http://www.starrett.com/pages/441_st...lobal_s eries
"Starrett Global Series
While the Starrett brand is synonymous with “American Made”, we have
manufactured products worldwide for nearly 50 years. These products are
available in the U.S.A. and identified as “Global Series”. Regardless of
country of origin, the Starrett brand remains your assurance of
unmatched precision, quality and value."

Mmm. I have nothing against Starrett or anyone else making tools in a
foreign market to service that market. But the idea of Foreign made
tools coming back to the US makes me pause. If they are Starrett
quality, then the folks with the Wal-Mart philosophy of cheaper = better
will be pleased. But I think that it's a sign that US business is being
held back by government. Think for a moment - a US plant, US technology,
that is local to the market (aka no transpacific shipping) has to import
tools made in a third country to compete in the market.

But I think that it's a sign that US business is being
held back by government. Think for a moment - a US plant, US technology,
that is local to the market (aka no transpacific shipping) has to import
tools made in a third country to compete in the market.


I don't see what the US government has to do with it. Starrett is responding
to market forces, and has probably been a industry holdout on relabeling
cheap imports with their name. A large portion of the market will buy a $10
mike from harbor freight instead of a $100 Starrett. So if Starrett wants
to cater as many customers as possible, they are selling the cheapies and
the high end.

I'm afraid there is a lack of a common view, here. I fully agree
that the cheaper imports are cutting into Starrett's bottom line.
Further, providing entry level products is not unknown to US
manufacturers. My question - how much is it a function of "market
forces", regulation, resource costs (labor, tooling, raw material,
overhead), and the desire of Starrett (and other manufacturers) to make
a profit, that "Global Series" is offered?

It's like Kabuki theater, where prop handlers in black move the
various props during the performance. The audience does not "see" them,
because that's how it is done.

Tony wrote:
But I think that it's a sign that US business is being
held back by government. Think for a moment - a US plant, US
technology, that is local to the market (aka no transpacific shipping)
has to import tools made in a third country to compete in the market.


I don't see what the US government has to do with it. Starrett is
responding to market forces, and has probably been a industry holdout on
relabeling cheap imports with their name. A large portion of the market
will buy a $10 mike from harbor freight instead of a $100 Starrett. So
if Starrett wants to cater as many customers as possible, they are
selling the cheapies and the high end.

Louis Ohland wrote:

Mmm. I have nothing against Starrett or anyone else making tools in a
foreign market to service that market. But the idea of Foreign made
tools coming back to the US makes me pause. If they are Starrett
quality, then the folks with the Wal-Mart philosophy of cheaper = better
will be pleased.


I don't see your problem. Starrett is clearly indicating that the Global
line of products are not USA made. I am fairly confident that Starrett does
not want to devalue their reputation on US made tools which is something
that they have worked hard and long to achieve.

They figure that a lot of HSM types or guys starting out are likely to trust
an offshore product that Starrett has a connection with.

They are just trying to grab some sales that they are currently loosing out
on.

Wes

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

The poor quality chinese tools are uslally this way because they are
spec'ed this way by the purchaser.

It must be noted, however, that the Chinese like to cheat at every
opportunity, hence the need for supervision.

i

In article , "Tony" wrote:

I don't see what the US government has to do with it.

Environmental regulation.

Corporate income tax.

Capital gains tax.

Occupational safety and health regulations.

And an ocean of other bureaucratic impediments, all of which drive up the cost
of doing business, and nearly all of which are much reduced or absent
altogether in third-world countries.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life. They are
quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost of the big
guys products.


The poor quality chinese tools are uslally this way because they are
spec'ed this way by the purchaser.

Typically.


It must be noted, however, that the Chinese like to cheat at every
opportunity, hence the need for supervision.

That does seem to be the case with many of the Chinese companies doesn't
it?

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

They are quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost
of the big guys products.

Without a doubt, cost is part of the equation.

i

Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.


They are quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost
of the big guys products.

Without a doubt, cost is part of the equation.

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:48:37 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

That seems to be an excellent test.


They are quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost
of the big guys products.

Without a doubt, cost is part of the equation.

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.

i

"Pete C." wrote in message
...
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

It's worth it, IMO, to buy two gage blocks in the range of your most
important gaging instrument, to check them from time to time. I don't have
statistical data or anything to prove the efficacy of this, but I've always
found it to be a worthwhile investment. I'm a hobby machinist too (when I
have time), and it's everything I need.

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.

--
Ed Huntress

Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:48:37 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

That seems to be an excellent test.


They are quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost
of the big guys products.

Without a doubt, cost is part of the equation.

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.

Unfortunately some rather pathetic insecure souls entire self image and
ego are dependent on meaningless items like their yuppmobiles. I once
saw a truly pathetic sight of a guy curled up in his freshly flattened
BMW crying. Even more pathetic since the cause of said flattening was
his arrogant charging out of a driveway without checking for traffic.

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 10:00:10 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:48:37 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

That seems to be an excellent test.


They are quite acceptable for nearly any HSM use, at 1/10 the cost
of the big guys products.

Without a doubt, cost is part of the equation.

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.

Unfortunately some rather pathetic insecure souls entire self image and
ego are dependent on meaningless items like their yuppmobiles. I once
saw a truly pathetic sight of a guy curled up in his freshly flattened
BMW crying. Even more pathetic since the cause of said flattening was
his arrogant charging out of a driveway without checking for traffic.

Very unfortunate. By the way, charging out of driveway is highly
dangerous -- I was once hit by a car that charged out of a driveway,
it knocked me off a bicycle when I was riding on a sidewalk.

i

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in message
...
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

It's worth it, IMO, to buy two gage blocks in the range of your most
important gaging instrument, to check them from time to time. I don't have
statistical data or anything to prove the efficacy of this, but I've always
found it to be a worthwhile investment. I'm a hobby machinist too (when I
have time), and it's everything I need.

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.

Considering the reading I got when measuring the 1" and 2" standards
that came with the HF micrometer set with the HF dig calipers that were
purchased at least a year prior, I think that points to reasonable
accuracy from both the calipers and the standards. At some point when
they're on sale I'll get the 81 piece B grade gauge block set from Enco
or similar.

"Pete C." wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in message
...
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 12:56:12 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
Ignoramus19284 wrote:

I have no doubt that the Chinese are capable of making high quality
products, especially under Starrett supervision and with CNC
equipment.

Looking at the HF dig calipers it's abundantly clear that the
Chinese
are capable of producing quality products without supervision of a
US
company. Those calipers are really quite good for general use, with
their only real fault being relatively short battery life.

Pete, I never owned such calipers, mine are Mitutoyo and they
surprised me again and again with their accuracy.

Could you tell me how did you verify their accurateness?

Let's say, did you measure a large gage block, moved the caliper back
to
zero and re-measure the same block?

I don't have a gauge block set yet, I don't really need that level of
precision. That said, I compared them against some Swiss made dial
calipers measuring various items and they matched well. I also have the
HF 0-3" micrometer set which is also pretty decent. The micrometer set
comes with 1" and 2" standards and I measured these with the HF
calipers
and came up with 1.0000 and 2.0000 which points to pretty decent
accuracy and repeatability, certainly adequate for HSM use.

It's worth it, IMO, to buy two gage blocks in the range of your most
important gaging instrument, to check them from time to time. I don't
have
statistical data or anything to prove the efficacy of this, but I've
always
found it to be a worthwhile investment. I'm a hobby machinist too (when I
have time), and it's everything I need.

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair
for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics
with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.

Considering the reading I got when measuring the 1" and 2" standards
that came with the HF micrometer set with the HF dig calipers that were
purchased at least a year prior, I think that points to reasonable
accuracy from both the calipers and the standards. At some point when
they're on sale I'll get the 81 piece B grade gauge block set from Enco
or similar.

Yeah, "standards," gage blocks, whatever. As long as they're right on.

I have to admit I didn't buy the ones I'm using now, although I bought my
originals from Starrett. When I was writing and doing photography for
Mitutoyo, they sent me a bunch of their then-new ceramic gage blocks for
photos, and said they didn't want them back because they had already written
them off as an expense. These are AA, I think. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:55:57 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm,
Ignoramus19284 quickly quoth:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:48:37 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

Hell YES! Grocery trips are faster and much more fun in the Ferrari.


Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.

Do what I do and buy door edge guard/cushions. They protect your own
paint as well as the other guy's when you accidentally bump. As to
being sensitive to a Beemer owner: don't. They're not worth it.
Beemers are the only "sports car" I've ever seen upside down next to
the freeway on a gentle grade and gentle curve. TWICE! Hell, with all
the screaming over the Ford Explorer you'd think we'd see those upside
down all the time. Newp, just 2 BMW 7-series. Whatta hoot!

--
If you turn the United States on its side,
everything loose will fall to California.
--Frank Lloyd Wright

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:01:01 -0700, Larry Jaques novalidaddress@di wrote:
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:55:57 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm,
Ignoramus19284 quickly quoth:

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:48:37 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

Cost and needs, and for most HMS use you don't need NIST traceable super
precision stuff. The big guys calipers are quite nice, but overkill.
That Ferrari might be nice, but will it perform any better than the
Chevrolet for grocery runs?

Hell YES! Grocery trips are faster and much more fun in the Ferrari.


Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.

Do what I do and buy door edge guard/cushions. They protect your own
paint as well as the other guy's when you accidentally bump. As to
being sensitive to a Beemer owner: don't. They're not worth it.
Beemers are the only "sports car" I've ever seen upside down next to
the freeway on a gentle grade and gentle curve. TWICE! Hell, with all
the screaming over the Ford Explorer you'd think we'd see those upside
down all the time. Newp, just 2 BMW 7-series. Whatta hoot!


I had a funny story with a "beemer" once.

We have a road that climbs up a hill next to my home (1 mile).

Once it showed heavily. I was in a 4x4 truck, so I could go uphill.

I saw a little beemer, RWD, struggling and unable of going uphill. So
I stopped by and offered the grateful owner help in pulling him up the
hill with my pickup.

When we started looking where to hook up, we realized that the cut
plastic bumper did not leave us any opportunity to hook him up. So I
had to leave and he had to wait for a BMW service truck or something.

i

You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated. I don't see how that applies to any manufacturer unless they
are selling their factory or property. You pay Corporate income tax on
profits the corporation makes, where the profit is from a manufacturer or
imported-distributor. I don't see environmetal regs significantly affecting
a company like Starrett, other than the cost to properly dispose of solvents
and waste oils.

Starrett does have to pay much higher wages and benefits for very skilled
labor, but that is a difference of living standards between the west and
China. Is that the government's fault?


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
t...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:

I don't see what the US government has to do with it.

Environmental regulation.

Corporate income tax.

Capital gains tax.

Occupational safety and health regulations.

And an ocean of other bureaucratic impediments, all of which drive up the
cost
of doing business, and nearly all of which are much reduced or absent
altogether in third-world countries.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

According to Ed Huntress :

[ ... ]

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.

There is something to be said for having standards which will be
measured at 1/3 and 2/3 rotations of the micrometer thimble (.008" and
..016" are close enough), as well as those which will have the thimble at
zero. This will show up a case where the anvil and spindle are lapped
at an angle and will read properly as long as the rotation of the
spindle is in full turns, but will introduce a bit of error at other
rotations. This is not too likely in most cases, but for testing a new
cheap micrometer, it is a good idea. Even better for this is a set of
quartz optical flats of these thicknesses and the proper illumination
which will show this up even at very tiny angles. Probably meaningless
for most hobby work, but if you really care, another thing to check.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
According to Ed Huntress :

[ ... ]

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair
for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics
with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.

There is something to be said for having standards which will be
measured at 1/3 and 2/3 rotations of the micrometer thimble (.008" and
.016" are close enough), as well as those which will have the thimble at
zero.

That's the value of the metric gage blocks with the inch mike, and vice
versa. And you get some interesting stacks by combining the inch and metric
blocks, too.

This will show up a case where the anvil and spindle are lapped
at an angle and will read properly as long as the rotation of the
spindle is in full turns, but will introduce a bit of error at other
rotations. This is not too likely in most cases, but for testing a new
cheap micrometer, it is a good idea. Even better for this is a set of
quartz optical flats of these thicknesses and the proper illumination
which will show this up even at very tiny angles. Probably meaningless
for most hobby work, but if you really care, another thing to check.

Uh, yeah. I would like to have a set of optical flats and an illuminator for
them, too. Then again, I'd like to have complete sets of inch and metric
gage blocks, and a master set I send to NIST every couple of years. g

--
Ed Huntress

In article , "Tony" wrote:
You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated.

APpreciated...

I don't see how that applies to any manufacturer unless they
are selling their factory or property. You pay Corporate income tax on
profits the corporation makes, where the profit is from a manufacturer or
imported-distributor.

It's still a cost of doing business.

I don't see environmetal regs significantly affecting
a company like Starrett, other than the cost to properly dispose of solvents
and waste oils.

Oh, no? You don't think it drives up the cost of the steel they use? Or the
cost of the machinery and tooling they buy? What about the cost of building a
factory? You think environmental regulations don't affect that?

Starrett does have to pay much higher wages and benefits for very skilled
labor, but that is a difference of living standards between the west and
China. Is that the government's fault?

Did I say it was? No. *You* brought that up. I didn't say anything at all
about wages and benefits.

And I notice you didn't address the issue of OSHA and the other regulatory
bureaucracies which encumber business throughout the U.S.


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
et...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:

I don't see what the US government has to do with it.

Environmental regulation.

Corporate income tax.

Capital gains tax.

Occupational safety and health regulations.

And an ocean of other bureaucratic impediments, all of which drive up the cost
of doing business, and nearly all of which are much reduced or absent
altogether in third-world countries.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Unless someone has been trained or studied a manual, the improper use
of blocks can give wide and inconsistent errors.

e.g. - can you stack steel and ceramic together and have the stack
stay together holding only the top block and letting the rest hang down ?

The surface must be clean. The blocks not just placed, but twisted together.

Quality knowledgeable people know all about that and then some.

The shop machinist has to know as well.
Martin
Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Ed Huntress wrote:
"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
According to Ed Huntress :

[ ... ]

For my 1" mikes I have 0.5" and 1.0" gage blocks. I have a similar pair
for
my metrics, and I use the inch gage blocks to cross-check the metrics
with a
"betweens" kind of test, and vice versa.

It ain't a formal certification but it keeps your gages honest enough for
ordinary work. If I used Chinese gages, I'd definitely get a pair of the
blocks to go with them.
There is something to be said for having standards which will be
measured at 1/3 and 2/3 rotations of the micrometer thimble (.008" and
.016" are close enough), as well as those which will have the thimble at
zero.

That's the value of the metric gage blocks with the inch mike, and vice
versa. And you get some interesting stacks by combining the inch and metric
blocks, too.

This will show up a case where the anvil and spindle are lapped
at an angle and will read properly as long as the rotation of the
spindle is in full turns, but will introduce a bit of error at other
rotations. This is not too likely in most cases, but for testing a new
cheap micrometer, it is a good idea. Even better for this is a set of
quartz optical flats of these thicknesses and the proper illumination
which will show this up even at very tiny angles. Probably meaningless
for most hobby work, but if you really care, another thing to check.

Uh, yeah. I would like to have a set of optical flats and an illuminator for
them, too. Then again, I'd like to have complete sets of inch and metric
gage blocks, and a master set I send to NIST every couple of years. g

--
Ed Huntress



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
Unless someone has been trained or studied a manual, the improper use
of blocks can give wide and inconsistent errors.

e.g. - can you stack steel and ceramic together and have the stack
stay together holding only the top block and letting the rest hang down ?

Yes. There's a photo of ten Mitutoyo gage blocks in a stack, mixed steel and
zirconia ceramic, held by the top one, in an old article in Modern Machine
Shop. It's my hand holding the stack.


The surface must be clean. The blocks not just placed, but twisted
together.

Quality knowledgeable people know all about that and then some.

The shop machinist has to know as well.

If you stack say, three blocks, and they're improperly wrung, the total
error of that stack might be 0.0001" or 0.0002". That's plenty close enough
for the kind of checking we're talking about. The average hobbyist is going
to have trouble reading absolute tenths, anyway, due to a host of factors.

However, if you're working in the sub-tenths range of accuracy, you need
very good technique, as you say. Just handling gage blocks with bare hands
can defeat you in that range.

--
Ed Huntress

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
t...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:
You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated.

APpreciated...

Doug,

The book value of capital assets is DEpreciated on a corporate tax return,
based on the established depreciation rates for various assets, according to
GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)

Capital gains tax has very little effect on the cost of a Starrett mike vs.
a import mike.

I don't see environmetal regs significantly affecting
a company like Starrett, other than the cost to properly dispose of
solvents
and waste oils.

Oh, no? You don't think it drives up the cost of the steel they use? Or
the
cost of the machinery and tooling they buy? What about the cost of
building a
factory? You think environmental regulations don't affect that?

The cost of steel is the same as steel is a worldwide commodity. The cost of
machinery and tooling is basically the same worldwide. Starrett's factory
has been there a long time, I don't see them building a new one. And I don't
see environmetal regs affecting construction, new buildings are going up all
over the place. How many new cars factories have been built in the South?
Plenty.Did environmetal regs hinder them? I think not.




Starrett does have to pay much higher wages and benefits for very skilled
labor, but that is a difference of living standards between the west and
China. Is that the government's fault?

Did I say it was? No. *You* brought that up. I didn't say anything at all
about wages and benefits.

On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:25:41 -0400, the renowned "Tony"
wrote:



I don't see environmetal regs significantly affecting
a company like Starrett, other than the cost to properly dispose of
solvents
and waste oils.

Oh, no? You don't think it drives up the cost of the steel they use? Or
the
cost of the machinery and tooling they buy? What about the cost of
building a
factory? You think environmental regulations don't affect that?

The cost of steel is the same as steel is a worldwide commodity.

If trade was free it would be, but the US government is always
slapping huge tariffs and/or quotas on imported steel in order to
protect inefficient domestic producers, so the price to the end user
may not be the same.

http://www.enza.co.nz/


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

In article , "Tony" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
et...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:
You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated.

APpreciated...

Doug,

The book value of capital assets is DEpreciated on a corporate tax return,
based on the established depreciation rates for various assets, according to
GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)

Yes, I know that.

Now show me what that has to do with capital gains taxes.

Capital gains tax is owed when an asset is sold for more than its purchase
price. That's APpreciation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On 15 Sep 2007 11:33:06 -0400, Maxwell Lol
wrote:

Another one for public companies is Sarbanes-Oxley
==========
This depends on your perception and what your level of employment
is.

While Sarbox is indeed a cramp for the schemers, skimmers and
scammers, it appears to be very helpful for the actual companies,
their stock holders, and other stake-holders, in that it forces
financial accountability onto the CEO who must now attest to the
correctness of all financial statements and mandates verification
of the adequacy of financial controls. A major weakness is the
phrase "to the best of my knowledge," combined with a staff that
understands their bonuses depend on their tacit appreciation of
the phrase "plausible deniability."

The high cost of meeting the independent auditors requirements
for verification of the adequacy of the financial controls and
record keeping was/is *NOT* a problem with Sarbox, but rather a
clear indication of the deplorable state of and total laxness in
financial control prior to its enactment and enforcement.

Adequate, accurate and detailed financial records are just as
important (some times more so) in a manufacturing operation as
accurate machines, skilled machinists, and good prints/products.
It is sad but accurate observation about too many (former)
machine shops "they made it in the shop but they lost it in the
ledger," (and this assume honest ignorance).

The ongoing housing [more precisely sub-prime mortgage/CDO]
debacle indicates that Sarbox needs to be expanded to include
financial operations such as banks to prohibit the use of SIVs
[special investment vehicles] and conduits to hide debt and allow
(encourage) speculative/fraudulent activities, with only the
losses charged to the parent organization, while the profits are
skimmed by third parties, many of whom have large conflicts of
interest.

It was exactly this type of activity that brought Enron and
several other shell corporations down, although their vehicles
were called "Special Purpose Entities." (Apparently just the
change from SPE to SIV was enough to evade Sarbox.) In addition
to the fraudulent nature of many of these activities, these also
evade the margin/reserve requirements imposed by the FRB and
Comptroller of the Currency as a result of the experiences of the
'29 crash.

In all likelihood, full implementation of Sarbox across the board
and the imposition of the proposed FASB accounting revisions,
particularly the reporting of "off the books" operations, would
have prevented the creation of the real estate/CDO mortgage
bubble, and the likely creation of a "super" RTC funded at
taxpayer expense to tidy up the mess the high rollers left.

Frankly, the FASB [Financial Standards Accounting Board] needs to
pound their reasonable accounting requirements up the noses of
the skimmers and scammers, and the Feds need to get their act
together such as mandating the use reasonable [possible] rates of
assumed return on investment for pension fund calculations, with
draconian penalties for evasion, such as prosecution under RICO
on the basis of ongoing criminal enterprise, with asset
confiscation and long prison terms. Indeed, it appears that the
Mafia are pikers and tinhorns in comparison to the damage
inflicted and boodle extracted by our corporate executives on
working/saving Americans.

The American economy/society is now far too entwined and
convoluted with the international financial/securities markets to
allow business as usual in a "free (to do anything you want)
market. Sarbox, as weak as it is, is an all too rare example of
a law enacted that benefits the vast majority of people, even as
it limits to some small extent the criminal and amoral activities
of the schemers, scammers and skimmers.

The next big scam is most likely the creation of a stock backed
trust fund by the Detroit big-three to assume liability for their
retire medical obligations, which I am sure will be as solvent as
the airline ESOPs. Check the tax consequences to see why this is
such a good deal for the companies, both coming and going [into
chapter 11], and why the UAW retirees, shareholders, and US
taxpayers are going to take it in the shorts big-time (again).


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.

Well, it just blows my SOX off...The following site appears to be a
mix of a blog and a SOX head hunting site. Any time that lawyers are
involved in writing laws, they become hard to interpret. The goal of SOX
is laudable, but giving the government the power to enforce it seems
more dangerous than the Patriot Act could ever be.

When the tax code is written so there is no interpretation, then it will
be how much did you earn? how much does it cost you to live? send us the
check for the difference... The same with trying to apply auditing that
is affected by the tax code. Can you prove beyond a doubt that you
properly depreciated or amortized whatever every year for the past ten
years, if the tax code has changed every year?

Looking through the eyes of Internal Review, good auditing practice
would reduce the need for something like SOX. But add the twisted
effects of trying to apply (or mitigate) the current tax code and things
become less clear...

http://www.insidesarbanesoxley.com/

Wall Street moves on red tape as IPO exodus continues

TyraTech, a maker of environmentally friendly pesticides, became the
latest American company to float in London yesterday as growing concerns
about the IPO drain from New York to the City prompted the formation of
a heavyweight Wall Street panel.

The panel is being set up by Eliot Spitzer, the former attorney-general
of New York who is now governor of the state. Mr Spitzer, who has given
the panel until June next year to propose legislative changes, said
yesterday that €œthe financial world has changed and we must change
with it to retain our leadership position€�. TyraTech, a Florida compan
that raised £25 million from floating on the Alternative Investment
Market (AIM) in London, said that the cost and inconvenience of strict
American listing requirements, introduced after the collapse of Enron,
were key to its decision to float overseas.

Douglas Armstrong, the chief executive, said: €œThe Sarbanes-Oxley
regulations undoubtedly played a part in our decision to list in London
because they place a heavy burden on small-cap companies in terms of
time and cost.€�

The flotation of TyraTech takes the number of US firms on AIM to about 70.



FEI Survey: Management Drives Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance Costs Down by
23%, But Auditor Fees Virtually Unchanged

Financial Executives International (FEI) announced today the results of
its sixth Sarbanes-Oxley compliance survey, which found that Section 404
compliance cost Corporate America less in year three of adoption than in
each of the first two years. FEI polled 200 companies to gauge
experiences in complying with Section 404. Responding companies have
average revenues of $6.8 billion.

According to the FEI survey, which included 172 "accelerated filers" --
companies with market capitalizations above $75 million -- total average
cost for Section 404 compliance was $2.9 million during fiscal year
2006, which represents a 23 percent decrease from 2005 totals. The data
also shows reductions in internal and external costs of compliance, with
internal staff time decreasing by 10 percent. The lower costs can be
attributed to companies' increased efficiencies in complying with
Section 404.
F. George McDuffee wrote:
On 15 Sep 2007 11:33:06 -0400, Maxwell Lol
wrote:

Another one for public companies is Sarbanes-Oxley
==========
This depends on your perception and what your level of employment
is.

While Sarbox is indeed a cramp for the schemers, skimmers and
scammers, it appears to be very helpful for the actual companies,
their stock holders, and other stake-holders, in that it forces
financial accountability onto the CEO who must now attest to the
correctness of all financial statements and mandates verification
of the adequacy of financial controls. A major weakness is the
phrase "to the best of my knowledge," combined with a staff that
understands their bonuses depend on their tacit appreciation of
the phrase "plausible deniability."

The high cost of meeting the independent auditors requirements
for verification of the adequacy of the financial controls and
record keeping was/is *NOT* a problem with Sarbox, but rather a
clear indication of the deplorable state of and total laxness in
financial control prior to its enactment and enforcement.

Adequate, accurate and detailed financial records are just as
important (some times more so) in a manufacturing operation as
accurate machines, skilled machinists, and good prints/products.
It is sad but accurate observation about too many (former)
machine shops "they made it in the shop but they lost it in the
ledger," (and this assume honest ignorance).

The ongoing housing [more precisely sub-prime mortgage/CDO]
debacle indicates that Sarbox needs to be expanded to include
financial operations such as banks to prohibit the use of SIVs
[special investment vehicles] and conduits to hide debt and allow
(encourage) speculative/fraudulent activities, with only the
losses charged to the parent organization, while the profits are
skimmed by third parties, many of whom have large conflicts of
interest.

It was exactly this type of activity that brought Enron and
several other shell corporations down, although their vehicles
were called "Special Purpose Entities." (Apparently just the
change from SPE to SIV was enough to evade Sarbox.) In addition
to the fraudulent nature of many of these activities, these also
evade the margin/reserve requirements imposed by the FRB and
Comptroller of the Currency as a result of the experiences of the
'29 crash.

In all likelihood, full implementation of Sarbox across the board
and the imposition of the proposed FASB accounting revisions,
particularly the reporting of "off the books" operations, would
have prevented the creation of the real estate/CDO mortgage
bubble, and the likely creation of a "super" RTC funded at
taxpayer expense to tidy up the mess the high rollers left.

Frankly, the FASB [Financial Standards Accounting Board] needs to
pound their reasonable accounting requirements up the noses of
the skimmers and scammers, and the Feds need to get their act
together such as mandating the use reasonable [possible] rates of
assumed return on investment for pension fund calculations, with
draconian penalties for evasion, such as prosecution under RICO
on the basis of ongoing criminal enterprise, with asset
confiscation and long prison terms. Indeed, it appears that the
Mafia are pikers and tinhorns in comparison to the damage
inflicted and boodle extracted by our corporate executives on
working/saving Americans.

The American economy/society is now far too entwined and
convoluted with the international financial/securities markets to
allow business as usual in a "free (to do anything you want)
market. Sarbox, as weak as it is, is an all too rare example of
a law enacted that benefits the vast majority of people, even as
it limits to some small extent the criminal and amoral activities
of the schemers, scammers and skimmers.

The next big scam is most likely the creation of a stock backed
trust fund by the Detroit big-three to assume liability for their
retire medical obligations, which I am sure will be as solvent as
the airline ESOPs. Check the tax consequences to see why this is
such a good deal for the companies, both coming and going [into
chapter 11], and why the UAW retirees, shareholders, and US
taxpayers are going to take it in the shorts big-time (again).


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.

Right - have the Mitutoyo Metrology Handbook from the training class.
Never was able to go (outside my Sr. Scientist requirements) but got
the book. If the blocks are not clean there is even more issues.
Some think wiping with a cloth is clean enough. Films are thick.

But hobby types like me likes to do what we can and hold to the level
we want. The real pro's have to know what they do.

I was impressed in some shops and the mechanical as well as electronic
measuring instruments for large 4' sized gears and stuff.

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Ed Huntress wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
Unless someone has been trained or studied a manual, the improper use
of blocks can give wide and inconsistent errors.

e.g. - can you stack steel and ceramic together and have the stack
stay together holding only the top block and letting the rest hang down ?

Yes. There's a photo of ten Mitutoyo gage blocks in a stack, mixed steel and
zirconia ceramic, held by the top one, in an old article in Modern Machine
Shop. It's my hand holding the stack.

The surface must be clean. The blocks not just placed, but twisted
together.

Quality knowledgeable people know all about that and then some.

The shop machinist has to know as well.

If you stack say, three blocks, and they're improperly wrung, the total
error of that stack might be 0.0001" or 0.0002". That's plenty close enough
for the kind of checking we're talking about. The average hobbyist is going
to have trouble reading absolute tenths, anyway, due to a host of factors.

However, if you're working in the sub-tenths range of accuracy, you need
very good technique, as you say. Just handling gage blocks with bare hands
can defeat you in that range.

--
Ed Huntress



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

A capital asset , even real estate that can appreciates in value, is
depreciated on the books for tax purposes. Therefore the corporation is
getting the tax write off each year until the asset is fully depreciated.
When the asset is sold off in the future, capital gains is owed on the final
value. Think of it as paying back the tax writeoffs the corporation
collected earlier.

Now that the accounting lesson is over, perhaps you can explain how capital
gains tax increases the cost for Starrett to manufacture its products???? Or
are you just parroting Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity???


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
In article , "Tony" wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. net...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:
You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated.

APpreciated...

Doug,

The book value of capital assets is DEpreciated on a corporate tax return,
based on the established depreciation rates for various assets, according
to
GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)

Yes, I know that.

Now show me what that has to do with capital gains taxes.

Capital gains tax is owed when an asset is sold for more than its purchase
price. That's APpreciation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Yes. Just today, at a parking lot, my truck door gently touched a new
BMW (really gently), the owner of which had quite a fit. Why buy a car
if regular wear and tear could make the owner so hysterical.



well everyone has their toys, if someone scratched your lathe bed due to
carelessness you might not be willing to shrug it off.

Can't see the forest for the trees... Why is the tax law so
convoluted at the start? It's like setting someone up to fail.

Since this accounting stuff is so clear to you, please explain to us
all the compliance costs, per year, of all regulation on US businesses.
This includes the legal representation, accounting departments, OSHA,
ADA, Social Security, Unemployment, Medicare, environmental, EEO, and
the myriad other little love taps from Federal and State governments.

One tax, one time. What a revolutionary proposal.

Tony wrote:
A capital asset , even real estate that can appreciates in value, is
depreciated on the books for tax purposes. Therefore the corporation is
getting the tax write off each year until the asset is fully
depreciated. When the asset is sold off in the future, capital gains is
owed on the final value. Think of it as paying back the tax writeoffs
the corporation collected earlier.

Now that the accounting lesson is over, perhaps you can explain how
capital gains tax increases the cost for Starrett to manufacture its
products???? Or are you just parroting Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity???


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
. ..
In article , "Tony"
wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
t...
In article , "Tony"
wrote:
You only pay capital gains tax when you sell an asset that has been
depreciated.

APpreciated...

Doug,

The book value of capital assets is DEpreciated on a corporate tax
return,
based on the established depreciation rates for various assets,
according to
GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)

Yes, I know that.

Now show me what that has to do with capital gains taxes.

Capital gains tax is owed when an asset is sold for more than its
purchase
price. That's APpreciation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:26:24 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:
SNIP
Wall Street moves on red tape as IPO exodus continues

TyraTech, a maker of environmentally friendly pesticides, became the
latest American company to float in London yesterday as growing concerns
about the IPO drain from New York to the City prompted the formation of
a heavyweight Wall Street panel.
SNIP
=========
As my father used to say "don't let the door hit you in the ass
on the way out."

If an American company can't or won't keep honest books then they
are free to more somewhere else. They would however do well to
remember that in many other countries such as China, if you are
caught stir-frying the books, they stand you up against a wall
and shoot you, bill your estate for the ammunition, and
confiscate the estates remaining assets.


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:00:35 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:

Can't see the forest for the trees... Why is the tax law so
convoluted at the start? It's like setting someone up to fail.
snip
===========
While the simple few do fail, the complexities of the code offer
more than ample loop-holes, exceptions, anomalies, etc., etc. so
that the sharpies, angle players, and corner cutters can
avoid/evade paying significant portions of their taxes,
effectively shifting their share of the cost of government onto
the rest of us.

Be reminded that in many areas the state and local taxes and fees
including property and sales are as significant as the federal
taxes, and are no longer deductible from income on your federal
tax return. Many of the major corporations have managed to
extort significant reductions and exemptions through abatements,
tax increment financing, etc. while increasing the tax burden on
pre-existing locally owned and operated businesses, as well as
individuals.

It is at least plausible that the IRS code is deliberately
convoluted to both entrap the simple [i.e. average citizen] and
reward the "players."


Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.

F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 09:00:35 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:

Can't see the forest for the trees... Why is the tax law so
convoluted at the start? It's like setting someone up to fail.
snip
===========
While the simple few do fail, the complexities of the code offer
more than ample loop-holes, exceptions, anomalies, etc., etc. so
that the sharpies, angle players, and corner cutters can
avoid/evade paying significant portions of their taxes,
effectively shifting their share of the cost of government onto
the rest of us.

Be reminded that in many areas the state and local taxes and fees
including property and sales are as significant as the federal
taxes, and are no longer deductible from income on your federal
tax return. Many of the major corporations have managed to
extort significant reductions and exemptions through abatements,
tax increment financing, etc. while increasing the tax burden on
pre-existing locally owned and operated businesses, as well as
individuals.

It is at least plausible that the IRS code is deliberately
convoluted to both entrap the simple [i.e. average citizen] and
reward the "players."

In short, you have defined the reason for lobbyists - to keep the
federal government away from business, failing that, make it more
difficult for competitors to operate.

What is the actual co$t to the public for our tax code? Look at the
farm subsidies... The candy industry could use real sugar if it wasn't
so expensive. So the sugar beet and cane sugar growers in the US derive
benefit from trade restrictions, the US economy takes one for the team
for higher prices, and in the end, the consumer still pays.... Either
taxes for subsidies or higher prices for the product.

F. George McDuffee wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 21:26:24 -0500, Louis Ohland
wrote:
SNIP
Wall Street moves on red tape as IPO exodus continues

TyraTech, a maker of environmentally friendly pesticides, became the
latest American company to float in London yesterday as growing concerns
about the IPO drain from New York to the City prompted the formation of
a heavyweight Wall Street panel.
SNIP
=========
As my father used to say "don't let the door hit you in the ass
on the way out."

If an American company can't or won't keep honest books then they
are free to more somewhere else. They would however do well to
remember that in many other countries such as China, if you are
caught stir-frying the books, they stand you up against a wall
and shoot you, bill your estate for the ammunition, and
confiscate the estates remaining assets.

Please furnish the public domain information that you use to label this
business as having cooked books.

As for the Chinese angle, as long as you aren't blatant, and you pay off
the government, who's going to complain?

In article , "Tony" wrote:
A capital asset , even real estate that can appreciates in value, is
depreciated on the books for tax purposes. Therefore the corporation is
getting the tax write off each year until the asset is fully depreciated.
When the asset is sold off in the future, capital gains is owed on the final
value.

*If* that final value exceeds the depreciated value at the time of the sale.

Or did you think that business assets are never disposed of until they're
fully depreciated?


Now that the accounting lesson is over, perhaps you can explain how capital
gains tax increases the cost for Starrett to manufacture its products???? Or
are you just parroting Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity???

*Any* tax is obviously an additional cost of doing business. Sorry you're
having such a hard time figuring that out.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

It's not just Sarbanes-Oxley, George.

Some of you may recall a whistleblower action that was brought against
Starrett about five years ago, in regard to problems with their
coordinate measuring machines. Got some large headlines, as the claim
implied that the problems might have resulted in defective parts used
in the NASA program, passenger airliners, pacemakers, and such.
Pretty serious stuff.

Starrett felt they had done nothing wrong, and fought it. Their
expense was in the millions, and the government probably spent the
same. We'll never know that, though. The action was settled only
recently, with Starrett agreeing to a $50,000 fine. Which is pretty
much the government saying "we tried to find that you had done
something wrong but couldn't, but since we have worked so long and
spent so much money trying to do so, we'll fine you a token amount
just to save face".

That is our government at work. The government lost, Starrett lost.
The only ones who came out of it happy were - can't you guess? - the
lawyers. Wonderful, no?

John Martin

*Any* tax is obviously an additional cost of doing business. Sorry you're
having such a hard time figuring that out.



Capital gains tax has no effect, and you can't provide any examples of how
it would to support your original statement. All of your responses just run
off on tangents.