cruise ships

.com

n who.

ortfall

ide

a

elves.

there

ll

the

y

I thought it was some kind of noodle. Or a thinly sliced sausage. Or something like that.

James

oo.com

. r

I hadn't realised you were throwing your hat into the ring as a potential candidate to be the Republican challenger in the next presidential election. You certainly believe enough right-wing nonsense to fit the profile, but this exhibition of more general ignorance may not be enough - on its own - to qualify you.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

as

e

s.

not

ed

m

He's actually advocating that he - and people like him - should pay more tax.

At the moment he - and people like him - can structure their incomes in such a way that that they end up paying 17% tax on tierh total incomes, while the middle classes aren't in a position to minimise their tax payments as effectively, and pay between 35% and 41%.

It's an odd way to run a tax system, but not as odd as your claim that it isn't happening.

So what? That you can't or don't exploit the loopholes open to people with larger incomes isn't evidence that your tax system is not in need of reform.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Scarcely. One personnel officer did - very politely - tell me that since I hadn't worked on precisely the kind of optical detector NXP wanted developed, and since I was 58 at the time, he was afraid that I wouldn't be able to learn about them fast enough to be useful. No mention of crazy nutcase there, and no security guard to make sure that I didn't beat hell out of him for being such a idiot.

I'm afraid that you are exercising what's left of your imagination again. The brain injury - whatever it was - has clearly impaired your capacity to invent plausible lies.

Of course you are wrong - that goes without saying - and that article has nothing to do with CERN, and doesn't include your

"boost taxes 100% to pay for the retired."

which seems to be entirely a figment of your imagination.

Face it - you haven't enough working brain tissue left to be able to lie remotely convincingly.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

e:

"Liberal" in Europe means right wing proponents of the free market and free trade, and some of them are rather nasty.

Ken's too dim to know about that.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

who.

shortfall

themselves.

What I can't understand is how the Italians can buy wheat from us for $6 a bushel, mix it with water, remove the water, and sell it back to us for $4 a pound.

John

e as

are

ax

ins.

s not

used

at

eem

d r

..

They aren't loopholes. They're the standard rates.

Clearly over your head. If you can't even understand the actual forms handed to you on a platter, you're beyond hope.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

Idiot. That's their incremental rate, not their net rate.

The top 1% of US taxpayers pay about 36% of total income tax collected. The top 10% pay 70%. The bottom 50% pay about 2%.

The average income tax rate across all US taxpayers is 11%.

John

He was using your age as a polite excuse to not hire you.

John

Which fits nicely with the definition of chaos: a system which has long-term stability (it tends to return to a mean value, i.e. an attractor), but the manner in which it follows that point is difficult to predict.

I suppose amplified noise is chaotic, in the sense that the magnitude is always constrained (by the saturation of the amplifier), but it has little (ideally no) order. (Theoretical noise, in principle any statistical fluctuation, is unconstrained, so a resistor alone (Johnson noise) doesn't count. Not that you'd ever expect to see a peak of 1V suddenly appear across a 1kohm resistor over the life of the universe, but it can't be ruled out.)

I love it when a control loop I'm working on starts hissing, because I can just yell out, 'Oh don't mind that, it's just chaos! Mwahaha!'

Real chaotic systems tend to have a certain periodicity or time constant to them. It's an approximate thing, where a limit cycle might be traveled in a certain amount of time *give or take*, but it always tends to come around, one way or another (depending on how many attractors there are to pull it a certain way).

Highly complex systems (which the weather certainly is, having a large volume of air and many dynamical boundary conditions to flow over) tend to exhibit this property, as well as stability (even the largest airflow is still subject to simple laminar flow under the right conditions), and randomness (the general stirring of turbulence on all scales), all at once, in various regions, at various times, under various conditions. This tends to make long-term predictions of arbitrary accuracy essentially impossible (the current statistic being, the weatherman can't do more than a week).

Tim

--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

who.

shortfall

themselves.

Vaudeville goes San Francisco?

The real point is whether the state of the system is predictable at some future point. If you put a kettle of water in the burner, the microscopic states and bubbles will be chaotic but the average temperature and such are predictable. It's a matter of time scale. We know that weather is chaotic over days and years and decades, and there's reconstructed data to indicate that it's chaotic over hundreds of thousands of years. So, is there some time scale in between where the system is causal to forcings like CO2?

The question is whether a steady push (like CO2 increases) will move the whole chaotic mess in some direction. Or whether the natural fluctuations are so big that the CO2 doesn't matter. Maybe we need lots of CO2 to prevent the next ice age.

A little warming won't wipe out 95% of the population, but a good ice age would.

John

--
You make hostile, irresponsible statements like that, without
providing any basis in fact, just to further the propaganda of your
misguided agenda; getting the US to kow-tow to the USE. 

Fortunately, you're not even a charismatic cartoon and, since you
can't supply details as to how to accomplish your nefarious ends, you
wind up pretty much a jellyfish, waiting for free-swimming
unsuspecting prey to swim into your trap.

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com

than who.

the shortfall

decide

fabric of a

themselves.

think there

and tell

in the

protestors

large

of any

their

protesting

spending

Europe.

the

summer.

wouldn't

Somebody has to pay for the shipping. Italy is too broke.

?-)

the

$373,650

qualified

Bill's notional ideas about what the tax rates and who pays what are more dear to him than life itself. No amount of demonstrated facts are going to dissuade him from his emotionally favored ideas. Then he wonders why he has problems getting a job or building a simple circuit himself or convincing anybody that his favored notions are true.

?-/

r.

Or

It must be some sort of stimulus plan.

James

Or

Hmmm. No bells are ringing; I'll have to think on that one.

James

If Buffett really wanted to pay more tax, all he'd have to do is write a bigger check. Instead, he'd rather give it away. He's an investor-- he thinks giving it away is a better investment.

11% sounds low to me, but it depends on which group you're rating. Of the people who actually pay tax, the effective rate's about 14-15%. OTOH, there are people who receive net tax; if we're including them the overall net rate would drop.

IRS' SOI has been the definitive source. (Today, e-filing tax software people would have more current info; I don't know if they release it.)

main page:

tax paid per income group:

-- Cheers, James Arthur

Hey, we went to the Wells Fargo beam-out down in the village and found a small stack of these postcards:

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/OWS_1.JPG

ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/OWS_2.JPG

so we took them all. I figure they are collectables, like old Grateful Dead concert posters. Maybe they'll be worth a lot of money some day.

John