wolfriverjoe

Well, in fairness to Trump, he failed. He couldn't manage to obstruct justice, any more than he could run a casino.

Yes. Those are the 'certain exceptions' I meant. But, for example, If I die next week, my 401k money will go to my nieces & nephew (no kids, no spouse). Nobody would get the SS benefits. Those would just 'go away.'

Well, there you go using facts again. Statistics. Data. Don't you realize he feels that most of the gang members are illegal aliens? He believes it. So it must be true.

No. Lots of us have IRAs, 401ks and personal savings (of a variety of sorts). I don't think SS will be enough to support the retirement I want to have. But I'm in a pretty good position to save up for it. Not everyone is. For a LOT of people (more today than ever), SS is the only 'retirement plan' they have. No savings, no nothing else. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/14/heres-how-many-americans-are-not-saving-any-money-for-emergencies-or-retirement-at-all.html What you are getting criticized for (not crucified) is the idea that you want to 'opt out' of SS. Because it takes everyone contributing to support it. And it's not unrealistic to make the prediction that someone's retirement savings won't survive a serious economic crash. So its entirely possible that someone who did plan properly for retirement could find themselves dependent on SS. Maybe not entirely, but it could go from 'nice to have' to 'need to survive'.

It's rather interesting that everyone (including my prior posts) are talking primarily about 'death'. We talk about 'deaths per xxx', or how likely you are to die. While that is perfectly understandable, for a couple different reasons, it ignores the injury potential. One of the reasons that injury is often overlooked is the reporting/statistics. Deaths are tracked a lot better, if for no other reasons than they make the news. At least in the US, it's pretty hard for a skydiving death to happen without the government (local & FAA) getting involved. Injuries are different. While many are reported to USPA, many are not. I can think of a lot of serious injuries (hospitalization serious) that never showed up here or in Parachutist. I also know a lot more folks who have suffered serious injury than have been killed. I'd guess that many injuries are 'self inflicted'. Swooping being the most obvious. Don't swoop, you won't misjudge a big turn and pound in. But not all. In addition to the classic 'swoop gone bad' injuries, turbulence or misjudging a 'normal' landing can have a bad outcome. Freefall collisions, bad exits (hitting the door hard enough to break bones), dislocations (primarily shoulders) during RW, that sort of thing. To disregard that risk, to only look at deaths, is to only see part of the total picture.

Honest question: Would the fact that the lines are fatter mean that there would be more area of the line acting on the grommet? The line itself may be 'draggier', but the larger surface area contact would also increase drag.

Contact with Russian government officials, real estate dealings, Stormy Daniels payoff, a lot more that I can't think of at the moment.

No, that's simply misunderstanding. SS isn't a "you pay in and build up an account and receive that money when you get old" deal. The money you (and me and everyone else) pays in goes to pay the current recipients. The money future recipients will get (you, me & everyone else) will come from the people working and paying in then. How about the people who have paid in their entire lives, retire at 65 and die a few months later? Their survivors (with certain exceptions) don't get 'their' money. How about the people who pay in their entire lives, but die before age 65 and get nothing?

I think you'd look pretty hot in a pair of Lederhosen. Yes, they are typically worn by men. In either case, post pics.

It's the 'Western Journal.' About as believable as the "Weekly World News", but without the BatBoy.

There are ways. The simplest is to not pay yourself anything. If you have no (or very little) income, you pay no (or very little) taxes. Both income taxes and FICA (SS & Medicare). By not paying into SS, you aren't eligible for it. I have to laugh a bit at the whole premise of this thread. SS isn't going to collapse. It won't fail. It won't 'go away.' I've been hearing that "SS will be gone in 15 years" since the early 90s (almost 30 years ago). Benefits may change (go down). Age to collect may change (go up). Taxes may change (go up or the max income subject to tax go up). But some sort of old age pension will be there. No way the congress-critters are going to let old people freeze or starve.

Shhhh... You're ruining his fantasy.

And during the financial crisis, lots of people had diversified investment strategies. The crisis was widespread enough that lots of people saw all their investments go 'poof'. You didn't answer the question of what would you do if all your investments suffered significant losses. Or do you simply think that it 'can't happen to you'?

So what exactly is your position? You want the ability to choose whether or not to participate in SS. It sounds like you would choose to not participate. So how would you be different from Jerry's friend? Without details, it's hard to say, but it's entirely conceivable that he had some sound and sensible (you know, 'smart') investment strategies. Lots of people saw huge amounts of 'sensibly' invested money simply disappear in the financial crisis in 08 (from the current age of 72, he would have been 61 in 08). Any investment that gives any real return has risk. There's also the chance of falling prey to a con man like Madoff. He fooled a lot of really smart people. So let me ask: What would you do, if you could opt out of SS, and then saw the majority of your investments go 'poof'?

Do not, under any circumstances, say "but they said on DZ dot com to..." Make sure you understand. If you don't keep asking until you do. Stay hydrated & fed. Have fun.

There's a quote attributed to Issac Asimov: I think it applies rather well in this situation.

As a citizen of the US, I fully agree. The idea that the Rs opposed anything Obama did, regardless of how good it was for the country, or that they defend Trump no matter what he did is appalling. I voted R almost exclusively for most of my life. I will almost certainly never vote that way again. Ever.

I have some longish term rotator cuff issues. No tearing (not yet), but some impingement and a fair amount of pain. I've been doing PT to build up and maintain the muscles in my shoulders for nearly a decade. It's more for dealing with everyday life with as little pain as possible than for any specific purpose, like jumping. I've found very little issues dealing with the force of the wind at freefall speeds. It's not that big of a deal. However, dealing with my piece partners can be rather hard on my shoulders. Sometimes we pull harder than we should to hold a formation, sometimes we get a little overenthusiastic rotating pieces. The temptation to 'make a point' by grabbing as I'm falling by can sometimes be irresistible. Yes, I know I shouldn't. Yes, it usually does more 'harm' to the formation than help. I also find that packing can be hard on my shoulders. I have added a couple different 'motions' to my PT routine that mimic certain things I do when packing (specifically pushing inward while narrowing the cocooned canopy). I can't imagine any PT or training that would help mitigate the effects of hard openings. When they happen, they happen. I get less 'twang' on my neck and more on my back, particularly the lower part. It's kind of hard to describe, but its not a 'strength' issue. It's an 'impact' sort of issue.

Some of the people who 'plan as he does' will also fail at those plans. So, what should those who chose to opt out of SS do if (when) their investment plan collapses? Starve to death? Freeze to death? The 'nanny state' has proven to be necessary. Too many people are too stupid, shortsighted, optimistic, unlucky, ignorant, or a zillion other things that would result in them deciding to opt out of SS, and then ending up needing it. In a (not terribly surprising) parallel, this is the same reason that Obama care had the requirement to have health care.

It shouldn't be a problem. Just keep in mind that the instructor's focus is on YOU, not the camera. I can very easily see how any sort of issue on jumprun or in the door would take the focus off the camera, and it doesn't get turned on. Some instructors are great video flyers. Some... Not so much.

Well, depending on where someone lives, climate change in a few hundred years may well 'sentence them to death'. A foot or so of sea level rise will make some areas much, much more prone to flooding in storms (Bangladesh is a good example, they've lost tens of thousands in past hurricanes). If temps rise (and not by a whole lot) a lot of 'lower latitude' land that is currently arable will not be so. If you think the African famines of the 80 were bad, these will make them look like a picnic. But those are all 'shithole countries, so most Trump supporters could not care less if those people survive. I'd guess some of them would cheer on the death of those 'brown people'.

Generally, the keepers aren't strong enough to hold the nose of the toggle during opening if it's stowed that way (incorrectly). They just tear out.

Local to me, the power company has a few 'charging spaces' that are free. They are located right near downtown, so they are encouraging EV owners to come downtown.

My current DZ sets the landing direction in the loading area. It's repeated on the plane. Jumpers are told that if they can't handle a 5 knot tailwind on landing, take a canopy course or get a different canopy. Anyone landing against the pattern will end up in a 'discussion' with the S&T A.

Did you miss Billy's second to last post before it got edited?