"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL
Kidding does the same ****, over and over and over and over again.
GM's dick must have a big barb on the end of it, Kidding can't seem to get
it out of his ass or his mouth.
Kidding, tho, is ultra masterful at the bull**** contrived strawman, at
contrivance in general.
--
EA



--
Ed Huntress

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 08:53:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:31:23 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

Taxing electricity to pay for road repairs, as Tom suggested, is not
going to happen. If electric vehicles proliferate, I don't doubt
they'll tax the vehicles and/or miles travelled -- and they should.
That's what Jim's references are about.

But Tom's suggestion that governments will tax electricity to pay for
roads is just plain paranoia.

He's not really worried about. It's merely another of those stupid
excuses tossed out by the ignorati who are terrified of change. Same
with "PV takes more energy to produce than it will ever generate." You
can bet he believes as strongly in that one as he does in talking
snakes.

I, of course, didn't say that. I said that PVs take a LOT of energy to
produce, AND the process is one of filthiest industrial processes on the
planet.
They MAY take so much energy, be so environmentally costly to produce that
the net net net ROI is worse than people think, but I don't know for sure.
Why don't YOU tell us??

But it don't matter. Your ROI on yer Volt is 75+++ years, and your ROI on
PVs will be another 30 years. Being a dumb****, you don't realize that PVs
don't last forever, either.


Taxation idn't rocket science.... it's proctological science.

What's your goal for the rest of your life, to set a record for
milking a single lame premise? I'll donate the cost of a second joke
if you agree to use it.

Apt metaphors are apt metaphors. The fact that you can't understand them is
because of the pounding your brain takes from all the ass****ings you
believe are colonoscopies. GM ass****s you, and you imagine they're in
white coats with stethoscopes, and whip out your checkbook.

Tell you what.
I'll donate to a team with some jaws-of-life to do the ole heave-ho to try
to pull out dat Status Quo dick that's shoved up to your medulla oblongata.
Or at least dislodge some, to relieve the pressure. Then you might gain
some clarity.... temporarily.
--
EA

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm. I largey ignore the arguments between you and Kidding. They're
dumb, useless, and kind of frustrating. You guys shouldn't be arguing,
IMO.

Tawwwwm, on the other hand, tries to put words in my mouth, and
assumes things I never said. He has a long history of doing that. It's
a shame, but it's necessary to keep him on the straight and narrow or
pretty soon he's dressing up that strawman with a hat, boots, and a
raincoat.

Kidding does the same ****, over and over and over and over again.
GM's dick must have a big barb on the end of it, Kidding can't seem to get
it out of his ass or his mouth.
Kidding, tho, is ultra masterful at the bull**** contrived strawman, at
contrivance in general.

As I said, I've learned not to pay attention. You're both smart, you
both have a lot of good thoughts, and neither one of you is a
foul-mouthed, knuckle-dragging rightard. That makes both of you
fairly exceptional these days. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where cat is
now cot, carrot is not corrot, and all kinds of dumb dialectical bull****.
Check THIS out -- fukn drives me CRAZY!!!! Check out the short audio
clip.... jesus....
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/more-c...tars-1C6436911
Goodgawd.....
I'll take the N'Yawk/Longyland/guido brooklyn accent any day.... well,
mebbe not guido brooklyn, and def'ly not fukn ebonics, yo....
I can't listen to the radio or watch TV half the time, cuz of this wretched
valleyspeak creeping in.... oh, and the croaking..... JESUS....

I largey ignore the arguments between you and Kidding. They're
dumb, useless, and kind of frustrating. You guys shouldn't be arguing,
IMO.

Kidding is a dick-waving prick, devoid of any/all integrity. You'll find
out sooner or later.
That you don't already see this is kind of odd..... Proly you two just
bonded over Gummer?? LOL

I answer Kidding's bull**** in the detail I do for 1. Sport, and 2. as an
expose of his incessant twisted logic.
Oh, and 3. Could you expect anything less from a Gummer-stalker??
That YOU don't like gummer may cloud the true toxicity, bizarreness,
characterlessness of such behavior.

Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly as he
argues on Usenet.... which, ackshooly, is not a bad formula for success!!
But this zeitgeist renders one as butt another inconsequential cocksucker,
who is butt another part of The Problem.
Don't let apparent articulateness disguise the true obliviousness, utter
lack of integrity.


Tawwwwm, on the other hand, tries to put words in my mouth, and
assumes things I never said. He has a long history of doing that. It's
a shame, but it's necessary to keep him on the straight and narrow or
pretty soon he's dressing up that strawman with a hat, boots, and a
raincoat.

Kidding does the same ****, over and over and over and over again.
GM's dick must have a big barb on the end of it, Kidding can't seem to get
it out of his ass or his mouth.
Kidding, tho, is ultra masterful at the bull**** contrived strawman, at
contrivance in general.

As I said, I've learned not to pay attention. You're both smart, you
both have a lot of good thoughts, and neither one of you is a
foul-mouthed, knuckle-dragging rightard. That makes both of you
fairly exceptional these days. d8-)

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL

Now if I can just get away from the valley croakster females..... jesus....
--
EA





--
Ed Huntress

Existential Angst wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...


Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

I have NO idea! It starts to sound like the "uphill both ways
to school" story. But, part of it is NEVER, EVER using the brakes or
stopping, so it might be like the bike riders that never stop
for stop signs, etc.
http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/09/12/top-10-fuel-saving-tips-from-a-hypermiler-who-gets-180mpg-in-a-honda-insight/

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3404022&page=1
This one seems to say it wasn't Wayne but one of the other
competitors who did the 168 MPG.


It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?
I think it is the squishing of the water out under the tires
that wastes the energy. Kind of like a water dyno added to the
engine.

Jon

Existential Angst wrote:


So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
Yes, YOU TOO can learn to do it! I suggest going to one
of these competitions and somehow getting one of the pros
to allow you to ride along. Supposedly, it is a harrowing
experience for journalists, who said they expected to die
horrible every second of the ride. I guess these guys never
stop, go around turns at 50 MPH, etc. so they never have to use
the brakes.

There might be some videos taken in these competitions, but
maybe for legal reasons the drivers don't want them to be
public. I've just read about it, and maybe these stories
are exaggerated by the writers.

Before I got my Honda Civic Hybrid, I tried hypermiling
my 1989 Toyota Corolla station wagon. I did mild hypermiling
before, like pushing in the clutch when going down a hill,
and got about 29 MPG in mixed city driving. Then, I tried
to see how far I could push it, like shutting the engine off
while going down hill and at every light. I was able to
push it up to nearly 35 MPG, hardly worth the trouble.
I easily get over 50 MPG tooling around town in the Civic
hybrid, just being light on the gas. In the Civic, you
want to keep the engine in Atkinson-cycle mode as much
as possible, so you don't press down on the accelerator
when going up a hill, you let the speed fade.
On a Prius, which doesn't have variable valve timing,
supposedly the pulse and glide scheme gives best fuel
economy.


Jon

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where cat is
now cot, carrot is not corrot,

(Check out Norther Tier Vowel Shift, sometimes called Northern Cities
Vowel Shift. My SIL has it soooo bad; she's from the Chicago southwest
suburbs, where it's worst. Iggy doubtless recognizes it. I want to
correct her pronunciation all the time, like you would with a kid who
says "nucular.")

... and all kinds of dumb dialectical bull****.
Check THIS out -- fukn drives me CRAZY!!!! Check out the short audio
clip.... jesus....
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/more-c...tars-1C6436911
Goodgawd.....

I'm getting so used to that (and annoyed by it) on TV and radio that I
really have to listen for it now, or it just makes my nose shrivel and
I don't know why.

I'll take the N'Yawk/Longyland/guido brooklyn accent any day.... well,
mebbe not guido brooklyn, and def'ly not fukn ebonics, yo....
I can't listen to the radio or watch TV half the time, cuz of this wretched
valleyspeak creeping in.... oh, and the croaking..... JESUS....

I largey ignore the arguments between you and Kidding. They're
dumb, useless, and kind of frustrating. You guys shouldn't be arguing,
IMO.

Kidding is a dick-waving prick, devoid of any/all integrity. You'll find
out sooner or later.
That you don't already see this is kind of odd..... Proly you two just
bonded over Gummer?? LOL

I answer Kidding's bull**** in the detail I do for 1. Sport, and 2. as an
expose of his incessant twisted logic.
Oh, and 3. Could you expect anything less from a Gummer-stalker??
That YOU don't like gummer may cloud the true toxicity, bizarreness,
characterlessness of such behavior.

It's not that I don't like Gunner. I just don't like his habits. It's
like having a friend who farts in elevators and smokes in your car.


Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly as he
argues on Usenet.... which, ackshooly, is not a bad formula for success!!
But this zeitgeist renders one as butt another inconsequential cocksucker,
who is butt another part of The Problem.
Don't let apparent articulateness disguise the true obliviousness, utter
lack of integrity.


Tawwwwm, on the other hand, tries to put words in my mouth, and
assumes things I never said. He has a long history of doing that. It's
a shame, but it's necessary to keep him on the straight and narrow or
pretty soon he's dressing up that strawman with a hat, boots, and a
raincoat.

Kidding does the same ****, over and over and over and over again.
GM's dick must have a big barb on the end of it, Kidding can't seem to get
it out of his ass or his mouth.
Kidding, tho, is ultra masterful at the bull**** contrived strawman, at
contrivance in general.

As I said, I've learned not to pay attention. You're both smart, you
both have a lot of good thoughts, and neither one of you is a
foul-mouthed, knuckle-dragging rightard. That makes both of you
fairly exceptional these days. d8-)

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL

Now if I can just get away from the valley croakster females..... jesus....

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where cat
is
now cot, carrot is not corrot,

(Check out Norther Tier Vowel Shift, sometimes called Northern Cities
Vowel Shift. My SIL has it soooo bad; she's from the Chicago southwest
suburbs, where it's worst. Iggy doubtless recognizes it. I want to
correct her pronunciation all the time, like you would with a kid who
says "nucular.")

Kids?? KIDS????? How bout 3/4 of fuknCongress????

I read a bit of the Wiki on this, it dudn't seem to apply to what I'm
referring.
Dialects are dialects, accents are accents, regional is regional, and I
really don't have a problem with most of them, perty inneresting in many
cases.
It's this obnoxious pretentious *peer-driven bull***** that sticks in my
craw....
I'm listening to fukn WNYC/NPR interviewers/anchors engaging in this
valley-speak bull****, and it is invariably females doing this.
Once in a while a male, but then f'sure he's gay, and they certainly have
their own bevy dialectical issues.... among so many others.... LOL

But HERE'S a Q ferya:
How do you explain vowel EXCHANGE???
For example, the typical deep-blue collar Queens/brooklynite will say terlet
for toilet, and THEN woik for work.... WTF?????
OR, they will say soder fer soda, micer for mica, and THEN huh fuh her, and
sistuh fuh sister..... WTF?????
COMPLETE REVERSALS!!!!

No one has ever been able to explain this, and I"ve axed all over the
lexcicogeographical place.
You're my last shot, Ed.... Don't let me down..... LOL

You know, this whole nookyooler thing came up here about 6 mos ago, and a
few people here actually DEFENDED the pronunciation.... and you know what??
It almost made sense!!!! I think some claimed that nookyooler is now an
accepted alternative pronunciation.....
Sheeit, not only are we subject to the Tyranny of the Majority, we are
subject to the Tyranny of an Ignerint and Ilitirit Majority.....
goodgawd.....

We are doomed..... ossumly doomed.... on so MANY levels!!!!
And now, I cain't even decay, deteriorate, die in peace.... I gotta listen
to co-ed ****heads croaking like fukn Brittny 'til my ignominious end.....
jesus.....
--
EA




... and all kinds of dumb dialectical bull****.
Check THIS out -- fukn drives me CRAZY!!!! Check out the short audio
clip.... jesus....
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/more-c...tars-1C6436911
Goodgawd.....

I'm getting so used to that (and annoyed by it) on TV and radio that I
really have to listen for it now, or it just makes my nose shrivel and
I don't know why.

I'll take the N'Yawk/Longyland/guido brooklyn accent any day.... well,
mebbe not guido brooklyn, and def'ly not fukn ebonics, yo....
I can't listen to the radio or watch TV half the time, cuz of this
wretched
valleyspeak creeping in.... oh, and the croaking..... JESUS....

I largey ignore the arguments between you and Kidding. They're
dumb, useless, and kind of frustrating. You guys shouldn't be arguing,
IMO.

Kidding is a dick-waving prick, devoid of any/all integrity. You'll find
out sooner or later.
That you don't already see this is kind of odd..... Proly you two just
bonded over Gummer?? LOL

I answer Kidding's bull**** in the detail I do for 1. Sport, and 2. as
an
expose of his incessant twisted logic.
Oh, and 3. Could you expect anything less from a Gummer-stalker??
That YOU don't like gummer may cloud the true toxicity, bizarreness,
characterlessness of such behavior.

It's not that I don't like Gunner. I just don't like his habits. It's
like having a friend who farts in elevators and smokes in your car.


Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly as he
argues on Usenet.... which, ackshooly, is not a bad formula for success!!
But this zeitgeist renders one as butt another inconsequential cocksucker,
who is butt another part of The Problem.
Don't let apparent articulateness disguise the true obliviousness, utter
lack of integrity.


Tawwwwm, on the other hand, tries to put words in my mouth, and
assumes things I never said. He has a long history of doing that. It's
a shame, but it's necessary to keep him on the straight and narrow or
pretty soon he's dressing up that strawman with a hat, boots, and a
raincoat.

Kidding does the same ****, over and over and over and over again.
GM's dick must have a big barb on the end of it, Kidding can't seem to
get
it out of his ass or his mouth.
Kidding, tho, is ultra masterful at the bull**** contrived strawman, at
contrivance in general.

As I said, I've learned not to pay attention. You're both smart, you
both have a lot of good thoughts, and neither one of you is a
foul-mouthed, knuckle-dragging rightard. That makes both of you
fairly exceptional these days. d8-)

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL

Now if I can just get away from the valley croakster females.....
jesus....

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 22:19:48 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
om...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where cat
is
now cot, carrot is not corrot,

(Check out Norther Tier Vowel Shift, sometimes called Northern Cities
Vowel Shift. My SIL has it soooo bad; she's from the Chicago southwest
suburbs, where it's worst. Iggy doubtless recognizes it. I want to
correct her pronunciation all the time, like you would with a kid who
says "nucular.")

Kids?? KIDS????? How bout 3/4 of fuknCongress????

I read a bit of the Wiki on this, it dudn't seem to apply to what I'm
referring.

Ah, sorry, I was just pointing it out as an example of vowel shifts,
not specifically addressing your example. There are lots of vowel
shifts in English, mostly regional.

Dialects are dialects, accents are accents, regional is regional, and I
really don't have a problem with most of them, perty inneresting in many
cases.
It's this obnoxious pretentious *peer-driven bull***** that sticks in my
craw....

Yeah, that's the new version of the ethnic dialects. Now it transmits
via electronic media, and can pop up in different parts of the country
at the same time.


I'm listening to fukn WNYC/NPR interviewers/anchors engaging in this
valley-speak bull****, and it is invariably females doing this.
Once in a while a male, but then f'sure he's gay, and they certainly have
their own bevy dialectical issues.... among so many others.... LOL

But HERE'S a Q ferya:
How do you explain vowel EXCHANGE???

It's not actually an exchange. It's a strange brew of non-rhotic
substitutions and dipthongs, or glides.

Most New Yawk dialects are non-rhotic: "r's" aren't pronounced unless
they're followed by a consonant ("batta up," instead of "batter up").
But there are some substititions -- the introduction of an "r" before
a consonant, possibly to simplify a preceding dipthong ("terlet"). And
"woik" does the opposite -- the "r" is dropped in exchange for a
dipthong ("oi," for "oy").

That's it. That's all I ever learned about it, back when I was
interested in linguistics.

It's not a big mystery but neither is it simple, because the basic
non-rhotic issue crops up in Boston accents, and some English accents,
and they don't always appear with the substitutes. Thus, the Bostonian
"broad 'a'." It's mostly just a dropping of rhotic "r's," and the "a"
is what's left.

There are examples from the New York dialects that contradict the
points above, because it's a tangle of substitutions and pronouncing
simplifications. I think you could find explanations about the
complexities of non-rhotic pronunciations online, but I don't
guarentee it will be easy to find what you're looking for. New York
dialects have been studied to beat hell, however. Try Google Scholar.


For example, the typical deep-blue collar Queens/brooklynite will say terlet
for toilet, and THEN woik for work.... WTF?????
OR, they will say soder fer soda, micer for mica, and THEN huh fuh her, and
sistuh fuh sister..... WTF?????
COMPLETE REVERSALS!!!!

No one has ever been able to explain this, and I"ve axed all over the
lexcicogeographical place.
You're my last shot, Ed.... Don't let me down..... LOL

You know, this whole nookyooler thing came up here about 6 mos ago, and a
few people here actually DEFENDED the pronunciation.... and you know what??
It almost made sense!!!! I think some claimed that nookyooler is now an
accepted alternative pronunciation.....
Sheeit, not only are we subject to the Tyranny of the Majority, we are
subject to the Tyranny of an Ignerint and Ilitirit Majority.....
goodgawd.....

A little piece of my heart is nibbled away each time I hear "nukular."
But it's another one of those lazy substitutions that are common in
many American and British dialects. "Lea" gets your tongue flapping.
"Ku" does not.

English evolves, and lots of our pronunciations make no sense.


We are doomed..... ossumly doomed.... on so MANY levels!!!!
And now, I cain't even decay, deteriorate, die in peace.... I gotta listen
to co-ed ****heads croaking like fukn Brittny 'til my ignominious end.....
jesus.....

I've been wondering if you have an old-time Yonkers accent. When I was
a kid and lived next door in Mr. Vernon, I attended a Catholic school
and we had some Yonkers kids. Their pronunciations stood out like a
sore thumb.

I suppose most of that has died out. I can even understand people from
Brooklyn now.

--
Ed Huntress

Existential Angst wrote:

I read a bit of the Wiki on this, it dudn't seem to apply to what I'm
referring.
Dialects are dialects, accents are accents, regional is regional, and I
really don't have a problem with most of them, perty inneresting in many
cases.
It's this obnoxious pretentious *peer-driven bull***** that sticks in my
craw....

I don't think this is particularly new. Speaking like
that takes less breath. That allows one to speak longer
without inhaling. One of the "researchers" in your links
noted that it tends to occur most at the end of sentences.


I'm listening to fukn WNYC/NPR interviewers/anchors engaging in this
valley-speak bull****, and it is invariably females doing this.
Once in a while a male, but then f'sure he's gay, and they certainly have
their own bevy dialectical issues.... among so many others.... LOL

But HERE'S a Q ferya:
How do you explain vowel EXCHANGE???
For example, the typical deep-blue collar Queens/brooklynite will say terlet
for toilet, and THEN woik for work.... WTF?????
OR, they will say soder fer soda, micer for mica, and THEN huh fuh her, and
sistuh fuh sister..... WTF?????
COMPLETE REVERSALS!!!!

No one has ever been able to explain this, and I"ve axed all over the
lexcicogeographical place.

All dialects/language is code. Have you ever turned on
english subtitles on English speaking movies to
decode the dialect?

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly

LOL One of the reasons I have what I have is that I used my head to
get ahead instead of wasting my life typing up stupid **** like you
just did above. You can't defend that nonsense with anything except
more nonsense, and you can't stop. None of it will get you an inch
closer to owning an EV or anything else. You're dedicated to not
catching up, and your shallow rants will always reflect it far more
than you realize.

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:21:56 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
.. .

Taxation idn't rocket science.... it's proctological science.

What's your goal for the rest of your life, to set a record for
milking a single lame premise? I'll donate the cost of a second joke
if you agree to use it.

Apt metaphors are apt metaphors.

Ah, so you're not joking, you actually believe you're metaphorically
being anally penetrated constantly. At what point are you going to
metaphorically install a plug, and MOVE? Don't tell me... there's no
escape! You've already done everything possible to fix your problems
and there's nothing to do now but spend increasing amounts of time
whining about them!

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:02:29 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:


As I said, I've learned not to pay attention. You're both smart, you
both have a lot of good thoughts, and neither one of you is a
foul-mouthed, knuckle-dragging rightard. That makes both of you
fairly exceptional these days. d8-)

Ed, I will bet $1 that EA would pay you $100 to flame me. That's a $99
ROI. Make sure you get cash.

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly

LOL One of the reasons I have what I have is that I used my head to
get ahead instead of wasting my life typing up stupid **** like you
just did above. You can't defend that nonsense with anything except
more nonsense, and you can't stop. None of it will get you an inch
closer to owning an EV or anything else. You're dedicated to not
catching up, and your shallow rants will always reflect it far more
than you realize.

yawn

Except that you can't do numbers. And you cannot refute ANYTHING I say,
except with strawman epithets and contrivances.
That's why you're so smug -- with a 75 year ROI. Oblivion is bliss.
Let us know how the PVs turn out.

And who knows what you have.... lord knows whatever it is, it's not nearly
enough for your family, to put up with a blowhard asshole such as yourself.
You did give them my condolances??
SAY...... why don't you come out with your latest Gummer
Chronicling/stalking, make yerself feel better, important??
--
EA

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 22:19:48 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news:qhd0t85pim856v1ggup94pm76fe7c6uc0k@4ax. com...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you
get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's
advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't
be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in
your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the
"Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is
beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the
start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where
cat
is
now cot, carrot is not corrot,

(Check out Norther Tier Vowel Shift, sometimes called Northern Cities
Vowel Shift. My SIL has it soooo bad; she's from the Chicago southwest
suburbs, where it's worst. Iggy doubtless recognizes it. I want to
correct her pronunciation all the time, like you would with a kid who
says "nucular.")

Kids?? KIDS????? How bout 3/4 of fuknCongress????

I read a bit of the Wiki on this, it dudn't seem to apply to what I'm
referring.

Ah, sorry, I was just pointing it out as an example of vowel shifts,
not specifically addressing your example. There are lots of vowel
shifts in English, mostly regional.

Dialects are dialects, accents are accents, regional is regional, and I
really don't have a problem with most of them, perty inneresting in many
cases.
It's this obnoxious pretentious *peer-driven bull***** that sticks in my
craw....

Yeah, that's the new version of the ethnic dialects. Now it transmits
via electronic media, and can pop up in different parts of the country
at the same time.


I'm listening to fukn WNYC/NPR interviewers/anchors engaging in this
valley-speak bull****, and it is invariably females doing this.
Once in a while a male, but then f'sure he's gay, and they certainly have
their own bevy dialectical issues.... among so many others.... LOL

But HERE'S a Q ferya:
How do you explain vowel EXCHANGE???

It's not actually an exchange. It's a strange brew of non-rhotic
substitutions and dipthongs, or glides.

Most New Yawk dialects are non-rhotic: "r's" aren't pronounced unless
they're followed by a consonant ("batta up," instead of "batter up").
But there are some substititions -- the introduction of an "r" before
a consonant, possibly to simplify a preceding dipthong ("terlet"). And
"woik" does the opposite -- the "r" is dropped in exchange for a
dipthong ("oi," for "oy").

Dood, you let me down!!!

NO explanation for the reversal, as in, The terlet doesn't woik??

Complete reversal!!!

Actually, to be phonetically ackerit, it would be, Da terlet dudn't woik....
But I didn't want to confuse anyone... LOL




That's it. That's all I ever learned about it, back when I was
interested in linguistics.

It's not a big mystery but neither is it simple, because the basic
non-rhotic issue crops up in Boston accents, and some English accents,
and they don't always appear with the substitutes. Thus, the Bostonian
"broad 'a'." It's mostly just a dropping of rhotic "r's," and the "a"
is what's left.

There are examples from the New York dialects that contradict the
points above, because it's a tangle of substitutions and pronouncing
simplifications. I think you could find explanations about the
complexities of non-rhotic pronunciations online, but I don't
guarentee it will be easy to find what you're looking for. New York
dialects have been studied to beat hell, however. Try Google Scholar.


For example, the typical deep-blue collar Queens/brooklynite will say
terlet
for toilet, and THEN woik for work.... WTF?????
OR, they will say soder fer soda, micer for mica, and THEN huh fuh her,
and
sistuh fuh sister..... WTF?????
COMPLETE REVERSALS!!!!

No one has ever been able to explain this, and I"ve axed all over the
lexcicogeographical place.
You're my last shot, Ed.... Don't let me down..... LOL

You know, this whole nookyooler thing came up here about 6 mos ago, and a
few people here actually DEFENDED the pronunciation.... and you know
what??
It almost made sense!!!! I think some claimed that nookyooler is now an
accepted alternative pronunciation.....
Sheeit, not only are we subject to the Tyranny of the Majority, we are
subject to the Tyranny of an Ignerint and Ilitirit Majority.....
goodgawd.....

A little piece of my heart is nibbled away each time I hear "nukular."
But it's another one of those lazy substitutions that are common in
many American and British dialects. "Lea" gets your tongue flapping.
"Ku" does not.

Notice the versatility of The Ilitirit:
Nookyooler, nookuhler, noooky-ler, nyookyooler, nyookuhler, nookle-er....
Have I missed any??? lol


English evolves, and lots of our pronunciations make no sense.

Wouldn't dat be, DEvolves??



We are doomed..... ossumly doomed.... on so MANY levels!!!!
And now, I cain't even decay, deteriorate, die in peace.... I gotta
listen
to co-ed ****heads croaking like fukn Brittny 'til my ignominious end.....
jesus.....

I've been wondering if you have an old-time Yonkers accent. When I was
a kid and lived next door in Mr. Vernon, I attended a Catholic school
and we had some Yonkers kids. Their pronunciations stood out like a
sore thumb.

Hard to say.... born/bred Manhattanite, until Manhattan expelled me.
Mostly I just chant various incarnations of "fukn mutha****a's" around the
house/shop....
hard to peg dat regionally.... lol
--
EA


I suppose most of that has died out. I can even understand people from
Brooklyn now.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 17:50:26 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 22:19:48 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 18:13:18 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news:qhd0t85pim856v1ggup94pm76fe7c6uc0k@4ax .com...
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you
get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's
advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't
be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in
your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the
"Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is
beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the
start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

Ed, who are responding to, Tom or Kidding??? LOL

Tawwwm.

LOL..... I see you have some dialectic awareness.... Few people do.
One day I'll go into a rant on the new nationwide Valley-speak, where
cat
is
now cot, carrot is not corrot,

(Check out Norther Tier Vowel Shift, sometimes called Northern Cities
Vowel Shift. My SIL has it soooo bad; she's from the Chicago southwest
suburbs, where it's worst. Iggy doubtless recognizes it. I want to
correct her pronunciation all the time, like you would with a kid who
says "nucular.")

Kids?? KIDS????? How bout 3/4 of fuknCongress????

I read a bit of the Wiki on this, it dudn't seem to apply to what I'm
referring.

Ah, sorry, I was just pointing it out as an example of vowel shifts,
not specifically addressing your example. There are lots of vowel
shifts in English, mostly regional.

Dialects are dialects, accents are accents, regional is regional, and I
really don't have a problem with most of them, perty inneresting in many
cases.
It's this obnoxious pretentious *peer-driven bull***** that sticks in my
craw....

Yeah, that's the new version of the ethnic dialects. Now it transmits
via electronic media, and can pop up in different parts of the country
at the same time.


I'm listening to fukn WNYC/NPR interviewers/anchors engaging in this
valley-speak bull****, and it is invariably females doing this.
Once in a while a male, but then f'sure he's gay, and they certainly have
their own bevy dialectical issues.... among so many others.... LOL

But HERE'S a Q ferya:
How do you explain vowel EXCHANGE???

It's not actually an exchange. It's a strange brew of non-rhotic
substitutions and dipthongs, or glides.

Most New Yawk dialects are non-rhotic: "r's" aren't pronounced unless
they're followed by a consonant ("batta up," instead of "batter up").
But there are some substititions -- the introduction of an "r" before
a consonant, possibly to simplify a preceding dipthong ("terlet"). And
"woik" does the opposite -- the "r" is dropped in exchange for a
dipthong ("oi," for "oy").

Dood, you let me down!!!

NO explanation for the reversal, as in, The terlet doesn't woik??

Complete reversal!!!

Actually, to be phonetically ackerit, it would be, Da terlet dudn't woik....
But I didn't want to confuse anyone... LOL




That's it. That's all I ever learned about it, back when I was
interested in linguistics.

It's not a big mystery but neither is it simple, because the basic
non-rhotic issue crops up in Boston accents, and some English accents,
and they don't always appear with the substitutes. Thus, the Bostonian
"broad 'a'." It's mostly just a dropping of rhotic "r's," and the "a"
is what's left.

There are examples from the New York dialects that contradict the
points above, because it's a tangle of substitutions and pronouncing
simplifications. I think you could find explanations about the
complexities of non-rhotic pronunciations online, but I don't
guarentee it will be easy to find what you're looking for. New York
dialects have been studied to beat hell, however. Try Google Scholar.


For example, the typical deep-blue collar Queens/brooklynite will say
terlet
for toilet, and THEN woik for work.... WTF?????
OR, they will say soder fer soda, micer for mica, and THEN huh fuh her,
and
sistuh fuh sister..... WTF?????
COMPLETE REVERSALS!!!!

g I don't know why. I only know that non-rhotic dialects often
contain substitutions. For "terlet," my vague recollection of that
kind of substitution is a non-dipthong pronunciation for one with a
dipthong. Dipthongs are more work for the tongue and non-dipthong
substitutions are common, even without the "r" stuff. Thus, "nukular."
I don't recall any more about it.

"Woik" looks like a straight non-rhotic substitution -- in this case,
by substituting a dipthong ("oi") for the rhotic "r.".

Beyond that, you're on your own. Really, this stuff is available in
the literature. But before you try to read it, brush up on the IPA
phonetic symbols. You'll find them online for sure -- maybe even with
audio pronunciations.

You're looking for a simple answer for a pretty complex thing. New
Yawk dialects are complex enough that peole have gotten PhD.s studying
them. You expect me to know those answers? Sheesh. I'm better with
stoichiometric fuel mixtures. d8-)


No one has ever been able to explain this, and I"ve axed all over the
lexcicogeographical place.
You're my last shot, Ed.... Don't let me down..... LOL

You know, this whole nookyooler thing came up here about 6 mos ago, and a
few people here actually DEFENDED the pronunciation.... and you know
what??
It almost made sense!!!! I think some claimed that nookyooler is now an
accepted alternative pronunciation.....
Sheeit, not only are we subject to the Tyranny of the Majority, we are
subject to the Tyranny of an Ignerint and Ilitirit Majority.....
goodgawd.....

A little piece of my heart is nibbled away each time I hear "nukular."
But it's another one of those lazy substitutions that are common in
many American and British dialects. "Lea" gets your tongue flapping.
"Ku" does not.

Notice the versatility of The Ilitirit:
Nookyooler, nookuhler, noooky-ler, nyookyooler, nyookuhler, nookle-er....
Have I missed any??? lol

Nookie oiler.



English evolves, and lots of our pronunciations make no sense.

Wouldn't dat be, DEvolves??

You wanna do linguistics? Ya' gotta loosen up.

Listen, I've done my time with the hard-core style prescriptions. I
edited with the American Medical Association Manual of Style. That's
enough prescription for anyone. Screw up, and you get a letter from a
lawyer.

I lost interest in linguistics years ago. But Noam Chomsky is always
an interesting read. So is J.R.R. Tolkien.




We are doomed..... ossumly doomed.... on so MANY levels!!!!
And now, I cain't even decay, deteriorate, die in peace.... I gotta
listen
to co-ed ****heads croaking like fukn Brittny 'til my ignominious end.....
jesus.....

I've been wondering if you have an old-time Yonkers accent. When I was
a kid and lived next door in Mr. Vernon, I attended a Catholic school
and we had some Yonkers kids. Their pronunciations stood out like a
sore thumb.

Hard to say.... born/bred Manhattanite, until Manhattan expelled me.
Mostly I just chant various incarnations of "fukn mutha****a's" around the
house/shop....
hard to peg dat regionally.... lol

It's all in the prosody. If you do High Rising Terminal (Val gal), I'm
not speaking to you.

--
Ed Huntress

On 6/30/2013 9:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.



Tell me how to value a machine, legally, for depreciation, a machine
that I have say 5k$ in parts and material and about 320 hours in? What
difference? I'm not dodging taxes at all, unless you say that I turned
a 5k$ pile of materials into 100k$.

What advantages of costing VS. depreciating? Me accountant said I can
only value a machine at what I paid for it, which isn't **** compared to
the value. But, I can't just assign a value and screw around with
taxes. If I *sell* it, that would assign a value, I imagine.

It sure would make the value of the business look good to a bank if I
could assign values! I did have the OEM of some of my brush machines
formally estimate the resale value of these used machines on the current
market in the industry for bank purposes but they are over 20 years old
and fully depreciated. I was AMAZED at those numbers, but I don't have
to pay PPT on them at that level, as I'm assured by my lawyer.

Ed, I've NEVER done anything even remotely clever yet alone shady or
Heaven forbid, illegal.

On 6/30/2013 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL


OMG! Please don't compare my with him in ANY way. There is something
WRONG with him that is FAR beyond whatever you think of me. I mean
REALLY, REALLY wrong with him...he is truly evil, by my definition and
I'm fairly tolerant.

On 6/30/2013 12:38 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs. You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!


Make sure it's sharp. And red hot, for the hotshot.


OUCH!

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 6/30/2013 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL


OMG! Please don't compare my with him in ANY way. There is something
WRONG with him that is FAR beyond whatever you think of me. I mean
REALLY, REALLY wrong with him...he is truly evil, by my definition and I'm
fairly tolerant.


Are you referring to His Asshole of Smugness Kidding, -- the King of 75 year
ROIs -- or to Ed??
Kidding: Yae,. of course.
Ed: Nay.... of course.
--
EA

On Mon, 01 Jul 2013 18:50:18 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/30/2013 9:52 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.



Tell me how to value a machine, legally, for depreciation, a machine
that I have say 5k$ in parts and material and about 320 hours in?

There are several ways to do it. Your accountant took the path that
saves you the most tax money.

For another purpose -- insurance, for example -- he would value it at
what it would cost you to have it replaced, or what it cost you to
make it. In fact, that's what you did -- with your $5k in parts and,
what, $6k or $7k in labor?

But what you did is exactly what any good accountant would tell you to
do -- expense the labor as if it was going to production, and expense
the parts as if they were replacements or repair parts. There's
nothing illegal about that, depending on what the law is these days
for that kind of tax accounting, and I doubt if it's changed much over
the years.

But now you have an asset with which you're making money, and for
which you paid both in materials and labor, and you're effectively
depreciated it all out at once. So you got a bigger than normal tax
break (which you can carry forward as a distributed expense, if that
happens to be better for you tax-wise, but it almost never is) and
it's an asset that continues to make you money. The tax advantage for
you came from expensing it all up front.

That got you an initial break that probably wouldn't be recovered by
normal depreciation, because the chances are the one-shot gave you a
one-time tax-bracket advantage, as well. Not necessarily, but
statistically, that's the way it works out. But that's not the primary
tax break you got, anyway.

The primary break was in NOT paying out that cash for taxes in the
first year. The future value (FV) of that cash is greater than the net
FV of the positive cash flows from the distributed savings you'd get
over, say, five years if you depeciated the real value over that
period of time. That's why you expense rather than depreciate, when
you can.

Your accountant did the right thing for you, as he should. And there's
nothing illegal about it. But the difference between that FV and the
net taxes you would have paid (run through a basic cash-flow analysis)
is the taxes you DIDN'T pay -- but the rest of us did, to make up for
what you didn't pay.

The amounts we're talking about are small. So are the amounts that
Kidding is not paying for motor fuel taxes, which is what you were
bitching about. But you're both getting a tax break, for reasons that
are right in line with many items in the tax code. Yours is to
encourage small business. His is to encourage reducing usage of
petroleum fuels. They're both legitimate goals.

What
difference? I'm not dodging taxes at all, unless you say that I turned
a 5k$ pile of materials into 100k$.

See above.


What advantages of costing VS. depreciating? Me accountant said I can
only value a machine at what I paid for it, which isn't **** compared to
the value. But, I can't just assign a value and screw around with
taxes. If I *sell* it, that would assign a value, I imagine.

That would assign a value, which would be a capital gain. But in most
such cases, businesses hold onto custom machinery until it has no
value except as scrap.


It sure would make the value of the business look good to a bank if I
could assign values!

How does your bank assign the value to your business? How does it
account for your productive assets?

Have you ever sold a business? My family sold two of them while I was
growing up. Valuing assets is always difficult, but you SURELY would
find a way to value your machinery. The most basic way is to calculate
the volume of sales you're getting from that machine, calculate your
ROI on your total productive assets, and then back into a value for
your custom machine based on your average ROI.

(That may not matter to a bank, because they may just value your
business as some multiple of your net profit. In retail, for example,
the physical assets may be small, and most of your assets are
designated "goodwill.")

I did have the OEM of some of my brush machines
formally estimate the resale value of these used machines on the current
market in the industry for bank purposes but they are over 20 years old
and fully depreciated. I was AMAZED at those numbers, but I don't have
to pay PPT on them at that level, as I'm assured by my lawyer.

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


Ed, I've NEVER done anything even remotely clever yet alone shady or
Heaven forbid, illegal.

I wouldn't suggest that you did, Tom. The point is, you were
complaining about the small tax break EV owners get. You're probably
getting a bigger one yourself. There's nothing shady about that. Your
accountant is taking advantage of provisions in the tax code that are
put there to support and promote small business.

Likewise, Kidding is taking advantage of tax breaks -- and it's a lot
more than motor-fuel tax -- that are put there to support and promote
use of non-petroleum-based fuels. In both cases, we have a small bit
of social engineering via tax codes.

As we should. The idea that we shouldn't do that with tax codes is so
stupid it isn't worth arguing. There are things we do with taxes to
promote business, and home ownership, and innovations, and many other
things, and they've worked out really well for our economy, the
biggest in the world, over the past century.

--
Ed Huntress

On 7/1/2013 7:20 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 6/30/2013 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL


OMG! Please don't compare my with him in ANY way. There is something
WRONG with him that is FAR beyond whatever you think of me. I mean
REALLY, REALLY wrong with him...he is truly evil, by my definition and I'm
fairly tolerant.


Are you referring to His Asshole of Smugness Kidding, -- the King of 75 year
ROIs -- or to Ed??
Kidding: Yae,. of course.
Ed: Nay.... of course.


Kidding is an A-hole! Ed's OK to poke and prod and he actually has a
bunch of knowledge...it's his opining that's one track. Don't get into
a tussle with Ed, his forearms are huge and his body strength is off the
scale! ...years of carrying all that water.

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 7/1/2013 7:20 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 6/30/2013 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL


OMG! Please don't compare my with him in ANY way. There is something
WRONG with him that is FAR beyond whatever you think of me. I mean
REALLY, REALLY wrong with him...he is truly evil, by my definition and
I'm
fairly tolerant.


Are you referring to His Asshole of Smugness Kidding, -- the King of 75
year
ROIs -- or to Ed??
Kidding: Yae,. of course.
Ed: Nay.... of course.


Kidding is an A-hole! Ed's OK to poke and prod and he actually has a
bunch of knowledge...it's his opining that's one track. Don't get into a
tussle with Ed, his forearms are huge and his body strength is off the
scale! ...years of carrying all that water.

How long has The Sphincter been posting? Always under "Kidding"?
What's his claim to fame? besides being a circle-jerking asshole?

And why doesn't anyone else step up to the plate, regarding this idiot's
lame arguments and incessant lambastings?
--
EA

On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 17:40:48 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:36:25 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Kidding has whatever he has cuz he played the system as dishonestly

LOL One of the reasons I have what I have is that I used my head to
get ahead instead of wasting my life typing up stupid **** like you
just did above. You can't defend that nonsense with anything except
more nonsense, and you can't stop. None of it will get you an inch
closer to owning an EV or anything else. You're dedicated to not
catching up, and your shallow rants will always reflect it far more
than you realize.

yawn

Except that you can't do numbers. And you cannot refute ANYTHING I say,
except with strawman epithets and contrivances.
That's why you're so smug -- with a 75 year ROI. Oblivion is bliss.
Let us know how the PVs turn out.

Why would I spend any time telling you about my PV installation
details? So that you can make up more **** like you've already spent
months doing? Do you seriously expect me to waste any more time than I
already do disputing the nonsense you write?

On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 02:37:57 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

You have some conflicting issues at work when it comes to valuing your
equipment and your business --tax issues; evaluating your business for
*your* sake -- deciding whether it's viable as a business in
comparative financial terms or if you're really just buying yourself a
job; insurance -- what it would cost to replace. And another is what
the banks think of your creditworthiness, both in terms of the
liquidation value of your physical assets and your prospects for
future success ("goodwill" value, value of patents, etc.).

That's normal. That's small business in general. And sorting them out
is one reason we have accountants -- or you do. I don't. g


They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

I have no idea why they were evaluated that high. Your accountant
should be able to explain it. I wonder if they were looking at
replacement cost or liquidation value. The former is going to be high.


Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

'Sounds like fun. I'm planning to die in harness.

--
Ed Huntress

On 7/2/2013 3:56 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 7/1/2013 7:20 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Tom Gardner" Mars@Tacks wrote in message
...
On 6/30/2013 9:45 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Tawwm is my kidding, my kidding is your tawwwm.
Now we can better empathize with each other.... LOL


OMG! Please don't compare my with him in ANY way. There is something
WRONG with him that is FAR beyond whatever you think of me. I mean
REALLY, REALLY wrong with him...he is truly evil, by my definition and
I'm
fairly tolerant.


Are you referring to His Asshole of Smugness Kidding, -- the King of 75
year
ROIs -- or to Ed??
Kidding: Yae,. of course.
Ed: Nay.... of course.


Kidding is an A-hole! Ed's OK to poke and prod and he actually has a
bunch of knowledge...it's his opining that's one track. Don't get into a
tussle with Ed, his forearms are huge and his body strength is off the
scale! ...years of carrying all that water.

How long has The Sphincter been posting? Always under "Kidding"?
What's his claim to fame? besides being a circle-jerking asshole?

And why doesn't anyone else step up to the plate, regarding this idiot's
lame arguments and incessant lambastings?



Everybody plonked him long ago.

On 7/2/2013 10:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 02:37:57 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

You have some conflicting issues at work when it comes to valuing your
equipment and your business --tax issues; evaluating your business for
*your* sake -- deciding whether it's viable as a business in
comparative financial terms or if you're really just buying yourself a
job; insurance -- what it would cost to replace. And another is what
the banks think of your creditworthiness, both in terms of the
liquidation value of your physical assets and your prospects for
future success ("goodwill" value, value of patents, etc.).

That's normal. That's small business in general. And sorting them out
is one reason we have accountants -- or you do. I don't. g


They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

I have no idea why they were evaluated that high. Your accountant
should be able to explain it. I wonder if they were looking at
replacement cost or liquidation value. The former is going to be high.


Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

'Sounds like fun. I'm planning to die in harness.



Skydiving?

On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 01:04:41 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/2/2013 10:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 02:37:57 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

You have some conflicting issues at work when it comes to valuing your
equipment and your business --tax issues; evaluating your business for
*your* sake -- deciding whether it's viable as a business in
comparative financial terms or if you're really just buying yourself a
job; insurance -- what it would cost to replace. And another is what
the banks think of your creditworthiness, both in terms of the
liquidation value of your physical assets and your prospects for
future success ("goodwill" value, value of patents, etc.).

That's normal. That's small business in general. And sorting them out
is one reason we have accountants -- or you do. I don't. g


They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

I have no idea why they were evaluated that high. Your accountant
should be able to explain it. I wonder if they were looking at
replacement cost or liquidation value. The former is going to be high.


Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

'Sounds like fun. I'm planning to die in harness.



Skydiving?

No. Wingwalking. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 7/2/2013 10:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 02:37:57 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

You have some conflicting issues at work when it comes to valuing your
equipment and your business --tax issues; evaluating your business for
*your* sake -- deciding whether it's viable as a business in
comparative financial terms or if you're really just buying yourself a
job; insurance -- what it would cost to replace. And another is what
the banks think of your creditworthiness, both in terms of the
liquidation value of your physical assets and your prospects for
future success ("goodwill" value, value of patents, etc.).

That's normal. That's small business in general. And sorting them out
is one reason we have accountants -- or you do. I don't. g


They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

I have no idea why they were evaluated that high. Your accountant
should be able to explain it. I wonder if they were looking at
replacement cost or liquidation value. The former is going to be high.


Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

'Sounds like fun. I'm planning to die in harness.


Skydiving?


Dragging a plow, with another ass...

Diagnosis - Insufficient Outrage On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 17:08:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" wrote:


Tom Gardner wrote:

On 7/2/2013 10:48 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jul 2013 02:37:57 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 7/1/2013 9:40 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Amazed that they were high, or low? Usually, when you do it that way,
the value is little better than scrap value. Otherwise, you should be
in the machinery-building business.

The bank wants to know the minimum it could get by liquidating your
business.


I don't fully understand the tax implications but I will ask the
accountant to explain it slowly in smaller words.

You have some conflicting issues at work when it comes to valuing your
equipment and your business --tax issues; evaluating your business for
*your* sake -- deciding whether it's viable as a business in
comparative financial terms or if you're really just buying yourself a
job; insurance -- what it would cost to replace. And another is what
the banks think of your creditworthiness, both in terms of the
liquidation value of your physical assets and your prospects for
future success ("goodwill" value, value of patents, etc.).

That's normal. That's small business in general. And sorting them out
is one reason we have accountants -- or you do. I don't. g


They valued those OEM machines at more than 5 times what I did and some
at 25x. They valued 3 of my/their machines that were heavily modified
at 75k each and I has less than 3k in each and I estimated value at 10k
each. They make products faster and better than any other in the world.
(very small niche) I needed value to show the bank and my newest
non-shopbuilt machine was bought in 1965, thus the OEM estimate. When
people ask me how old is a machine, I say "Which part?" The OEM still
makes the exact base machines I have. Sometimes they call me to ask how
I solved some problem or another, not really surprising, I've probably
been working on them since before the OEM engineers were born.

I have no idea why they were evaluated that high. Your accountant
should be able to explain it. I wonder if they were looking at
replacement cost or liquidation value. The former is going to be high.


Might not be doing this much longer, we're negotiating with a company in
Taiwan. I'm not getting younger and have no kids. I'm thinking golf,
Walleye and shooting sports.

'Sounds like fun. I'm planning to die in harness.


Skydiving?


Dragging a plow, with another ass...

We're going to do the world a favor and plow you under before you
stink the place up, Drool Cup.

--
Ed Huntress