Messages

3991

Downwind and Racing / Re: Wow skinny boys are winning all the races!

« on: October 24, 2012, 10:38:43 AM »

They are winning all of the surf events as well.  Analyzing Jung was complicated, Young is pretty easy to understand.

3992

Downwind and Racing / Re: Wow skinny boys are winning all the races!

« on: October 24, 2012, 08:42:12 AM »

They are dominating the unlimited races as well.  You are focused on skinny while the active ingredient is young.

To make these races more fair you could make these younger guys be a little older or the older guys a little younger.  Either would work.

3993

Random / Disavow

« on: October 22, 2012, 11:06:36 AM »

Have you web masters/lovers/polluters been following this?

http://www.noblesamurai.com/blog/seo-news/google-changes-seo-forever-with-it’s-disavow-link-tool-what-you-need-to-do-right-now-3261/

3994

Random / Re: Is it me or is it the Forum?

« on: October 21, 2012, 06:09:56 PM »

Hi guys,

Think of this as our "green cell tower" of advertising.  You can barely see it until, bam...shit!  We are thinking that we can get the links to be red and green for X-mas.

In seriousitude, we installed an in-text ad service called Vibrant.  It is not a virus and resides on our (server) side only.  It is very common on forum sites these days.  Like Google Ads, it will attempt to get smarter based on site content, but unfortunatey, it blocks all porn regardless of our content.  

If the spirit moves you, click a link or two and buy us a beer.  Sláinte, whoops (that was the green getting to me) I meant L'chaim.

PS: The links on the index pages will be removed.  Vibrant is helping modify the code for that on their end.

3995

SUP General / Re: Whats that I hear about a sharking biting on a SUP on Maui this morning?

« on: October 21, 2012, 08:51:17 AM »

Maybe we can get DP to tie some flies.  That board does look fishy.

3996

SUP General / Re: Whats that I hear about a sharking biting on a SUP on Maui this morning?

« on: October 21, 2012, 08:13:51 AM »

Sure DP is pretty happy not to have been prone and straddling.  Long live SUP (and 4 full length limbs).

3997

Random / Re: mass-debaters

« on: October 19, 2012, 06:26:27 AM »

Ok, while we are off on irritants, how about the endless humanization anecdotes.  You know the ones, the highly practiced sad yet resolute face comes on, the brows raise slightly and then..."when I was in a diner in Tallahasee, I met a mother of 17 children. All of her kids had lupus, gout and necrotizin...".  I am sure the test groups show that this is successful, but it reads as so disengenuous.  These two are really bad at it but the worst was John Edwards, his humanization stories made me throw stuff at the TV.  Maybe if they could present them more as limericks, "I just met a man from Little Rock..."

3998

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 18, 2012, 04:30:00 PM »

If you are taking advantage of a loophole, you are in some way cheating.
It's called taking over the language to get the kind of effect that you desire.

Yes, that is the connotation, but as you have mentioned, the term has been used that way by JFK, Mitt Romney, and almost everyone in between.

The more valid/relevant argument is not whether these loopholes are legal (they are our tax code), but if they are fair, or if changing them will help offset/correct/lower the debt.  

Bill mentioned this earlier and he is spot on. It doesn't matter what your tax rate is if you are not paying it.  It is a multi-part problem.

3999

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 18, 2012, 09:44:06 AM »

There's been a lot of talk about 'closing loopholes', but has anyone defined what a loophole is and which ones should be closed?

Using Romney as an example:

Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year.

The majority of the candidate's income last year came from his investments: capital gains ($6.8 million), taxable interest ($3 million) and dividends ($3.7 million).

The most common "loophole":

"The reason Romney's rate is so low -- despite having one of the highest incomes in the country -- is because his income was derived almost entirely from capital gains and dividends from his extensive portfolio of investments. And that form of investment income is typically taxed at just 15%, well below the 35% top tax rate for high earners."

Then:

"Romney took $4.7 million in itemized deductions and $102,790 in foreign tax credits, which likely represents taxes paid on foreign investments to other sovereign governments."

4000

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 18, 2012, 08:38:31 AM »

The unemploment rate doubled from 2007 to 2009.  http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3 .  That is a 100% increase in joblessness.  If you agree with Headmount that those jobs are permanantly gone then there is a hard group of choices to be made.  

This article proposes no plan.  

4001

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 17, 2012, 06:27:56 PM »

2nd debate was interesting.  Mitt held his own but Candy Crowley won, right?

4002

SUP General / A WARM welcome to site sponsor Ocean Rodeo

« on: October 16, 2012, 11:25:34 AM »

Stoked guys!!

4003

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 15, 2012, 06:19:25 PM »

Of course wealthy people invest overseas, it's simply prudent.

As long as we don't confuse tax breaks for the wealthy with stimulating ourselves.  Oh yeah, that was fun.

4004

Random / Re: The presidential political thread

« on: October 15, 2012, 03:24:00 PM »

The wealthy have options.  They have options on where they spend and on where they invest and it is very often overseas.  If trickle down had ever worked, the damp end would be Europe, etc as often as the USA.

4005

Random / Re: Mittens: the "Cayman Candidate" --

« on: October 15, 2012, 07:54:02 AM »

I don't have a big problem with people using tax loopholes, its the politicians that put them into the tax law and the rich bastards that contribute to the politicians to get the loopholes enacted.

One and the same.  The politicians are among the recipients of the benefit.   We should go back to the Per Diem model that was used in the original Congress.  Used to be $6 a day  .  Members served out of Patriotism and for the honor of the position.

The Washington Post:

By 2010, the median estimated wealth for members of the House of Representatives was $746,000; for senators it was $2.6 million.

The median net worth of the current Congress rose 5% during the recession while it fell 39% for the average American. The wealthiest one-third of lawmakers saw their net worth rise 14%.