Burning Man: The Musical
Today is the official start of Burning Man. If you’re not on the Playa and without Internet access, enjoy Burning Man: The Musical.
Full post, including commentsA posting every day; an interesting idea every three months…
Today is the official start of Burning Man. If you’re not on the Playa and without Internet access, enjoy Burning Man: The Musical.
Full post, including commentsA recent newsletter from the bank notes that the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 effectively saddles people with an income over $258,000 with higher tax rates. The higher effective rates come from the fact that these individuals can’t deduct the full amount of mortgage interest, state tax payments, charitable contributions, etc (for a person with a high enough income, only 20 percent of the amounts spent can be deducted, thus resulting in a tax reduction of only about 10 percent of the amount spent/donated).
Readers: What are some other examples of federal laws whose names suggest the opposite of what the law does?
Related:
Full post, including commentsIf you’re a fan of “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” (2005; Ioannidis), you’ll be interested to know that Professor Ioannidis’s work has in fact been reproduced. See “Many Psychology Findings Not as Strong as Claimed, Study Says” (nytimes) and “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science” (the paper; full text available).
One of my MIT graduate school classmates commented on this article: “When there were only a couple of climate scientists, they were probably reasonably good. Now that it is a popular discipline, they are approaching in quality the average of the population… And that is without taking fads and funding pressure into account.”
Full post, including commentsOur Legislature is once again taking up the idea of taxing new aircraft (Avweb), which drives the small airplane folks over the border into New Hampshire and the big airplane folks to Advocate Tax for a “solution” (starts with the aircraft owned by an LLC somewhere other than Massachusetts, presumably).
[Plainly nobody is going to pay $6.25 million in sales tax on a $100 million Gulfstream if the plane, pilots, and mechanics can be based in New Hampshire and the plane can swoop in, pick up the rich people, and fly out (has the effect of doubling aircraft noise for neighbors since there are two operations instead of one).]
I had wondered why PlaneSense, whose owner lives in Massachusetts, hadn’t moved down from New Hampshire (huge base that generates lots of jobs) when Massachusetts went tax-free for aircraft. Presumably the owner figured out that the Legislature wouldn’t be able to resist reinstating the tax. Smart guy!
Bernie Sanders would be proud, presumably…
Full post, including commentsOne of my wealthiest friends on Facebook has, over the past few weeks, posted more than 50 items about Bernie Sanders and/or her passion for Bernie Sanders. A recent example was a photo of a Bernie Sanders bumper sticker affixed to her shiny new BMW (BMW badge also in photo). She’s a stay-at-home wife to a partner at a law firm with annual profits per partner of roughly $3.5 million (i.e., her husband very likely earns in that neighborhood). As far as I know she spends almost all of her husband’s income. They live in one of the most expensive neighborhoods in the United States and recently expanded their already sizable house despite the fact that their children have departed for (expensive private) colleges. With Sanders promoting ideas such as a 90-percent federal tax rate on income over $1 million (with state tax that would be nearly 100 percent), her Facebook postings are tantamount to her saying “I want the government to cut my spending power roughly in half.” But she could already cut her spending power in half by donating the majority of her husband’s income to charity and this she does not do.
Readers: What’s going on here? I can understand why people with low incomes would support Sanders but why a rich person whose lifestyle he is supposedly targeting for reduction?
Full post, including commentsI attended a wedding this weekend in Massachusetts (a healthy percentage of the upper-income attendees had been defendants in custody, child support, and alimony lawsuits so people were a little less sentimental than in other states (Best Man: “[the groom] said that if I did a good job today that I could be best man at the next one.”)). As it happened I was seated next to a retired U.S. military officer who had been “inspector general” for eight years on a base with about 1200 members of the military.
What were his office’s responsibilities? “The majority of the work was handling complaints about discrimination or harassment,” he responded. “Mostly women complaining about sex discrimination but also some race discrimination complaints.” What percentage had merit? “About one percent,” he said. “If these people had put half of the effort that they put into pursuing complaints into working the base would have been about twice as productive.”
I thought of that conversation today while watching television in our local airport lounge. The man who murdered Alison Parker and Adam Ward in Roanoke, Virginia (Wikipedia) was a frequent flyer in the American grievance system, having sued one employer for race discrimination and threatened a second employer with an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint.
Related:
Nightmare for flight instructors: Nasa drop-tests a Cessna 172 from 100 feet: on YouTube. Maybe a good reminder to students to maintain airspeed and keep a touch of power in for normal approaches and landings…
(The goal was to test emergency locator transmitters (a selection) that are supposed to start transmitting in response to high G forces.)
Full post, including commentsA friend arrived in Manhattan with his three children just in time for the press to erupt with stories about topless women in Times Square (e.g., nytimes, Daily News). His response to the complaints that this kind of, um, exposure would be bad for children: “It is not even in the top 100 things in NY that can harm children.”
Full post, including comments“Petco Files IPO, Plans Return to Public Markets” is a Wall Street Journal story about Petco, which keeps going back and forth between private and public. The private equity guys last purchased the company from public shareholders in 2006 for $1.7 billion. Now they will sell it back to the public for $4 billion. So a starting theory could be that they collected $2.3 billion from the public shareholders. “8 Takeaways from Petco’s IPO Filing” is a follow-up WSJ piece noting that “Since TPG and Leonard Green took Petco private, they’ve received two dividends. The first one came in 2010, when Petco made a cash payment to its PE owners of roughly $700 million. Moody’s estimates this payment returned over 85% of the equity invested in the company by its owners. In 2012, the company made another dividend payment of roughly $589 million.” In other words, whatever the private equity guys put at risk has been completely paid back. The money that comes from this IPO and the value of their remaining holdings will be gravy.
Presumably it is successes like this that keep people excited about private equity.
Full post, including commentsHere’s an interesting use of video for education: a Burning Man airspace movie. It shows simulated airplanes arriving, departing, and in scenic traffic around the event.
[Non-pilots: I think this video still might be worth watching to see how three-dimensional information is presented.]
Readers: Have you seen similar videos? e.g., for Oshkosh?
Full post, including comments