Question:

No matter how much you fix up an old plane, it remains old. It flies old, smells old, and breaks down a lot. It is generally much cheaper to buy a new airplane rather than to try to upgrade an old airplane with new avionics, paint, interior, etc.

Really?  I’d imagine that it would have more to do with the age of the engine than the age of the airframe.  The newer 172R at the Ottawa Flying Club seems to spend as much time in the maintenance hangar as the older 172M’s and 172P’s. All the best, David —

Response:

All nice and clean and undamaged. Everything works and you get a 2-year (typ.) warranty which eliminates the major operating cost risk of a used plane

My new Cirrus went to the service center over 20 times in the first year. The service center is a 2 hour round trip flight. The warranty is 2 years, but does not include parts provided by suppliers. Things like the engine, avionics, tires, etc.

Response:

You know, new is nice and if you have the will and means to buy new, it’s a good thing for all the reasons listed by others here.  There are reasons why you might want to buy a simple Cessna or Piper over a modern fixed gear single Cirrus, Katana, or whatever.  I bought an almost new Maule but did so because it was relatively cheap, it drags it tail, and I live on a grass/mud strip.  Otherwise I would have bought a C180 that was as old as I am for about the same money. If you have to watch your dollars or are otherwise interested in making a sound financial choice, used is the place to get transportation value. Choice, value, and options abound here. If you love aircraft of a certain type and vintage, or want to socialize with certain groups, used is where it is at by definition.  And a lot of the best stuff around just isn’t available new. If you love hot machines and the prestige of a new ship, new/new is the place to get it.  Some of those plane have teething problems but they are HOT (I don’t mean too hot for you to fly). High tech hedonism at its best. What could be better? And to go full circle, if like suspenders with your belt, don’t particularly care to be hot, and prefer  dealing with the known, buy new/old (i.e Cessna, Piper).  You already know how to fly it, you can move anonymously from FBO to ramp to distant city and back and never be noticed.  Nothing wrong with that. Just some thoughts.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am a student pilot, getting close to getting my Private Pilot license.   Being trained on a C-172, I consider purchasing a similar plane (i.e. a simple 4-seater single). Why should I not buy a new one (assuming I can afford it)? If the depreciation story is so obvious, who are those people buying new ’simple’ aircraft? Analogy with cars doesn’t work, as cars do change (and sometimes improve) year-to-year, which doesn’t seem to be the case with planes. I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase. Regards, M.

Response:

It is generally much cheaper to buy a new airplane rather than to try to upgrade an old airplane with new avionics, paint, interior, etc.

No, way.  Not even close.  Take a run out mid 60’s 182 for example. Purchase price about $40K.  New 182 is about $290K.  New engine, prop, engine mount and accesories will set you back, worst case, $35K.  Figure new leather interior at $5K, altough I put in my leather for a lot less.   Paint and any needed body work and new fairings at $10K.  OK I have spent $90K so far and all I need is a panel.  What does your dream panel cost?  Spend $50K on the panel and you’re at $140K.  Now I’ll add the big engine that you can’t, that’s an extra $5K.  Figure whatever you want to fix other minor stuff that old airplanes wear out.  Insurance will be 1/2 – 1/3 of the new plane.

Response:

| | | Airplanes depreciate about 10% a year for the first three years, then begin | to slowly appreciate in value. (Except, of course, for airplanes with | relatively short useful lives, such as the Cirrus SR22 — these will | depreciate and never recover; their value will eventually depreciate to 0.) | | Why is the SR22 different in this regard?  Why does it have a relatively | short useful life? The SR22’s airframe is limited by its type certificate to 4,350 hours. After that it becomes a lawn ornament.

Response:

The SR22’s airframe is limited by its type certificate to 4,350 hours. After that it becomes a lawn ornament.

Have any of them hit that yet? IIRC, the flight schools put about 1,000 hours a year on my old Cessna when it was new. George Patterson "Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum." – When you have  their full attention in your grip, their hearts and minds will follow.

Response:

Things like the engine, avionics, tires, etc.

All of which are warranteed by their manufacturers. Lycoming, for example, has a full 1 year warrantee and prorated second year. George Patterson "Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum." – When you have  their full attention in your grip, their hearts and minds will follow.

Response:

The SR22’s airframe is limited by its type certificate to 4,350 hours. After that it becomes a lawn ornament. Have any of them hit that yet? IIRC, the flight schools put about 1,000 hours a year on my old Cessna when it was new.

I doubt anybody’s close (if nothing else, an SR22 at a flight school probably wouldn’t be used that much due to insurance issues;  at this point most underwriters are looking for 500 hours TT and an instrument rating for privately operated 22s.)  Given that the oldest 22 is a bit more than two years old, there’s still time before this becomes an issue. The airframe lifetime for the SR22 was generated based on some formula applied to the SR20 lifetime (which I think is 12,000 hours) in order to speed along the original certification process.  Cirrus will do whatever testing is necessary to come up with an independent airframe lifetime (which ought not to be much different than the SR20) prior to this being an issue for anyone.

Response:

Things like the engine, avionics, tires, etc. All of which are warranteed by their manufacturers. Lycoming, for example, has a full 1 year warrantee and prorated second year.

TCM doesn’t go beyond 1 year, nor do Garmin, Sandel, Arnav, and the various other manufacturers used by Cirrus. Even when the parts are replaced (some people have gone through 7 vacuum pumps, 4 HSIs, and quite a few flap relays) the warranty is not extended. So the bad design, which is probably causing these repetitive failures, becomes the owners problem after 1 year.

Response:

("Peter" wrote) If you rent the aircraft, you have to do 100 hour inspections This and other specific advice here is likely to be applicable only in the USA – so those elsewhere on the Earth’s surface, beware!

You’re right Peter. We sometimes get a little too focused on the FAA and USA flying here in rec.aviation. So, what exactly is the metric conversion for 100 hours?  <g — Montblack

Response:

No matter how much you fix up an old plane, it remains old. It flies old, smells old, and breaks down a lot.

Unless you do one of the jobs that AOPA does with their prize aircraft. It is generally much cheaper to buy a new airplane rather than to try to upgrade an old airplane with new avionics, paint, interior, etc.

And if you look at the retail value of all the stuff AOPA does to one of those prizes, you’ll find that this is true. George Patterson "Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum." – When you have  their full attention in your grip, their hearts and minds will follow.

Response:

Airplanes depreciate about 10% a year for the first three years, then begin to slowly appreciate in value. (Except, of course, for airplanes with relatively short useful lives, such as the Cirrus SR22 — these will depreciate and never recover; their value will eventually depreciate to 0.)

Why is the SR22 different in this regard?  Why does it have a relatively short useful life?

Response:

Now, if you have a good business justification for having an airplane (good by IRS standards, not by common sense), then you can likely get Uncle Sam to pay for one third to one fourth of whatever plane you buy over the next five years (through depreciation).  The trick is that with a new plane, the schedule is front loaded.  You need to talk to an expert, but there are ways to help justify the extra expense of new.

Add in the guaranteed trade in values that some of the manufactures are offering you could roll through a couple of plane in the next 4 or 5 years. Of course talk to your legal and accounting people to make sure it’s good for you. Another good part to having your business is you don’t have anyone telling you that you can’t fly your own plane for business purposes.

Response:

I think after 4,700 (approx. – guessing) hours it is no longer considered FAA airworthy because of the airframe life of the composites. You keep hearing that it is only a paperwork issue for Cirrus to overcome, and that it will go up to something like 12,000 hrs pretty soon – but it hasn’t happened yet. I still think it’s odd that a hangar’d SR-22 has the same (UV rays) 4,700 hrs airframe limit as another SR-22 sitting out on the ramp (IN THE SUN) for ten years. The smaller Cirrus plane, the SR- 20, doesn’t have the short useful life problem that its big brother/sister has. Hope they get this "paperwork(?)" issue resolved before they go diesel.  <g Montblack ("xyzzy" wrote) Airplanes depreciate about 10% a year for the first three years, then begin to slowly appreciate in value. (Except, of course, for airplanes with relatively short useful lives, such as the Cirrus SR22 — these will depreciate and never recover; their value will eventually depreciate to

0.) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why is the SR22 different in this regard?  Why does it have a relatively short useful life?

Response:

I am a student pilot, getting close to getting my Private Pilot license.   Being trained on a C-172, I consider purchasing a similar plane (i.e. a simple 4-seater single). Why should I not buy a new one (assuming I can afford it)? If the depreciation story is so obvious, who are those people buying new ’simple’ aircraft? Analogy with cars doesn’t work, as cars do change (and sometimes improve) year-to-year, which doesn’t seem to be the case with planes. I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase. Regards, M.

Response:

Misha, I bought new because the design I wanted was not available used (Diamond Star).  Had I been interested in a Cessna, I would have had a hard time justifying a new plane.  As it is, I bought new, and since I am willing to share it with a few select friends (renters), it isn’t much more expensive than if I had bought  a used plane and not shared it. Since you can have a 20 year old plane brought up to new standards, customized for your taste in paint, interior and avionics, it would seem that unless the new plane has something about it you desire a lot you should go with used. Especially in your case.  Assuming you can afford it, if you buy a new simple four seater, you will find that you want to trade up in a few years to something that you can’t quite afford! (believe me). Now, if you have a good business justification for having an airplane (good by IRS standards, not by common sense), then you can likely get Uncle Sam to pay for one third to one fourth of whatever plane you buy over the next five years (through depreciation).  The trick is that with a new plane, the schedule is front loaded.  You need to talk to an expert, but there are ways to help justify the extra expense of new. Lastly, some folks want a new plane, and can afford it (God Bless’em).  New planes have warranties and usually less problems with maintenance.  Some folks will put up cash to have this convenience. Good Luck, Eric PS don’t get discouraged by all the folks that say you should fly longer before buying.  Its good advice, but its not a law.  I love my plane, and am glad I didn’t wait.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am a student pilot, getting close to getting my Private Pilot license.   Being trained on a C-172, I consider purchasing a similar plane (i.e. a simple 4-seater single). Why should I not buy a new one (assuming I can afford it)? If the depreciation story is so obvious, who are those people buying new ’simple’ aircraft? Analogy with cars doesn’t work, as cars do change (and sometimes improve) year-to-year, which doesn’t seem to be the case with planes. I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase. Regards, M.

Response:

I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase.

Back in 1995, Maule was in trouble, so they cut the price on certain planes down to about 60% of normal retail. About that time, my 26 year old Cessna 150 hung a valve at ~800′ AGL when I was taking off to take my fiance on a sightseeing run up the Hudson River exclusion. At night. I called Maule the next day and said "build me a plane". I like flying behind new engines. George Patterson "Cuius testiculos habes, habeas cardia et cerebellum." – When you have  their full attention in your grip, their hearts and minds will follow.

Response:

I am a student pilot, getting close to getting my Private Pilot license.   Being trained on a C-172, I consider purchasing a similar plane (i.e. a simple 4-seater single). Why should I not buy a new one (assuming I can afford it)? If the depreciation story is so obvious, who are those people buying new ’simple’ aircraft? Analogy with cars doesn’t work, as cars do change (and sometimes improve) year-to-year, which doesn’t seem to be the case with planes. I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase. Regards, M.

Individuals (as opposed to companies, which is totally different) buy new versus used for the same reasons no matter what the big ticket item is. It’s bright, it’s shiny, smells new, and it doesn’t have the smells and stains of other people. It’s the latest and greatest. It has a warrenty and if anything is wrong you can go back and raise hell with the dealer instead of having to fix it yourself. You have made it, can do it, and by God, everyone should be aware of that fact. The feeling that it should be a while before anything breaks, and if anything does, you know about it as opposed to it being a hidden "feature" the seller doesn’t tell you about. As for the reality of any of this, airplanes are in a unique position because of the maintenance and logging requirements; there’s a vast difference between buying a 30 year old airplane and a 30 year old house or car just because of it. Bottom line; if the purchase has no business ramifications you are essentially buying a toy. Buy the best toy you can afford that floats your boat whether it’s a brand new 172 or a 1935 Waco as long as it’s something you can fly (I wouldn’t suggest buying a P-51, for example). Remember, he who dies with the most and best toys wins. — Jim Pennino (Toys, must have more toys)

Response:

The feeling that it should be a while before anything breaks, and if anything does, you know about it as opposed to it being a hidden "feature" the seller doesn’t tell you about.

After 1 year my new SR20 needs a second airplane logbook, the original was complete filled.

Response:

| I am a student pilot, getting close to getting my Private Pilot license. |   Being trained on a C-172, I consider purchasing a similar plane (i.e. | a simple 4-seater single). Why should I not buy a new one (assuming I | can afford it)? If the depreciation story is so obvious, who are those | people buying new ’simple’ aircraft? Analogy with cars doesn’t work, as | cars do change (and sometimes improve) year-to-year, which doesn’t seem | to be the case with planes. | Actually, airplanes change more from year to year than cars do. The avionics alone have changed significantly in the 172 since it was re-introduced in 1998. Airplanes depreciate about 10% a year for the first three years, then begin to slowly appreciate in value. (Except, of course, for airplanes with relatively short useful lives, such as the Cirrus SR22 — these will depreciate and never recover; their value will eventually depreciate to 0.) New airplanes have good warranties which can often offset the cost of maintenance on an older airplane. No matter how much you fix up an old plane, it remains old. It flies old, smells old, and breaks down a lot. It is generally much cheaper to buy a new airplane rather than to try to upgrade an old airplane with new avionics, paint, interior, etc.

Response:

share it with a few select friends (renters), it isn’t much more expensive than if I had bought  a used plane and not shared it.

Erick, What kind of arrangement do you have with your select friends (these renters)?  How does it work with Insurance and charging them rental fees? Thanks, Ryan N8096W

Response:

| share it with a few select friends (renters), it isn’t much more expensive | than if I had bought  a used plane and not shared it. | | Erick, What kind of arrangement do you have with your select friends (these | renters)?  How does it work with Insurance and charging them rental fees? | If you rent the aircraft, you have to do 100 hour inspections (though these are not a great burden — you just build that into the rent, along with gas, engine overhaul, etc.) You do not absolutely have to have insurance. The most expensive part is hull value, and some people just go uninsured; they carry only liability insurance. In fact, this is becoming more common. You can also usually get specific individuals covered on your insurance, or you can insist that they provide their own renter’s insurance.

Response:

New airplanes have good warranties which can often offset the cost of maintenance on an older airplane. No matter how much you fix up an old plane, it remains old. It flies old, smells old, and breaks down a lot.

This has not been my experience.  My C182P is 28 years old, and in the 3.5 years and 700+ hours I’ve flown it, it has never broken down once. I’ve yet to be stranded or have to cancel a flight for any mechanical reason. –Ron

Response:

I got on this 1995 Maule sales train a little later.  I bought one 2 years and 35 hours later as the 3rd owner (the previous owners just bought and hangared due to the low price).  I apparently paid exactly the factory advertised sale price but the plane had been upgraded with  enough Nav and radio gear to be flown reasonably. There’s an alternative strategy here – buying a recently new/slightly used a/c might be a good option.  You probably lose the warranty but you get an almost new ship with a big chunk of depreciation covered.  You have to  work hard to find the right deal instead of just sauntering up to the factory dealer, but you can save some bucks. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I will appreciate experienced owners who decided to buy new sharing their rationalization of such purchase. Back in 1995, Maule was in trouble, so they cut the price on certain planes down to about 60% of normal retail.

Response:

        OK…I gotta pipe in here: : Actually, airplanes change more from year to year than cars do. The avionics : alone have changed significantly in the 172 since it was re-introduced in : 1998.         This does not change the airplane… just the options included.   The fact that it’s "ridiculously" expensive to upgrade them is not intrinsic to the value of the plane… it’s induced : New airplanes have good warranties which can often offset the cost of : maintenance on an older airplane.         Buy a new airplane (C-172 at what, $200k?) and it’s warranty (*maybe* $5k worth of stuff done during the warranty)…. For that, I’d rather buy four used ones and throw them away when they break. :No matter how much you fix up an old : plane, it remains old. It flies ld, smells old, and breaks down a lot.         The "new" airplanes most people are talking about (certified Cessnas and Pipers) are basically warmed-over versions of the original planes built close to 50 years ago.  The only exceptions are the newer experimentals and kitplanes with composite constructions, liquid cooling, etc. :It is generally much cheaper to buy a new airplane rather than to try to : upgrade an old airplane with new avionics, paint, interior, etc.         That seems like a slightl warped version of the aircraft purchasing rule of thumb that’s it’s cheaper to buy another more expensive *used* aircraft with the avionics you want than a cheaper used one that needs some new avionics.  A new aircraft makes as much sense as a new car, financially… none.   New car:  $25k Used car: $5k (with $20k for "upgrades" and maintenance) New plane: $200k Used plane: $40k ($160k is a lot of upgrades and maintenance) Anway, enough ranting.  If you’ve gotta have the "new plane smell," go for it…. I just wish I could afford it.. -Cory — * The prime directive of Linux:                                         * *       – learn what you don’t know,                                    * *       – teach what you do.                                            * *                                               (Just my 20 USm$)       *

Response:

Question:

I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%?

Based on our experience with "Read my lips" George the 41st, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000.   Jim

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 As the Bush administration draws up plans to simplify the tax system, it is also refining arguments for why it may be necessary to shift more of the tax load onto lower-income workers.

=== The Washington Post is putting the Democrats’ spin on the story.  Everyone except the freeloaders will probably benefit.  The Liberals don’t like to see any reduction whatsoever for high-income taxpayers, but want to give Earned Income Credits to freeloaders. If either party really wanted to simplify taxes they should [1] Start with gross, total income.  [2] Allow deduction for any expense whatsoever incurred in order to enable the person to earn that income (with a standard maximum allowance for commuting and  a mileage allowance for business car expense).  [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. [4] Allow a standard deduction for food, clothing, shelter.  [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) The tax return could be reduced to a post card size, even with a progressive tax rate–the complicated part of taxes is not the mathematics of calculating it once you arrive at taxable income.

Response:

, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000.

George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster.  Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it.   The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes. One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline.

Response:

George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster. Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it.  

We will all be on the edge of our seats watching this one. The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes.

Someone has to get an increase – unless overall spending is reduced – which is highly unlikely if we go to war with Iraq. One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline.

The above only works during inflationary periods.  Presently we are flirting with deflation. Jim

Response:

[3] Allow Medical expenses in full.

I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?)

THAT is something long overdue!   But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%? Based on our experience with "Read my lips" George the 41st, my guess would be lowering the rates at the top and extending the top rates much deeper. The effect would be a flatter tax – George & Dick pay less – you and I pay more. I also think that would be a political disaster.  There are a lot more people making $60,000 per year than $600,000. Jim

As I see it, you can pay directly or you can pay indirectly, but you will pay. The only solution is to shrink government, e.g., get rid of Medicare, etc…   Not going to happen.  It is also impossible to control as "needs" are unlimited and will expand to consume any identifiable resource. The thing is like a baloon, it will expand until it bursts. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – George and Dick are well aware that it would be a political disaster. Even if they tried something that stupid, the congressmen and senators want to be re-elected time and again and would never vote for it. We will all be on the edge of our seats watching this one. The fat cats may get a bigger cut, but they won’t offset it by increasing taxes on lower incomes. Someone has to get an increase – unless overall spending is reduced – which is highly unlikely if we go to war with Iraq.

Let you in on a little secret.  War has nothing to do with it.  You know who used Viet Nam as an excuse to blow domestic spending out of all known proportion.  Slimeball O’Neil & cohorts pulled the same stunt when Reagan was trying to build up the defenses.  You want a $1 for defense, you have to sign these $4 worth of pork to keep us in office. When you have time, get the budget, its on the net, and compare the Defense Budget to HHS, HUD & Do.Ed. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – One method they may revive is  "bracket creep" which is the slickest way to raise taxes through use of the printing press and inflating incomes and cost of living so that you pay a higher percent. $6000 a year used to be a good salary.  Now $60,000 is only a moderate income. A buck private in the Army used to get $21 per month.  In WW II, they raised it to $75 a month. At that time, $21 a month was better than the breadline. The above only works during inflationary periods.  Presently we are flirting with deflation. Jim

– *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd

I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor. I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior. — *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor. So unearned income wouldn’t be taxed at all???

Correct.  I want the maximum amount of National capital formation possible and I want it to follow the "invisible hand." It would lower the cost of money and spur investment, building the Nation’s wealth. I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior. HHS and Ed. are semi-pointelss, but HUD helps a lot with the poor, it just needs a beauracratic overhaul.

HUD is one of those really bad ideas that even the english permanent civil service wouldn’t be able to get to work. It can’t be fixed and no one has ever been able to even get it veer into a reasonably useful direction.  It is and always will be a massive failure. -=john=-

– *             Ronald Lee Todd M.B.A., C.P.A.                  * *  Unemployed for six years, mistake of being an accountant.  * *   Students, when someone tells you of your great future as  * *       an accountant, ask him to show you the job.           *

Response:

[5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?)

Well, I don’t have a million dollar house and I find the mortgage interest deduction to be quite nice.  I would say that this deduction isn’t going to put much of a dent in the tax burden of someone that can afford a million dollar house to begin with. — Todd Stephens

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – [3] Allow Medical expenses in full. I can’t see any rhyme or reason to your prescriptions. The medical establishment should not be favored by tax subsidies. It should be taxed just as heavily as every other sector of the economy, until there is both, universal health care and removal of structural barriers that are blocking the supply of doctors and nurses. [5] Allow nothing for Real Estate Mortgage interest or Taxes on homes (why subsidize someone who chooses to buy a million dollar house?) THAT is something long overdue! But what difference if we agree on this or that? What are your *principles*? Todd I would go with the one fixed percentage against all income earned by labor.

So unearned income wouldn’t be taxed at all??? I would also close down HHS, HUD, Do.Ed., and a big chunk of Ag., and Interior.

HHS and Ed. are semi-pointelss, but HUD helps a lot with the poor, it just needs a beauracratic overhaul. -=john=-

Response:

I read somewhere else recently that the administration was planning to squeeze a substantial sum out of Medicare.  I don’t know how they plan to provide drug benefits to seniors, which they also claim to be working on, while cutting funding.

I’m wondering if that means they want a broader "bracket" (expand the 27% range to include lower incomes) or if it means raising the rates.  Does 27% become 36%? — Todd Stephens

Response:

"The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that."

Well, my household falls in that category.  I didn’t realize I was working poor though. (Actually, I do work, and I feel poor most of the time so maybe that counts.)  Paying 1/3 more taxes?  I’d love to debate GWB on that one as well. — Todd Stephens

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 <snip "The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that."

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help". — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia

Response:

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help".

I think the implication was that their tax burden is only 2/3 of what some believe it should be. — Todd Stephens

Response:

"A third more" than what?  That’s as empty as "half off", "the more you shop, the more you save", and "Hi, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help". I think the implication was that their tax burden is only 2/3 of what some believe it should be.

That was what I got out of it. I’ve been expecting this – or something similiar.   It is real easy for the new guy to talk about tax cuts, but doing it is another matter.   I read somewhere else recently that the administration was planning to squeeze a substantial sum out of Medicare.  I don’t know how they plan to provide drug benefits to seniors, which they also claim to be working on, while cutting funding. I still think of "Read my lips" George the 41st every time I do a schedule A.   Jim

Response:

New Tax Plan May Bring Shift In Burden Poor Could Pay A Bigger Share By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 16, 2002; Page A03 As the Bush administration draws up plans to simplify the tax system, it is also refining arguments for why it may be necessary to shift more of the tax load onto lower-income workers. <snip The Council of Economic Advisers’ "Economic Report to the President," scheduled for release late next month or in early February, is to include a section arguing for new methods to calculate the distribution of tax burdens on various income groups. The Treasury Department is working up more sophisticated distribution tables that are expected to make the poor appear to be paying less in taxes and the rich to be paying more. <snip The tenor of the administration’s policy discussions marks a dramatic shift from early in 2001, when Bush sold his 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut as a tool to "take down the tollgate on the road to the middle class," emphasizing its beneficial impact on workers "on the outskirts of poverty." At that time, the administration fretted over the tax burden on the working poor, which the White House calculated to include federal income taxes, state taxes and the Social Security tax. <snip But advocates of this new line can expect a furious backlash. Liberal commentators have already reduced the argument to an appeal to tax the poor, and even conservatives worry that the label will stick. "It’s hard to conclude it’s anything else," said the Heritage Foundation’s Beach. Michael J. Graetz, a Yale University law professor and tax reform expert, said he could not figure out where the administration’s arguments are supposed to lead. "I would be very surprised if the agenda is to put more people on the tax rolls," he said. "That doesn’t seem like a good political agenda." But Democrats say that is exactly where the administration is heading. Matsui (Rep. Robert T. Matsui – D-Calif) said he sees the seeds of a disastrous Republican overreach. "The president is making the case that people who earn between $50 [thousand] and $75,000 a year should be paying a third more taxes," Matsui said. "I’d love to debate him on that." <snip http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59577-2002Dec15.html The Democrats may be finding their issue. Jim Hudspeth

Response:

Question:

Stop whining!   Trying to justify the costs are ridiculous, you’ll NEVER do it.  And if you do, it’ll not work out.  Look at what’s happening. Now, you’re trying to convince yourself that a faster airplane may be the ticket for trips that you’ll probably never make!  Look into a club or renting for those occasional trips. How about a close relationship with a current owner?  If you just want to be one of the boys and get into the air on your own steed, be happy and satisfied with a 150, a Champ or Chief or an Ercoupe.  Under 15K and costs are low.  This is pure pleasure and you need to fund it with piss money, so face the facts.  But remeber, what ever you get will never be enough.  That includes buying the space shuttle!  Good luck and keep at it, just throw away the damn spreadsheets. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really

Response:

And you’ll need to get into that Barbie jet of yours to go as fast. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You were doing great until you got to the part about what’s more fun to fly. Right then and there you entered into the realm of bs. <grin Juan And aviation-wise, the only thing more fun to fly than a Viking, is flying a hang glider, which on time is the best fun you can have with your clothes on…   Enrique (OH MY GAWD!!!, they are gonna burn me before I get to HELL) Troconis

Response:

I like to live within my means so modeling the costs of ownership make sense to me.  With my Excel spreadsheet I can see just what I will need to do to get a plane.  Of course, in my circumstances there are things that cannot be put into the spreadsheet such as a family that likes to travel and a wife with back problems who cannot stand long car trips.  So I am putting myself on the waiting list for a tie down spot (only $200-250 per month and a one year wait, much better than the $800 per month and 5 year wait for a T-hangar). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Stop whining! Trying to justify the costs are ridiculous, you’ll NEVER do it.  And if you do, it’ll not work out.  Look at what’s happening. Now, you’re trying to convince yourself that a faster airplane may be the ticket for trips that you’ll probably never make!  Look into a club or renting for those occasional trips. How about a close relationship with a current owner?  If you just want to be one of the boys and get into the air on your own steed, be happy and satisfied with a 150, a Champ or Chief or an Ercoupe.  Under 15K and costs are low.  This is pure pleasure and you need to fund it with piss money, so face the facts.  But remeber, what ever you get will never be enough.  That includes buying the space shuttle!  Good luck and keep at it, just throw away the damn spreadsheets. As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really

Response:

Good idea, Jim— I think I’ll do just that.  They meet again first sunday in August – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Otherwise, if anyone in Little River, Ukiah, Boonville, or Willits is interested in a partnership, let me know! Perhaps a call to your friendly local EAA chapter would be a good start for an earnest search for a partner and/or a plane .  Attend a meeting, meet some nice folks and let your wishes be known. Check out Willits EAA at: http://www.willitseaa.homestead.com/ — Jim Fisher Cherokee 180 www.EAAChapter615.org

Response:

Jefro, If you are thinking of taking the 7k a year you now spend on flying added to the 4k that you are going to spend on travel expenses and spend it on a plane that will fulfill all that need for 11k a year, then you have a perfectly rational decision process that rivals those of many Fortune 500 companies. I once met a real estate agent that said that you should not look at your house as an investment. "Buy the house that you want to live in," he said. While that has an important bit of wisdom to it, it also is a load of crap to someone like me whose buying process is based on using rational processes to keep from making a bad emotion based decision. Take the middle road.  Don’t throw out emotion, you have to want and love the plane. Don’t throw out financial considerations or you won’t be able to enjoy it – either because it adds too much stress to your life, or becuase you can’t keep it in the air. Throwing out logic is something that some millionaires need to do because they are so uptight they would never buy the plane otherwise.  Guys like you and me need to throw in some financial planning or we will never be able to enjoy the plane. I think you are on the right track.  Just ensure that you can afford the "emergency" that will get you every few years, and do your diligence on the plane.  Your buddy may have taken great care of it, but it may still be ready to blow up. Bon Voyage!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Congrats, Jefro — you’re well on the road to financial perdition…  ;)

Hehehehehe MUCH cheaper commercially (or in your car), there are many trips that can ONLY be made realistically in a light plane.

Amen to that.  For one thing, the nearest "big" airport is 4 hrs drive from here, and Grandma’s house on the other end is 3 hrs drive from either MSP or Des Moines.  That alone adds 7 hours onto a very long trip. places commercially, and with rental cars — you will soon conclude that personal aircraft are the CHEAPEST form of transportation!

hahahha… I love it!  Keep going, we’ll get those planes to pay US to fly them pretty soon In fact, using current "WorldCom" accounting techniques, you can actually show a PROFIT from flying your own plane, based on decreased expenditures!

HA!  You did it!  I want you to be my financial advisor from now on.  No shredders, though. Thanks, man.  We’ve been working on the new lobby, and I’ve suddenly remembered why I decided not to make a living in the building trades.  I’m getting too old to hold a Sawz-all over my head all day!

Yike, be careful there.  I bet there are a ton of college students in town whose parents pay their health insurance who might want some summer work…

Response:

I suspect part of the attraction to buying is where Jefro lives. The north coast of California is a bit of a drive from anywhere. The plane rental opportunities are slim and expensive and having a plane makes it a lot more reasonable to get out of the area occasionally.

You said it!  4 hrs drive to either airport (OAK or SFO) or Amtrak.  We got Greyhound over in Willits, though.  (eek)

Response:

You were doing great until you got to the part about what’s more fun to fly. Right then and there you entered into the realm of bs. <grin Juan

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And aviation-wise, the only thing more fun to fly than a Viking, is flying a hang glider, which on time is the best fun you can have with your clothes on…   Enrique (OH MY GAWD!!!, they are gonna burn me before I get to HELL) Troconis

Response:

Yike, be careful there.  I bet there are a ton of college students in town whose parents pay their health insurance who might want some summer

work… Yeah, but it’s ME who is paying the liability insurance.  Last thing I need is some whiny parent complaining cuz junior gave himself a hangnail while working on the hotel… Besides, demolition is *fun*!   Like my friend (who is helping me) exclaimed, while holding the Sawz-All with a wicked gleam in his eye: "If it scars the earth in any way, I LOVE it…" I’d say that just about sums up most guy’s attitudes toward power tools, eh? — Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993

Response:

Otherwise, if anyone in Little River, Ukiah, Boonville, or Willits is interested in a partnership, let me know!

Perhaps a call to your friendly local EAA chapter would be a good start for an earnest search for a partner and/or a plane .  Attend a meeting, meet some nice folks and let your wishes be known. Check out Willits EAA at: http://www.willitseaa.homestead.com/ — Jim Fisher Cherokee 180 www.EAAChapter615.org

Response:

Don’t you dare compare a plywood and rag airplane to the sacred Bonanza.  Shame on you, may the termites of a thousand forests infest your wings. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi Jefro, under the risk of starting a never-ending flame war, I’ll suggest you to take a look at the Super Viking. You’ll be glad you did…   Check out http://www.bellancaviking.com, especially http://www.bellancaviking.com/news.html.  See also http://www.millerflyingservice.com for some current prices and http://www.kitepilot.com/viking/horror_story.htm for what Miller did for me. Sometime ago someone said here that Vikings had the bad habit of breaking up in mid flight.  That was a false accusation (read the NTSB files) and could not be proved.  Vikings don’t have a worse tendency to break up than V-tail Bonanzas zooming out of control or C172 bouncing in thunderstorms.  And aviation-wise, the only thing more fun to fly than a Viking, is flying a hang glider, which on time is the best fun you can have with your clothes on…   Enrique (OH MY GAWD!!!, they are gonna burn me before I get to HELL) Troconis http://www.kitepilot.com/ http://www.kitepilot.com/viking/ As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Hi Jefro, under the risk of starting a never-ending flame war, I’ll suggest you to take a look at the Super Viking. You’ll be glad you did…   Check out http://www.bellancaviking.com, especially http://www.bellancaviking.com/news.html.  See also http://www.millerflyingservice.com for some current prices and http://www.kitepilot.com/viking/horror_story.htm for what Miller did for me. Sometime ago someone said here that Vikings had the bad habit of breaking up in mid flight.  That was a false accusation (read the NTSB files) and could not be proved.  Vikings don’t have a worse tendency to break up than V-tail Bonanzas zooming out of control or C172 bouncing in thunderstorms.  And aviation-wise, the only thing more fun to fly than a Viking, is flying a hang glider, which on time is the best fun you can have with your clothes on…   Enrique (OH MY GAWD!!!, they are gonna burn me before I get to HELL) Troconis http://www.kitepilot.com/ http://www.kitepilot.com/viking/

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Yer Nuts, trying to figure out all the cost of this trip & that trip, what if I took the train, what is it going to cost to drive, what I will save if

I was on this road for a while in the beginning, trying to figure out whether I could one thing or another more cheaply by flying, and realized it wasn’t going to work then.  I don’t have any illusions of flying being cheaper than taking the train, but then I have had a few years of finding out just how expensive the train can be as well—delays measured in 12-hour increments, lack of sleep from the condition of the rails, and hotels and rental cars because the train doesn’t quite go where I want to go are the norm.  For a $1600 train fare we usually spend about $2100 on the trip with many weird excursions en route. In short, I think all travel is as you describe.  I well remember the 2-week vacation to the lake when I was a kid that turned into one week at the lake, preceded by six days at a truck stop near Stockton, CA waiting for a transmission part.  We were stuck at Anderson’s Split Pea Soup, and if I never eat another bowl of pea soup it will be too soon, no offense to Anderson’s—it’s good, but not for a week.  I never found commercial flying to be all that reliable either.  Cheaper, maybe, but the advantages of flying yourself far outweight the advantages of other forms of long-distance travel. The adventure is at least half the fun, and flying is the best adventure there is. Thanks for the response

Response:

Your typical mission needs, seem ideal for a partnership. As a suggestion, why don’t you offer to buy 50% of your friend’s Mooney? Having a good

I would absolutely love to do this, except for two things: 1. He lives across the country from me 2. He’s selling because his needs are changing Otherwise, if anyone in Little River, Ukiah, Boonville, or Willits is interested in a partnership, let me know!

Response:

Amen.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve had some minutes in an my airplane that I wouldn’t take a million dollars for. I’ve also had a coupla minutes I woulda given a million bux not to have had. Regards, Art (Mommy, I scared myself) Johnson Well in the real world, flying is the most expensive way to go. Well, now, that depends on how much value you place on your time, the aggravation of having to stand in line, take off your shoes for some TSA drone who’s gotten too big for his britches, the chance that you’ll have to do it all over again because some moron from Atlanta decided to jump the line and breach security, the chance that you may do it yet all over again because you were within eyeshot of the other TSA drone inside the terminal, the delay in departure and chance that you’ll do it YET all over again because the idiot pilots were drunk and belligerent, the lousy food, the lousy service, the attitude that everyone from the pilot to the baggage handler is doing you a favor by helping you dispose of your money in exchange for a cramped seat next to some 4 foot wide whale that wouldn’t fit into a 55 gallon drum, let alone an airline seat, but thinks that no matter how much stored Crisco she’s got stored in her humungous butt because she can’t stop stuffing her face with food she thinks she still has the right to aggravate other passenger’s lives, the potential loss of baggage and having to deal with the attitude problem from the baggage services drone, then wondering if the cab driver at your destination is going to try to rip you off, or today is his first day and he’s totally clueless when it comes to reading a map, or he smells like a mule after a 12 day trip through some swamp and has the windows closed and the a/c on high, etc., etc. Of course, if all you do is compare cost of the airline ticket vs indirect/direct cost of flying your own a/c, more than likely you’ll never make it worth your while, but then again, if you’re going to be that way, ride a Greyhound or book a ticket on Amtrak.

Response:

I suspect part of the attraction to buying is where Jefro lives. The north coast of California is a bit of a drive from anywhere. The plane rental opportunities are slim and expensive and having a plane makes it a lot more reasonable to get out of the area occasionally. Mike Clapp

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yer Nuts, trying to figure out all the cost of this trip & that trip, what if I took the train, what is it going to cost to drive, what I will save if I own a plane and fly.  Well in the real world, flying is the most expensive way to go.  First  & always first you have to take the weather into consideration.  That little item will run up your costs, and here is an example.  You and your family depart and head east.  You get to the mountains and guess what, you run right into a nice little storm, you know the one the briefer said would be moving out of the area, but old mother nature had other plans.  So you land at a nice little airport to sit it out, should be clearing up by tomorrow.  Now you have to get a taxi, get a motel, feed the family.  Well that little storm gets bigger, and you are now home-steading the motel for a week.  If you think you can justify owning an airplane to save money on a trip, it will not work.  Once in a blue moon everything will work out just right, and the flight will go as plan, but I never really count on it.  I have even arrived at my destination airport and found it closed because of a crash, I always have extra fuel for those situations, but remember you need money and options, and don’t worry about getting there on time.  The way I look at it is:  I get there when I get there. Clyde As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Congrats, Jefro — you’re well on the road to financial perdition…  ;) I *especially* like the part about remodeling your house in order to raise the value in order to provide the line of credit you’ll need in case you lose an engine!   This is creative financing at its best! (Kind or reminds me of the time I REALLY wanted a GoldWing, but had no money…so I managed to sell my Fiero, buy a Mazda GLC, AND finance the GoldWing — all for the same monthly payments.  Mary was amazed.  And appalled.) But I digress; you’ve got "the fever" bad, boy!  ;) Now, as to the nay-sayers who have so eloquently pointed out that personal flying is not cost-justifiable, they are only partially correct.   While it is true that "major-hub-to-major-hub" air (or driving) travel is usually MUCH cheaper commercially (or in your car), there are many trips that can ONLY be made realistically in a light plane. For example, our vacation to Arizona last month couldn’t have been accomplished by car — either time-wise, or by location.   I simply don’t have two weeks available to drive to the Grand Canyon and back, and to pay commercial airfare for four people would have been outrageously expensive, especially when you factor in all the rental cars we would have needed. (And does United fly into Liberal, Kansas?  Or Grand Canyon Airport?  Not!) Thus, if you factor in all the amazing places you will visit in your own plane — and then try to figure out what it would cost to visit those SAME places commercially, and with rental cars — you will soon conclude that personal aircraft are the CHEAPEST form of transportation! In fact, using current "WorldCom" accounting techniques, you can actually show a PROFIT from flying your own plane, based on decreased expenditures! And if you simply capitalize your costs, instead of counting them as expenses, why, you might be able to retire a wealthy man on the proceeds your new Mooney provides! So, see?  It IS possible to justify owning your own plane.  You’ve just got to want it bad enough! PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Thanks, man.  We’ve been working on the new lobby, and I’ve suddenly remembered why I decided not to make a living in the building trades.  I’m getting too old to hold a Sawz-all over my head all day! — Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993

Response:

First, if you want to own a somewhat high-performance plane so much, why not a partnership?  Surely you could have found someone over the years?

Two answers, (1) perhaps there haven’t been enough years, and (2) I live in a rural area with few pilots.  I have nagged around the pilot’s association with no takers to date.  In fact I was just this weekend bugging the airport manager to keep his ears open for anyone looking.  I’m not sure I’m temperamentally suited to a partnership, but for the other rewards of ownership I would be willing to try. Second, reasoning that spending money on your house enables you to buy a plane strikes me as something that Enron would admire.  Besides, if you’ve owned your home even a couple of years in California prices have risen 15%-30%.  No need to remodel to increase equity.

We have only been here a year, and I need the office space anyway. Good comment about Enron, though, and something to take to heart.  I am lucky enough to have a very stable job and the means to pay back the loan, and I am specifically choosing a Mooney over my real dream plane for its resale value in case something disastrous happens.  However, you are right, borrowing money is always a risk. Anyway I hate houses with no garage.  Just a thought.

We’re in luck!  The house also has a very nice detatched 2-car garage.  The original builder thought to make the attached garage in such a way that it could be easily converted to living space, and part of that was adding another garage right next to the house.  It looks a little odd the way it is now. thanks for the comments

Response:

Yer Nuts, trying to figure out all the cost of this trip & that trip, what if I took the train, what is it going to cost to drive, what I will save if I own a plane and fly.  Well in the real world, flying is the most expensive way to go.  First  & always first you have to take the weather into consideration.  That little item will run up your costs, and here is an example.  You and your family depart and head east.  You get to the mountains and guess what, you run right into a nice little storm, you know the one the briefer said would be moving out of the area, but old mother nature had other plans.  So you land at a nice little airport to sit it out, should be clearing up by tomorrow.  Now you have to get a taxi, get a motel, feed the family.  Well that little storm gets bigger, and you are now home-steading the motel for a week.  If you think you can justify owning an airplane to save money on a trip, it will not work.  Once in a blue moon everything will work out just right, and the flight will go as plan, but I never really count on it.  I have even arrived at my destination airport and found it closed because of a crash, I always have extra fuel for those situations, but remember you need money and options, and don’t worry about getting there on time.  The way I look at it is:  I get there when I get there. Clyde

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Well in the real world, flying is the most expensive way to go.

Well, now, that depends on how much value you place on your time, the aggravation of having to stand in line, take off your shoes for some TSA drone who’s gotten too big for his britches, the chance that you’ll have to do it all over again because some moron from Atlanta decided to jump the line and breach security, the chance that you may do it yet all over again because you were within eyeshot of the other TSA drone inside the terminal, the delay in departure and chance that you’ll do it YET all over again because the idiot pilots were drunk and belligerent, the lousy food, the lousy service, the attitude that everyone from the pilot to the baggage handler is doing you a favor by helping you dispose of your money in exchange for a cramped seat next to some 4 foot wide whale that wouldn’t fit into a 55 gallon drum, let alone an airline seat, but thinks that no matter how much stored Crisco she’s got stored in her humungous butt because she can’t stop stuffing her face with food she thinks she still has the right to aggravate other passenger’s lives, the potential loss of baggage and having to deal with the attitude problem from the baggage services drone, then wondering if the cab driver at your destination is going to try to rip you off, or today is his first day and he’s totally clueless when it comes to reading a map, or he smells like a mule after a 12 day trip through some swamp and has the windows closed and the a/c on high, etc., etc. Of course, if all you do is compare cost of the airline ticket vs indirect/direct cost of flying your own a/c, more than likely you’ll never make it worth your while, but then again, if you’re going to be that way, ride a Greyhound or book a ticket on Amtrak.

Response:

I’ve had some minutes in an my airplane that I wouldn’t take a million dollars for. I’ve also had a coupla minutes I woulda given a million bux not to have had. Regards, Art (Mommy, I scared myself) Johnson – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Well in the real world, flying is the most expensive way to go. Well, now, that depends on how much value you place on your time, the aggravation of having to stand in line, take off your shoes for some TSA drone who’s gotten too big for his britches, the chance that you’ll have to do it all over again because some moron from Atlanta decided to jump the line and breach security, the chance that you may do it yet all over again because you were within eyeshot of the other TSA drone inside the terminal, the delay in departure and chance that you’ll do it YET all over again because the idiot pilots were drunk and belligerent, the lousy food, the lousy service, the attitude that everyone from the pilot to the baggage handler is doing you a favor by helping you dispose of your money in exchange for a cramped seat next to some 4 foot wide whale that wouldn’t fit into a 55 gallon drum, let alone an airline seat, but thinks that no matter how much stored Crisco she’s got stored in her humungous butt because she can’t stop stuffing her face with food she thinks she still has the right to aggravate other passenger’s lives, the potential loss of baggage and having to deal with the attitude problem from the baggage services drone, then wondering if the cab driver at your destination is going to try to rip you off, or today is his first day and he’s totally clueless when it comes to reading a map, or he smells like a mule after a 12 day trip through some swamp and has the windows closed and the a/c on high, etc., etc. Of course, if all you do is compare cost of the airline ticket vs indirect/direct cost of flying your own a/c, more than likely you’ll never make it worth your while, but then again, if you’re going to be that way, ride a Greyhound or book a ticket on Amtrak.

Response:

Jefro, Don’t even try to cost justify owning a plane – you never can. It’s an emotional thing. If you did this before you married, had kids or bought a dog, you wouldn’t have any of them. Like your family, an aircraft costs serious money to keep, but the pleasure you get is worth every penny. Your typical mission needs, seem ideal for a partnership. As a suggestion, why don’t you offer to buy 50% of your friend’s Mooney? Having a good partnership *significantly* reduces cost of ownership, and if there are only two of you, access to the plane for a couple of weeks at a time is unlikely to be an issue. Regards,

As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.

 SNIP The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird.

SNIP

Response:

IMO damn good advice, especially since the plane you’re interested in is owned by someone you already consider a good friend and you seem to think that he takes good care of it.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Jefro, Don’t even try to cost justify owning a plane – you never can. It’s an emotional thing. If you did this before you married, had kids or bought a dog, you wouldn’t have any of them. Like your family, an aircraft costs serious money to keep, but the pleasure you get is worth every penny. Your typical mission needs, seem ideal for a partnership. As a suggestion, why don’t you offer to buy 50% of your friend’s Mooney? Having a good partnership *significantly* reduces cost of ownership, and if there are only two of you, access to the plane for a couple of weeks at a time is unlikely to be an issue. Regards, As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  SNIP The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. SNIP

Response:

The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage,

Coupla comments.  OK three. First, if you want to own a somewhat high-performance plane so much, why not a partnership?  Surely you could have found someone over the years? Second, reasoning that spending money on your house enables you to buy a plane strikes me as something that Enron would admire.  Besides, if you’ve owned your home even a couple of years in California prices have risen 15%-30%.  No need to remodel to increase equity. Anyway I hate houses with no garage.  Just a thought.

Response:

As many of you will remember, I am a fairly pessimistic regular here.  I have done a lot of research over the past few years, created spreadsheet after spreadsheet to convince myself that I could afford to own a plane, and finally gave it up due to the financial risks involved.  I really wanted to buy just a small plane, a 172 or similar, but simply couldn’t afford it.  The whole thing simply stretched me too tight, particularly since the stock market has remained in the toilet. Well… Things change, though not much has changed financially.  I was sniffing around at some Mooneys not long ago and it occurred to me that I was trying to cost-justify the wrong plane.  Also, my flight "mission" is changing slightly in a positive direction. For background, we normally make two "long" trips each year from our home in northern California, one to southern CA by driving (for some reason it’s always in bad weather) and one to Iowa on Amtrak.  We could use the 172 to get to southern CA, but I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking the whole family to Iowa in a 172, and I couldn’t afford a bigger plane. Between the two trips, we spend around $3k/yr.  We are going to discontinue the regular trip to southern CA, maybe only go every two years now, but increase the frequency to Iowa since my Grandma turns 85 this year and her health is failing, not to mention that we have gotten closer to family there in recent years.  Expected amount to spend on travelling to Iowa twice a year is about $4k. Now… as I said, I couldn’t justify making that trip in a 172, but what about a faster plane?  Sniffing around Mooneys prompted me to look into it.  A mid-60s Mooney M20C can be had for about the same cash outlay as a mid-70s 172, with approximately the same financial risks.  BUT, the trips to Iowa could be made easily in a Mooney.  If I apply the $4k/yr we spend travelling anyway to the $7k/yr I spend on flying (approx. 75hrs/yr at average $95/hr), suddenly we are into the realm of ownership. But about that pesky financial liability.  What happens if an engine goes south?  I’m still stuck here, but one option for coping is to have at least $15k readily available, even in form of a loan.  I can afford monthly cash flow more easily than large-chunk outlay, so I’ll be taking money out of the Home Equity Line of Credit to help pay for the plane, but it drains the availability of funds in that loan to a minimum, and I’m not going to get another loan. The line of credit is a function of the value of my house.  The answer? Make the house more valuable!  So I’m remodeling the garage, making it into a master bedroom suite with attached home office.  (I get the added advantage of a bigger office.)  If I do a good job on the remodel I’ll be able to afford the plane, and the faster I get it done the sooner it will all happen.  That’s motivation for you. The best part is that a friend is interested in selling his M20C between now and October, and I know very well how he has treated the bird. I’m posting this to show that a even a pessimistic (albeit dedicated) nut like myself can find a way to afford a plane and manage the associated financial risk.  The added benefits are numerous and have been discussed here and elsewhere, and I am totally jazzed about the possibility of taking advantage of them.  I am also more than ever convinced that waiting was the right thing for me to do until now, and that going into something like this with eyes open is the best way, for me anyway. PS.  Jay, I’ll try to stop by in Sept/Oct.  I should be done with my Skilsaw by then if you need to borrow it.  :D

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – PAYING OFF YOUR DEBTS READING THIS COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE! IT DOES WORK! I found this on a bulletin board and decided to try it. A little while back, I was browsing through newsgroups, just like you are now, and came across an article similar to this that said you could make thousands of dollars within weeks with only an initial investment of $6.00! So I thought, "Yeah right, this must be a scam", but like most of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send $1.00 to each of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You then place your own name and address in the bottom of the list at #6, and post the article in at least 200 newsgroups. (There are thousands) No catch, that was it. So after thinking it over, and talking to a few people first, I thought about trying it. I figured: "what have I got to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right?" Then I invested the measly $6.00. Well GUESS WHAT!?… within 7 days, I started getting money in the mail! I was shocked! I figured it would end soon, but the money just kept coming in. In my first week, I made about $25.00. By the end of the second week I had made a total of over $ 900.00! In the third week I had over $8,000.00 and it’s still growing.. It’s certainly worth $6.00,and 6 stamps, I have spent more than that on the lottery!! Let me tell youhow this works and most importantly, WHY it works… Also, make sure youprint a copy of this article NOW, so you can get the information off of it as you need it. I promise you that if you follow the directions exactly, that you will start making more money than you thought possible by doing something so easy! Suggestion: Read this entire message carefully! (print it out or download it.) Follow the simple directions and watch the money come in! It’s easy. It’s legal. And, your investment is only $6.00 (Plus postage) IMPORTANT: This is not a rip-off; it is not indecent; it is not illegal; and it is 99% no risk – it really works! If all of the following instructions are adhered to, you will receive extraordinary dividends. PLEASE NOTE: Please follow these directions EXACTLY, and $50,000 or more can be yours in 20 to 60 days. This program remains successful because of the honesty and integrity of the participants. Please continue its success by carefully adhering to the instructions. You will now become part of the Mail Order business. In this business your product is not solid and tangible, it’s a service. You are in the business of developing Mailing Lists. Many large corporations are happy to pay big bucks for quality lists. However, the money made from the mailing lists is secondary to the income which is made from people like you and me asking to be included in that list. Here are the 4 easy steps to success: STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper and write the following on each piece of paper "PLEASE PUT ME ON YOUR MAILING LIST." Now get 6 US $1.00 bills and place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of paper so the bill will not be seen through the envelope (to prevent thievery). Next, place one paper in each of the 6 envelopes and seal them. You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of paper stating the above phrase, your name and address, and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating a service. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! You are requesting a legitimate service and you are paying for it! Like most of us I was a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal. Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses: #1) David Freeman 11045 Harbour Springs Circle Boca Raton, Fl 33428 #2) Brian Carlson 177 Nataqua Ave. Pacifica, CA #3) H. Gulley 2818 Sherman Rd. Portsmouth, OH 45662 #4) Pat Webb 4527 Hayes St. (Rear) Calumet Township, In 46408 #5) R Mayes 3821 N. 15th Drive Phoenix AZ 85015 #6) M Wolfe 1123 SW Liggett Ct Blue Springs MO  64015 STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move the other names up (6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc…) and add YOUR Name as number 6 on the list. STEP 3: Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as close to original as possible. Now, post your amended article to at least 200 newsgroups. (I think there are close to 24,000 groups) All you need is 200, but remember, the more you post, the more money you make! You won’t get very much unless you post like crazy. This is perfectly legal! If you have any doubts, refer to Title 18 Sec. 1302 & 1341 of the Postal lottery laws. Keep a copy of these steps for yourself and, whenever you need money, you can use it again, and again. PLEASE REMEMBER that this program remains successful because of the honesty and integrity of the participants and by their carefully adhering to the directions. Look at it this way. If you are of integrity, the program will continue and the money that so many others have received will come your way. NOTE: You may want to retain every name and address sent to you, either on a computer or hard copy and keep the notes people send you. This VERIFIES that you are truly providing a service. (Also, it might be a good idea to wrap the $1 bill in dark paper to reduce the risk of mail theft.) So, as each post is downloaded and the directions carefully followed, six members will be reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer with one dollar each. Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when your name reaches the #1 position you will be receiving thousands of dollars in CASH!!! What an opportunity for only $6.00 ($1.00 for each of the first six people listed above) Send it now, add your own name to the list and you’re in business! Step 1) You do not need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting. Simply put your cursor at the beginning of this letter and drag your cursor to the bottom of this document, and select ‘copy’ from the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter into the computer’s memory. Step 2) Open a blank ‘notepad’ file and place your cursor at the top of the blank page. From the ‘edit’ menu select ‘paste’. This will paste a copy of the letter into notepad so that you can add your name to the list. Step 3) Save your new notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do your postings in different settings, you’ll always have this file to go back to. Step 4) Use Netscape or Internet explorer and try searching for various newsgroups (on-line forums, message boards, chat sites, discussions.) Step 5) Visit these message boards and post this article as a new message by highlighting the text of this letter and selecting paste from the edit menu. Fill in the Subject, this will be the header that everyone sees as they scroll through the list of postings in a particular group, click the post message button. You’re done with your first one! Congratulations…THAT’S IT! All you have to do is jump to different newsgroups and post away, after you get the hang of it, it will take about 30 seconds for each newsgroup! **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE MONEY YOU WILL MAKE! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST A MINIMUM OF 200** That’s it! You will begin receiving money from around the world within days! You may eventually want to rent a P.O.Box due to the large amount of mail you will receive. If you wish to stay anonymous, you can invent a name to use, as long as the postman will deliver it. **JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.** Now, each of the 5 persons who just sent me $1.00 make the MINIMUM 200 postings, each with my name at #5 and only 5 persons respond to each of the original 5, that is another $25.00 for me, now those 25 each make 200 MINIMUM posts with my name at #4 and only 5 replies each, I will bring in an additional $125.00! Now, those 125 persons turn around and post the MINIMUM 200 with my name at #3 and only receive 5 replies each, I will make an additional $625.00! OK, now here is the fun part, each of those 625 persons post a MINIMUM 200 letters with my name at #2 and they each only receive 5 replies, that just made me $3,125.00!!! Those 3,125 persons will all deliver this message to 200 newsgroups with my name at #1 and if still 5 persons per 200 newsgroups react I will receive $15,625,00! With an original investment of only $6.00! AMAZING! When your name is no longer on the list, you just take the latest posting in the newsgroups, and send out another $6.00 to names on the list, putting your name at number 6 again. And start posting again. The thing to remember is do you realize that thousands of people all over the world are joining the internet and reading these articles everyday?, JUST LIKE YOU are now!! So, can you afford $6.00 and see if it really works?? I think so… People have said, "what if the plan is played out and no one sends you the money? So what! What are the chances of that happening when there are tons of new honest users and new honest people who are joining the internet and newsgroups everyday and are willing to give it a try? Estimates are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users, every day, with thousands of those joining the actual internet. Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this will really work.

Response:

(The fully postquoted scam deleted) Dear Chris, That is very commendable. Please, however, do not aggravate the situation by repeating the entire scam. More on this facet at  Of proper quoting  http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html    All the best, Timo — Prof. Timo Salmi ftp & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5 Department of Accounting and Business Finance  ; University of Vaasa Timo’s  FAQ  materials  at   http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html

Response:

Question:

http://www.taxtools.com says the FTC decided CPAs are financial institutions and must provide written privacy policies. Do you CPAs do this?      Mike Block – Tax Cut CPA  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester     FREE  NetLedger accounting   FREE 462p QB books/error codes 100+ QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/

Response:

Mike Block – Tax Cut C.P.A. wrote http://www.taxtools.com says the FTC decided CPAs are financial institutions and must provide written privacy policies. Do you CPAs do this?

I picked up some preprinted ‘privacy statements’ from Greatland (800-968-1099) and am including them in with the client’s tax returns (or at least that’s the plan).  They are very, very basic and probably are less in scope that what is required by the AICPA (and your state society) as far as client confidentiality. I think most CPA’s (and other accounting and tax professionals) keep their client information confidential, and I also think that it can only be beneficial to let the client know that.   — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia http://www.pat-cpa.com

Response:

Good question.  I will follow up with our state society and see if there is any news regarding this specific law.  After reading it, it does seem that tax preparers should be sending a notice to it’s clients that agrees not to sell their non-public information that section 502 states we are already prohibited from selling without permission from the client.  That’s the gov. for you. Mike.

Response:

Good question.  I will follow up with our state society and see if there is any news regarding this specific law.  After reading it, it does seem that tax preparers should be sending a notice to it’s clients that agrees not to sell their non-public information that section 502 states we are already prohibited from selling without permission from the client.  That’s the gov. for you.

This law also encompasses non-Circ 230 preparers, if I’m not mistaken. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens,  Georgia http://www.pat-cpa.com

Response:

This law also encompasses non-Circ 230 preparers, if I’m not mistaken.

Mike, Thanks for the heads up. It would appear we can provide our first annual notice any time during 2001. Annual Privacy Notice (

Question:

I guess it’ll be on C-SPAN at this time and date – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->***** HEARING ANNOUNCEMENT ***** >GRASSLEY ANNOUNCES HEARING ON KIDNEY DIALYSIS >Hearing: "Kidney Dialysis Patients: A Population at Undue Risk?" >Date/time: Monday, June 26, 2000, at 1:30 p.m. >Location: 628 Dirksen Senate Office Building >Description: Thousands of Americans must undergo regular kidney dialysis to >survive. The number of dialysis patients is skyrocketing as the nation ages. >These patients receive their treatment at clinics across the country. >Medicare pays for kidney dialysis. As a result, the federal government is >charged with ensuring that dialysis patients receive good quality of care. >Several dialysis patients and advocates believe the government is neglecting >that duty, and charge that patients are suffering as a result. A new General >Accounting Office report concludes that government oversight of kidney >dialysis is indeed lacking, and the consequent lack of the right data makes >it impossible to quantify how much patients are suffering. >Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, and Sen. >John Breaux, ranking member, will convene a hearing to explore the hardships >that dialysis patients endure and the options for improving the government’s >oversight. Witnesses include two dialysis patients who will describe >problems including untrained, unqualified dialysis staff; ever-decreasing >amounts of dialysis; the questionable re-use of sensitive medical equipment; >and a flawed patient grievance process. >Witness List >Panel I >W. Kenneth Bays, D.D.S., Dialysis Patient, Pelham, Georgia >Brent Smith, Dialysis Patient, Chandler, Arizona >George Grob, Deputy Inspector General, Office of Inspector General, U.S. >Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C. >William Scanlon, Ph.D., Director, Health Financing and Public Health >Division, General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C. >Panel II >Terry Bahr, President, National Renal Administrators Association, Reston, >Virginia >William F. Owen, Jr., M.D., President, Renal Physicians Association, >Rockville, Maryland >Jay Wish, M.D., President, Forum of End Stage Renal Disease Networks, >Midlothian, Virginia >Jeffrey L. Kang, M.D., Director, Office of Clinical Standards and Quality, >Health Care Financing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human >Services, Washington, D.C.

– Operation Just Cause POW/MIA Bring Them Home http://hometown.aol.com/tackneyny/brooklyntovietnamMIA.html

Response:

If not on C-SPAN, it will be on the Internet, at http://www.senate.gov/~aging/whatsnew.htm Real Player format 1:30 PM EST Mon. June 26th. Undue Risk is right. -fjb   tackne…@aol.com (TackneyNY) wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I guess it’ll be on C-SPAN at this time and date > >***** HEARING ANNOUNCEMENT ***** > >GRASSLEY ANNOUNCES HEARING ON KIDNEY DIALYSIS > >Hearing: "Kidney Dialysis Patients: A Population at Undue Risk?" > >Date/time: Monday, June 26, 2000, at 1:30 p.m. > >Location: 628 Dirksen Senate Office Building > >Description: Thousands of Americans must undergo regular kidney dialysis to > >survive. The number of dialysis patients is skyrocketing as the nation ages. > >These patients receive their treatment at clinics across the country. > >Medicare pays for kidney dialysis. As a result, the federal government is > >charged with ensuring that dialysis patients receive good quality of care. > >Several dialysis patients and advocates believe the government is neglecting > >that duty, and charge that patients are suffering as a result. A new General > >Accounting Office report concludes that government oversight of kidney > >dialysis is indeed lacking, and the consequent lack of the right data makes > >it impossible to quantify how much patients are suffering. > >Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, and Sen. > >John Breaux, ranking member, will convene a hearing to explore the hardships > >that dialysis patients endure and the options for improving the government’s > >oversight. Witnesses include two dialysis patients who will describe > >problems including untrained, unqualified dialysis staff; ever- decreasing > >amounts of dialysis; the questionable re-use of sensitive medical equipment; > >and a flawed patient grievance process. > >Witness List > >Panel I > >W. Kenneth Bays, D.D.S., Dialysis Patient, Pelham, Georgia > >Brent Smith, Dialysis Patient, Chandler, Arizona > >George Grob, Deputy Inspector General, Office of Inspector General, U.S. > >Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C. > >William Scanlon, Ph.D., Director, Health Financing and Public Health > >Division, General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C. > >Panel II > >Terry Bahr, President, National Renal Administrators Association, Reston, > >Virginia > >William F. Owen, Jr., M.D., President, Renal Physicians Association, > >Rockville, Maryland > >Jay Wish, M.D., President, Forum of End Stage Renal Disease Networks, > >Midlothian, Virginia > >Jeffrey L. Kang, M.D., Director, Office of Clinical Standards and Quality, > >Health Care Financing Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human > >Services, Washington, D.C. > — > Operation Just Cause > POW/MIA Bring Them Home > http://hometown.aol.com/tackneyny/brooklyntovietnamMIA.html

– "When you’re going through hell, keep going."         — Winston Churchill Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Response:

Question:

BIG needs? Cuuuute Tony

<SNIP – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am out of Florida, new business with time to take care of a client with big needs. Darlene Carrillo Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise?

Response:

Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Pay your taxes on your income.  That’s  how that brought down Al Capone. — Dean L. Covey www.coveyaccounting.com

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Why don’t you ask Jesus what he thinks? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

I didn’t know Jesus was an accountant….

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why don’t you ask Jesus what he thinks? Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

To start you need an open minded accountant. Then that person ahs to be well guided with your needs and will need to show you how to manage your books properly, and finally make you as legal and straight up as possible. The best recommendations is a good accountant and a great lawyer. I am out of Florida, new business with time to take care of a client with big needs. Darlene Carrillo

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

$51 for a half-and-half in Mexico? You gotta to be kidding. How ’bout $10 and that includes a clean rubber. Yoko Loco Purchase prescription drugs, vitamins & herbals online! www.rxpill.com Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

– Yoko Loco Before you buy.

Response:

HI, yeah, its illegal in one sense BUT the govt sees it as a business and wants its taxes that makes it legal doesnt it ??????? P

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Hi, just thought of it, a question fringe benefits would be great valuing those benefits may be a worry though paying the accountant may be negoitable as well wonder if house calls are legit for the acct’nt P

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Who do you think keeps the ultimate ledger?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I didn’t know Jesus was an accountant…. Why don’t you ask Jesus what he thinks? Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise?

I could help you with verification of assets.  .

Response:

Is building a practice worth trading your soul?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – To start you need an open minded accountant. Then that person ahs to be well guided with your needs and will need to show you how to manage your books properly, and finally make you as legal and straight up as possible. The best recommendations is a good accountant and a great lawyer. I am out of Florida, new business with time to take care of a client with big needs. Darlene Carrillo Hi guys, Jenny here.  A friend and I are thinking about starting an Escort Service.  Do any of you guys have any information on the business end of running such an enterprise? Thanks, Jenny Legal Prostitution at http://www.51DollarFantasy.com Providing complete information about the exciting world of Legal Prostitution just five-minutes south of the border from Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico.

Response:

Question:

Hi all, This is more finance than accounting, but I thought someone might be able to at least recommend where to go to find out the answer to my question.  I couldn’t see a newsgroup dealing directly with swaps, bonds, or finance (other than personal finance). BTW: I tried asking my lecturer/tutor but he is TERRIBLE at explaining things.  He is normally a physics lecturer (say no more). Can anyone please explain to me how swaps are valued using bonds?  The formula for the fixed bond (ie, fixed part of the swap) is calculated by discounting all the future interest payments, and the final principal payment, back to current prices.  The floating bond is calculated by just discounting the current interest payment (based on the previous LIBOR), as well as the principal back to todays rate.  So if the swap had 1.5 years to go with interest payments every 6 months, under the fixed bond you would discount  the first payment at the risk-free rate for 0.5 years, the second pmt at the risk-free rate for 1 year, the third pmt (includes interest & principal) at the risk-free rate for 1.5 yrs. Under the floating bond, the next interest (in 6 months) payment and the principal are discounted at the risk-free rate for 0.5 years.  So I guess I am wondering why the floating rate isn’t calculated by discounting back to current prices all the interest payments (at the probable future interest rate) as well as the principal.  Regardless of whether the principal is paid back in 6 months or 3 years, it is still discounted back as if it were going to be paid at the next interest date. All my tutor said was that Bfl (ie, floating bond) will equal the notional principal in the swap agreement immediately after the next payment date. All the formulas we have been given assume continuous compounding of interest(, ie, e^rt) Thanks for any help anyone can provide – this stuff is really tough!! ADAM

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all, This is more finance than accounting, but I thought someone might be able to at least recommend where to go to find out the answer to my question.  I couldn’t see a newsgroup dealing directly with swaps, bonds, or finance (other than personal finance). BTW: I tried asking my lecturer/tutor but he is TERRIBLE at explaining things.  He is normally a physics lecturer (say no more). Can anyone please explain to me how swaps are valued using bonds?  The formula for the fixed bond (ie, fixed part of the swap) is calculated by discounting all the future interest payments, and the final principal payment, back to current prices.  The floating bond is calculated by just discounting the current interest payment (based on the previous LIBOR), as well as the principal back to todays rate.  So if the swap had 1.5 years to go with interest payments every 6 months, under the fixed bond you would discount  the first payment at the risk-free rate for 0.5 years, the second pmt at the risk-free rate for 1 year, the third pmt (includes interest & principal) at the risk-free rate for 1.5 yrs. Under the floating bond, the next interest (in 6 months) payment and the principal are discounted at the risk-free rate for 0.5 years.  So I guess I am wondering why the floating rate isn’t calculated by discounting back to current prices all the interest payments (at the probable future interest rate) as well as the principal.  Regardless of whether the principal is paid back in 6 months or 3 years, it is still discounted back as if it were going to be paid at the next interest date. All my tutor said was that Bfl (ie, floating bond) will equal the notional principal in the swap agreement immediately after the next payment date. All the formulas we have been given assume continuous compounding of interest(, ie, e^rt) Thanks for any help anyone can provide – this stuff is really tough!! ADAM there a lot of literature about swap valuation.

you can get a good example, and easy of understand, in the financial accounting standards board. (www.fasb.org). there is a course of financial instruments and some part of it is free. In the free part you can get the example of a swap valuation.  Also in the sfas 133 accounting for derivatives and hedging activities there are some examples. you can not get it in internet, but you would have the FASB statement in the library of your university.  there it follow the compond interest method. They are very simple, because they want to explain how to account a swap, nor how to value it. the valuation of a swap can be done of many forms, so i need your example to know where are you lost. i can say some things: 1. if you want to value the swaps as bond you must know that the swap there are only paymetn of interest, there are not exchange of principal (generally). 2. The best way is to value the payment of interest throught zero coupon bond. so the fixed part will be a sum zero copuon where with a period of life according to each payment. 3. to discount the payment of the swap you better has to use "forward rate of interst", nor spot rates. 4. in valuing the variable part, you have only to consider the next payment because the other payment will be value its nominal:  (1+i) Nominal of debt/ (1+i). think about it and if you want we can work with an example. A question; as you can see i am not english speaking (i am from spain) what do you mean when you say your lecture is a "physics lecturer") Is that mean that he read its lessons? in what university are you studing? bet wishes Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.

Response:

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Nicholas Temple wrote: > In article <6vj5of$ne…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, raffa…@my-dejanews.com > says… > >In article <907820633.108…@news.bluegrass.net>, > >  ntem…@bluegrass.net (Nicholas Temple) wrote: > >> In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… > >> >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they > >> >do to you if you succeed? > >> >              John II > >> OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if > you > >> succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be > >> buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital > >> offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. > >> Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they > are, > >> without guitar cords: > >> SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) > >> (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) > >> Through early morning fog I see > >> Visions of the things to be, > >> The pains that are withheld for me, > >> I realize and I can see… > >> That suicide is painless, > >> It brings on many changes > >> And I can take or leave it if I please. > >> The game of life is hard to play, > >> I’m going to loose it anyway, > >> The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; > >> So this is all I have to say… > >> That suicide is painless, > >> It brings on many changes > >> And I can take or leave it if I please. > >> The only way to win is cheat > >> And lay it down before I’m beat > >> And to another give my seat > >> For that’s the only painless feat. > >> That suicide is painless, > >> It brings on many changes > >> And I can take or leave it if I please. > >> And you can do the same thing if you please. > >Nick, that’s a real surprise. > >Not about the Church, since it was considered a major sin. > >But I was JK about death penalty, and now you tell > >that this is was legal in certain states? Could you give details? > >Another point. I’ve never seen the movie M*A*S*H, but I suppose > >that it’s a comedy on militaries, why the main them happens to > >concern suicide? > >– > >All the best > >                    Raffaele > Hi, Raffaele! > The death penality for attempted suicide was in effect in the United States, > to the best of my knowledge, only in colonial times, in New England, where my > Pilgrim ancestors of the United Church of Christ set up a theocracy after > fleeing England to America for religious freedom. (They also hanged some > witches in Salem, as my might remember). > However, if my memory serves me right, it was part of the medieval laws of > Great Britian, France, and, I think, Germany. I’d have to do some research to > be sure. > Shalom, > Nick

      Nick,   It seems to me that making the penalty for suicide to be death is one of the stupidist things I can think of. I mean, really. You’re convicted of trying to commit suicide, then for that crime, you’re killed. Duh. You wanted to be dead, and now you are. Somewhere, I see government involvement in this… (laugh)   If you succeed, then I guess they could put your body under "house arrest". You know, one of those collars around your ankles so they’ll know if you go anywhere. I guess the only problem I might have with that would be if I were the guy who was keeping track of the movement of the collars, and they started to disperse around the city. That is, without an earthquake or other "natural" event, including grave robbing. It would mean that the dead were up and walking, and I think that I wouldn’t be too concerned about whatever laws I might break as I left town!         John II

Response:

In article <361C0996.2718C…@hotmail.com>, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -  bshep…@vt.edu wrote: > John II, > John H Schneider II wrote: > > Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they > > do to you if you succeed? > I was having a little discussion about this very topic on another > newsgroup recently.  From what I heard, your will can be declared null > and void.  The police can launch a full-scale investigation into your > former life.  IOW, it may not be fun for your relatives, although they > can’t do much to you personally, of course. > >               John II > Brad

Hi Brad, John and all! Thank you Brad for your information. In fact, it happens that some "incidents" are actually suicides, so disguised to avoid such painful consequences. This may happens everywhere, for suicide is frowned upon in almost all cultures (perhaps that Japan is an exception). What is actually done depends from the country. I’ve no idea of the procedure you’ve described in Italy, I don’t think that this happens here. Social disapproval may anyway be a consequence, I assume that this depends on circumstances. If there is somebody who tries to discredit the relatives of the suicide, for instance. OTOH; other countries may have death penalty for attempted suicide, but I’m not sure. JK. Brad, why you say "another newsgroup" and don’t use our acronym, so to promote the list? Is that ASH? To all: should I leave in the FAQ the mention that messages *promoting* suicide are off-topic here? I mean that discuss suicide in a topical way (like in this thread) is acceptable. — All the best                     Raffaele <http://www.angelfire.com/mi/raffaele55/> ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

Nick, Nicholas Temple wrote: > Thanks, Brad. > After a few hours sleep I feel enough energy to follow these and see where > they lead.

Here’s a few more that I ran across tonight: http://www.headworks.com/ http://suicidal.com/ http://depression.com/ Note to Ric:  you may want to add these to the list of links for the ASL Web Page.  Note to Eliza:  some of these pages (specifically the last link) contain information on SAD. > Shalom, > Nick

Brad

Response:

Nick, Nicholas Temple wrote: > You know, Brad, that’s how I found the data I posted: I just stumbled onto > it. Actually I was looking for data on depression and loneliness when my > search engine took me there. > I’m still looking for info. on any relationship between depression and > lonelieness, in case anyone can directe me.

Well, I posted last night about ABC having an article and self-test on depression.  Here’s some addresses that I have: http://www.metanoia.org/suicide/ http://members.tripod.com/~Veb/live.htm http://www.lollie.com/suicide.html http://www.frt.com/joyin.htm http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/ptdep.htm http://www.ndmda.org/ http://www.nimh.nih.gov/dart/index.htm http://www.depression.org/ http://www.abcnews.com/sections/living/InYourHead/allinyourhead.html The URLs near the beginning of the list deal with suicide (they’re anti-suicide).  The latter ones are for depression.  Note to Ric:  I did not send someof these URLs to you with my other list, since I was unaware of them at the time.  Therefore, you may wish to add these to your list for the Links section of the ASL Web Page. I don’t think any of these focus exclusively on social relationships and lack thereof, but they ought to contain some information on loneliness-related stuff. > Shalom and hugs, > Nick

Brad

Response:

Thanks, Brad. After a few hours sleep I feel enough energy to follow these and see where they lead. Shalom, Nick In article <36242812.33B53…@hotmail.com>, superth…@hotmail.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Nick, >Nicholas Temple wrote: >> You know, Brad, that’s how I found the data I posted: I just stumbled onto >> it. Actually I was looking for data on depression and loneliness when my >> search engine took me there. >> I’m still looking for info. on any relationship between depression and >> lonelieness, in case anyone can directe me. >Well, I posted last night about ABC having an article and self-test on >depression.  Here’s some addresses that I have: >http://www.metanoia.org/suicide/ >http://members.tripod.com/~Veb/live.htm >http://www.lollie.com/suicide.html >http://www.frt.com/joyin.htm >http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/ptdep.htm >http://www.ndmda.org/ >http://www.nimh.nih.gov/dart/index.htm >http://www.depression.org/ >http://www.abcnews.com/sections/living/InYourHead/allinyourhead.html >The URLs near the beginning of the list deal with suicide (they’re >anti-suicide).  The latter ones are for depression.  Note to Ric:  I did not send >someof these URLs to you with my other list, since I was unaware of them at the >time.  Therefore, you may wish to add these to your list for the Links section of >the ASL Web Page. >I don’t think any of these focus exclusively on social relationships and lack >thereof, but they ought to contain some information on loneliness-related stuff. >> Shalom and hugs, >> Nick >Brad

Response:

Nick, Nicholas Temple wrote: > As our discussion goes on I thought I’d do a little research on suicide. > Below is what I found regarding two countries, Canada and the United States.

Here’s what I found yesterday, by accident: For 1995, there were 32,000 suicides and 22,562 homicides.  There is one suicide every fifteen minutes, and one attempt every minute.  Suicide rates have more than doubled for those aged 10-24.  There’s a new anti-suicide technique being implemented, called QPR.  You Question the person about his suicidal thoughts and feelings, then you Persuade the person to get help and finally you Refer him to someone who can offer assistance. There’s many suicide-related newsgroups, including alt.suicide, alt.suicide.holiday, alt.suicide.finals, alt.suicide.methods, alt.suicide.recovery, alt.gothic.suicide and alc.suicide. I could babble on and on, describing what types of people use what methods, giving out web sites for both pro- and anti-suicide organizations (is this allowed, Raffaele ?) and plenty of other stuff, but I’ll spare y’all. > Nick

Brad

Response:

You know, Brad, that’s how I found the data I posted: I just stumbled onto it. Actually I was looking for data on depression and loneliness when my search engine took me there. I’m still looking for info. on any relationship between depression and lonelieness, in case anyone can directe me. Shalom and hugs, Nick In article <3623DDC5.1248A…@hotmail.com>, superth…@hotmail.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Nick, >Nicholas Temple wrote: >> As our discussion goes on I thought I’d do a little research on suicide. >> Below is what I found regarding two countries, Canada and the United States. >Here’s what I found yesterday, by accident: >For 1995, there were 32,000 suicides and 22,562 homicides.  There is one suicide >every fifteen minutes, and one attempt every minute.  Suicide rates have more >than doubled for those aged 10-24.  There’s a new anti-suicide technique being >implemented, called QPR.  You Question the person about his suicidal thoughts and >feelings, then you Persuade the person to get help and finally you Refer him to >someone who can offer assistance. >There’s many suicide-related newsgroups, including alt.suicide, >alt.suicide.holiday, alt.suicide.finals, alt.suicide.methods, >alt.suicide.recovery, alt.gothic.suicide and alc.suicide. >I could babble on and on, describing what types of people use what methods, >giving out web sites for both pro- and anti-suicide organizations (is this >allowed, Raffaele ?) and plenty of other stuff, but I’ll spare y’all. >> Nick >Brad

Response:

As our discussion goes on I thought I’d do a little research on suicide. Below is what I found regarding two countries, Canada and the United States. Nick Canada      Source: Causes of Death 1992 (Minister of Industry, Science and Technology,      Statistics Canada, Health Statistics Division, September 1994)      More information:      http://www.statcan.ca/      Suicide is the fifth leading cause of death in Canada, with 3709 deaths recorded in 1992. This approximates to around one death every two hours.      Of these, men account for 2923 (one death every three hours – fifth leading cause) and women account for 786 (one death every ten hours – tenth leading cause).      Men were more likely to use firearms to commit suicide: 991 of the men compared with only 59 of the women. __________ United States      Source: Centres for Disease Control, National Centre for Injury Prevention and Control; nosuicide.com; National Institute for Mental Health      More information:      http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/10lc92c.htm;      http://www.nosuicide.com:80/stats.htm; http://www.nimh.nih.gov/      Suicide is the ninth leading cause of death in the US, with 31204 deaths recorded in 1995. This approximates to around one death every seventeen minutes. There are more suicides than homicides each year in the United States.      In 1993, the suicide rate was 11.3/100,000, and suicide accounted for 1.4% of all deaths (56% of deaths were from heart disease and tumours). Two-thirds of all suicides under 25 were committed with firearms (accounting for most of the increase in suicides from 1980 to 1992). The second most common method was hanging, third was poisoning. 61% of all suicides involve firearms.      From 1952 to 1992, the incidence of suicide among teens and young adults tripled.      Today, it is the third leading cause of death for teenagers aged 15-19 (after motor vehicle accidents and unintentional injury). Suicide is increasing, particularly for those under 14 and for those over 65.      In young people, the suicide rate is relatively low (13.5/100,000 in 1993), but it is still a leading cause of death. In older people, the suicide rate is very high, but it is not a leading cause of death (eg in white males over 85, the suicide rate in 1993 was 73.6/100,000).      In all age groups, men commit suicide successfully more than women (around four times as much). In young people (15-24), the average ratio is 5.5:1. The ratio increases with age within this group. In article <6vvle8$jv…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, djr…@indigo.ie says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->In article <6vl1rg$67…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, >  djr…@indigo.ie wrote: >> Hi there Damien! >> Well met in ASL (or we talked before?)! >I can’t remember.  If we haven’t *HUGS* and if we have *BIGGER HUGS* for >forgetting. >> How sad, this reminds a post of Nick Temple yesterday on the same >> theme. >I know.  At least the modern church is slightly more understanding. >> > There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the >news >> > they say that the person died of a broken heart. >> And yes, trying to disguise a suicide may be done by many, so stats >> are also alterated and the official number of suicides is underestimated. >> OTOH, this helps to avoid to provide examples, encouragining imitation. >> This is maybe only a theory. >*nods* I think this is more of a way to shield the public from the truth. >Actually there have been several reports that suicide is on the increase in >Ireland.  And Aware (an organisation which helps people with depression) has >been trying to make people aware of how much pain a suicide must have been >going through. >> And since you’ve a site, why don’t submit your address to Ric to >> add it to the ASL WebSite? (or you did already?). You’ll r(i)each >> it from my ASL page >> <http://www.angelfire.com/mi/raffaele55/asl.html>. >i did *giggles*  though tripod ate my pages and it’s taken me all day to fix:< >– >Peace, >Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/). >———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- >http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

Wow, Chloe! People under the guise of religion can do some terrible things. Just thinking of parents of a stillborn having to sneak into a cemetary so thei child may be buried in sanctified ground makes my heart ache. I’m glad I don;t have to deal with those issues. If I’m not sure a grave has been blessed, I do it anyway, no matter at whose funeral I’m officiating. And I have had more than my share of suicide funerals: 5 in the first 4 years of my ordained ministery, which is more than enough for any cleric. I even had to inform the mother of one of her son’s suicide. I hope we are open enough now to see the light of God’s love for every one, including suicides. Thanks for sharing. You input has opened my mind again to a terrible issue — and the way the Church has often be so, uh, unchristian. Oh — and, yes, I beleive one of commits suidice IS a victim. Hags from Kentucky, Nick In article <6vl7fn$…@freenet-news.carleton.ca>, cj…@FreeNet.Carleton.CA says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Hi again, Damien! >Same here in Quebec, with catholicism anyway, where it was >not only so (might still be actually, not sure) in the case >of suicide "victims" (? can one be said to be the victim of >their own suicide..?) nut also for still born babies…. >Imagien the family, then in both cases, in that time of >pain, made to feel that way….Sometimes one can wonder >where the spirit was in what letter that had it be so…. >I know personally of two fervent catholic parents that >went like thieves at night to burry their still born child >in the "blessed" part of the cimetary…Such a little shy and >observant couple, really, that hearing their story >made me really imagine the pain that must have been >for them…They felt so ashamed for having disobeyed, >and yet just could not leave their baby "rejected" by >their own Church… It made me wonder if in the "love one >another" rules and in their >paragraphs and articles and subdivisons of it all, compassion, >"Love for one another" had not exactly been totally left >out in the end…. >Chloe > (djr…@indigo.ie) writes: >> Hi everyone, >> I hope you don’t mind me butting in but I’d like to add that until a few >> years ago anyone who committed suicide in Ireland wasn’t allowed to be buried >> in holy ground and couldn’t even get last rites. >> There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the news >> they say that the person died of a broken heart. >> — >> Peace, >> Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/). >> ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- >> http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own   >–

Response:

Oh, you can tell the Mormons that it’s okay, I already bought my tickets. Chloe "Ollie The Sandcastle" (ol…@sandcastle.freeserve.co.uk) writes: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> In the good old days of religious superstition and the inquisition etc, > suicide was a good thing as it was a scandal for some rich and influential > family and priests liked to put such families under their thumb if they > found out about it. It’s all down to power, really. BTW the Mormons want my > birth records (+ everyone else’s) because they want me to go to heaven. I’d > sooner become an Adversary for the new millenium. > John H Schneider II wrote in message <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>… >>Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >>do to you if you succeed? >>              John II

Response:

Raff, and Nick, Hi you two! I am catching up with many posts that I coudl not read nor see before all at once arriving on my screen. Just a quickie here (hey you two, behave!!:):). To say that: It is when we leave the box opened that the gifts unwrap itself. (Now Ric will have to find the ""rrreson" under those words!;-):):)) Chloe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Nicholas Temple (ntem…@bluegrass.net) writes: > In article <6vj5of$ne…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, raffa…@my-dejanews.com > says… >>In article <907820633.108…@news.bluegrass.net>, >>  ntem…@bluegrass.net (Nicholas Temple) wrote: >>> In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… >>> >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >>> >do to you if you succeed? >>> >              John II >>> OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if > you >>> succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be >>> buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital >>> offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. >>> Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they > are, >>> without guitar cords: >>> SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) >>> (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) >>> Through early morning fog I see >>> Visions of the things to be, >>> The pains that are withheld for me, >>> I realize and I can see… >>> That suicide is painless, >>> It brings on many changes >>> And I can take or leave it if I please. >>> The game of life is hard to play, >>> I’m going to loose it anyway, >>> The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; >>> So this is all I have to say… >>> That suicide is painless, >>> It brings on many changes >>> And I can take or leave it if I please. >>> The only way to win is cheat >>> And lay it down before I’m beat >>> And to another give my seat >>> For that’s the only painless feat. >>> That suicide is painless, >>> It brings on many changes >>> And I can take or leave it if I please. >>> And you can do the same thing if you please. >>Nick, that’s a real surprise. >>Not about the Church, since it was considered a major sin. >>But I was JK about death penalty, and now you tell >>that this is was legal in certain states? Could you give details? >>Another point. I’ve never seen the movie M*A*S*H, but I suppose >>that it’s a comedy on militaries, why the main them happens to >>concern suicide? >>– >>All the best >>                    Raffaele > Hi, Raffaele! > The death penality for attempted suicide was in effect in the United States, > to the best of my knowledge, only in colonial times, in New England, where my > Pilgrim ancestors of the United Church of Christ set up a theocracy after > fleeing England to America for religious freedom. (They also hanged some > witches in Salem, as my might remember). > However, if my memory serves me right, it was part of the medieval laws of > Great Britian, France, and, I think, Germany. I’d have to do some research to > be sure. > Shalom, > Nick

Response:

In article <6vkmsb$n5…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, djr…@indigo.ie says… >Hi everyone, >I hope you don’t mind me butting in but I’d like to add that until a few >years ago anyone who committed suicide in Ireland wasn’t allowed to be buried >in holy ground and couldn’t even get last rites. >There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the news >they say that the person died of a broken heart. >– >Peace, >Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/).

Thanks, Damien, and you’re not butting in. Welcome aboard! And you are so right. It hasn’t bee that long — a couple of years at most and less than that is some places — when Church (Cannon law) as well as Church inspired civil law prevented buriel in consecrated ground. Thanks for the additional info. about how suicides are reported: "died of a broken heart." An interesting euphemism! Shalom from Kentucky, Nick

Response:

In article <361D9A60….@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Nicholas Temple wrote: >> In article <6vj5of$ne…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, raffa…@my-dejanews.com >> says… >> >In article <907820633.108…@news.bluegrass.net>, >> >  ntem…@bluegrass.net (Nicholas Temple) wrote: >> >> In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… >> >> >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >> >> >do to you if you succeed? >> >> >              John II >> >> OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if >> you >> >> succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be >> >> buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital >> >> offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. >> >> Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they >> are, >> >> without guitar cords: >> >> SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) >> >> (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) >> >> Through early morning fog I see >> >> Visions of the things to be, >> >> The pains that are withheld for me, >> >> I realize and I can see… >> >> That suicide is painless, >> >> It brings on many changes >> >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> >> The game of life is hard to play, >> >> I’m going to loose it anyway, >> >> The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; >> >> So this is all I have to say… >> >> That suicide is painless, >> >> It brings on many changes >> >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> >> The only way to win is cheat >> >> And lay it down before I’m beat >> >> And to another give my seat >> >> For that’s the only painless feat. >> >> That suicide is painless, >> >> It brings on many changes >> >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> >> And you can do the same thing if you please. >> >Nick, that’s a real surprise. >> >Not about the Church, since it was considered a major sin. >> >But I was JK about death penalty, and now you tell >> >that this is was legal in certain states? Could you give details? >> >Another point. I’ve never seen the movie M*A*S*H, but I suppose >> >that it’s a comedy on militaries, why the main them happens to >> >concern suicide? >> >– >> >All the best >> >                    Raffaele >> Hi, Raffaele! >> The death penality for attempted suicide was in effect in the United States, >> to the best of my knowledge, only in colonial times, in New England, where my >> Pilgrim ancestors of the United Church of Christ set up a theocracy after >> fleeing England to America for religious freedom. (They also hanged some >> witches in Salem, as my might remember). >> However, if my memory serves me right, it was part of the medieval laws of >> Great Britian, France, and, I think, Germany. I’d have to do some research to >> be sure. >> Shalom, >> Nick >      Nick, >  It seems to me that making the penalty for suicide to be death is one >of the stupidist things I can think of. I mean, really. You’re convicted >of trying to commit suicide, then for that crime, you’re killed. Duh. >You wanted to be dead, and now you are. Somewhere, I see government >involvement in this… (laugh) >  If you succeed, then I guess they could put your body under "house >arrest". You know, one of those collars around your ankles so they’ll >know if you go anywhere. I guess the only problem I might have with that >would be if I were the guy who was keeping track of the movement of the >collars, and they started to disperse around the city. That is, without >an earthquake or other "natural" event, including grave robbing. It >would mean that the dead were up and walking, and I think that I >wouldn’t be too concerned about whatever laws I might break as I left >town! >        John II

John II ~ You’re absolutely right about the stupidity of considering suicide a crime. Back then (whenever) it was a definite no win situation! I’m glad we’ve at least come far enough to see suicide as a social and psychological issue. Nick

Response:

Hi there Damien! Well met in ASL (or we talked before?)! In article <6vkmsb$n5…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,   djr…@indigo.ie wrote: > Hi everyone, > I hope you don’t mind me butting in but I’d like to add that until a few > years ago anyone who committed suicide in Ireland wasn’t allowed to be buried > in holy ground and couldn’t even get last rites.

How sad, this reminds a post of Nick Temple yesterday on the same theme. > There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the news > they say that the person died of a broken heart.

And yes, trying to disguise a suicide may be done by many, so stats are also alterated and the official number of suicides is underestimated. OTOH, this helps to avoid to provide examples, encouragining imitation. This is maybe only a theory. > — > Peace, > Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/).

And since you’ve a site, why don’t submit your address to Ric to add it to the ASL WebSite? (or you did already?). You’ll r(i)each it from my ASL page <http://www.angelfire.com/mi/raffaele55/asl.html>. Take care.                     Raffaele ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

Hi again, Damien! Same here in Quebec, with catholicism anyway, where it was not only so (might still be actually, not sure) in the case of suicide "victims" (? can one be said to be the victim of their own suicide..?) nut also for still born babies…. Imagien the family, then in both cases, in that time of pain, made to feel that way….Sometimes one can wonder where the spirit was in what letter that had it be so…. I know personally of two fervent catholic parents that went like thieves at night to burry their still born child in the "blessed" part of the cimetary…Such a little shy and observant couple, really, that hearing their story made me really imagine the pain that must have been for them…They felt so ashamed for having disobeyed, and yet just could not leave their baby "rejected" by their own Church… It made me wonder if in the "love one another" rules and in their paragraphs and articles and subdivisons of it all, compassion, "Love for one another" had not exactly been totally left out in the end…. Chloe – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text - (djr…@indigo.ie) writes: > Hi everyone, > I hope you don’t mind me butting in but I’d like to add that until a few > years ago anyone who committed suicide in Ireland wasn’t allowed to be buried > in holy ground and couldn’t even get last rites. > There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the news > they say that the person died of a broken heart. > — > Peace, > Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/). > ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- > http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

–

Response:

In article <907820633.108…@news.bluegrass.net>,   ntem…@bluegrass.net (Nicholas Temple) wrote: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… > >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they > >do to you if you succeed? > >              John II > OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if you > succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be > buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital > offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. > Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they are, > without guitar cords: > SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) > (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) > Through early morning fog I see > Visions of the things to be, > The pains that are withheld for me, > I realize and I can see… > That suicide is painless, > It brings on many changes > And I can take or leave it if I please. > The game of life is hard to play, > I’m going to loose it anyway, > The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; > So this is all I have to say… > That suicide is painless, > It brings on many changes > And I can take or leave it if I please. > The only way to win is cheat > And lay it down before I’m beat > And to another give my seat > For that’s the only painless feat. > That suicide is painless, > It brings on many changes > And I can take or leave it if I please. > And you can do the same thing if you please.

Nick, that’s a real surprise. Not about the Church, since it was considered a major sin. But I was JK about death penalty, and now you tell that this is was legal in certain states? Could you give details? Another point. I’ve never seen the movie M*A*S*H, but I suppose that it’s a comedy on militaries, why the main them happens to concern suicide? — All the best                     Raffaele <http://www.angelfire.com/mi/raffaele55/> ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

In article <6vj5of$ne…@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, raffa…@my-dejanews.com says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->In article <907820633.108…@news.bluegrass.net>, >  ntem…@bluegrass.net (Nicholas Temple) wrote: >> In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… >> >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >> >do to you if you succeed? >> >              John II >> OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if you >> succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be >> buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital >> offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. >> Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they are, >> without guitar cords: >> SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) >> (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) >> Through early morning fog I see >> Visions of the things to be, >> The pains that are withheld for me, >> I realize and I can see… >> That suicide is painless, >> It brings on many changes >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> The game of life is hard to play, >> I’m going to loose it anyway, >> The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; >> So this is all I have to say… >> That suicide is painless, >> It brings on many changes >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> The only way to win is cheat >> And lay it down before I’m beat >> And to another give my seat >> For that’s the only painless feat. >> That suicide is painless, >> It brings on many changes >> And I can take or leave it if I please. >> And you can do the same thing if you please. >Nick, that’s a real surprise. >Not about the Church, since it was considered a major sin. >But I was JK about death penalty, and now you tell >that this is was legal in certain states? Could you give details? >Another point. I’ve never seen the movie M*A*S*H, but I suppose >that it’s a comedy on militaries, why the main them happens to >concern suicide? >– >All the best >                    Raffaele

Hi, Raffaele! The death penality for attempted suicide was in effect in the United States, to the best of my knowledge, only in colonial times, in New England, where my Pilgrim ancestors of the United Church of Christ set up a theocracy after fleeing England to America for religious freedom. (They also hanged some witches in Salem, as my might remember). However, if my memory serves me right, it was part of the medieval laws of Great Britian, France, and, I think, Germany. I’d have to do some research to be sure. Shalom, Nick

Response:

In the good old days of religious superstition and the inquisition etc, suicide was a good thing as it was a scandal for some rich and influential family and priests liked to put such families under their thumb if they found out about it. It’s all down to power, really. BTW the Mormons want my birth records (+ everyone else’s) because they want me to go to heaven. I’d sooner become an Adversary for the new millenium. John H Schneider II wrote in message <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >do to you if you succeed? >              John II

Response:

Hi everyone, I hope you don’t mind me butting in but I’d like to add that until a few years ago anyone who committed suicide in Ireland wasn’t allowed to be buried in holy ground and couldn’t even get last rites. There’s still a huge stigma attached and if a suicide is reported on the news they say that the person died of a broken heart. — Peace, Damien (http://members.tripod.com/~djryan/). ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, JH…@IX.Netcom.Com says… >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >do to you if you succeed? >              John II

OK, John II, you ask a hard one. If I remember my history correctly, if you succeeded in some time and places, the Church would not allow you to be buried in consecrated ground. If you tried, but failed, it was a capital offense and the state would do to you what you failed to do to yourself. Do you know the words to the Theme Song for M*A*S*H? If not, here they are,   without guitar cords: SUICIDE IS PAINLESS (MASH THEME SONG) (Mike Altman and Johnny Mandel) Through early morning fog I see Visions of the things to be, The pains that are withheld for me, I realize and I can see… That suicide is painless, It brings on many changes And I can take or leave it if I please. The game of life is hard to play, I’m going to loose it anyway, The loosin’ card I’ll someday lay; So this is all I have to say… That suicide is painless, It brings on many changes And I can take or leave it if I please. The only way to win is cheat And lay it down before I’m beat And to another give my seat For that’s the only painless feat. That suicide is painless, It brings on many changes And I can take or leave it if I please. And you can do the same thing if you please.

Response:

In article <I7US1.144$525.511…@ptah.visi.com>,   dsg…@visi.com (Dan Goodman) wrote: > In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, > John H Schneider II  <JH…@IX.Netcom.Com> wrote: > >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they > >do to you if you succeed? > A magician will resurrect you — and you’ll be sentenced to life.

*LOL* What if he’s resurrected again? > — > Dan Goodman > dsg…@visi.com > http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html > Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.

– All the best                     Raffaele <http://www.angelfire.com/mi/raffaele55/> ———–== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==———- http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Response:

Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they do to you if you succeed?               John II

Response:

John II, John H Schneider II wrote: > Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they > do to you if you succeed?

I was having a little discussion about this very topic on another newsgroup recently.  From what I heard, your will can be declared null and void.  The police can launch a full-scale investigation into your former life.  IOW, it may not be fun for your relatives, although they can’t do much to you personally, of course. >               John II

Brad

Response:

In article <361C1C37.4…@IX.Netcom.Com>, John H Schneider II  <JH…@IX.Netcom.Com> wrote: >Another thought occurred to me: If suicide is illegal, what can they >do to you if you succeed?

A magician will resurrect you — and you’ll be sentenced to life. — Dan Goodman dsg…@visi.com http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.

Response:

Question:

My company is starting up a non-profit thriftstore, similar to Goodwill Industries. Since all of the items we sell will be donated, we have a question on whether we should recognize revenue when a donation is received. I know that according to GAAP, donations are usually recognized as revenue as long as the amount is significant and the value can be determined fairly. But how can we determine a fair value of the donated item, as most will be used and some won’t be worth selling? Are there any exceptions, which allow non-profits to wait until such items are sold to recognize revenue? Also, if we do recognize revenue what are the proper accounting entries to be made for the donation and then for the sale of the same donated item? This is my best attempt at such an entry:  DR  CR Inventory  5  Donated Revenue  5 to record the donation of an item valued at $5 Cash  10 Donated Expense  5  Inventory  5  Sales  10 to record the sale of the same item for $10 Any help or advise in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Response:

fasb 116 says contributions should be recognized when they are received. They should be recognized at their "fair market" value…  That is where your problem comes about, what to consider fair value.  The debit would be to inventory and the credit to contributions….  the fair value would be an estimate of value.  the value would be tested in an audit by noting history and subsequent sales of merchandise.  the je at sale would be a dr to cash then a credit to inventory (at the value determined at donation) and the je would be balanced by some account that quantifies the over or undervaluation of the contribution (IE gain/loss on valuation of inventory)….. have fun – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My company is starting up a non-profit thriftstore, similar to Goodwill Industries. Since all of the items we sell will be donated, we have a question on whether we should recognize revenue when a donation is received. I know that according to GAAP, donations are usually recognized as revenue as long as the amount is significant and the value can be determined fairly. But how can we determine a fair value of the donated item, as most will be used and some won’t be worth selling? Are there any exceptions, which allow non-profits to wait until such items are sold to recognize revenue? Also, if we do recognize revenue what are the proper accounting entries to be made for the donation and then for the sale of the same donated item? This is my best attempt at such an entry:  DR  CR Inventory  5  Donated Revenue  5 to record the donation of an item valued at $5 Cash  10 Donated Expense  5  Inventory     5  Sales  10 to record the sale of the same item for $10 Any help or advise in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Response: