out of 100 senators voted for the act, with only one against and one abstaining. 357 out of 432 representatives were in favor, 66 against, and 9 abstaining. The Republican and Democratic parties are both for higher corporate profits. They both run candidates from the elite financial class who give up a lot of money in private industry for a lot more power when they take office which leads to a more powerful and expensive federal government. Individual rights are overlooked and sacrificed to get there. Grousing about differences between the two parties serves only to keep people from noticing that the two parties are rather alike and doing something about it (like Proportional representation in states where citizens can amend their constitution via ballot initiative).

I knew one jumper who got an assembled container that was missing stitching. Catching those problems sooner means you're more likely to end up with a free rig than a funeral.

In low wind situations, you land them on their side and they fold up like an accordion just like any other canopy. In high wind situations, you land them on their nose, float them on the top skin, and run the slider up. A few yanks on the tail get enough air out that it's not appreciably different from any other ZP canopy when you're packing. It takes me the same 6-7 minutes to pack my Samurai, Stiletto, Monarch.... Right.

Hogwash. Samurais open better than Crossfires, Specters, Stilettos, Safires, Omegas, FXes, and the myriad of square canopies which preceded them. They stay on heading, open uniformly, open soft, and don't take so long to open that you want to pull at student altitudes so you have enough time to fly back to the dropzone and setup for a swoop. I paid about the same $1600 I would have for a new Crossfire (or another Stiletto, PD didn't have the Katana yet) and there are just nine more pieces of fabric that might increase pack volume 5%. Availability is a problem, the both Samurai and Lotus are discontinued.

31 is still young, especially for a guy who doesn't have eggs with an expiration date. Wait until you find the right person with whom you have fire, passion, excitement, etc. who can also be your best friend, a good partner, etc.

I got some physical therapy after mine and it helped some but stopped when I ran out of visits or whatever. After a few years it had become pretty much asymptomatic on its own.

I have a 1998 car with a $0/month car payment and not much left to depreciate. Given state and federal tax rates totaling 40%, buying a car with a $407/month payment would be like taking an $8000 paycut for the next 6 years or $48,000 in pre-tax money over that time. No. I'd buy a set of 4 nice snow tires from tirerack.com for $500-$600, spend $50 twice a year to get them swapped, and save myself almost $24,000 out of pocket. Especially if I didn't have 6-12 months of cash to live on in the bank (it would suck to need to sell things to survive if you lost your job in a down economy) and/or stashing $15,000+ annually in tax advantaged retirement accounts (it would suck more to live on social security and cat food).

If I'm understanding you correctly, the 12gu will. The problem with the .223 (thats what we use in the military here in the US) is that the round goes straight through the target imparting only a small ammt of its energy. If you want to put someone on the floor then the 12gu with a light load (such as #8 shot) is the ticket. .223 M193 and M855 usually have great terminal ballistics provided that they arrive at their destination at 2700fps. The spin isn't enough to stabilise them in material denser than air so they start to yaw and then fragment. A 14.5" barrel only gets you 45 meters of useful range, and even at a full 20" it's not a long range round.

Pretty much everybody I know who jumped elliptical canopies with wingsuits had spinning malfunctions in relatively few jumps after which most of us give up and switched to more appropriate canopies. I learned by lesson on a Batwing, but the specifics aren't that important.

Waiting for surgery to get titanium hardware removed.

Or we could apply the lesson we learned from alcohol prohibition and repeal the laws we've passed making street drugs illegal. With no profits the dealers won't have anything to fight over.

No. A 7 cell low aspect F111 canopy flies differently from a modern ZP skydiving wing. For some situations it flies a LOT nicer. In no wind conditions you can fly the 7-cell final approach at glide ratios from 2:1 down past 1:1 all the way to the target and have energy left for a nice flare and stand-up landing. If you really need to you can bring it straight down in a sink although you don't want to land immediately after doing that for a significant distance, especially with smaller canopies and/or no soft surface to crash on. A contemporary skydiving canopy starts around the same 2:1 glide ratio, gets flatter after you apply brakes, and stays that way until just short of stalling. Landing with other people in a 50x100' clearing surrounded by trees and boulder strewn drop-offs the classic design is a _LOT_ nicer. While not as nice as a 7-cell at a more proper .7 pound/square foot loading, my 143 still retains a lot of the nice approach characteristics from its bigger brother.

Having a 105 main and 143 reserve the area will be the deciding factor.

Sure, if there really were no reasonable landing areas. Of course in real life cities have streets and parking lots that are both a lot like runways and work great for landing.

Turkey breast is sort of a carnivore's tofu with calories but no real taste or texture of its own. Bacon might make it tolerable. I had turkey drum sticks and duck all cooked in duck fat for my Thanksgiving.

Health insurance can cost a lot more. I estimate that my employers and I paid over $54,000 before making a significant claim.