Could anyone tell me what the average number of billable hours they spend preparing monthly or quarterly financial statements for small business clients?
also "write up" work has changed in the past few years, you used to spend a lot of time inputting client checks now it’s cleaning up the clients own data in quickbooks, peachtree, MTOB, simply accounting, etc.
I actually spend more time doing that than if I were to have done the data input myself. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia taxman at negia.net
also "write up" work has changed in the past few years, you used to spend a lot of time inputting client checks now it’s cleaning up the clients own data in quickbooks, peachtree, MYOB, simply accounting, etc. I actually spend more time doing that than if I were to have done the data input myself.
if you get fairly compensated for knowing how to properly use quickbooks, peachtree, etc. that’s better than data entry. I used to that plus bank deposits, loan amortization, etc. The clean up type work of producing real financial statements for a client should ultimately pay more than the old data entry predominate "write up" work.
The clean up type work of producing real financial statements for a client should ultimately pay more than the old data entry predominate "write up" work.
It does. Gets me out of the office to boot. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia taxman at negia.net
Could anyone tell me what the average number of billable hours they spend preparing monthly or quarterly financial statements for small business clients?
It’s going to vary a lot depending on what you do for the client, and how involved the client’s books really are. Some are as little as two hours a month, others take the better part of a day. Quarterly always take longer for two reasons, it’s three months worth of work, and the client can’t remember what happened back in January when you have a question that needs an answer. We are trying to get away from quarterly and annual financial statements because of the large lump of work at one time. Unless the client is very small, it’s monthly only. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA taxman at negia.net
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Could anyone tell me what the average number of billable hours they spend preparing monthly or quarterly financial statements for small business clients? It’s going to vary a lot depending on what you do for the client, and how involved the client’s books really are. Some are as little as two hours a month, others take the better part of a day. Quarterly always take longer for two reasons, it’s three months worth of work, and the client can’t remember what happened back in January when you have a question that needs an answer. We are trying to get away from quarterly and annual financial statements because of the large lump of work at one time. Unless the client is very small, it’s monthly only.
also "write up" work has changed in the past few years, you used to spend a lot of time inputting client checks now it’s cleaning up the clients own data in quickbooks, peachtree, MTOB, simply accounting, etc.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Duane Bozarth wrote (at this indent level): - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard? 
Duane, by coincidence I probably have the same enquiry. I too have come from another programming newsgroup (microsoft.public.dotnet.general) after discussing nonintegral datatypes and rounding issues. I am suprised by the length of this thread without a satisfactory reply. Surely an accounting standard does exist. What is the standard for when/where rounding is used (whether it’s banker’s rounding or another direction)? Perhaps an example will help the accountants, from whom we need help, see that it is not an esoteric programming problem: If we think about our savings accounts then occasionaly we get an interest payment. If we just use our pocket calculator we can do the mathematics like this 125.85 * ‘ Initial Balance 04.1% ’ Interest Rate ——- 5.15985 + ’ Interest Payment 125.85 131.00985 ‘ Final Balance Any further interest payment at the same rate will increase the number of decimal places. What, exactly is your entitlement? 131.00, 131.01, 131.00985, 131.0098 (banker’s round), 131.0099 (round toward positive infinity, or away from zero, it could be either)? If I were to guess at what standard could be, something that is fair, I’d say that currency amounts shall be stored to 4 decimal places, rounded according to "banker’s rounding" (which is toward the even number). So I’d choose, in this case, 131.0098 Let me continue the discussion with another example. If an interest payment yields an intermediate balance of 157.34865 this could get stored in your account as 157.3486. The 0.0086 is kept there for future rounding operations. However if you closed your account with 157.3486 in it you will be actually handed 157.35. If you closed your account on a day with 157.3428 in it, you will get back 157.34. My particular enquiry, therefore is, what is the accounting standard for the number of decimal places that a currency amount must be stored? cents only (2 places), 4 places, or as many places as the computer will store? Does this describe your problem Duane? Does this help Steve?
I know what you’re asking but your view of "standards" is not quite the same as accounting standards! In your example the auditor would be verifying the total of interest expense paid to depositors and that all customer accounts add up the total reported on the financial statements — ( the rounding issue may be a non-issue, the number of decimal points in the computer irrelevant) — if the customer gets the disclosed interest and all the accounts add up to the total. You’re looking at it from an individual viewpoint and what the definition of "annual percentage rate" and "interest paid", etc. that is covered in bank regulations (Fair Credit Act, etc. ) – "rounding" and how it’s disclosed to customers is probably in those regs, i am just not up on them!
Duane Bozarth wrote (at this indent level):
You might also be interested in a thread "Standard for financial applications specifying maximum number of decimal places?" in microsoft.public.dotnet.general. So far there is no different conclusions. It might be getting a little hotter there though. It appears to me that at least the group populating this ng simply doesn’t know of any controlling standards (not to denigrate anybody, it just appears to not be common knowledge). Since both of us have looked and not found anything like ANSI/ISO standards standards with which we are familiar, I presume there aren’t similar organizations dealing w/financial standards in such a fashion and that the standards as they exist, are in fact, embedded either in controlling legislation of the various (and multitudinous) jurisdictions, and which, owing to that very "multitudinous" are probably occasionally, at least, even in conflict one with another.
Yes. I was, and still do, expect possible replies like: 1. There is no standard practice. It varies between organisation or even within an organisation. Or 2. There is a standard that differs between each country or group of countries. The name of this standard, for example, in ….., is …… Here is the URL of this standard …. Following up on my above supposition, I now suspect the controlling "standards" are actually an amalgamation of 1 and 2…
Yes. There are multitudinous standards that differ from country/Region to country/Region. Futher, as steve points out, standards apply to specific areas of a financial industry rather than the industry as a whole. Eg Rounding standard for euro converstion, (the next are hypothetical) rounding standard for banking, rounding standard for banking. More, it seems, the everyday accountant doesn’t really have these standards particularly in mind when they do their work. But that can’t be right ?!? Correct–it covers only a specific conversion for a specific currency although one would assume that it is modelled after preceding policy/practice/standard for other currencies. The major limitation in my view for expanding its practice to more general application is the bias inherent in summations if this form of rounding is followed unilaterally. It’s fine for it’s application, namely individual conversion transactions where the effect of bias is, no the average, taken care of by there being an (approximately) equal number of transactions both ways.
Also when working with a computer you often come at the data in different ways, to produce different totals. Eg Total profit for Quater, Profit by Region, etc. When programming you want the numbers to come out against your crosscheck total no matter how you come at the data. From that point of view always doing banker’s rounding is going to eliminate bias over a number of transactions. The number of decimal places to which you store amounts is a related issue that can have a big impact on a total. Of course there are times when you may want to deliberately round off conservatively, or "asymetrically". For instance you may want your invoiced client to know that you round off in their favour to the nearest dollar. 123.78 to 123.00 I look at it from the point of view of an engineer who thinks any process can (and should) be controlled… I’m fairly sure that <somewhere in the bowels of various codes of regulations from which derive other reams of documents of interpretations/rules and on down where those are/were implemented by various organizations there are their interpretations and internal procedures/standards for dealing with such questions/issues, but that is so far removed from the every day accountant
Yes this seems to be a good description of the state of things. that it’s not too surprising many haven’t even thought of there being the possibility of there being a problem to be dealt with somehow.
But this does suprise me. In my naivety I have thought that an accountant is someone trained to monitor/administer closely the financial transactions of an organisation. In order to do that all, I would have thought, you have to have in mind the way things will be done, specifically. In accounting 101 I would have thought: " to how many decimal places do we store financial amounts?" and "how will we round a number?" would have to be one of the first answers you need before moving on with any other issue.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – …snip preceding discussions… I know what you’re asking but your view of "standards" is not quite the same as accounting standards! I am niave with respect to accounting. I have no clear idea of the subject boundaries/ role limits of accountancy. I don’t appreciate, for example, what an auditor is to an accountant. (A specialised type of accountant, I presume, someone who checks the work of other accountants). However, when I speak of standards I mean, as a minimum a way of doing things that is commonly understood within the group (here accountants). I am however, intending "standards" to mean a little more. That this commonly understood way of doing things is formalized at some level, whether it is at a organisation, national, or industry (international) level.
It appears to me that at least the group populating this ng simply doesn’t know of any controlling standards (not to denigrate anybody, it just appears to not be common knowledge). Since both of us have looked and not found anything like ANSI/ISO standards standards with which we are familiar, I presume there aren’t similar organizations dealing w/financial standards in such a fashion and that the standards as they exist, are in fact, embedded either in controlling legislation of the various (and multitudinous) jurisdictions, and which, owing to that very "multitudinous" are probably occasionally, at least, even in conflict one with another. I was, and still do, expect possible replies like: 1. There is no standard practice. It varies between organisation or even within an organisation. Or 2. There is a standard that differs between each country or group of countries. The name of this standard, for example, in ….., is …… Here is the URL of this standard ….
Following up on my above supposition, I now suspect the controlling "standards" are actually an amalgamation of 1 and 2… For example I have found a standard for rounding after conversion between currencies in the European Community. The Name of this standard I’m calling (as I continue my search for the Authorative title) the "EC Legislation on the Euro".
….snip longish quote… Yes, I had also found that or several similar documents–it appears that because the introduction of the euro is recent that most of these documents are on the web and much of the preceding legislation isn’t (or at least, is so obscure that search engines aren’t successful in finding pertinent links to it)… This content quite match what I, or I assume Duane, are after. It, this standard, narrowly speaks of conversion operations. For the EC I’d like to know if there is a more general standard. One that might apply even when no conversion have taken place.
Correct–it covers only a specific conversion for a specific currency although one would assume that it is modelled after preceding policy/practice/standard for other currencies. The major limitation in my view for expanding its practice to more general application is the bias inherent in summations if this form of rounding is followed unilaterally. It’s fine for it’s application, namely individual conversion transactions where the effect of bias is, no the average, taken care of by there being an (approximately) equal number of transactions both ways. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – However, the form of the reply matches with what I was hoping for. And so the part of your reply… that is covered in bank regulations (Fair Credit Act, etc. ) – "rounding" and how it’s disclosed to customers is probably in those regs, i am just not up on them! … Is, as a beginning, a match with this form. The Fair Credit Act (But for which country?) sounds like it might be such a standard. And if you are not up on that standard, then that’s fine. In your example the auditor would be verifying the total of interest expense paid to depositors and that all customer accounts add up the total reported on the financial statements — ( the rounding issue may be a non-issue, the number of decimal points in the computer irrelevant) — if the customer gets the disclosed interest and all the accounts add up to the total. In my example which total would the auditor check the calculation against? 131.00, 131.01, …? I can only see a limited number of replies here (please do show me if some ignorance causes this limitation): A. The total she would choose is x. B. The total doesn’t need to be verified to cent amounts (assume our currency in dollars and cents). The application of each case would either be the application of a standard OR the entire task of auditing is a fraud. It would be a fraud because the task of deciding whether an organisations books are in order is arbitrary. The application of either case COULD be standardized. In which case the reason a non fraudulent auditor would choose one case over the other is because they referencing a standard. You’re looking at it from an individual viewpoint and what the definition of "annual percentage rate" and "interest paid", etc Not clear what you mean by this. I am looking at it from the point of view of an individual, who might have a bank account for example, and from the point of view of a group, namely the group of accountants.
I look at it from the point of view of an engineer who thinks any process can (and should) be controlled… I’m fairly sure that <somewhere in the bowels of various codes of regulations from which derive other reams of documents of interpretations/rules and on down where those are/were implemented by various organizations there are their interpretations and internal procedures/standards for dealing with such questions/issues, but that is so far removed from the every day accountant that it’s not too surprising many haven’t even thought of there being the possibility of there being a problem to be dealt with somehow.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Steve wrote (at this indent level): Duane Bozarth wrote (at this indent level): - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard? If we think about our savings accounts then occasionaly we get an interest payment. If we just use our pocket calculator we can do the mathematics like this 125.85 * ‘ Initial Balance 04.1% ’ Interest Rate ——- 5.15985 + ’ Interest Payment 125.85 131.00985 ‘ Final Balance Any further interest payment at the same rate will increase the number of decimal places. What, exactly is your entitlement? 131.00, 131.01, 131.00985, 131.0098 (banker’s round), 131.0099 (round toward positive infinity, or away from zero, it could be either)? My particular enquiry, therefore is, what is the accounting standard for the number of decimal places that a currency amount must be stored? cents only (2 places), 4 places, or as many places as the computer will store? I know what you’re asking but your view of "standards" is not quite the same as accounting standards! I am niave with respect to accounting. I have no clear idea of the subject boundaries/ role limits of accountancy. I don’t appreciate, for example, what an auditor is to an accountant. (A specialised type of accountant, I presume, someone who checks the work of other accountants). However, when I speak of standards I mean, as a minimum a way of doing things that is commonly understood within the group (here accountants). I am however, intending "standards" to mean a little more. That this commonly understood way of doing things is formalized at some level, whether it is at a organisation, national, or industry (international) level. I was, and still do, expect possible replies like: 1. There is no standard practice. It varies between organisation or even within an organisation. Or 2. There is a standard that differs between each country or group of countries. The name of this standard, for example, in ….., is …… Here is the URL of this standard …. For example I have found a standard for rounding after conversion between currencies in the European Community. The Name of this standard I’m calling (as I continue my search for the Authorative title) the "EC Legislation on the Euro". The part of the standard dealing with rounding and decimal places after converting between currencies in contained in: "D1 – Council Regulation (EC) No 1103/97 of 17 June 1997 on certain provisions relating to the introduction of the euro" At:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/euro/essentials/reference_t… mpen dium/pdf/en_087_090_en.pdf Listed with other legislation at
http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/euro/essentials/reference_t… mpen – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – dium/index_en.html In this legislation we have: "Article 5 Monetary amounts to be paid or accounted for when a rounding takes place after a conversion into the euro unit pursuant to Article 4 shall be rounded up or down to the nearest cent. Monetary amounts to be paid or accounted for which are converted into a national currency unit shall be rounded up or down to the nearest sub-unit or in the absence of a sub-unit to the nearest unit, or according to national law or practice to a multiple or fraction of the sub-unit or unit of the national currency unit. If the application of the conversion rate gives a result which is exactly half-way, the sum shall be rounded up." This content quite match what I, or I assume Duane, are after. It, this standard, narrowly speaks of conversion operations. For the EC I’d like to know if there is a more general standard. One that might apply even when no conversion have taken place. However, the form of the reply matches with what I was hoping for. And so the part of your reply… that is covered in bank regulations (Fair Credit Act, etc. ) – "rounding" and how it’s disclosed to customers is probably in those regs, i am just not up on them! … Is, as a beginning, a match with this form. The Fair Credit Act (But for which country?) sounds like it might be such a standard. And if you are not up on that standard, then that’s fine. In your example the auditor would be verifying the total of interest expense paid to depositors and that all customer accounts add up the total reported on the financial statements — ( the rounding issue may be a non-issue, the number of decimal points in the computer irrelevant) — if the customer gets the disclosed interest and all the accounts add up to the total. In my example which total would the auditor check the calculation against? 131.00, 131.01, …? I can only see a limited number of replies here (please do show me if some ignorance causes this limitation): A. The total she would choose is x. B. The total doesn’t need to be verified to cent amounts (assume our currency in dollars and cents). The application of each case would either be the application of a standard OR the entire task of auditing is a fraud. It would be a fraud because the task of deciding whether an organisations books are in order is arbitrary. The application of either case COULD be standardized. In which case the reason a non fraudulent auditor would choose one case over the other is because they referencing a standard. You’re looking at it from an individual viewpoint and what the definition of "annual percentage rate" and "interest paid", etc Not clear what you mean by this. I am looking at it from the point of view of an individual, who might have a bank account for example, and from the point of view of a group, namely the group of accountants.
all I can say is that the standards you seek concerning rounding are, like the "euro" example, are defined by the specific application, e.g. in banking it is in a series of regulations (in US) called "Fair Credit Reporting Act" (and other regs) in reporting interest. I think in your example the bank auditor would make sure the software rounds to 131.01 for the customer (because i believe gov’t regs specify this for interest) and the totals add to the financial statments and that the customer received the amount rounded "up" (not the "bankers" method!) but there are also materialty standards in auditing the financial statements as a whole.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Steve wrote (at this indent level): Duane Bozarth wrote (at this indent level): - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard? If we think about our savings accounts then occasionaly we get an interest payment. If we just use our pocket calculator we can do the mathematics like this 125.85 * ‘ Initial Balance 04.1% ’ Interest Rate ——- 5.15985 + ’ Interest Payment 125.85 131.00985 ‘ Final Balance Any further interest payment at the same rate will increase the number of decimal places. What, exactly is your entitlement? 131.00, 131.01, 131.00985, 131.0098 (banker’s round), 131.0099 (round toward positive infinity, or away from zero, it could be either)? My particular enquiry, therefore is, what is the accounting standard for the number of decimal places that a currency amount must be stored? cents only (2 places), 4 places, or as many places as the computer will store? I know what you’re asking but your view of "standards" is not quite the same as accounting standards!
I am niave with respect to accounting. I have no clear idea of the subject boundaries/ role limits of accountancy. I don’t appreciate, for example, what an auditor is to an accountant. (A specialised type of accountant, I presume, someone who checks the work of other accountants). However, when I speak of standards I mean, as a minimum a way of doing things that is commonly understood within the group (here accountants). I am however, intending "standards" to mean a little more. That this commonly understood way of doing things is formalized at some level, whether it is at a organisation, national, or industry (international) level. I was, and still do, expect possible replies like: 1. There is no standard practice. It varies between organisation or even within an organisation. Or 2. There is a standard that differs between each country or group of countries. The name of this standard, for example, in ….., is …… Here is the URL of this standard …. For example I have found a standard for rounding after conversion between currencies in the European Community. The Name of this standard I’m calling (as I continue my search for the Authorative title) the "EC Legislation on the Euro". The part of the standard dealing with rounding and decimal places after converting between currencies in contained in: "D1 – Council Regulation (EC) No 1103/97 of 17 June 1997 on certain provisions relating to the introduction of the euro" At: http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/euro/essentials/reference_t… dium/pdf/en_087_090_en.pdf Listed with other legislation at http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/euro/essentials/reference_t… dium/index_en.html In this legislation we have: "Article 5 Monetary amounts to be paid or accounted for when a rounding takes place after a conversion into the euro unit pursuant to Article 4 shall be rounded up or down to the nearest cent. Monetary amounts to be paid or accounted for which are converted into a national currency unit shall be rounded up or down to the nearest sub-unit or in the absence of a sub-unit to the nearest unit, or according to national law or practice to a multiple or fraction of the sub-unit or unit of the national currency unit. If the application of the conversion rate gives a result which is exactly half-way, the sum shall be rounded up." This content quite match what I, or I assume Duane, are after. It, this standard, narrowly speaks of conversion operations. For the EC I’d like to know if there is a more general standard. One that might apply even when no conversion have taken place. However, the form of the reply matches with what I was hoping for. And so the part of your reply… that is covered in bank regulations (Fair Credit Act, etc. ) – "rounding" and how it’s disclosed to customers is probably in those regs, i am just not up on them!
… Is, as a beginning, a match with this form. The Fair Credit Act (But for which country?) sounds like it might be such a standard. And if you are not up on that standard, then that’s fine. In your example the auditor would be verifying the total of interest expense paid to depositors and that all customer accounts add up the total reported on the financial statements — ( the rounding issue may be a non-issue, the number of decimal points in the computer irrelevant) — if the customer gets the disclosed interest and all the accounts add up to the total.
In my example which total would the auditor check the calculation against? 131.00, 131.01, …? I can only see a limited number of replies here (please do show me if some ignorance causes this limitation): A. The total she would choose is x. B. The total doesn’t need to be verified to cent amounts (assume our currency in dollars and cents). The application of each case would either be the application of a standard OR the entire task of auditing is a fraud. It would be a fraud because the task of deciding whether an organisations books are in order is arbitrary. The application of either case COULD be standardized. In which case the reason a non fraudulent auditor would choose one case over the other is because they referencing a standard. You’re looking at it from an individual viewpoint and what the definition of "annual percentage rate" and "interest paid", etc
Not clear what you mean by this. I am looking at it from the point of view of an individual, who might have a bank account for example, and from the point of view of a group, namely the group of accountants.
Duane Bozarth wrote (at this indent level): - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard?
Duane, by coincidence I probably have the same enquiry. I too have come from another programming newsgroup (microsoft.public.dotnet.general) after discussing nonintegral datatypes and rounding issues. I am suprised by the length of this thread without a satisfactory reply. Surely an accounting standard does exist. What is the standard for when/where rounding is used (whether it’s banker’s rounding or another direction)? Perhaps an example will help the accountants, from whom we need help, see that it is not an esoteric programming problem: If we think about our savings accounts then occasionaly we get an interest payment. If we just use our pocket calculator we can do the mathematics like this 125.85 * ‘ Initial Balance 04.1% ’ Interest Rate ——- 5.15985 + ’ Interest Payment 125.85 131.00985 ‘ Final Balance Any further interest payment at the same rate will increase the number of decimal places. What, exactly is your entitlement? 131.00, 131.01, 131.00985, 131.0098 (banker’s round), 131.0099 (round toward positive infinity, or away from zero, it could be either)? If I were to guess at what standard could be, something that is fair, I’d say that currency amounts shall be stored to 4 decimal places, rounded according to "banker’s rounding" (which is toward the even number). So I’d choose, in this case, 131.0098 Let me continue the discussion with another example. If an interest payment yields an intermediate balance of 157.34865 this could get stored in your account as 157.3486. The 0.0086 is kept there for future rounding operations. However if you closed your account with 157.3486 in it you will be actually handed 157.35. If you closed your account on a day with 157.3428 in it, you will get back 157.34. My particular enquiry, therefore is, what is the accounting standard for the number of decimal places that a currency amount must be stored? cents only (2 places), 4 places, or as many places as the computer will store? Does this describe your problem Duane? Does this help Steve?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – …snip… - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard? …Some of this is described in literature from technology internal auditors http://www.theiia.org/itaudit/ , some of it in industry guidelines from financial standards http://www.fasb.org but none of it may apply to your "rounding" question! I’ll probably dig a little more, but it appears I’m coming up dry and it was only a personal curiousity anyway, not a requirement. After all, I’m an engineer, anyway…all I have to do is make sure the reactor doesn’t do something it shouldn’t…
there are plenty of "audit" standards, some say too many! they (standards / rules) probably extend down to your rounding question but you really need to ask a technical "programmer" type audit person. Software such as banking software come with a certification from a third party and the "source code" is literally locked in a vault!
…snip… - warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results.
How can they "verify the results" if there is no standard? …Some of this is described in literature from technology internal auditors http://www.theiia.org/itaudit/ , some of it in industry guidelines from financial standards http://www.fasb.org but none of it may apply to your "rounding" question!
I’ll probably dig a little more, but it appears I’m coming up dry and it was only a personal curiousity anyway, not a requirement. After all, I’m an engineer, anyway…all I have to do is make sure the reactor doesn’t do something it shouldn’t…
Never came across that term in my business studies. Where did you encounter the term?
First by another name (Gauss) in engineering school, later heard it associated with "bankers’ rounding" but I could no longer begin to tell you where. As noted, the question was raised (yet again) in a Visual Basic programming newsgroup as "why does round(2.45,1) = 2.4 rather than 2.5?". This particular thread happened to go on longer than most and finally piqued my curiousity as to whether it is actually used and if there are any general standards/guidelines for how to round in the accounting/business/banking arenas. Also as noted, the search on Google raised a very high percentage of hits associated with the implementation in various programming languages (BASIC, Delphi and Pascal the most prevalent) and very few directly associated with finance. So, I figured a ng dedicated to accounting practices should be a good place to find out. :) What I <seem to be learning is that there is no "standard practice" and that most aren’t aware of it….needless to say, that there isn’t a recognized practice surprises me somewhat (actually, greatly).
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Never came across that term in my business studies. Where did you encounter the term? First by another name (Gauss) in engineering school, later heard it associated with "bankers’ rounding" but I could no longer begin to tell you where. As noted, the question was raised (yet again) in a Visual Basic programming newsgroup as "why does round(2.45,1) = 2.4 rather than 2.5?". This particular thread happened to go on longer than most and finally piqued my curiousity as to whether it is actually used and if there are any general standards/guidelines for how to round in the accounting/business/banking arenas. Also as noted, the search on Google raised a very high percentage of hits associated with the implementation in various programming languages (BASIC, Delphi and Pascal the most prevalent) and very few directly associated with finance. So, I figured a ng dedicated to accounting practices should be a good place to find out. :) What I <seem to be learning is that there is no "standard practice" and that most aren’t aware of it….needless to say, that there isn’t a recognized practice surprises me somewhat (actually, greatly).
don’t be surprised, this isn’t a science! Most standards in industry come about because of regulations, long ago practice or it benefited someone financially. Math or physics is not really considered! I don’t know about rounding but banks have to disclose the calculation of how interest is compounded to customers so maybe there is a standard. - if you find out let us know !
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Never came across that term in my business studies. Where did you encounter the term? First by another name (Gauss) in engineering school, later heard it associated with "bankers’ rounding" but I could no longer begin to tell you where. As noted, the question was raised (yet again) in a Visual Basic programming newsgroup as "why does round(2.45,1) = 2.4 rather than 2.5?". This particular thread happened to go on longer than most and finally piqued my curiousity as to whether it is actually used and if there are any general standards/guidelines for how to round in the accounting/business/banking arenas. Also as noted, the search on Google raised a very high percentage of hits associated with the implementation in various programming languages (BASIC, Delphi and Pascal the most prevalent) and very few directly associated with finance. So, I figured a ng dedicated to accounting practices should be a good place to find out. :) What I <seem to be learning is that there is no "standard practice" and that most aren’t aware of it….needless to say, that there isn’t a recognized practice surprises me somewhat (actually, greatly). don’t be surprised, this isn’t a science! Most standards in industry come about because of regulations, long ago practice or it benefited someone financially. Math or physics is not really considered! I don’t know about rounding but banks have to disclose the calculation of how interest is compounded to customers so maybe there is a standard. - if you find out let us know ! Setting up a chart of accounts or similar actions may be/is an "art", but the mechanics of keeping those accounts or computing exchanges is math (specifically, arithmetic) which isn’t subjective. I entered this quest with the feeling that the rules by which operations where there was/is room for choosing an alternate mechanism would be codified or at least there would have evolved a set of "best practices". I had the idea that the "accounting profession" (for lack of knowledge of a better term) had the development/disbursment of such codification/standardization as a general tenet. I’d love to find any standards or, what I expected to find, a set of quidelines promulgated by either the accounting industry itself or in conjunction with government regulation. Is there any accounting profession trade group/association that would be such a place where such would arise? I’m sure there must be professional organizations for individuals–would any of them be appropriate sources for such information? This has now made me curious over a larger question–I understand there are all sorts of additional rules and regulations by the SEC, etc., over business reporting, etc, in the wake of recent corporate fiascoes. Who has/does dealt/deals with the more routine details of "how" accounts are kept? Would there somewhere be sets of regulations that possibly spell out such things or is it really an individual firm basis or now relegated to "however IT does it in their software" since everything has become automated these days? And if so, who specifies/verifies the rules for the coders? ’Cause that brings me back around to the source of the original question–the implementation of a rounding function in a programming language.
- warning – you are now getting into the area of auditing! The accounting /auditing profession doesn’t set the "rules for the coders" but they do verifiy the results. Some of this is described in literature from technology internal auditors http://www.theiia.org/itaudit/ , some of it in industry guidelines from financial standards http://www.fasb.org but none of it may apply to your "rounding" question!
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Never came across that term in my business studies. Where did you encounter the term? First by another name (Gauss) in engineering school, later heard it associated with "bankers’ rounding" but I could no longer begin to tell you where. As noted, the question was raised (yet again) in a Visual Basic programming newsgroup as "why does round(2.45,1) = 2.4 rather than 2.5?". This particular thread happened to go on longer than most and finally piqued my curiousity as to whether it is actually used and if there are any general standards/guidelines for how to round in the accounting/business/banking arenas. Also as noted, the search on Google raised a very high percentage of hits associated with the implementation in various programming languages (BASIC, Delphi and Pascal the most prevalent) and very few directly associated with finance. So, I figured a ng dedicated to accounting practices should be a good place to find out. :) What I <seem to be learning is that there is no "standard practice" and that most aren’t aware of it….needless to say, that there isn’t a recognized practice surprises me somewhat (actually, greatly). don’t be surprised, this isn’t a science! Most standards in industry come about because of regulations, long ago practice or it benefited someone financially. Math or physics is not really considered! I don’t know about rounding but banks have to disclose the calculation of how interest is compounded to customers so maybe there is a standard. - if you find out let us know !
Setting up a chart of accounts or similar actions may be/is an "art", but the mechanics of keeping those accounts or computing exchanges is math (specifically, arithmetic) which isn’t subjective. I entered this quest with the feeling that the rules by which operations where there was/is room for choosing an alternate mechanism would be codified or at least there would have evolved a set of "best practices". I had the idea that the "accounting profession" (for lack of knowledge of a better term) had the development/disbursment of such codification/standardization as a general tenet. I’d love to find any standards or, what I expected to find, a set of quidelines promulgated by either the accounting industry itself or in conjunction with government regulation. Is there any accounting profession trade group/association that would be such a place where such would arise? I’m sure there must be professional organizations for individuals–would any of them be appropriate sources for such information? This has now made me curious over a larger question–I understand there are all sorts of additional rules and regulations by the SEC, etc., over business reporting, etc, in the wake of recent corporate fiascoes. Who has/does dealt/deals with the more routine details of "how" accounts are kept? Would there somewhere be sets of regulations that possibly spell out such things or is it really an individual firm basis or now relegated to "however IT does it in their software" since everything has become automated these days? And if so, who specifies/verifies the rules for the coders? ’Cause that brings me back around to the source of the original question–the implementation of a rounding function in a programming language.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been involved in a discussion in a programming newsgroup wrt to its intrinsic function round() which uses bankers’ rounding. My question: is there a standard for accounting/banking/etc., that defines which/where rounding is used? (I’m not asking about <how the rounding works mathematically, or why it’s been defined–I understand that–I’m asking whether there’s an agreed upon set of conditions/places/rules for using particular rounding rules–and if so, does someone have a link? Googling on "bankers rounding" produces virtually all references to computer code implementations or definitions of what it is, <not where/whether it is used.) you might have to ask a programmer or data processing person in the "information system" dept. of a bank, I’ve worked in bank operations and finance but never heard of the term. Surely an accountant would know the rules by which large sums are rounded or there would be some standard to follow? Surely somewhere in the rules promulgated the issue is addressed? If I <knew anyone fitting those descriptions, I would…
actually, general ledgers are not rounded, they are "in cents" — but automated subsidiary ledgers are sometimes rounded like a calculator 4/5) - I don’t believe there is a banking or accounting association that has a rounding rule but i could be wrong. There are lots of banking software companies "around" Kirchmans’ one that comes to mind, http://www.kirchman.com if you really want to know – Ask them!
…. actually, general ledgers are not rounded, they are "in cents" — but automated subsidiary ledgers are sometimes rounded like a calculator 4/5) - I don’t believe there is a banking or accounting association that has a rounding rule but i could be wrong. There are lots of banking software companies "around" Kirchmans’ one that comes to mind, http://www.kirchman.com if you really want to know – Ask them!
The question comes in play when one does computations of interest, currency conversion, etc. where results of the intermediate computations aren’t even cents. After large numbers of transactions a sum could be different significantly depending on rounding method used. Thanks for the link, I’ll go pursue it–meanwhile, if you (or anyone else) has additional info, I’d like to know it.
The question comes in play when one does computations of interest, currency conversion, etc. where results of the intermediate computations aren’t even cents. After large numbers of transactions a sum could be different significantly depending on rounding method used. Thanks for the link, I’ll go pursue it–meanwhile, if you (or anyone else) has additional info, I’d like to know it.
I suppose that each bank or business can set their own rules, but in general, if the amount if half a cent or greater, then round up. .49 of a cent gets rounded down. If there are calculations that in total, need to be added first then rounded, would depend on the company/bank policy. Otherwise, each account or investment should be rounded first, then added together. Is there a law (like codified) that says it has to be done this way or that? I doubt it. After all, we’re talking fractions of pennies here, and even for someone with billions of dollars in investments, the round ups and the round downs would most likely negate each other over time. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, GA The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.
I suppose that each bank or business can set their own rules, but in general, if the amount if half a cent or greater, then round up. .49 of a cent gets rounded down. If there are calculations that in total, need to be
I don’t remember where, but in one of my accounting or math courses I was taught to always round to the even number if the fraction was .5 – i.e 63.5 becomes 64, and 64.5 also becomes 64.
I suppose that each bank or business can set their own rules, but in general, if the amount if half a cent or greater, then round up. .49 of a cent gets rounded down. If there are calculations that in total, need to be I don’t remember where, but in one of my accounting or math courses I was taught to always round to the even number if the fraction was .5 – i.e 63.5 becomes 64, and 64.5 also becomes 64.
That is the basis for bankers’ rounding — it splits the over/under equally so that sums are, on the average, unbiased (since there are an even number of odd/even numbers half go up, half go down assuming a uniform distribution of odd/even leading digits). My question has to do with whether there are general guidelines for the usage. (I’m an engineer/physicst by training, so my inclination would be that it would an "automatic" thing to do, but I’ve yet to actually find anything that indicates one way or another). The effect can be seen in a loan repayment schedule in a spreadsheet where one will, virtually always, be off at the final payment because the arithmetic rounds biased unless care is taken to compensate.
I suppose that each bank or business can set their own rules, but in general, if the amount if half a cent or greater, then round up. .49 of a cent gets rounded down. If there are calculations that in total, need to be I don’t remember where, but in one of my accounting or math courses I was taught to always round to the even number if the fraction was .5 – i.e 63.5 becomes 64, and 64.5 also becomes 64.
Interesting. I doubt that most software is written like that. Most, I believe, round up at .5, and down below that. In any event, there was a movie (I think with Eddie Murphy) where he programmed the bank’s computers to deposit the roundings to his bank account. It was a while back, and most likely a bomb, so I’m not looking for it on video. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA
Never came across that term in my business studies. Where did you encounter the term?
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I suppose that each bank or business can set their own rules, but in general, if the amount if half a cent or greater, then round up. .49 of a cent gets rounded down. If there are calculations that in total, need to be I don’t remember where, but in one of my accounting or math courses I was taught to always round to the even number if the fraction was .5 – i.e 63.5 becomes 64, and 64.5 also becomes 64. Interesting. I doubt that most software is written like that. Most, I believe, round up at .5, and down below that. In any event, there was a movie (I think with Eddie Murphy) where he programmed the bank’s computers to deposit the roundings to his bank account. It was a while back, and most likely a bomb, so I’m not looking for it on video.
Hmmm…as I noted, I’m an engineer/physicst by training, so my background/education is obviously different but I’m surprised that at least an awareness of it isn’t (apparently) more prevalent. It only matters in large summations, and even then, admittedly, it is certainly a small <relative error, but a bias that could, over time amount to "real money" if an institution were to utilize it in their favor consistently. So, I was prompted by the discussion in the other programming language group to see if I could find any reference as to how the issue was actually handled and was surprised when my initial searches came up essentially empty. I’ll lurk here for a few more days and see if anyone else adds anything else, otherwise, I’ll just go on and next time I see my local banker I’ll ask him if he knows–I’m expecting that will be a detail that will be out of his ken, too, but I may be surprised. Thanks to all for the inputs so far…
I’ve been involved in a discussion in a programming newsgroup wrt to its intrinsic function round() which uses bankers’ rounding. My question: is there a standard for accounting/banking/etc., that defines which/where rounding is used? (I’m not asking about <how the rounding works mathematically, or why it’s been defined–I understand that–I’m asking whether there’s an agreed upon set of conditions/places/rules for using particular rounding rules–and if so, does someone have a link? Googling on "bankers rounding" produces virtually all references to computer code implementations or definitions of what it is, <not where/whether it is used.)
you might have to ask a programmer or data processing person in the "information system" dept. of a bank, I’ve worked in bank operations and finance but never heard of the term.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been involved in a discussion in a programming newsgroup wrt to its intrinsic function round() which uses bankers’ rounding. My question: is there a standard for accounting/banking/etc., that defines which/where rounding is used? (I’m not asking about <how the rounding works mathematically, or why it’s been defined–I understand that–I’m asking whether there’s an agreed upon set of conditions/places/rules for using particular rounding rules–and if so, does someone have a link? Googling on "bankers rounding" produces virtually all references to computer code implementations or definitions of what it is, <not where/whether it is used.) you might have to ask a programmer or data processing person in the "information system" dept. of a bank, I’ve worked in bank operations and finance but never heard of the term.
Surely an accountant would know the rules by which large sums are rounded or there would be some standard to follow? Surely somewhere in the rules promulgated the issue is addressed? If I <knew anyone fitting those descriptions, I would…
I’ve been involved in a discussion in a programming newsgroup wrt to its intrinsic function round() which uses bankers’ rounding. My question: is there a standard for accounting/banking/etc., that defines which/where rounding is used? (I’m not asking about <how the rounding works mathematically, or why it’s been defined–I understand that–I’m asking whether there’s an agreed upon set of conditions/places/rules for using particular rounding rules–and if so, does someone have a link? Googling on "bankers rounding" produces virtually all references to computer code implementations or definitions of what it is, <not where/whether it is used.)
any info on pay roll
What kind of info do you need? Don Regards, Donald A Haney, MBA Emergency Care Specialists, PC "Learning occurs in the mind, independent of time and place." – Plato any info on pay roll
Ours is on the 15th and the 30th of each month. Does that help? You are going to have to be a little more specific as to what kind of information you require.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – any info on pay roll
Denis – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ours is on the 15th and the 30th of each month. Does that help? You are going to have to be a little more specific as to what kind of information you require. any info on pay roll
There is a web service, AllExperts.com, which seems to offer free answers from credible persons. http://www.allexperts.com/getExpert.asp?Category=1418 Category: Accounting & Payroll & Pension Issues Example: http://www.allexperts.com/displayExpert.asp?Expert=848 Robert W. LaRose, CPP I have been in payroll for over 18 years. I receive my Certified payroll Profesional (CPP) designiation in 1997. I write for a newsletter for payroll managers. I am on the board of directors of the Conn. chapter of the American Payroll Association, and I could field questions in: 1) Overtime calculation (Fail Labor Standards Act) 2) When to deposit 941 taxes 3) Wage and Hour questions 4) Taxable fringe benefits 5) Payroll convrsions (software and outside payroll services) 6) General payroll and labor law questions Please let me know the advice quality. After all, free bad advice might be too expensive. Respectfully, - Carl www.cpaccess.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -any info on pay roll
<SNIP I am on the board of directors of the Conn. chapter of the American Payroll Association, and I could field questions in: 1) Overtime calculation (Fail Labor Standards Act)
OK, is it just me, or is this a GREAT typo? LOL 
Tony — The graveyards are full of indispensable people. – Charles de Gaulle
just starated doing some accounting work from home. i need help to get a good and not expnsive pay roll soft ware for small business. Thank you Nawal —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–
Nawal, You can get a complete accounting program (including payroll) for $25 by calling toll free to (800)365-6790. Tell them you want to order the program approved by the SBA. Have your credit card ready and they will ship it to you priority mail. By the way, the CD includes 51 sessions of training. Your software will have payroll, general ledger, accounts payable, and accounts receivable. You can print W-2s, do 1099s and run financial statements. Or, if you prefer, you can just use the payroll. Whatever you do, you can’t go wrong for $25. That should take care of you. Arnold – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – just starated doing some accounting work from home. i need help to get a good and not expnsive pay roll soft ware for small business. Thank you Nawal —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–
before you call or send any money run a google on the telephone # and check out the website to see if the accounting software is appropriate for your needs, you can go wrong for $25 !
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nawal, You can get a complete accounting program (including payroll) for $25 by calling toll free to (800)365-6790. Tell them you want to order the program approved by the SBA. Have your credit card ready and they will ship it to you priority mail. By the way, the CD includes 51 sessions of training. Your software will have payroll, general ledger, accounts payable, and accounts receivable. You can print W-2s, do 1099s and run financial statements. Or, if you prefer, you can just use the payroll. Whatever you do, you can’t go wrong for $25. That should take care of you. Arnold just starated doing some accounting work from home. i need help to get a good and not expnsive pay roll soft ware for small business. Thank you Nawal —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–
Check out PenSoft Payroll at www.pensoft.com
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – just starated doing some accounting work from home. i need help to get a good and not expnsive pay roll soft ware for small business. Thank you Nawal —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–== Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–
Physically, since the thicker strings have more mass, the tension needs to be higher to tune them up to pitch. The relative bending also needs then to "more" in order to bend up more. One can see it on double-wound strings, too.
Yes, but until we determine whether bending the string the same distance on a thicker string tuned to higher tension will or will not change the tension more than doing the same to a thinner, looser string, I won’t be convinced in a mathy, formulaic sense. I expect its one of those nasty non-linear relationships intro texts tend to ignore. Perhaps a look at mechanical enginneering resources would be fruitful since they’d have to deal with tension in non-ideal strings whenever cables are used in strutcures, or strings/springs are used to provde tension in a device, and they wouldn’t always assume you can somply determine the tension by measuring freq. Random web searches have turned up nothing but frustration for me, since everyone in acoustics who’d put anything on the web seems to think the F = 1/2L sqrt(T/u) formula solves everything. Of course, measuring the characteristics of a few strings under force might help as well, but I don’t have the tools for that. In practice though, judging from my intution and experience, I’m in agreement with you and the others who’ve said you’ll have to bend farther. Although the same bend on the a thicker string tuned lower seems to produce *more* pitch change, as bending the low E the same amount as bending a high E or B will create much more pitch change for the thicker string. Also, in reality, I would imagine the question varies from guitar to guitar and bridge to bridge, since I need to re-adjust my bridge whenever I switch gauges, *especially* if I keep the same tuning. That would have an effect on bending properties as well. I would like to check out Dave’s guitar album.
Yeah, that’s what I like to see! I’m a guitar player, too, from age 5 and have been in the music industry for a while. However, I’m more on the digital processing side of things.
I’m jealous, I wish I had started when I was 5. Oh well… Dave —- Check out my instrumental guitar album at: http://www.davechisholm.net (Last updated on 11.14.01)
Physically, since the thicker strings have more mass, the tension needs to be higher to tune them up to pitch. The relative bending also needs then to "more" in order to bend up more. One can see it on double-wound strings, too. Additionally, since if you look at the original strings position versus the beny position, you are actually making the string slightly longer (a hypotenuse on a triangle, albeit a small deflection), and thus the string is actually slightly longer from nut to fret than it was before, requiring (a very small) tension adjustment to compensate for the slight lengthening of the nut-to-fret length. I really like this mathematical response below by Dave. Nice job, Dave. My explanation is somewhat "down to earth", but it’s always refreshing to see someone who really digs in to the mathematical desription of the physics, too. I would like to check out Dave’s guitar album. I’m a guitar player, too, from age 5 and have been in the music industry for a while. However, I’m more on the digital processing side of things. Regards, Gary – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric guitar, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination? Hmm. Need to keep in mind the basic formula F = 1/(2L) * Sqrt(T/u), where F is fundamental freq, L is length, T is tension and u is mass per unit length (ie gauge). I believe u can also be expressed as (M/L) where M is the total mass of the vibrating string. So when we bend the string, what we are changing is L and T. The new length of the string could be expressed: sqrt( (original L)^2 + (distance moved across neck)^2)) but I think it’s better to just see it as (L + dL). The tension also changes, and we can look at it as (T +dT). (dL = change in length, dT change in tension) So before we bend any strings, lets look at the two cases of having different gauge strings tuned to the same pitch on the same guitar: F = 1/(2L) * sqrt(T1*L/M1) = F = 1/(2L) * sqrt(T2*L/M2) = which implies T1/M1 = T2 / M2 now when we bend we have F = 1/(2L+dL) * sqrt((T1+dT1)*(L+dL)/M1) ?=? F = 1/(2L+dL) * sqrt((T2+dT2)*(L+dL)/M2) ?=? If there is a way to relate the dT’s (probably different in each) to our dL (which is the same in both cases) given the two different masses of the string, I think we could come up with the theoretical answer. Of course, the observation that the bridge (espically a floyd rose) or guitar itself could be bending in response to the greater tension of a heavier set of strings, and also the fact that guitar strings don’t act as ideal strings could change things more. Hmm, that’s about as close as I can get to a convincing scientific answer for now, but I’ve crossposted to couple groups which might also have the full answer. This all also assumes that both strings are either wound or both are not, since I don’t think wound and not-wound strings can be compared so easily. And perhaps it’d be better to look at the changes in length and tension as multiplications of scalars than adding a change quantity? Any takers? Dave PS – And I recently recommened Rossing’s Science of Sound book on a different thread here and now just a few days later I find it doesn’t go as deeply as I need about string vibration. Grr. —- Check out my instrumental guitar album at: http://www.davechisholm.net (Last updated on 11.14.01)
I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric guitar, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Hmm. Need to keep in mind the basic formula F = 1/(2L) * Sqrt(T/u), where F is fundamental freq, L is length, T is tension and u is mass per unit length (ie gauge). I believe u can also be expressed as (M/L) where M is the total mass of the vibrating string. So when we bend the string, what we are changing is L and T. The new length of the string could be expressed: sqrt( (original L)^2 + (distance moved across neck)^2)) but I think it’s better to just see it as (L + dL). The tension also changes, and we can look at it as (T +dT). (dL = change in length, dT change in tension) So before we bend any strings, lets look at the two cases of having different gauge strings tuned to the same pitch on the same guitar: F = 1/(2L) * sqrt(T1*L/M1) = F = 1/(2L) * sqrt(T2*L/M2) = which implies T1/M1 = T2 / M2 now when we bend we have F = 1/(2L+dL) * sqrt((T1+dT1)*(L+dL)/M1) ?=? F = 1/(2L+dL) * sqrt((T2+dT2)*(L+dL)/M2) ?=? If there is a way to relate the dT’s (probably different in each) to our dL (which is the same in both cases) given the two different masses of the string, I think we could come up with the theoretical answer. Of course, the observation that the bridge (espically a floyd rose) or guitar itself could be bending in response to the greater tension of a heavier set of strings, and also the fact that guitar strings don’t act as ideal strings could change things more. Hmm, that’s about as close as I can get to a convincing scientific answer for now, but I’ve crossposted to couple groups which might also have the full answer. This all also assumes that both strings are either wound or both are not, since I don’t think wound and not-wound strings can be compared so easily. And perhaps it’d be better to look at the changes in length and tension as multiplications of scalars than adding a change quantity? Any takers? Dave PS – And I recently recommened Rossing’s Science of Sound book on a different thread here and now just a few days later I find it doesn’t go as deeply as I need about string vibration. Grr. —- Check out my instrumental guitar album at: http://www.davechisholm.net (Last updated on 11.14.01)
I was hoping you would ask that! When you bend, normally, you increase the tension of the string, so the pitch goes up, but at the same time, you are making the distance from the bridge to the fret longer, increasing the vibrating length of the string. If the tension were created in such a way that it was constant, however, the tension would remain the same while the vibrating length got longer, lowering the pitch.
Ahh now I see. Clever. I bet that would be really hard to implement in reality though – you’d have to hang a weight or something on a pulley pulling on the string at the bridge, rather than fixing it in place so it could lengthen or not (more likely use a spring). However, I doubt you could both use enough force there to get proper pitchs, yet also make it easy to bend with a finger. Maybe you can though. Seems like it would require very stiff strings. Probbaly easier to build an electronic guitar-ish controller and hook it up to some neat synth though. And of course, in real life we just use the whammy bar. Maybe now you can answer the questions I raised in my other reply to this thread… Dave —- Check out my instrumental guitar album at: http://www.davechisholm.net (Last updated on 11.14.01)
I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Yes, that would be true. CW
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, that would be true. CW I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Go back to a lighter gauge.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam Yes, that would be true. CW I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam
Two possible factors: 1. I’ve heard it explained by a hack-physicist on this NG before that there’s something about a larger string which requires further bending. I made it through high school physics, but didn’t do well enough to make sense of the explanation, so I don’t remember exactly what it was. 2. If your guitar has a tremolo, then that’s most of your problem. On a guitar with a trem, bending one string pulls the trem down, loosening everything and requiring more string travel on a bend. The thicker the string, the more tension, the more you pull the trem down, the farther you have to bend. It’s a pain. Sparky
I have no tremelo
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam Two possible factors: 1. I’ve heard it explained by a hack-physicist on this NG before that there’s something about a larger string which requires further bending. I made it through high school physics, but didn’t do well enough to make sense of the explanation, so I don’t remember exactly what it was. 2. If your guitar has a tremolo, then that’s most of your problem. On a guitar with a trem, bending one string pulls the trem down, loosening everything and requiring more string travel on a bend. The thicker the string, the more tension, the more you pull the trem down, the farther you have to bend. It’s a pain. Sparky
Then, your guitar, is like a bow and arrow, the guitar is bending.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have no tremelo Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam Two possible factors: 1. I’ve heard it explained by a hack-physicist on this NG before that there’s something about a larger string which requires further bending. I made it through high school physics, but didn’t do well enough to make sense of the explanation, so I don’t remember exactly what it was. 2. If your guitar has a tremolo, then that’s most of your problem. On a guitar with a trem, bending one string pulls the trem down, loosening everything and requiring more string travel on a bend. The thicker the string, the more tension, the more you pull the trem down, the farther you have to bend. It’s a pain. Sparky
Lots of good info from the other posters. My suggestion would be not jump 2 gauges, but instead go to 11’s. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam Yes, that would be true. CW I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
Then, your guitar, is like a bow and arrow, the guitar is bending.
What would be really weird would be playing a guitar where weights were used for tension; bending a string would make the pitch go down! — << << << << << << << << << << << << << << << <<
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is this? I used to be able to do a 1 1/2 bend on the 4th string, but now when I do, the string will go right off the fretboard! I was noticing this phenomenon on my acoustic too. As if the extra resiliance of the strings didn’t make bending hard enough, now I need to deal with pushing extra far. Just call me Sysaphus. -Adam Yes, that would be true. CW I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination?
i’m surprised by this. i was always told that heavier strings didn;t need to be bent as far to achieve the same pitch change. anyone else heard that?
i’m surprised by this. i was always told that heavier strings didn;t need to be bent as far to achieve the same pitch change. anyone else heard that?
It all depends on how much the string gives, and how much the guitar gives. If you’re talking about going from a solid G to a wound G, that’s another issue. A wound G has much more elasticity than a solid G from a slightly lighter set, and has to be bent more to increase the pitch the same amount. — << << << << << << << << << << << << << << << <<
I recently switched from 10’s to 12’s on my electric, and of course bending is harder, but it also seems that I have to bend each string *further* to acheive the same pitch change. Is this true, or is it just my imagination
Seems true to me. I have one guitar strung with 9s and another with 11s, and it seems like, even accounting for the tension difference, you have to bend the heavier strings farther to get the same pitch change. Ed.
What would be really weird would be playing a guitar where weights were used for tension; bending a string would make the pitch go down!
What do you mean – I fail to see a situation where bending would do anything but increase the tension in a string, thereby increasing the pitch? Dave —- Check out my instrumental guitar album at: http://www.davechisholm.net (Last updated on 11.14.01)
What would be really weird would be playing a guitar where weights were used for tension; bending a string would make the pitch go down! What do you mean – I fail to see a situation where bending would do anything but increase the tension in a string, thereby increasing the pitch?
I was hoping you would ask that! When you bend, normally, you increase the tension of the string, so the pitch goes up, but at the same time, you are making the distance from the bridge to the fret longer, increasing the vibrating length of the string. If the tension were created in such a way that it was constant, however, the tension would remain the same while the vibrating length got longer, lowering the pitch. — << << << << << << << << << << << << << << << <<
Maybe we should check the positions of the planets; it seems that several of us had a "Lost Weekend"! Bird Since 11/1 128/130/110
: Maybe we should check the positions of the planets; it seems that several of us : had a "Lost Weekend"! I sure did. AAACK. I think that after several months of doing all low carb, it’s becoming obvious I’ll have to reintroduce carbs slowly, not jump feet-first into the CAD lifestyle again. Sigh. Not posting my real numbers (hanging head in shame) Lydia 145/140/130 — Lydia Ash / I don’t want the world. http://falcon.cc.ukans.edu/~ash /
Maybe we should check the positions of the planets; it seems that several of us had a "Lost Weekend"! Bird
Count me in. 
. Went to a wedding on Sat. Had pesto ravioli for an hors doeuvre. But I also had scallops wrapped in bacon:). Didnt do too badly at dinner – just 2 pieces of Roast Beef(no mashed potaotoes and no bread) but drank A LOT of wine:(. Then yesterday I went to my moms for dinner and had ravioli with marinara sauce, a meatball and a piece of Italian bread. Back on the low carb bandwagon today! Sue
Count me in too. This past weekend, I decided to try CAD and I used breakfast as my reward meal. The first day I felt fine, but the second day on it, I felt terrible. My stomach was hurting so bad. I felt like total crap. And I gained 5 lbs. Back to induction for me. Joe 201/170.5/165 since June 07, 1998
Well it even reached over here to New Zealand. My son had his farewell from his work, and his bosses invited me along, and lo and behold — an Italian restaurant. Well I couldn’t see much LC fare there and thought what the hang, I’ll just go for it … I’ve been the same weight for months ANYWAY!! Had pasta, Tiramisu, wine … plus some ‘legal’ food too. Weight went from 201.5 to 205.5 …. I just jumped back on the LC wagon. didn’t even have any cravings, just felt a bit bloaty. Well low and behold, in the last week I have gotten back under 199.5 – I got there a month or so ago but bounced back up despite keeping consistently lowcarb. Funny too because when I had a controlled "cheat" to try and bump my metabolism, it didn’t work. THis time, when I thought "darn it all!" it DID work!!! There’s no accounting for bodies, but I just hope I can remain in the beloved 100’s now!!! Maybe we should check the positions of the planets; it seems that several of us had a "Lost Weekend"! Bird Count me in. . Went to a wedding on Sat. Had pesto ravioli for an hors doeuvre. But I also had scallops wrapped in bacon:). Didnt do too badly at dinner – just 2 pieces of Roast Beef(no mashed potaotoes and no bread) but drank A LOT of wine:(. Then yesterday I went to my moms for dinner and had ravioli with marinara sauce, a meatball and a piece of Italian bread. Back on the low carb bandwagon today! Sue
– ~^
Thanks much for the tips. I’ll be giving them a shot tomorrow….
Well, there is one thing you can do now to quickly balance your system at least on paper. Then, you should probably keep control totals manually as a monthly and on-going check for all of your sub-ledgers. If the AR is out of balance, do the following; Start at the last point the AR aging agreed with the GL control account. Add all AR sales and subtract all AR cash received on a month by month basis, attempting to balance with any AR aging reports on the way (its a good idea to keep monthly aging reports). Bear in mind any writeoffs and discounts taken/allowed on the way. You’ll have to ensure all transactions during that time were posted both to the GL and the subledgers. Somewhere along the line, you will find where the imbalance occurred. More than likely in the month that yielded corrupted integrity checks. Maintain this temporary out of balance condition in your manual control totals until such time as the missing transactions can be accounted for. Review all bank reconciliations to ensure all cash was posted to AR and cash receipts journals. Trace all sales (invoices) to sales register to ensure all sales posted. It’s not such a tough job, perhaps just time consuming. Don’t despair, it will work out. There must be some import/export utility within Peachtree to import any missing transactions. There certainly is some way to fix it. Chaloner Hale
Well, there is one thing you can do now to quickly balance your system at least on paper. Then, you should probably keep control totals manually as a monthly and on-going check for all of your sub-ledgers. If the AR is out of balance, do the following; Start at the last point the AR aging agreed with the GL[..]. Somewhere along the line, you will find where the imbalance occurred.
This reminds me of a fantastically easy way to fix corruption if you are lucky enough to find the problematic transaction. First make a backup. Then put your cursor on the unbalanced transaction, and hit <DELETE Then run the reindexing, and integrity checks again, this might cure the whole thing. Todd
But first you have to find the offending transaction, which I believe that we did today. Thanks for your help !
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello all — I’m a computer consultant, not an accountant, so excuse any ignorance as it applies to accounting terms within this post. Here’s our problem, any advice, suggestions, good beers to drink after fixing it, are much appreciated. I’m working with a small steel brokerage that is currently running Peachtree for Windows 5.0. We have it running on a Compaq workstation (Pentium 166 / 32 mb. / Win 95), and four users are accessing the PEACHW data on this machine from their Win 95 machines. Your basic peer-to-peer operation. The problem is the bankers are in their office this week doing audits. The books don’t balance, and we suspect that the data within Peachtree is corrupted. We ran "integrity checks" for the month of June ‘98, and found two entry errors which were corrected. We then ran integrity checks for both May and July (before and after June months) to test to make sure that no errors were showing up before or after the June accounting periods. No errors were found by the integrity check for May or July. Yet, when the folks in this office run the Aged Receivables report, apparently they are not getting whatever is supposed to balance, to balance. The data within the General Ledger seems to be OK. We called Peachtree support, and they advised running integrity checks & data synchronizations for EVERY accounting period going back to Jan. of ‘97. During one of these checks / synchronizations, the check got up to about 85% complete, then it stops, giving an error msg. which Peachtree tells us means that the file is corrupt. How can we have corrupt data files if we are able to work within Peachtree at all? A) Can we somehow "uncorrupt", or clean up the Peachtree data files? B) Can we retrieve a Peachtree data backup from, say, September ‘97, determine if it is clean, then use this retored file on our system? And if so, is there a quick and easy way to enter data from (for example) September ‘97 going forward until October ‘98 without manually entering every entry? C) How can we convince a bank that we are not playing games with our books, but that our data is genuinely corrupt, and yes, by the way, we still need your loan in order to stay in business? This is a grave situation. Any advice will be MOST appreciated. Thanks much in advance and I offer apologies for the lengthy post.
you can go back to any period and "export" or extract applications, say payments or receivables to check the numbers. This can then be imported back into the current period but first a professional (CPA) should review ledgers/files to determine where and why the G.L. or "books" don’t balance.
Hello all — I’m a computer consultant, not an accountant, so excuse any ignorance as it applies to accounting terms within this post. Here’s our problem, any advice, suggestions, good beers to drink after fixing it, are much appreciated. I’m working with a small steel brokerage that is currently running Peachtree for Windows 5.0. We have it running on a Compaq workstation (Pentium 166 / 32 mb. / Win 95), and four users are accessing the PEACHW data on this machine from their Win 95 machines. Your basic peer-to-peer operation. The problem is the bankers are in their office this week doing audits. The books don’t balance, and we suspect that the data within Peachtree is corrupted. We ran "integrity checks" for the month of June ‘98, and found two entry errors which were corrected. We then ran integrity checks for both May and July (before and after June months) to test to make sure that no errors were showing up before or after the June accounting periods. No errors were found by the integrity check for May or July. Yet, when the folks in this office run the Aged Receivables report, apparently they are not getting whatever is supposed to balance, to balance. The data within the General Ledger seems to be OK. We called Peachtree support, and they advised running integrity checks & data synchronizations for EVERY accounting period going back to Jan. of ‘97. During one of these checks / synchronizations, the check got up to about 85% complete, then it stops, giving an error msg. which Peachtree tells us means that the file is corrupt. How can we have corrupt data files if we are able to work within Peachtree at all? A) Can we somehow "uncorrupt", or clean up the Peachtree data files? B) Can we retrieve a Peachtree data backup from, say, September ‘97, determine if it is clean, then use this retored file on our system? And if so, is there a quick and easy way to enter data from (for example) September ‘97 going forward until October ‘98 without manually entering every entry? C) How can we convince a bank that we are not playing games with our books, but that our data is genuinely corrupt, and yes, by the way, we still need your loan in order to stay in business? This is a grave situation. Any advice will be MOST appreciated. Thanks much in advance and I offer apologies for the lengthy post. — —
Hi. I have been playing bass for only two years, bt I have some things on my mind that need to be addressed. In my opinion, a real bass player will contribute to the rythnm and melody of a song. What I mean is a bassist that will play rythem with licks that fit the drummers tempo, that sound attractive, and make the sound of the song fuller. What’s with all these so called "bassists these days, who think they have talent by using only one freakin string, with one freakin note? They have no talent. And the sad part is, they get all the money, and get to play "million dollar basses". I’m talkin the ones we’d give an arm and a leg for. I give props to REAL bassists like Gene Simmons, Flea, Nathan East, Marcus Miller, Robert Deleo, Dean Felber, and Gerald Albright. Those are great examples of REAL TALEN, REAL BASS PLAYERS!!!
Here ya’ go…….to quote you directly….." In my opinion, a real bass player will contribute to the rythnm and melody of a song. What I mean is a bassist that will play rythem with licks that fit the drummers tempo, that sound attractive, and make the sound of the song fuller.
That’s what bass playin’ is all about…..if the song screams "one note, charlie"….you play one note……if the song wants a 32nd note run……go for it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi. I have been playing bass for only two years, bt I have some things on my mind that need to be addressed. What’s with all these so called "bassists these days, who think they have talent by using only one freakin string, with one freakin note? They have no talent. And the sad part is, they get all the money, and get to play "million dollar basses". I’m talkin the ones we’d give an arm and a leg for. I give props to REAL bassists like Gene Simmons, Flea, Nathan East, Marcus Miller, Robert Deleo, Dean Felber, and Gerald Albright. Those are great examples of REAL TALEN, REAL BASS PLAYERS!!!
I agree with the you but you must realize they are playing what people want to here and quite frankly they’ll let their bank accounts do all the talking.
I would have to agree with your assertion about the nature of the bass. Indeed it is unique in that it is a combination rhythm/melody instrument. There’s been many a time I’ve kept the drummer "honest" by maintaining the tempo while he’s attempting some new variation. I also feel a bass should not overpower the rest of the band or orchestra – it shouldn’t so much be heard as sensed, and it should be missed if not there. It should be an integral part of the music without standing out, (unless the song calls for it.) As to those who make boat-loads of money on limited talent and ability…well, there’s just no accounting for the public’s taste in music. I personally can’t stand rap. But that’s just my personal opinion, which with a $5 bill will get you a cup of coffee…usually. I use all four fingers on my left hand which is rather unusual. It’s not right, it’s not wrong, it’s just the way I do it and I’ve been doing it that way since 1972. My advice is develop your own style – if you can do that with one note on one string, more power to you.
I use all four fingers on my left hand which is rather unusual. It’s not right,
it’s not wrong, it’s just the way I do it and I’ve been doing it that way since 1972. Since when is it unusual or not right to use (all?) four fingers on your left hand ? (unless you’re left-handed …) BassBaby
I am an accounting major looking to start my career. I have been on a number of interviews, but things have not worked out. I am interested in starting my career with a promising firm with room for advancement. If there are any firms around that needs a void filled, please let me know. I have done well in college (3.48 GPA) while staying involved in a number of things. I also have significant accounting experience. I will forward my resume to anybody who is interested. Thanks for your time. Kevin C. Kuzior
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am an accounting major looking to start my career. I have been on a number of interviews, but things have not worked out. I am interested in starting my career with a promising firm with room for advancement. If there are any firms around that needs a void filled, please let me know. I have done well in college (3.48 GPA) while staying involved in a number of things. I also have significant accounting experience. I will forward my resume to anybody who is interested. Thanks for your time. Kevin C. Kuzior
Are you interested in public accounting or industry?
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From the Washington Post, 2/7/97: At least 135,000 children who receive federal cash assistance because they are characterized as disabled will be denied benefits under the welfare law enacted in August, the Clinton administration announced yesterday. Federal officials, releasing long-awaited regulations interpreting one of the most controversial provisions of the new welfare measure, said benefits no longer will go to children who, for example, suffer from hyperactivity that affects schoolwork and behavior, certain learning disabilities, or rheumatoid arthritis that limits physical movement and social interaction. But advocates for disabled children said the rules will also deny assistance to those with much more severe problems. They cited the example of an 8-year-old who has an IQ of 75, suffers from depression and requires constant supervision because of behavioral problems. The new and much stricter standards stem from Congress’s determination to tighten access to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) children’s disability program, which provides cash averaging $424 a month and access to Medicaid health coverage to eligible children. President Clinton has proposed that children who lose SSI benefits be allowed to retain Medicaid, but there is no assurance that Congress will adopt that plan. Marty Ford, assistant director of The Arc, an advocacy group, said many parents are afraid that if they lose the benefits they will be unable to care for their disabled children, who may then have to be placed in foster care or an institution. "These kids [who will lose benefits] are still severely disabled and come from families who are very poor," she said. Clinton vetoed an earlier version of the welfare bill that would have been much harsher, denying SSI cash benefits to an estimated 700,000 children. Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):( Harry
Don’t forget, Clinton signed this bill. He didn’t have to. If he felt it was morally unacceptable, he could have vetoed the sucker. He is just as culpable as the Republicans and the Democrats in Congress who voted for this bill. Hey, does anyone else remember that New Yorker article from ‘92 about that brain damaged guy that got executed in Arkansas while Clinton was governor just before the election?
From the Washington Post, 2/7/97: At least 135,000 children who receive federal cash assistance because they are characterized as disabled will be denied benefits under the welfare law enacted in August, the Clinton administration announced yesterday. Federal officials, releasing long-awaited regulations interpreting one of the most controversial provisions of the new welfare measure, said benefits no longer will go to children who, for example, suffer from hyperactivity that affects schoolwork and behavior, certain learning disabilities, or rheumatoid arthritis that limits physical movement and social interaction. But advocates for disabled children said the rules will also deny assistance to those with much more severe problems. They cited the example of an 8-year-old who has an IQ of 75, suffers from depression and requires constant supervision because of behavioral problems. The new and much stricter standards stem from Congress’s determination to tighten access to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) children’s disability program, which provides cash averaging $424 a month and access to Medicaid health coverage to eligible children. President Clinton has proposed that children who lose SSI benefits be allowed to retain Medicaid, but there is no assurance that Congress will adopt that plan. Marty Ford, assistant director of The Arc, an advocacy group, said many parents are afraid that if they lose the benefits they will be unable to care for their disabled children, who may then have to be placed in foster care or an institution. "These kids [who will lose benefits] are still severely disabled and come from families who are very poor," she said. Clinton vetoed an earlier version of the welfare bill that would have been much harsher, denying SSI cash benefits to an estimated 700,000 children. Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):( Harry
Once again the liberals are lying to you. The changes are to prevent peop getting "crazy checks" for kids who misbehave, not the truly disabled. Yet liberals assert that if the ends are noble, the means can not be questioned! Sorry, we’re not going to pay for your misbehaving children to get private tutors and posh private school digs at our children’s expense any more! Pay your fair share and quit taxing us to send your kids to private schools! (Gee, where have I heard that before…?) Brett The Reagan Home Page: http://www.dnaco.net/~bkottman/reagan.html Exposing lies about that page: http://www.dnaco.net/~bkottman/stilt_lies.html My home page: http://www.dnaco.net/~bkottman/brett.html
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From the Washington Post, 2/7/97: At least 135,000 children who receive federal cash assistance because they are characterized as disabled will be denied benefits under the welfare law enacted in August, the Clinton administration announced yesterday. Federal officials, releasing long-awaited regulations interpreting one of the most controversial provisions of the new welfare measure, said benefits no longer will go to children who, for example, suffer from hyperactivity that affects schoolwork and behavior, certain learning disabilities, or rheumatoid arthritis that limits physical movement and social interaction. But advocates for disabled children said the rules will also deny assistance to those with much more severe problems. They cited the example of an 8-year-old who has an IQ of 75, suffers from depression and requires constant supervision because of behavioral problems. The new and much stricter standards stem from Congress’s determination to tighten access to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) children’s disability program, which provides cash averaging $424 a month and access to Medicaid health coverage to eligible children. President Clinton has proposed that children who lose SSI benefits be allowed to retain Medicaid, but there is no assurance that Congress will adopt that plan. Marty Ford, assistant director of The Arc, an advocacy group, said many parents are afraid that if they lose the benefits they will be unable to care for their disabled children, who may then have to be placed in foster care or an institution. "These kids [who will lose benefits] are still severely disabled and come from families who are very poor," she said. Clinton vetoed an earlier version of the welfare bill that would have been much harsher, denying SSI cash benefits to an estimated 700,000 children. Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):( Harry Harry, The last time this happened was in 1981 when the Reagan Administration cut 500,000 people off the Social Security Disability Rolls! There justification at the time was they stated because there Waste, Fraud and abuse of Disability! After years of Federal Court decisions in favor of the Disabilty who had been summarily terminated from the program, the Reagan Administration only allowed the people in the particular Federal Court Jurisdiction that had found for the Disabiled to regain benefits. Thus the cases dragged out for 3 years with the result that many of the disabled Died or committed Suicide! After all the Court Cases the General Accounting Office found that the total amount of Waste, Fraud and abuse was less then .03% ( anyone wanting a copy of the report can contact the GAO and ask for the 1985 Disability Report!) In typical Republican fashion they always target the people who can lease afford the costs of fighting the system, not having the balls to take on the Corporations who were involved in the Military Industrial Complex! They same people who brought us the $ 600.00 Hammers and $ 5,000.00 Toilet Seats, reason being that they keep there blinders on when it comes to there friends and campaign contributors! They also see nothing wrong with $ 600.00 Hammers or $ 5,000.00 Toilet Seats! Hopefully the American People will see them for what they really are, and next year show them how they feel about there onesided approach to cutting Government Spending! Claude
What’s all this nonsense about Republicans? This last bill was passed with broad bi-partisan support, and it was signed into law by a Democratic president. And although I could be wrong, as far as I remember the 1981 reform you’re talking about also enjoyed broad support in both parties. All this welfare cutting may or may not be reprehensible, but the lesson of the last four years is pretty clear: there’s not necessarily all that much difference between the two parties.
Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):(
Satisfy your own damn needs! -William Bennett to America’s children
Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):( Satisfy your own damn needs! -William Bennett to America’s children
You, and William Bennett, whoever he is, are one the reasons this country is turning into a two class society that in the not too distant future could turn this country into a battlefield. Z Dittoheads are educated beyond their intellectual capacity.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From the Washington Post, 2/7/97: At least 135,000 children who receive federal cash assistance because they are characterized as disabled will be denied benefits under the welfare law enacted in August, the Clinton administration announced yesterday. Federal officials, releasing long-awaited regulations interpreting one of the most controversial provisions of the new welfare measure, said benefits no longer will go to children who, for example, suffer from hyperactivity that affects schoolwork and behavior, certain learning disabilities, or rheumatoid arthritis that limits physical movement and social interaction. But advocates for disabled children said the rules will also deny assistance to those with much more severe problems. They cited the example of an 8-year-old who has an IQ of 75, suffers from depression and requires constant supervision because of behavioral problems. The new and much stricter standards stem from Congress’s determination to tighten access to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) children’s disability program, which provides cash averaging $424 a month and access to Medicaid health coverage to eligible children. President Clinton has proposed that children who lose SSI benefits be allowed to retain Medicaid, but there is no assurance that Congress will adopt that plan. Marty Ford, assistant director of The Arc, an advocacy group, said many parents are afraid that if they lose the benefits they will be unable to care for their disabled children, who may then have to be placed in foster care or an institution. "These kids [who will lose benefits] are still severely disabled and come from families who are very poor," she said. Clinton vetoed an earlier version of the welfare bill that would have been much harsher, denying SSI cash benefits to an estimated 700,000 children. Aw. Ain’t that a damn shame. The right-wing creeps wanted to cut 700,000 disabled kids from the welfare role. Hey, who knows? If the right-wing gets lucky maybe they’ll cut a coupla million next time. ):( Harry
Harry, The last time this happened was in 1981 when the Reagan Administration cut 500,000 people off the Social Security Disability Rolls! There justification at the time was they stated because there Waste, Fraud and abuse of Disability! After years of Federal Court decisions in favor of the Disabilty who had been summarily terminated from the program, the Reagan Administration only allowed the people in the particular Federal Court Jurisdiction that had found for the Disabiled to regain benefits. Thus the cases dragged out for 3 years with the result that many of the disabled Died or committed Suicide! After all the Court Cases the General Accounting Office found that the total amount of Waste, Fraud and abuse was less then .03% ( anyone wanting a copy of the report can contact the GAO and ask for the 1985 Disability Report!) In typical Republican fashion they always target the people who can lease afford the costs of fighting the system, not having the balls to take on the Corporations who were involved in the Military Industrial Complex! They same people who brought us the $ 600.00 Hammers and $ 5,000.00 Toilet Seats, reason being that they keep there blinders on when it comes to there friends and campaign contributors! They also see nothing wrong with $ 600.00 Hammers or $ 5,000.00 Toilet Seats! Hopefully the American People will see them for what they really are, and next year show them how they feel about there onesided approach to cutting Government Spending! Claude – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so years of travelling, and covering more of the world than the Medeterranian area, people would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion in an udated Seven Wonders of the World listing? Any ideas, of modern, ancient, natural, or man made wonders, please e-mail me! Thanks for any suggestions, Jon Aldridge. I know the ancient Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Temple of Artemis at Ephesus Hanging Gardens of Babylon Colossus of Rhodes Mausoleum at Halicarnassus Lighthouse of Alexandria Statue of Zeus at Olympia I know a subset of the modern Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Great Wall of China Taj Mahal Please help me finish the list! Alice Wang
One for your list of modern Seven Wonders is: Temples of Angkor Gerard de Leeuw
I suggest: 1.Pagodas in Bagan, Myanmar. 2.Blue Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey. 3.? Mosque in Esphhan, Iran. 4.Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet. 5.Forbidden City in Beijing, China. 6.Amon temple in Luxor, Egypt. 7.Lost City in Machuppichu, Peru. Could be more, but if you only want seven… Hajime
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – writes: I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so years of travelling, and covering more of the world than the Medeterranian area, people would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion in an udated Seven Wonders of the World listing? Any ideas, of modern, ancient, natural, or man made wonders, please e-mail me! Thanks for any suggestions, Jon Aldridge. I know the ancient Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Temple of Artemis at Ephesus Hanging Gardens of Babylon Colossus of Rhodes Mausoleum at Halicarnassus Lighthouse of Alexandria Statue of Zeus at Olympia I know a subset of the modern Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Great Wall of China Taj Mahal Please help me finish the list! Alice Wang One for your list of modern Seven Wonders is: Temples of Angkor Gerard de Leeuw
When they finally finish the CRAZY HORSE monument in South Dakota, it would be in my list. The Empire State Building in New York should deserve inclusion. It was built before the war with, what is now, primitive technology. No other architectural acheivement has yet to usurp it. — Matt
For Ancient Wonders, Angkor is obvious and probably at the top of the list. This is an easy list to prepare, except keeping it to Seven Wonders may be a challenge. For more-or-less modern wonders, I’d consider Luang Prabang, as it is a beautifully preserved city (nearly unchanged since the 1940’s despite all the wars) and should be a World Heritage Site. For natural wonders, consider Seychelles — granite islands with all much of the beauty of coral ones. Nepal is another obvious consideration. For cultural wonders, Bali belongs on the list because of the very special, unique culture. , Larry in Berkeley
I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so years of travelling, and covering more of the world than the Medeterranian area, people would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion in an udated Seven Wonders of the World listing? Any ideas, of modern, ancient, natural, or man made wonders, please e-mail me! Thanks for any suggestions, Jon Aldridge.
I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so years of travelling, and covering more of the world than the Medeterranian area, people would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion in an udated Seven Wonders of the World listing? Any ideas, of modern, ancient, natural, or man made wonders, please e-mail me! Thanks for any suggestions, Jon Aldridge.
I know the ancient Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Temple of Artemis at Ephesus Hanging Gardens of Babylon Colossus of Rhodes Mausoleum at Halicarnassus Lighthouse of Alexandria Statue of Zeus at Olympia I know a subset of the modern Seven Wonders: Great Pyramid at Giza Great Wall of China Taj Mahal Please help me finish the list! Alice Wang
:I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so years of :travelling, and covering more of the world than the Medeterranian area, people :would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion in an udated Seven Wonders of the :World listing? Any ideas, of modern, ancient, natural, or man made wonders, :please e-mail me! : : Thanks for any suggestions, : : Jon Aldridge. : : :I know the ancient Seven Wonders: : : Great Pyramid at Giza : Temple of Artemis at Ephesus : Hanging Gardens of Babylon : Colossus of Rhodes : Mausoleum at Halicarnassus : Lighthouse of Alexandria : Statue of Zeus at Olympia : :I know a subset of the modern Seven Wonders: : : Great Pyramid at Giza : Great Wall of China : Taj Mahal : 
lease help me finish the list! : :Alice Wang : Before I went to Angkor Watt, I read that it was considered a moder wonder. Though in other sources I have not seen it listed as such, but I was impressed with all the Angkor ruins. — The graduate with a Science degree asks, "Why does it work?" …Engineering degree asks, "How does it work?" …Accounting degree asks, "How much will it cost?" …Liberal Arts degree asks, "Do you want fries with that?" Medieval Studies and Italian UC Davis 87
On 26-Jan-96 02:22:23, Jon Aldridge had this to say: JA I was just wondering what, with the benefit of another thousand or so JA years of travelling, and covering more of the world than the JA Medeterranian area, people would tink of as as being worthy of inclusion JA in an udated Seven Wonders of the World listing? Any ideas, of modern, JA ancient, natural, or man made wonders, please e-mail me! JA Thanks for any suggestions, Bangkok traffic.
Please help me finish the list! Alice Wang
Purely a personal choice, but try adding: Borobodur (Java) Angkor Wat (Cambodia) Mazzupicchu (Peru – I hope I’ve spelt it correctly) the city of Kyoto (Japan)