Question:

… FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-) Big Brother, at one time, served a very valid and needed purpose. Today, that purpose is lost in the bureaucracy it has created and that the average person cannot possibly comprehend.

… FWIW, I would question the original intent considering the people involved and the initial outcomes.  You might want to read "FDR’s Follies,"  and you might want to look into the biographies of the folks involved. Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-) Big Brother, at one time, served a very valid and needed purpose. Today, that purpose is lost in the bureaucracy it has created and that the average person cannot possibly comprehend. … FWIW, I would question the original intent considering the people involved and the initial outcomes.  You might want to read "FDR’s Follies,"  and you might want to look into the biographies of the folks involved.

He was the 32nd President.  I was thinking more along the lines well before his time.  The orginal intent of "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." – Lincoln. . – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi everyone, … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. I agree that trying to "thwart" this progression is hopeless. However, I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost.  Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas. The world – U.s. in particular – is undergoing a significant side-effect of the Information Revolution – economic information fallout.  Now, that there are no limitations between borders, information has the ability to be processed anywhere in the world. As a result, jobs will shift, standards of living and economic classes will be forced to change, new economic developments will be made to "fill" (some of) the holes, etc.  There will be a shift in productivity and education.  To some extent, the "haves" will become the "have nots" while the "have nots" will become the "haves".  Eventually, economic dilution will make the playing fields somewhat equal.  Although, I do not expect to see that in my lifetime. My contention is that companies will work to lower cost and raise income.  If, in doing that they discover an unacceptable loss in They will raise profits through short/med-term labor costs.  Not a true characteristic of economic growth.  What these comanies really need is increased revenue.  However, it’s hard to argue with the logic. Increase sales and reduce overhead makes for a profitable business. quality of product, that will (eventually) be determined and cause either an increase in quality at the new location or a reshifting to somewhere else–maybe even back to from whence they came.  The Unfortunately, quality has been a receding factor with not only companies but with the average person as well.  We continue to accept lower and lower quality and re-evaluate (what was once considered poor) this quaility as ok and thus, acceptable.

This is true in many areas, most notably consumer goods, not commercial (such as power distribution equipment, etc., the are with which I am most familiar).  In the case wrt consumer goods, this is a combination of effects but I submit it is mostly self-inflicted (the by the cheapest at WalMart philisophy that is now dominant in the US).  With that as a market to sell to, the producer that tries to stay at the "top of the line" has a shrinking market, hence he shifts his target to the larger market for the most part. alternative to one of these options will be loss of business and profits or going out of business.  These aren’t fast changes but the system is dynamic and will evolve. Quite right, but it seems that change for the worse is always faster than change for the better.  As an analogy, think of our econmomy as a neglected car.  Once shiny and the envy of most of the world, it’s not dull, dented and running rough due to years of neglect.  Had we washed, waxed and changed the oil consistently, we would be in much better shape.

Some truth in that, but see not above about changing it–it’s meeting demand.  If demand were to change drastically, so would product. Someone else’s (Ron Todd maybe?) pointed out the effect of regulation in accelerating the present phenomenon.  That is a contributing factor as well, particularly if one includes the environmental impact costs–some things have just become very difficult to do here. I’m sure that plays a part.  How much, I do not know.  What is amazing is how much something costs to produce compared to what we actually pay.

It’s always interesting to look at the <total cost of production which often is controlled by things such as advertising and liability, etc., not the actual production cost per se.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-) Big Brother, at one time, served a very valid and needed purpose. Today, that purpose is lost in the bureaucracy it has created and that the average person cannot possibly comprehend. … FWIW, I would question the original intent considering the people involved and the initial outcomes.  You might want to read "FDR’s Follies,"  and you might want to look into the biographies of the folks involved. He was the 32nd President.  I was thinking more along the lines well before his time.  The orginal intent of "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." – Lincoln. Yes, But… In Lincoln’s time it was a representative Republic of, by, and for, and was such since our founding.  The push for a popular or mob oriented democracy started with Marx and the attacks on the Republic of the 1880s and forward.  Remember, the "progressive" income tax and inheritance taxes were formulated with the specific intent to break up concentrations of private capital, to destroy capitalism.  This required a destruction of the representative Republic and the implementation of a euro parliamentary system.

But that’s what I was trying to say.  We no longer have a good and just government.  It’s long overdue for massive reform. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – . . Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

I think this whole issue of offshoring is worrisome. It is of course the natural consequense of a global economy, that jobs will follow the cheap labor. But now that knowledge work is allso outsorced, think of the disruption caused by americans finding theri expensive education investments being made worthless by cheap foriegn competition. Imagine a radoilogist, making $100 G’s  who spent mabe $250,000 on medical school, only to find out he’s competing against a tech in India who makes $10 grand a year?

Supposedly the person performing radiology services in India is a radiologist.  If not, I see all sorts of malpractice problems – for which the US hospital would be liable.  Sure throught history their has always been disruption thru technology,  but the pace of change is comming faster than I’ve ever read about, and our government is not preparing for the fallout. Look at all the industries about to dump their "legacy" problems on the US government. Steel companies can’t compete globally, in large part they say due to legacy costs like pensions and health beneifits.

GM is an advanced case study – at least with regards to pension and health care costs.   When these industries eventually dump these costs, the government will be forced to pick them up, at least in part.

In part, maybe,  but there are only so many resources. Jim Hudspeth

Response:

History will show that Paul O’Neill was the voice of reason, in a "Don’t worry, Be happy" administration. I don’t see how any sane person can’t be worried. Because most would rather stick their heads in the ground rather than face or acknowledge the issues.

Doesn’t the US constitution guarantee the right to have our cake and eat it, too? Certainly most politicians act as if that were true. Bush’s carelessness is just more egregious than some of the other ones.

Response:

History will show that Paul O’Neill was the voice of reason, in a "Don’t worry, Be happy" administration. I don’t see how any sane person can’t be worried.

Because most would rather stick their heads in the ground rather than face or acknowledge the issues.

Response:

Supposedly the person performing radiology services in India is a radiologist.  If not, I see all sorts of malpractice problems – for which the US hospital would be liable.

Supposedly the Indian’s have excellently trained radiologists working as we speak to put USS trained professionals out of busines.  Check out the following op-ed piece duscusssing our dilemma. http://nytimes.com/2004/01/06/opinion/06SCHU.html GM is an advanced case study – at least with regards to pension and health care costs.  

GM is definately a big case study, but I’m not sure how advanced it is. GM still has some profitable operations (mainly GMAC) and maybe able to hang on long enuf for its problem retirees to die off (maybe with a little help from a recovering stock market).  But some steel companies have already used the bankrupcy code to push its pension funds off on the Pension garantee Fund, and their are plenty of others in smokestack industries poised to do the same. The guy who runs the Gty. fund just resigned recently with a warning that the fund is likely to need a tax-payer bailout soon.. When these industries eventually dump these costs, the government will be forced to pick them up, at least in part. In part, maybe,  but there are only so many resources.

Yes, that will be what the present administration will say when wage earners in their 30’s and 40’s (who like most american’s have been spending and borrowing like crazy) find their jobs moved overseas, and looking at a life trying to make ends meet making mocha latte’s at Starbucks, look for help from the government.  You think they might take a more critical look at why exactly cost is no object trying to support our cousins in Iraq, or why we need to send people to the moon  again, on the way to Mars? Or how if resources are so scarce, we needed to give a sencond round of large tax cuts to the investor class, who propmptly invested the windfall in China, India and Mexico?   History will show that Paul O’Neill was the voice of reason, in a "Don’t worry, Be happy" administration. I don’t see how any sane person can’t be worried.

Response:

I think this whole issue of offshoring is worrisome. It is of course

And it should be.  It can (most likely) drastically redefine the U.S. economy. the natural consequense of a global economy, that jobs will follow the cheap labor.  But now that knowledge work is allso outsorced, think of the disruption caused by americans finding theri expensive education investments being made worthless by cheap foriegn

Let’s be politically correct – inexpensive. competition. Imagine a radoilogist, making $100 G’s  who spent mabe $250,000 on medical school, only to find out he’s competing against a tech in India who makes $10 grand a year?

Many in the manufacturing industry asked the same questions and fought the same battles.  Those on the outside ignored those warnings as they weren’t directly affected.  As outsourcing is rapidly expanding beyond manufacturing, many are just now starting to take notice – perhaps too late.  I have seen many articles about increased outsourcing.  Even the recent issue of Popular Science has a blurb about outsourcing.  Still many do not see a problem.  I have a friend who owns a construction business.  He said "as long as I still have work…".  The problem is this.  His company performs services that cannot be done overseas. However, the companies he does work for – on their buildings – are moving overseas so, he won’t have those buildings to work on.  And so, he is indirectly affected by outsourcing. Costs of education.  I feel this pain having spent a considerable amount of time and money on my primary education and even more on my ongoing education.  In fact, I have been considering leaving my field over the last couple of years.  My pay is at half of what it was 3 years ago with no signs of recovery.  What’s troublesome about the cost of education vs. appealable opportunity is the potential drop in college enrollments.  This has way too many consequences to enumerate here!  Sure throught history their has always been disruption thru technology, but the pace of change is comming faster than I’ve ever read about, and our government is not preparing for the fallout. Look

I concur.  Change today is considerably faster than it once was.  We are in the Information Age and if you don’t buckle up, you’re going to fall out. at all the industries about to dump their "legacy" problems on the US government. Steel companies can’t compete globally, in large part they say due to legacy costs like pensions and health beneifits. When these industries eventually dump these costs, the government will be forced to pick them up, at least in part. I wonder is GWB figured this into his deficit projections?

I’m not sure any of the Presidents considered this.  But that’s another discussion. We contributed these issues as much as the government.  We wanted healthcare and pensions so we formed unions and lobbying committees to force the government to make rules that make it harder for business to operate.  We have high rates of employee fraud.  Do you think outsourcing requires this of U.S. based companies?   I think not.  And these costs are massive. The question becomes what can be done?  What should be done?  This is a global economy so we have to deal with that fact.  It is not likely that we can or will close our borders.  But we should be prepared for the social and economical realignment this IS coming.

Response:

I think this whole issue of offshoring is worrisome. It is of course the natural consequense of a global economy, that jobs will follow the cheap labor. But now that knowledge work is allso outsorced, think of the disruption caused by americans finding theri expensive education investments being made worthless by cheap foriegn competition. Imagine a radoilogist, making $100 G’s  who spent mabe $250,000 on medical school, only to find out he’s competing against a tech in India who makes $10 grand a year?  Sure throught history their has always been disruption thru technology, but the pace of change is comming faster than I’ve ever read about, and our government is not preparing for the fallout. Look at all the industries about to dump their "legacy" problems on the US government. Steel companies can’t compete globally, in large part they say due to legacy costs like pensions and health beneifits. When these industries eventually dump these costs, the government will be forced to pick them up, at least in part. I wonder is GWB figured this into his deficit projections?

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-) Big Brother, at one time, served a very valid and needed purpose. Today, that purpose is lost in the bureaucracy it has created and that the average person cannot possibly comprehend. … FWIW, I would question the original intent considering the people involved and the initial outcomes.  You might want to read "FDR’s Follies,"  and you might want to look into the biographies of the folks involved. He was the 32nd President.  I was thinking more along the lines well before his time.  The orginal intent of "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." – Lincoln.

Yes, But… In Lincoln’s time it was a representative Republic of, by, and for, and was such since our founding.  The push for a popular or mob oriented democracy started with Marx and the attacks on the Republic of the 1880s and forward.  Remember, the "progressive" income tax and inheritance taxes were formulated with the specific intent to break up concentrations of private capital, to destroy capitalism.  This required a destruction of the representative Republic and the implementation of a euro parliamentary system. . . Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

… I’m sure that plays a part.  How much, I do not know.  What is amazing is how much something costs to produce compared to what we actually pay. It’s always interesting to look at the <total cost of production which often is controlled by things such as advertising and liability, etc., not the actual production cost per se.

Yes, this is a very interesting point on the cost accounting that almost no one understands.   AIR, brand name beer and cigarettes are almost all taxes and advertising.  OTOH, generic bread is almost all distribution and taxes. Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

Citi Bank and Discover Card have not only moved programming but when you get phone calls from these two listen to the voice.

Wow, now that is a racist comment if ever I heard one. "The voice" determines where someone lives and works. When in fact they could be in Atlanta, or Chicago, or left coast, or right coast. The calls are coming from overseas.

Unless you have caller ID, you just don’t know that. You may even loose your home!

Then I’ll move to India, get a job as a English speaking manager of the telephone sweat shop. — Paul A. Thomas, CPA Athens, Georgia taxman at negia.net

Response:

… I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost.  Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas.

… FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-) Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying." For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Response:

OK, move to India, China or any other offshoring country. I’ll bet you won’t get a job. You probably will not even get a work visa.  It is a one-way street. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Citi Bank and Discover Card have not only moved programming but when you get phone calls from these two listen to the voice. Wow, now that is a racist comment if ever I heard one. "The voice" determines where someone lives and works. When in fact they could be in Atlanta, or Chicago, or left coast, or right coast. The calls are coming from overseas. Unless you have caller ID, you just don’t know that. You may even loose your home! Then I’ll move to India, get a job as a English speaking manager of the telephone sweat shop.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost. Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas. … FWIW, I think the major reason(s) stem from U.S. regulation and work rules. Ever since the Federal Government decided to become every businessman’s partner, businessmen have been looking for ways to dissolve the partnership.  :-)

Big Brother, at one time, served a very valid and needed purpose. Today, that purpose is lost in the bureaucracy it has created and that the average person cannot possibly comprehend. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Best Regards. Boycott list: Belgium, France, Germany, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland, PRC, Iran, Syria, Hollywood, San Francisco, Massachusetts, New York City, Sierra Club, ACLU, Movies of the first blacklist, Turner, Madonna, S. Crowe, Dixie Chicks, Cher, U2, rapp, Trudeau, W.Miller, Disney, ABC news, CBS news, NBC news, CNN, PBS, B&H Photo Video, Heinz Foods, Ontario & Quebec provinces, Sometimes the only influence you have is to say, "No, I’m not buying."

It sometimes works to gather followers or at least affords and opportunity to explain to someone else why. For those who are unclear about the situation, California is the Clinton – Davis model for the rest of the United States of America.

Scary, isn’t it.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi everyone, … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. I agree that trying to "thwart" this progression is hopeless. However, I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost.  Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas. The world – U.s. in particular – is undergoing a significant side-effect of the Information Revolution – economic information fallout.  Now, that there are no limitations between borders, information has the ability to be processed anywhere in the world. As a result, jobs will shift, standards of living and economic classes will be forced to change, new economic developments will be made to "fill" (some of) the holes, etc.  There will be a shift in productivity and education.  To some extent, the "haves" will become the "have nots" while the "have nots" will become the "haves".  Eventually, economic dilution will make the playing fields somewhat equal.  Although, I do not expect to see that in my lifetime. My contention is that companies will work to lower cost and raise income.  If, in doing that they discover an unacceptable loss in

They will raise profits through short/med-term labor costs.  Not a true characteristic of economic growth.  What these comanies really need is increased revenue.  However, it’s hard to argue with the logic. Increase sales and reduce overhead makes for a profitable business. quality of product, that will (eventually) be determined and cause either an increase in quality at the new location or a reshifting to somewhere else–maybe even back to from whence they came.  The

Unfortunately, quality has been a receding factor with not only companies but with the average person as well.  We continue to accept lower and lower quality and re-evaluate (what was once considered poor) this quaility as ok and thus, acceptable. alternative to one of these options will be loss of business and profits or going out of business.  These aren’t fast changes but the system is dynamic and will evolve.

Quite right, but it seems that change for the worse is always faster than change for the better.  As an analogy, think of our econmomy as a neglected car.  Once shiny and the envy of most of the world, it’s not dull, dented and running rough due to years of neglect.  Had we washed, waxed and changed the oil consistently, we would be in much better shape. Someone else’s (Ron Todd maybe?) pointed out the effect of regulation in accelerating the present phenomenon.  That is a contributing factor as well, particularly if one includes the environmental impact costs–some things have just become very difficult to do here.

I’m sure that plays a part.  How much, I do not know.  What is amazing is how much something costs to produce compared to what we actually pay.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi everyone, … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. I agree that trying to "thwart" this progression is hopeless.  However, I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost.  Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas. The world – U.s. in particular – is undergoing a significant side-effect of the Information Revolution – economic information fallout.  Now, that there are no limitations between borders, information has the ability to be processed anywhere in the world.  As a result, jobs will shift, standards of living and economic classes will be forced to change, new economic developments will be made to "fill" (some of) the holes, etc.  There will be a shift in productivity and education.  To some extent, the "haves" will become the "have nots" while the "have nots" will become the "haves".  Eventually, economic dilution will make the playing fields somewhat equal.  Although, I do not expect to see that in my lifetime.

My contention is that companies will work to lower cost and raise income.  If, in doing that they discover an unacceptable loss in quality of product, that will (eventually) be determined and cause either an increase in quality at the new location or a reshifting to somewhere else–maybe even back to from whence they came.  The alternative to one of these options will be loss of business and profits or going out of business.  These aren’t fast changes but the system is dynamic and will evolve. Someone else’s (Ron Todd maybe?) pointed out the effect of regulation in accelerating the present phenomenon.  That is a contributing factor as well, particularly if one includes the environmental impact costs–some things have just become very difficult to do here.

Response:

… I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help

slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road.

And, there may also be a backlash down the road when some very important data is lost, stolen, or otherwise causes a ruckus with the client/public. In fact, it may become a selling point for some firms to boast that "all your files stay here". As far as smaller firms, I can’t justify to my clients that I’m farming out their records to India.  They just wouldn’t understand. So while the big boys may play that game, I suspect that they will be the minority over time. — Snowmen fall from heaven unassembled. Paul A. Thomas, CPA taxman at negia.net

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi everyone, … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road.

I agree that trying to "thwart" this progression is hopeless.  However, I do question "efficient economic development".  So far, the #1 reason for moving jobs offshore, particularly India, is cost.  Programmers in India are typically paid 10% of what U.S. workers are paid.  They can accept lower wages because of their much lower (more than 20%) cost of living. Quality is a distant second at best and I have seen nothing substantial to support better quality with these jobs going overseas. The world – U.s. in particular – is undergoing a significant side-effect of the Information Revolution – economic information fallout.  Now, that there are no limitations between borders, information has the ability to be processed anywhere in the world.  As a result, jobs will shift, standards of living and economic classes will be forced to change, new economic developments will be made to "fill" (some of) the holes, etc.  There will be a shift in productivity and education.  To some extent, the "haves" will become the "have nots" while the "have nots" will become the "haves".  Eventually, economic dilution will make the playing fields somewhat equal.  Although, I do not expect to see that in my lifetime.

Response:

Citi Bank and Discover Card have not only moved programming but when you get phone calls from these two listen to the voice. The calls are coming from overseas. Accounts Receivable have been outsourced as well as billing by many companies. Not only are we losing jobs but taxes. Unrelated but very important, New credit card rate changes. Pay ANY bill late and your interest rate jumps to 24.9%. This new rule (Thanks to our President) will cause a lot of harm. Watch how much banks and credit card will earn off of this rule change. You may even loose your home! … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy

w/instantaneous data – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. And, there may also be a backlash down the road when some very important data is lost, stolen, or otherwise causes a ruckus with the client/public. In fact, it may become a selling point for some firms to boast that "all your files stay here". As far as smaller firms, I can’t justify to my clients that I’m farming out their records to India.  They just wouldn’t understand. So while the big boys may play that game, I suspect that they will be the minority over time. — Snowmen fall from heaven unassembled. Paul A. Thomas, CPA taxman at negia.net

Response:

Citi Bank and Discover Card have not only moved programming but when you get phone calls from these two listen to the voice. The calls are coming from overseas. Accounts Receivable have been outsourced as well as billing by many companies. Not only are we losing jobs but taxes. Unrelated but very important, New credit card rate changes. Pay ANY bill late and your interest rate jumps to 24.9%. This new rule (Thanks to our President) will cause a lot of harm. Watch how much banks and credit card will earn off of this rule change. You may even loose your home!

you are free to shop around for any bankcard, there is no law saying you will automatically pay a higher rate.   As to the outsourcing, there are outsourced Japanese and european jobs here in the US.   This movement of jobs and capital has accelerated in recent years but the total effect may not be the big negative you perceive it to be. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. And, there may also be a backlash down the road when some very important data is lost, stolen, or otherwise causes a ruckus with the client/public. In fact, it may become a selling point for some firms to boast that "all your files stay here". As far as smaller firms, I can’t justify to my clients that I’m farming out their records to India.  They just wouldn’t understand. So while the big boys may play that game, I suspect that they will be the minority over time. — Snowmen fall from heaven unassembled. Paul A. Thomas, CPA taxman at negia.net

Response:

Hi everyone, … I’ve been trying to recruit … help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring.

You’re pissin’ in the wind…in a global economy w/instantaneous data transfer and communication it’s going to happen one way or another–while painful transitions are inevitable, the consequences of attempting to thwart efficient economic development is subject to even worse consequences on down the road. PS I didn’t think it was possible but, I think you guys get more spam than any group I’ve ever seen!

Then you must watch a <very restricted set of ng’s!!!

Response:

Hi everyone, I’m not an accountant I’m a software engineer. As you may be aware US IT workers have been experencing a LOT of job losses lately due to US firms offshoring software and IT work to India. The cost of living in India is 20% or less that that of the US so the programmers there can work for a fraction of what US programmers do and still live very well (nice house, servants, MercedesI etc) I’ve been shocked to see articles about US income tax returns and accounting work being offshored to India. My point in posting in this group is to get some feedback on how offshoring has affected you. I have two brother-in-laws who are accountants and I’ve been trying to recruit there help in lobbying lawmakers to help slow down the loss of US jobs by preventing the sending of US citizens private data to India(or any other 3rd world country) without written consent. Please let me know your thoughts or experiences on the matter of offshoring. best regards Oldguy PS I didn’t think it was possible but, I think you guys get more spam than any group I’ve ever seen! http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/359117.cms BANGALORE: Outsourcing of tax returns to India for processing is likely to receive a big boost, given the fact that The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), the apex body governing US-based Certified Public Accountants (CPAs), has given a clean chit to this practice, despite growing concerns among US professionals and their clients. The AICPA will shortly issue a guidance note to its members concerning their responsibilities when they outsource their work to BPO service providers in India and other countries. According to industry estimates, around three lakh returns were sent to India during the current calendar year for outsourcing and this number is expected to more than double next year. (Has the BPO backlash in the West failed to impress corporates?) A Delhi-based chartered accountant, engaged in such a BPO practice, said, "It costs anything between $50 and $175 to process the return in US and in India this is done at almost half the cost." On the most conservative estimates made by the BPO industry, if the inflow of tax processing work doubles next year, it would mean an inflow of the tune of $15 million. This does not include statistics of tax returns processed by captive outfits of one of the Big 4 entities, which is dominant in India.

Response:

Question:

Can’t you use something like simply accounting?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need an inexpensive inventory software program (less than $1,000) to run in Windows.  I plan to use it for a medical supply room.  It needs to have a bar code scanning capability so that I can scan the multiple items "picked" out of inventory and shipped to my doctors off-site. Any help in identifying potetial software would be appreciated.

Response:

I need an inexpensive inventory software program (less than $1,000) to run in Windows.  I plan to use it for a medical supply room.  It needs to have a bar code scanning capability so that I can scan the multiple items "picked" out of inventory and shipped to my doctors off-site. Any help in identifying potetial software would be appreciated.

Response:

The barcode scanning is going to be the issue.  ACCPAC Vision point can be modified to handle it easily.  Don’t think any of the low ends (Under a $1000) will do the job.  Also suspect your inventory needs might swamp them too.  If you say under $5000 might be able to find something. Bill Couture http:\www.sbtbill.com

Response:

Look for wedge type bar code scanners work with your keyboard. At any point in your software where you normally type in a part number or name you can scan it. Its as is you typed in the name or number. — Karl E Irvin, CPA Arlington, Texas

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I need an inexpensive inventory software program (less than $1,000) to run in Windows.  I plan to use it for a medical supply room.  It needs to have a bar code scanning capability so that I can scan the multiple items "picked" out of inventory and shipped to my doctors off-site. Any help in identifying potetial software would be appreciated.

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:

As an intangible asset – ‘Formation Expenses" Peter French Melbourne – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi All, How do we record the company registration fee on the accounts? I don’t see how it is recorded as expenditure because it is acutally spent before the company exists ? Or can the company reimburse the founders for this fee ? Many Thanks Daniel

Response:

Hi All, How do we record the company registration fee on the accounts? I don’t see how it is recorded as expenditure because it is acutally spent before the company exists ? Or can the company reimburse the founders for this fee ? Many Thanks Daniel

Response:

These expenses are treated as Formation Expenses, and are actually an asset, that can be amortised for accounting purposes, but not for tax. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi All, How do we record the company registration fee on the accounts? I don’t see how it is recorded as expenditure because it is acutally spent before the company exists ? Or can the company reimburse the founders for this fee ? Many Thanks Daniel

Response:

Question:

What methods do (small) local governments use to implement fund accounting for assets that are shared by several funds or may be used by different funds at different times?  An example might be a piece of construction equipment that is used to construct a road in the summer and a sewer in the fall.  The financial statements are supposed to show expenses by fund, and the sewer and road costs are paid out of different funds.  Transfering assets from one fund to another many times sounds like more trouble than it’s worth, but a fair allocation of the initial cost, depreciation, maintenance, proceeds of sale, etc, doesn’t appear easy either.   Al

Response:

I work with the Federal government so I can not specifically address small local governments, but the issue you describe is common.  From what I have seen, an approach could be to use a form of internal service fund which can have different names (working capital fund, internal enterprise fund, etc.). Assets, such as that piece of construction equipment, would be acquired under that fund.  Different funds/projects would be charged for use of the equipment based on depreciation and other costs and using some systematic charging mechanism (e.g., per hour or per day charge for the equipment). That way your road and sewer funds would receive shares of the equipment and related expenses based on actual usage of the equipment.  The recording of expenses for supplies by fund (when there is a supply inventory) is similar. By the way, until the pressures in the last few years to prepare auditable financial statements in the Federal government, systematic recognition of equpment expenses by different fund/project was frequently disregarded (particularly in cases similar to your example).  The primary emphasis for management in the Federal government has usually been fund controls associated with obligation (encumbrance) authority and the reporting of obligations incurred by agency funds at the time of purchase of equipment. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -What methods do (small) local governments use to implement fund accounting for assets that are shared by several funds or may be used by different funds at different times?  An example might be a piece of construction equipment that is used to construct a road in the summer and a sewer in the fall.  The financial statements are supposed to show expenses by fund, and the sewer and road costs are paid out of different funds.  Transfering assets from one fund to another many times sounds like more trouble than it’s worth, but a fair allocation of the initial cost, depreciation, maintenance, proceeds of sale, etc, doesn’t appear easy either.   Al

Response:

Question:

Read the BLM’s position on the proposed Outfitters Policy Act.  They are opposed to it and the reasons are set forth here.  This can provide a basis for penning letters of opposition. http://www.blm.gov/nhp/news/legislative/pages/2000/te000329.htm .  Read the proposed Act at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:S.1969: .For the Willamette Kayak and Canoe Club take on this see http://www.wkcc.org/newsletter/winter00.htm .  If you do not think the guiding business is serious about this, go to http://www.accesspubliclands.com  and click the "Policy Act" and the "Get Involved" buttons. Parkin Hunter

Response:

Anybody? It must be you or your server, I’ve got the thread complete.

I have to agree with Scott on this one. Different servers do different quality jobs of picking up USENET messages. On one server, I was only getting about 15% of the postings I was picking up on a different server. As a first step in dealing with it, contact your ISP’s USENET server administrator and ask them to dial up the expiritations on rec.boats.paddle. — Wes

Response:

A clearly thought out letter, limited to just one topic, (i.e.- allocation or Wilderness status or river concessions reform or opposition to S1969 – The Outfitters "Welfare" act) is what it takes to get their attention.

If you do write, please refer to the legislation by its "real name". Referring to it as above will immediately caused it to get counted as an "Against" (which is fine) and thrown into the appropriate pile (which isn’t). I’ve found that presenting reasoned, succinct arguments sometimes actually causes real responses and occasionally incremental change. If you’re writing from the US, you’ll typically receive the most response from your local Congress critters; however, you will also receive responses from the AZ ones if you note that you have traveled or will travel to AZ for this purpose. mikel PS: The one great thing about a new Congress and a new President is that neither has categorized me as a kook just yet.  So they still respond to my notes with their standard automatic responses.  I particularly love the email autoresponders that request that you contact them in writing.

Response:

Seal and everyone… Here’s a few places to start writing. *briefly* what a Representive’s and a Senator’s responsibilities and powers are.  Just enough so I can put the right slant on the respective e-mails. They make the laws that NPS and the DOI make policy to implement. Asking them to oppose a given bill (like S1969 – the Outfitters "Welfare" Act) or to support formal Wilderness status for the Colorado River Corridor in Grand Canyon National Park or to support fair reallocation of river permits in GCNP is the place to start.

Cheers, that should help. Still not sure what the difference between Senate an HoR is.  You’ve given me some where to start.  This might take me a while, but when I’ve written something I shall put it here for "proof reading", since I’m bound to make a mess of the legal bits! Another  topic which I’ll write a posting about soon is called Common Pool access… Everybody waits in the same line and has the same access rights.

Sounds like a pretty sensible idea.  Afterall, not everyone has the skills or skilled friends necessary to do it themselves. Actually there are exactly 100 Senators; 2 from each state.  Writing any or all of them is helpful….. Phone calls aren’t a bad idea either.

My budget won’t stretch to phone calls from Malaysia I’m afraid!! Basically, one should start with one’s own Congressperson and the Senators from your home state, then of course the senators and congresspeople responsible for the states in the Colorado River basin.

Since I don’t have my own I shall stick to the Colorado Basin ones I think . BuRec has nothing to do with management or policy in our National Parks, although writing them regarding the removal of Glen Canyon dam isn’t a bad idea, though probably 40 years too soon …

Hmm, perhaps not the best use of my time *yet* then. — Seal

Response:

Anybody? It must be you or your server, I’ve got the thread complete. I have to agree with Scott on this one.

Hey Wes, We’ll let you get away with saying that this time, but don’t make a habit out of it! (Yep, I have similar problems with my chello.nl newsserver: they seem to have set the expiration time to something like two milli-seconds! I get between 30 to 50% of all the posts that show up on deja.com, and I think that they don’t have all the posts either. ) — Spam-trap, all mail sent to that adress is deleted. Please use the Europe.Com address!!! Wilko van den Bergh – Quibus<ateurope(dot)com

Response:

(Yep, I have similar problems with my chello.nl newsserver: they seem to have set the expiration time to something like two milli-seconds! I get between 30 to 50% of all the posts that show up on deja.com, and I think that they don’t have all the posts either. )

The free news server "news.univ-angers.fr" seems to do about the best job I’ve seen of capturing posts of any free news server. They don’t miss many. You can’t post there, but it’s a heckuva good place to see how many your local ISP is missing, and to keep up on what’s happening when the local server is messed up. — Wes

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (Yep, I have similar problems with my chello.nl newsserver: they seem to have set the expiration time to something like two milli- seconds! I get between 30 to 50% of all the posts that show up on deja.com, and I think that they don’t have all the posts either. ) The free news server "news.univ-angers.fr" seems to do about the best job I’ve seen of capturing posts of any free news server. They don’t miss many. You can’t post there, but it’s a heckuva good place to see how many your local ISP is missing, and to keep up on what’s happening when the local server is messed up.

Thanks Wes, I’ll give that a try when I’m back at home! (at work I can only use www ("http://") adresses, and not direct access to usenet) — Spam-trap, all mail sent to that adress is deleted. Please use the Europe.Com address!!! Wilko van den Bergh – Quibus<ateurope(dot)com

Response:

So if you tell us where to send our mails (or, God forbid, even paper!!) then maybe we can do some good.

Right, now I’ve started on this I suppose I ought to do it sensibly. If the idea is to "mailbomb" the entire US government then I guess I just write a generic mail and send it to somewhere in the region of two hundred e-mail addresses which these links point to.  Otherwise, I need some help here.  I should add that my knowledge of US politics is pretty much limited to cigars and stained dresses… Firstly I have no idea what the Senate or the House of Representatives does.  Could somebody tell me *briefly* what a Representive’s and a Senator’s responsibilities and powers are.  Just enough so I can put the right slant on the respective e-mails. More specific stuff… Senate emails and snail mails can be gotten from http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm.

I did a little research from the web page and find there are over a hundred senators, many of whom I guess geographically have little interest in and/or power to affect what happens to the Grand Canyon. So my first inclination is to mail the Arizona senators and those of the other corner states.  Or should I go wider? I also notice that "At present, Senate committees include 16 standing committees, 3 select committees, and 2 special committees" so perhaps I should target the senators by there committee based areas of responsibility.  There are number of likely looking committees, perhaps someone would highlight those who have influence over the access issues in question. Some such as the "Special Committee On Aging" seem unlikely, but you never know Standing Committees  Agriculture, Nutrition, And Forestry Committee  Appropriations Committee  Armed Services Committee  Banking, Housing, And Urban Affairs  Budget Committee  Commerce, Science, And Transportation Committee  Energy And Natural Resources Committee  Environment And Public Works Committee  Finance Committee  Foreign Relations Committee  Governmental Affairs Committee  Judiciary Committee  Health, Education, Labor And Pensions Committee  Rules And Administration Committee  Small Business Committee  Veterans’ Affairs Committee Special, Select, and Other  Senate Select Committee On Intelligence  Senate Select Committee On Ethics  Indian Affairs Committee  Senate Special Committee On Aging Joint Committees of Congress  Joint Economic Committee  Joint Committee On Taxation  Joint Committee On The Library http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html.

Which states? I expect any answer given above will cover this. And the Department of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov/indexj.html

I believe the Bureau of Reclaimation were responsible for building the dam in the first place so I guess they are a good place to send a mail, as are obviously the NPS.  Any of these others?  From the names all except the last two seem to have at least something to do with it.   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service   Bureau of Indian Affairs   Bureau of Land Management   U.S. Geological Survey   Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement   Minerals Management Service and the National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/e-mail/.

I guess mailing the Alaska office isn’t going to do much good, but my US geography isn’t up to figuring out which of these covers the Grand Canyon. Alaska Area Region Northeast Region Midwest Region National Capital Region Intermountain Region Southeast Region Pacific West Region Fire away.

I’m tactically holding fire at the moment.  Let me know whether I should go for the cluster bomb or surgical strike. A parting thought that came up from looking through these sites.  Do you think there’d be a conflict of interests or could they lend some of expertise to you guys out there.  Maybe they know how to take away a dam and get corporate money to do it "Rivers & Trails serves as a community resource of the National Park Service. The program does not provide funding for these projects, rather it offers decades of National Park Service expertise to local groups trying to get their projects off the ground. And they get results. They have the experience and know-how to help attract community and corporate support for projects." http://www.ncrc.nps.gov/rtca/rtca-we.htm Happy boating, — Seal

Response:

Warren:     Thanks for the clarification.     Is there any movement towards banning the motorized rafts? These don’t seem to be consistent with the wilderness character of the Canyon.

That will depend on formal Wilderness Status for the Colorado River Corridor in Grand Canyon.  A complicated and highly contested issue and one very close to the core of this struggle for fairer access.  See http://www.gcpba.org/access/IllegitimateWeb.html for more details about this. Warren

Response:

< Convincing argument snipped First and foremost, call AND write your Congressperson and Senator and let them know that you support Wilderness Status for the Colorado River corridor in Grand Canyon and the Wilderness Plan for Grand Canyon National Park. Also let them know that you, as a private boater, are strongly for implementation of the 1979 CRMP and the reallocation of user days between Commercial and Private boaters to accurately reflect the current boating public.

Having had the priviledge to take part in a private trip through the GC in Oct ‘99 I would love to do this.  However not being a US citizen or living in the USA I have neither a congressperson or senator.  I suspect I am not the only person outside the States who has an interest in this and often international interest adds weight to these issues. So if you tell us where to send our mails (or, God forbid, even paper!!) then maybe we can do some good. Good luck and happy boating, — Seal

Response:

Having had the priviledge to take part in a private trip through the GC in Oct ‘99 I would love to do this.  However not being a US citizen or living in the USA I have neither a congressperson or senator.  I suspect I am not the only person outside the States who has an interest in this and often international interest adds weight to these issues. So if you tell us where to send our mails (or, God forbid, even paper!!) then maybe we can do some good.

Yep, I second that! If there is any e-mail adress to which I can write, please let me know! — Wilko van den Bergh                       quibus(at)europe(dot)com     Eindhoven           The Netherlands            Europe                       "Look Mum: No sense!"  

Response:

Once upon a time there was a river… Actually they are several rivers and in the end they all go to the sea…

Not the Platte. — – Melissa "A Bill Of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference." -Thomas Jefferson         http://www.UPAlliance.org/ I’m looking for a local job: http://www.dimensional.com/~melissa/resume.htm

Response:

So if you tell us where to send our mails (or, God forbid, even paper!!) then maybe we can do some good.

Senate emails and snail mails can be gotten from http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html . And the Department of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov/indexj.html and the National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/e-mail/ . Fire away. Parkin Hunter

Response:

Actually they are several rivers and in the end they all go to the sea… Not the Platte.

Um, doesn’t the Platte go to the Missouri which goes to the Mississippi which goes to the Gulf of Mexico which is, by most definitions, at least part of the sea? mikel

Response:

Thank you Parkin. These addresses will be added to the next posting. Warren

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – So if you tell us where to send our mails (or, God forbid, even paper!!) then maybe we can do some good. Senate emails and snail mails can be gotten from http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm .  House of representatives http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html . And the Department of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov/indexj.html and the National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/e-mail/ . Fire away. Parkin Hunter

Response:

Most years the Colorado doesn’t actually make it to the sea… all our damned dams and the waste of water along the way from evaporation, irrigation, power plant cooling and other stuff tends to make the Colorado a trickle at best.  Last time it reached the sea in significant volume was 1984. Warren – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Actually they are several rivers and in the end they all go to the sea… Not the Platte. Um, doesn’t the Platte go to the Missouri which goes to the Mississippi which goes to the Gulf of Mexico which is, by most definitions, at least part of the sea? mikel

Response:

Actually they are several rivers and in the end they all go to the sea… Not the Platte.

The Humbolt, in Nevada, just flows out into the middle of the desert and evaporates. There are a couple of streams that flow into Great Salt Lake and do the same thing. For that matter, the Colorado is so tapped out that it doesn’t reach the sea.

Response:

I don’t know if I’m hallucinating or if there is some glitch with my computer, but not 3 hours ago there was a significant number of messages in this thread as well as the conservative’s version under Draining Lake Powell is a Silly Idea.  I just went to do a search and I can find NO messages at all!  Is there some sort of cancel-bot going on here?  I have more than 5 responses on my part to this thread in the last 3 weeks since it started and can find NONE on the newsserver nor any other messages from the thread. Anybody? Warren

Response:

I don’t know if I’m hallucinating or if there is some glitch with my computer, but not 3 hours ago there was a significant number of messages in this thread as well as the conservative’s version under Draining Lake Powell is a Silly Idea.  I just went to do a search and I can find NO messages at all!  Is there some sort of cancel-bot going on here?  I have more than 5 responses on my part to this thread in the last 3 weeks since it started and can find NONE on the newsserver nor any other messages from the thread. Anybody?

It must be you or your server, I’ve got the thread complete. — Regards, Scott Weiser ****** "I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend upon my friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" ****** "The Constitution is not a pool or a pond circumscribed by limitations and constrained in its depth, it is a flowing river of humanity, fed by the wellspring of liberty and freedom.  It is as deep as human emotion, as wide as human thought and it circles the universe of belief and expression and returns to feed itself, and thus grows ever deeper and wider." Copyright 2000 by Scott Weiser To send me email, remove "private."

Response:

I will repeat myself… the awarding of preferential treatment to commercial concessionaires violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and specifically violates 16 USC 3, the National Park Organic Act which states explicitly:  "… and no natural curiosities, wonders, or objects of interest shall be leased, rented, or granted to anyone on such terms as to interfere with the free access to them by the public." The private public by law has preferential right of access over the right of any concessionaire to make a profit, clearly and explicitly stated in law. Secondly, it is clear you have no idea of the eco-ethos of the private boating public.  Commercial operators are well known for overusing the resources they contract on to maximize profits.  This may be a conflict between user groups, but private boaters have the law on their side. Where usage limits are appropriate as they are in Grand Canyon and around the other permitted stretches of river in the Colorado drainage, it clearly is unfair for the private boating public to receive less than 50% of the allocation as is the case in Grand Canyon.  It is clearly in violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution that commercial passengers can book a trip next month while a private boater must wait 17+ years for a permit.  It is clearly in violation that commercial concessionaires have established a monopoly on timely access to Grand Canyon in explicit violation of 16 USC 3. Warren

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – This is almost a battle between 2 special interest groups.  The only thing that I know that if I would run any of the canyons I would select a commercial outfit.  Therefore I support the domination of the commercial runners. If things are done properly the commercial operators should be held responsible for following the rules or lose their permits.  Properly regulated commercial operations should cause less damage and create fewer problems than one-shot private parties. To conserve electrons large portions of the original text deleted. On all of these permitted sections of river, access is restricted to two classes of users – commercial river concessionaires and private boaters. Commercial concessionaires negotiate permits with the administering agency and by contract with that agency are allowed to make use of  ’x’ user-days spread over ‘y’ launches each year during the term of their contract. Private boaters are generally required to apply during December and January to a lottery system wherein successful applicants may launch a trip on a specific day with a body count limited, usually, to a maximum of 16 people. To this day, these lotteries continue and applying to the lottery has become a yearly ritual to almost all Western boaters as well as a good many boaters from all over the country.  Commercial operators continue to operate on fixed allocations awarded for the duration of their contract.

Response:

   Warren:     So what do you propose to do about it? As much as I hate to say the dreaded words, it seems this will only be resolved by a lawsuit. I don’t see the commercial outfitters voluntarily giving up their cash cow. Does anyone know if the current system ever has been challenged in court?     You said "less than 50% of the allocation as is the case in Grand Canyon." How certain are you of these numbers? I remember at one time it was 90-10 (in favor of commercial outfitters), but that was a long time ago.     My understanding (and I may be wrong about this) is that user days gradually are being reallocated to private users as outfitters go out of business. Previously, the allottment could be sold to as part of a compnany’s assests.     Am I correct on this? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I will repeat myself… the awarding of preferential treatment to commercial concessionaires violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and specifically violates 16 USC 3, the National Park Organic Act which states explicitly:  "… and no natural curiosities, wonders, or objects of interest shall be leased, rented, or granted to anyone on such terms as to interfere with the free access to them by the public." The private public by law has preferential right of access over the right of any concessionaire to make a profit, clearly and explicitly stated in law. Secondly, it is clear you have no idea of the eco-ethos of the private boating public.  Commercial operators are well known for overusing the resources they contract on to maximize profits.  This may be a conflict between user groups, but private boaters have the law on their side. Where usage limits are appropriate as they are in Grand Canyon and around the other permitted stretches of river in the Colorado drainage, it clearly is unfair for the private boating public to receive less than 50% of the allocation as is the case in Grand Canyon.  It is clearly in violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution that commercial passengers can book a trip next month while a private boater must wait 17+ years for a permit.  It is clearly in violation that commercial concessionaires have established a monopoly on timely access to Grand Canyon in explicit violation of 16 USC 3. Warren This is almost a battle between 2 special interest groups.  The only thing that I know that if I would run any of the canyons I would select a commercial outfit.  Therefore I support the domination of the commercial runners. If things are done properly the commercial operators should be held responsible for following the rules or lose their permits.  Properly regulated commercial operations should cause less damage and create fewer problems than one-shot private parties. To conserve electrons large portions of the original text deleted. On all of these permitted sections of river, access is restricted to two classes of users – commercial river concessionaires and private boaters. Commercial concessionaires negotiate permits with the administering agency and by contract with that agency are allowed to make use of  ’x’ user-days spread over ‘y’ launches each year during the term of their contract. Private boaters are generally required to apply during December and January to a lottery system wherein successful applicants may launch a trip on a specific day with a body count limited, usually, to a maximum of 16 people. To this day, these lotteries continue and applying to the lottery has become a yearly ritual to almost all Western boaters as well as a good many boaters from all over the country.  Commercial operators continue to operate on fixed allocations awarded for the duration of their contract.

Response:

Warren:     Thanks for the clarification.     Is there any movement towards banning the motorized rafts? These don’t seem to be consistent with the wilderness character of the Canyon.

Response:

Seal and everyone… Here’s a few places to start writing. Right, now I’ve started on this I suppose I ought to do it sensibly. If the idea is to "mailbomb" the entire US government then I guess I just write a generic mail and send it to somewhere in the region of two hundred e-mail addresses which these links point to.  Otherwise, I need some help here.  I should add that my knowledge of US politics is pretty much limited to cigars and stained dresses…

That’s not a bad idea. A clearly thought out letter, limited to just one topic, (i.e.- allocation or Wilderness status or river concessions reform or opposition to S1969 – The Outfitters "Welfare" act) is what it takes to get their attention.  The more letters and the more Senators or Congresspeople who receive letters, the better. To find your Congressperson, go to this link: : http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html To find your Senators, go to this link: http://www.senate.gov/contacting/index.cfm Firstly I have no idea what the Senate or the House of Representatives does.  Could somebody tell me *briefly* what a Representive’s and a Senator’s responsibilities and powers are.  Just enough so I can put the right slant on the respective e-mails.

They make the laws that NPS and the DOI make policy to implement. Asking them to oppose a given bill (like S1969 – the Outfitters "Welfare" Act) or to support formal Wilderness status for the Colorado River Corridor in Grand Canyon National Park or to support fair reallocation of river permits in GCNP is the place to start.  Another topic which I’ll write a posting about soon is called Common Pool access… Everybody waits in the same line and has the same access rights. That’s the end goal we should have – equal rights of access for all with everyone waiting in the same line. I did a little research from the web page and find there are over a hundred senators, many of whom I guess geographically have little interest in and/or power to affect what happens to the Grand Canyon. So my first inclination is to mail the Arizona senators and those of the other corner states.  Or should I go wider?

Actually there are exactly 100 Senators; 2 from each state.  Writing any or all of them is helpful. The more mail and email they get from different people and the more public input they receive on a given subject, the more attention they pay to it.  Phone calls aren’t a bad idea either.  If you do call, ask to speak to the aide in charge of Natural Resources or National Parks. They go by different titles under different Senators and Congresspeople depending on the committee memberships involved.  This is called Lobbying and we private boaters need to do a lot of it.  The Commercial Outfitters have paid lobbyists (Mark Grisham of the Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association) to get in their face about their issues and back in 1980 they were able to lobby Orrin Hatch to submit a bill defunding NPS in their attempt to rectify the allocation issue and to enforce wilderness management standards within Grand Canyon National Park. Basically, one should start with one’s own Congressperson and the Senators from your home state, then of course the senators and congresspeople responsible for the states in the Colorado River basin. Arizona: John McCain  (R) Jon Kyl  (R) Nevada: Harry Reid  (D) John Ensign  (R) Utah: Orrin Hatch  (R) Robert Bennett  (R) Colorado: Wayne Allard  (R) Ben Nighthorse Campbell  (R) New Mexico: Pete Domenici  (R) Jeff Bingaman  (D) California: Dianne Feinstein  (D) Barbara Boxer  (D) Wyoming: Craig Thomas  (R) Mike Enzi  (R) And finally members of the following committees: House Committee on Natural Resources – http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/107cong/quicklist.htm#quick I also notice that "At present, Senate committees include 16 standing committees, 3 select committees, and 2 special committees" so perhaps I should target the senators by there committee based areas of responsibility.  There are number of likely looking committees, perhaps someone would highlight those who have influence over the access issues in question. Some such as the "Special Committee On Aging" seem unlikely, but you never know

Try these, they have the most responsibility for Department of the Interior and the National Park Service: House Committee on Natural Resources – http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/107cong/quicklist.htm#quick You’ll have to wait on a list of these folks as the full committee hasn’t been chosen yet. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources – http://www.senate.gov/committees/energy.html Senators:       Jeff Bingaman, NM    Chairman       Daniel Akaka, HI       Byron Dorgan, ND       Bob Graham, FL       Ron Wyden, OR       Tim Johnson, SD       Mary Landrieu, LA       Evan Bayh, IN       Blanche Lincoln, AR             Frank Murkowski, AK             Pete Domenici, NM             Don Nickles, OK             Larry Craig, ID             Ben Nighthorse Campbell, CO             Craig Thomas, WY             Gordon Smith, OR             Jim Bunning, KY             Peter Fitzgerald, IL             Conrad Burns, MT Which states? I expect any answer given above will cover this. And the Department of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov/indexj.html

While it appears Gale Norton will be confirmed as Secretary of the Interior, this has not yet occurred and so no email address is available yet. I believe the Bureau of Reclaimation were responsible for building the dam in the first place so I guess they are a good place to send a mail, as are obviously the NPS.  Any of these others?  From the names all except the last two seem to have at least something to do with it.

BuRec has nothing to do with management or policy in our National Parks, although writing them regarding the removal of Glen Canyon dam isn’t a bad idea, though probably 40 years too soon given our government’s attitude about Lake Foul. and the National Park Service: http://www.nps.gov/pub_aff/e-mail/.

A good choice.  When a new Director for NPS is chosen, writing directly to him/her would be an excellent idea. I want to thank everyone who takes the time to participate in this process. Lobbying our elected officials and the senior officials in our government is one of our basic rights as American Citizens and it’s the ONLY way we can affect the process other than with out vote.  As they say, the squeaky wheel gets the grease and it’s time we started squeaking – VERY LOUDLY. Warren 1/22/2001

Response:

   Warren:     So what do you propose to do about it? As much as I hate to say the dreaded words, it seems this will only be resolved by a lawsuit. I don’t see the commercial outfitters voluntarily giving up their cash cow. Does anyone know if the current system ever has been challenged in court?

No court case has come to trial in the last 30 years.  Previously, the private user groups have tried to operate within the NPS planning process. Finally, due to the recent arbitrary halt in the 2000 CRMP process, a group of private citizens filed suit to force and immediate reallocation to reflect the numbers of private boaters seeking permits. The Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association has also filed a broader suit seeking to force NPS and DOI to reallocate usage as well as to force NPS to comply with it’s own studies and the requirements of the Wilderness and Redwoods Acts which define how proposed Wilderness must be managed.     You said "less than 50% of the allocation as is the case in Grand Canyon." How certain are you of these numbers? I remember at one time it was 90-10 (in favor of commercial outfitters), but that was a long time ago.

In the early 70’s when the allocation was first imposed, private boaters had 8% versus 92% for the commercial concessionaires.  In the period 1979 to 1981, the allocation was changed giving a larger chunk to private boaters. The answer is more complicated than a straight across percentage. By User Days, a system which favors commercial profits by a complicated system in which commercial operators run short motorized trips and are able to charge twice for the same user day, the split is 73% commercial/ 27% private. A total of 145,500 passengers and crew versus 54,450 private boaters. The grand total is 199,950 user days not counting NPS and scientific research trips. When counted by Launches, Commercials receive 670 launches versus privates receiving between 250 and 272 launches. The key percentage is the actual body count percentage on the river on any given day.  Commercial operators have 87% of the bodies on the river on any given day versus 13% are private boaters.  This percentage changes on Wednesdays when 2 private launches are allowed resulting in 81% commercial/19% private. The situation is even more complicated in that private groups are given permits year round while over 95% of commercial usage is concentrated during the period 4/15 through 9/15. The key figure has nothing to do with these numbers but with the relative wait that a person must experience to get on the river.  If you call a commercial operator to get on a trip, you’ll wait somewhere between a few days to a few months to get space on a Grand Canyon trip, yet if you want to drive your own boat and do without paying $200 to $300 per day per person, that wait is 17+ years even accounting for a 30% cancellation rate. (Figures for all this may be found at: http://www.gcpba.org/access/factsheet.php3  These figures are from NPS via FOIA request.)     My understanding (and I may be wrong about this) is that user days gradually are being reallocated to private users as outfitters go out of business. Previously, the allottment could be sold to as part of a compnany’s assests.

No, this has been discussed but has never happened.  There are 16 commercial permits representing 15 companies who provide river outfitting services.  In no case have commercial permits ever been re-allocated to the private sector. Commercial concessionaires buy/sell/trade user-days in an effort to keep their allocation fully used. Warren

Response:

Once upon a time there was a river… Actually they are several rivers and in the end they all go to the sea… I’m talking about the Green-Yampa-Grand-Colorado-San Juan river system of the southwestern United States.  The Colorado River – considered by many to be the historical home of whitewater river running world wide.  Since John Wesley Powell first ran the Green and Colorado in 1869, these rivers and the techniques developed on them have engendered the sport of river running as we know it.  Prior to the early 1970’s, anyone could run these rivers at a whim provided they had the skills and equipment to do so.  By 1974, the numbers of people running these rivers had reached a point where significant degradation of the experience had occurred. Since then, beginning with Grand Canyon in 1974, the administering agencies began requiring permits to run the Colorado, Green, Yampa and San Juan rivers. On all of these permitted sections of river, access is restricted to two classes of users – commercial river concessionaires and private boaters. Commercial concessionaires negotiate permits with the administering agency and by contract with that agency are allowed to make use of  ’x’ user-days spread over ‘y’ launches each year during the term of their contract. Private boaters are generally required to apply during December and January to a lottery system wherein successful applicants may launch a trip on a specific day with a body count limited, usually, to a maximum of 16 people. To this day, these lotteries continue and applying to the lottery has become a yearly ritual to almost all Western boaters as well as a good many boaters from all over the country.  Commercial operators continue to operate on fixed allocations awarded for the duration of their contract. Historically speaking, at least over the last 20 years or so, all of these permitted stretches of  river have operated in this fashion with ever increasing numbers of private boaters competing in lotteries for a fixed number of launch permits.  Some people apply for year after year for a given river permit before drawing successfully in these lotteries and the chances get more difficult with every year.  This is best exemplified by the Colorado River through the Grand Canyon which by 1979 had so many applicants to the river lottery system and the chances of drawing a permit were so slim that the lottery system was done away with and a waiting list system was implemented.  While this sort of system has not yet been applied to other sections of the Colorado River, the Grand Canyon has been stuck with it AND the fixed allocation ever since. Between 1979 and 2000, that waiting list has grown from approximately 300 private permit applicants (a 1.5 year wait) to nearly 7000 permit applicants. The wait to actually receive a permit has grown from 1 to 2 years to over 20 years, even taking into account a 30% to 40% cancellation rate.  At the same time, commercial outfitters have grown from an $8 million dollar a year business in 1979 to over $28 million dollars a year (1999).  In 1972, 90% or more of the river usage was commercial outfitters due mostly to the fact if the extensive logistics involved in setting up a Grand Canyon trip.  Over the years however, private boaters have increased to the point where many, many boaters desire and have the capability to run the Grand.  Because they were the bulk of traffic in the early 70’s AND they make significant political contributions, the commercial river operators monopolize Grand Canyon river access.  They account for some 73% of the user days and launches and 87% of the actual bodies on the river. Private boaters, a hugely growing constituency since the 1970’s, account for only 13% of the actual bodies on the river and a bare 27% of the launches.  If you want to go commercially you can get space on the next available launch; anywhere from a few days or so on up to about a year or two depending on how flexible you are with your launch date and how much space you want to reserve on a trip so long as you have the $200 to $300 per day rates that the concessionaires charge. Private boaters on the other hand have a wait of no less than 17 years at present and depending on cancellation rate, very likely to be over 20+ years before they can get a permit to go down America’s premier desert canyon whitewater river. As a result of this state of affairs regarding access to the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, few boaters even bother to apply for a permit.  Between the $100 application fee and the need to formally express continuing interest on a yearly basis, it’s truly amazing that even 6800 names are on the list. Since the list only accounts for trip leaders, it in essence represents nearly 109,000 boaters.  Given these hurdles plus a number of other rules and the heavy red tape and logistics of actually putting together a Grand Canyon trip, few boaters even bother to apply.  Anecdotally, I know of no more than 3 out of nearly 40 boaters who are on the list as they consider it an effective impossibility to actually get on the river on their own trip in their own lifetime.  Those with a real hankering to go generally hope and pray to be asked on a trip on someone else’s permit.  Yet, a commercial passenger can call an outfitter and generally have a date within at worst a couple months. This is BEYOND wrong, it is also against the very laws which authorize the National Park Service.  A key phrase in the 1916 National Park Service Organic Act, the very act which authorizes the National Park Service, says:       "… and no natural curiosities, wonders, or objects of interest shall be leased, rented, or granted to anyone on such terms as to interfere with the free access to them by the public." [16 U.S.C. 3] Amongst other things, the fact that commercial outfitters have access in preference to private boaters is a direct violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution not to mention a direct violation of 16 USC 3 (See Thomas’s Register: http://www.house.gov/resources/106cong/reports/parkslaws/03_admin_.pdf) Since the mid 1970’s, private boaters have tried to have the allocation of commercial/private permits adjusted to accommodate the growing numbers of private boaters. (A detailed account of the history of this struggle can be found at: http://www.gcpba.org/access/IllegitimateWeb.html )  Aside from an adjustment made in 1979 that raised the allocation from 8% to 27% of the user days, this effort has been fruitless. The Colorado River Management Plan proposed by the park service in 1979 was explicitly defunded by an amendment from then freshman senator Orrin Hatch (a close relative of the Hatch’s that own the largest river concession company in the west.) which prevented NPS from implementing that river plan. (See http://www.gcpba.org/access/HatchAnalWeb.html)  Since then, private river runners have continued to seek a re-allocation of user days to private boaters and a reform of the permit system and waiting list but to no avail. At every turn, the commercial concessions have fought ANY change whatsoever in the relative allocation of permits between commercial and private boaters as well as consistently fighting the declaration of the Colorado River Corridor as formal Wilderness due to the assured loss of short duration motor trips.  Bottom line is the bottom line – the commercial river trip business is a $28 million dollar a year monopoly for 15 river trip companies.  They contribute regularly to appropriate members of  Congress and the Senate and do everything they can to continue to solidify their near monopoly over rafting down the Colorado River in Grand Canyon.  So much influence do they have that finally NPS dropped their latest planning effort in February 2000.  This was allegedly at the behest of the river concessionaires’ lobbying group, the Grand Canyon River Outfitters Association (GCROA).  Whether true or not, at the least this occurred as a direct result of the political pressure that GCROA or it’s members brought to bear on senior NPS, GCNP and Department of Interior staff.  The result of this is to seemingly preserve the unfair status quo of the last 21 years with commercial outfitters receiving the lion’s share of access (and continued huge profits) and their passengers receiving immediate access all in exchange for money. Prior to 1996, there was the Colorado River Constituency Panel which consisted of both private and commercial interests which purported to represent the interests of all users but this was dissolved in 1996 by then GCNP superintendent Rob Arnburner with the reason given that it was supposedly in conflict with federal law. As a result of this and continued NPS stonewalling on the topic of re-allocation of user days, the Grand Canyon Private Boaters Association (GCPBA) was formed to work as a representative of the private boater with both NPS and the river concession companies.  The goal of GCPBA has been to work within the planning process to achieve a more equitable allocation for private boaters with regard to commercial concessions and to promote Wilderness values and the declaration of the Colorado river corridor as pure Wilderness. In March of 2000, immediately after the cancellation of the 2000 CRMP, a group of private individuals have filed suit against the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior in an effort to use the legal venue to force reallocation of user-days.  This suit brought by boater/attorney John Wells and a group of private boaters seeks to enjoin the Park Service from re-negotiating concession contracts with the river outfitters and to force an immediate reallocation of user days to reflect the growth in private boating since 1979. (Details at http://www.gcpba.org/litigation/wells_brief.html) Also, in July of 2000, GCPBA filed suit against the National Park Service and the Department of Interior also to force this issue but also to … read more »

Response:

Question:

I cry about what QuickBooks and Quicken must do to fight for their lives. Both now have 85% of their market at retail. Microsoft quickly folded its TurboTax competitor. Only Intuit monopoly related arrogance (anti-customer policies) and programs like NetLedger may change this. NL has a free Quicken & QuickBooks subset at http://blocktax.com/ NetLedger. I removed your crosspost to grc.optout.  This is a newsgroup for discussing Quicken, not conducting a flamewar because I challenged the stability of members of another newsgroup. Mandatory Quicken content:  Intuit is in a fight for their proverbial life, with Microsoft offering a competing product.  I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if they employed some aggressive marketing tactics, can you blame them?  Luckily for them, Microsoft Money isn’t quite on par with Quicken, yet.  If Intuit’s survival was my responsibility, I’d be looking for every trick I could find.

  Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A.  World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester FREE NetLedger consult refer #10260   FREE 462p QB book/error codes/ 80 QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/

Response:

15,000 NetLedger customers and countless other webledger users and security specialists know webledger files are up to a million times safer than those on our own PCs. We know encryption, split data, internal controls, audits and many controls we could not possibly afford alone insure our security even from NL employees. These are the methods our largest corporations and top secret government agencies use to limit access to those who need-to- know data in their networked and internet files. For 10 years I specialized in Quicken, QuickBooks and TurboTax. I probably was responsible for thousands of their sales. However, when Intuit adopted many anti-customer and Pro Advisor policies they made me organize boycotts, threaten lawsuits and seek alternatives. Earlier this year we attracted national attention and got QB to drop about $40 million in price increases. We also very probably made QB drop required tax tables in the not yet released 2001. http://www.blocktax.com/mar31.htm (CNET article) http://www.blocktax.com/FEB162000.htm Some day soon most of us will use webledgers and other ASPs because they have dramatic price, feature, integration, reliability and security advantages over desktop software. In my opinion, this time will be very soon after NL show us how to very cheaply save most data entry time & increase accuracy , by automating data from other ASPs. They should have this in a few days. Intuit will soon have a big share of this market and may well dominate it. However, so far all reviews have NL as a clear first. Yesterday a PC Magazine writer called to discuss the amazing fact that QB for the Web does not yet import Quicken or QB data, as NL does. NL even gives Quicken users a permanent free trial, which they also do for a QB subset. http://www.blocktax.com/NetLedger.htm This type of student-appealing giveaway is part of what once made IBM and Apple dominant. What NL has not done is pay me a dime. Of course, my Intuit prize winning beta test awards also were far less than $1 an hour. In such cases my reward comes from being able to better serve a rapidly increasing list of clients from around the country and the world. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -You have concerns about Intuit collecting information on you, and requiring registration, yet you’re not concerned about having your bookkeeping data stored on someone’s web server?  Sorry, I fail to see the logic in this, and instead I’m seeing someone promoting an ASP-type service with which he is someway affiliated… I cry about what QuickBooks and Quicken must do to fight for their lives. Both now have 85% of their market at retail. Microsoft quickly folded its TurboTax competitor. Only Intuit monopoly related arrogance (anti-customer policies) and programs like NetLedger may change this. NL has a free Quicken & QuickBooks subset at http://blocktax.com/ NetLedger. I removed your crosspost to grc.optout.  This is a newsgroup for discussing Quicken, not conducting a flamewar because I challenged the stability of members of another newsgroup. Mandatory Quicken content:  Intuit is in a fight for their proverbial life, with Microsoft offering a competing product.  I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if they employed some aggressive marketing tactics, can you blame them?  Luckily for them, Microsoft Money isn’t quite on par with Quicken, yet.  If Intuit’s survival was my responsibility, I’d be looking for every trick I could find.  Mike Block, Tax Fighting C.P.A. World’s #1 QuickBooks Top Tester FREE NetLedger consult refer #10260  FREE 462p QB book/error codes/ 80 QB add-ons http://blocktax.com/

     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:

Question:

MS SQL Server is the M$ version of SQL Server by Sybase.  As a RD (relational database) they are very similar to a non tech.  They hold the data, they do good security, they allow backups and dump files, etc….. Software developers will a line themselves with a major player like M$ (Microsoft), Sybase or Oracle. Access was commented about in this thread somewhere and it is a weak player in the arena stated above.  It is not good for more than 5 concurrent users, and will not work on a WAN (multi office environment).  I bet it could but I would want to put up with it. The price tags for the various programs have lots of hidden costs.  The primary vendors Oracle, Sybase & M$ all have a licensing fee of users allowed into the database.  That is part of the cost that you see.  A good reason why one module costs 1,500 and another costs 5,000.  The back end fee is in there.  That means that in the 1,500 version they may use the less robust products from the same manufacturer.  Sybase has SQL Anywhere which is designed for 25 and under concurrent users. Getting back the thee initial question?   Re: Difference between SQL and Microsoft SQL Products Not much for the end user, a bigger issue for the IT Director.  What type of server will the database be put on?  Unix or NT, or AS400?  What types of connections do they have to do to allow users access to the new environment? How do they manage multiple log ins and different ID’s and Passwords. ARPITA actually. So find the software that is close to your business.  Find out if the vendor you are going to purchase it from listens to customer requests?  Do they charge the customer for the new feature and then put in the new upgrade to be released soon?  Can you get custom reporting from the database from in-house power users? Can they damage the data in any way? __Stephen Russell Memphis FoxPro User Group – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – x-no-archive: yes My company is, like so many others, in the process of software selection/evaluation to take care of our little Y2K problem.  We have received several bids, and I am starting to realize the importance of the database or platform (is that correct terminology?) that is used by each package.  Of course, most of us understand the difference between a Windows and a DOS product.  However, I’m trying to learn the difference between Windows 98/NT products (some of which do use SQL, if I understand correctly) vs. those that use "Microsoft SQL".  (I know that there are also AS/400 products, but we don’t have that so those are automatically ruled out.) Just setting up an ERP (Visual Manufacturing) that is SQLBase (not MS SQL) and the accessability of it is less than MS SQL Server. I need an ODBC driver that has been a pain to get working while the SQL Server is built into MS Access. Other than that, I’m not techie enough to know the answers. Gord

Response:

x-no-archive: yes My company is, like so many others, in the process of software selection/evaluation to take care of our little Y2K problem.  We have received several bids, and I am starting to realize the importance of the database or platform (is that correct terminology?) that is used by each package.  Of course, most of us understand the difference between a Windows and a DOS product.  However, I’m trying to learn the difference between Windows 98/NT products (some of which do use SQL, if I understand correctly) vs. those that use "Microsoft SQL".  (I know that there are also AS/400 products, but we don’t have that so those are automatically ruled out.)

Just setting up an ERP (Visual Manufacturing) that is SQLBase (not MS SQL) and the accessability of it is less than MS SQL Server. I need an ODBC driver that has been a pain to get working while the SQL Server is built into MS Access. Other than that, I’m not techie enough to know the answers. Gord

Response:

So, here’s the questions.  Just how important is the database or platform?  Why are MS SQL products around $2,000 per module higher than the Windows NT products (from the same company, I’m just talking about different versions.)  For instance, Solomon IV has Solomon IV Pervasive for Windows, which is priced around $1,195 per module, and Solomon IV on MS SQL which is around $3,195 per module.  Why the big price differential?  

I think that much of the difference would be in the number of simultaneous users which can access the database. I come from the MS Access world.  There, if you have more than five simultaneous users the rule of thumb is to upsize the backend from Access to SQL Server. Not only that, I am also hearing about FoxPro, SQL/DBL, SBS, and Backoffice?  Are those other database products?  Or the same thing as something I’ve already mentioned? *  How do all these terms fit together?   *  How important is this when selecting the software?   *  How does it affect performance?   *  Is any one superior to the others? *  Will software companies continue to develop and support Windows products?  Or are those headed the way of many DOS products which are being phased out?   *  Are there any websites where I can get educated/more informed?

Probably not a lot of difference between the database engines as far as you are concerned.  So long as your environment is not too large or busy.  Ie, their largest customer has 5 simultaneous users and you’re coming in with 25 I’d be concerned. What’s the most important thing here would be how well does the software fit with your organization.  And how good is their technical support when you have a problem. Tony —- Message posted to newsgroup and emailed. Tony Toews, Independent Computer Consultant The Year 2000 crisis: Will my parents or your grand parents still be receiving their pension in January, 2000?  See http://www.granite.ab.ca/year2000 Microsoft Access Links, Hints, Tips & Accounting Systems at http://www.granite.ab.ca/accsmstr.htm

Response:

So, here’s the questions.  Just how important is the database or platform?  Why are MS SQL products around $2,000 per module I think that much of the difference would be in the number of simultaneous users which can access the database. I come from the MS Access world.  There, if you have more than five simultaneous users the rule of thumb is to upsize the backend from Access to SQL Server.

database conference, if you’re interested.   Todd Boyle I’ve run into this before, with an app that wrote to the DB, and then re-read the data and couldn’t see the changes. From what I understand, it’s because Jet has separate threads for read and write, and the write thread does a delayed write back. It pretty well makes Jet useless for some/most real apps. But then, that was true in any case… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I have a Web server talking to a local .MDB database via ODBC, and another local process talking to the same database. When the local process makes an update, the Web-server process doesn’t always see it immediately, and this causes an error. If I make the local process sleep a second or two after making an update, before the Web-server process looks for the update, things are OK. To isolate the fact that it’s a .MDB thing, I tried an alternate ODBC datasource (the Excel driver, actually) and that exhibits no such problem. I’ve never felt that Jet/ODBC/MDB was a safe combination for rapidfire multiuser access, which is what this is. Nor would I deploy anything this way, it’s just a test setup. But still, it’s got me wondering. For example, I notice a registry key, on a per-.MDB-datasource basis, called SafeTransactions. What is that? Is that supposed to help this situation? Is there any way to force a system DSN that is Jet/MDB-based to serialize properly in a situation like this?

I’ve run into this before, with an app that wrote to the DB, and then re-read the data and couldn’t see the changes. From what I understand, it’s because Jet has separate threads for read and write, and the write thread does a delayed write back.

That jibes with what I see. Wait 2 secs, and it’s in synch. Not that you want to wait 2 secs… I’m guessing there’s some registry setting that could force those threads to synchronize. Thought it might be SafeTransactions, but setting that to 1 from the default of 0 seems ineffective. Makes you wonder what SafeTransactions is for, though. Couldn’t find a lick of documentation about it on the Web. In the MSDN online library (link at msdn.microsoft.com), their is a Jet Database programmer’s guide (the whole book is in the library). I think it has a section on registry settings for Jet.

And here’s the scoop: Update Delays You can set up a data source with a page timeout that retains a page in its buffer for a period before it is removed. Specify a page timeout either with the Page Timeout option in the Driver Options section of the Data Source Setup dialog box, or through the PageTimeout keyword in a call to SQLConfigDataSource (see the next section, Creating .Mdb Files Programmatically). A page timeout can cause undesirable delays in updates. To specify that there be no delay in updating when you are using the Microsoft Access Desktop Database Driver, set the SafeTransactions data source setup option to 1, and set PageTimeout to 0.

So I tried that. And…no dice. Still the same concurrency problem. I think this is clearly a case of: Patient: "Doctor, doctor, it hurts when I do that." Doctor: "Don’t do that."

Response:

Question:

Anyone know that interesting histories of the accounting terms ‘credit’ and ‘debit’?

Response:

Anyone know that interesting histories of the accounting terms ‘credit’ and ‘debit’?

My understanding is that the are the anglicized versions of the Italian.

Response:

Question:

What’s the matter, Bobby? Feeling paranoid? Reading into things? Losing your grip on reality? Your assertion:  Black people are genetically inferior in intellect to White people. My response:  I am Black, I am not inferior in intellect, and I know dozens of other Blacks who also are not inferior in intellect. Your response:   …money can make it easier, but not always… …I went to work for a Fortune 500… …"smarter" parents and "smarter" kids…do not disprove the IQ question… …I have not generalized… …lack of hope comes from peers telling them that all whites are racists… …I’m down in 3rd or 4th place… (there are only five races to choose from, Bob) …where do you get off thinking everything is a plot of whitey?… …its the majority white that support the change… Don’t accuse me of taking things out of context either.  Your original post is up for everyone to read and draw their own conclusions from. You and all your cronies can scan your textbooks until your eyes pop out, but you can never disprove the fact that my very existence throws a wrench in your works.  You want a reference?  I’ll provide you with a list of 20 high-IQ Blacks that I am personally acquainted with.  You provide me a list of 20 low-IQ Blacks that you are personally acquainted with and we’ll call it even. Naomi  (IQ 145)

Response:

For all y’all lacking in information (and you know who you are,) I’ve got news for ya. All WHITE MEN have SMALL PENISES. It’s true, I READ IT IN A BOOK. Although I personally have never seen a WHITE MAN’S PENIS, the book I read was written by a SCHOLARLY BLACK FEMALE, who obviously MUST KNOW. She says that SMALL PENISES are a GENETIC DEFICIENCY of WHITE MALES, as they consistently measure 2 to 3 inches SHORTER than those of BLACK MALES. It’s a FACT.  I READ it. FURTHERMORE, she says to remember HER ASSERTIONS next time you MAKE YOUR OWN. Outie. Naomi.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – : : :Racial propagandists assert a 15 point IQ difference between blacks :and whites is due to innate racial inferiority based on genetics. :However, where racial stock is identical a similar difference :is evident where a minority is forced to perform  demeaning and :low paying tasks. The hereditary form of such socially enfored :inferiority assure that even where minority members overcome :discriminatory sabotage of education and opportunity, a maximum f the more desirable economic and social niches are apparently :reserved to the majority. : :In the U.S., blacks have the same opportunities as whites. Really? :Besides, the :environmental effects on IQ happen before age 5. : :Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s :psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary :scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." It :hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear :and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the :national average. : :But that’s not what the previous poster denied.  He denied that the :difference in IQ is genetic.  If it isn’t genetic, then it’s :environmental.  Then he argued that the environments are different with :regard to economic opportunity.  I don’t think that’s true in the U.S. :The environmental influences that make black children less intelligent in my opinion) are to be found in the home. : Speaking as a black man, I can say that the environmental influences that could possibly affect my performances on intelligent tests would most definitely stem from outside my home. In my opinion, the greatest environmental factor affecting a person’s performance on such tests would be related to the stress and low self esteem that is derived from living in an environment that continually tries to denigrate and demean you. Before I go on, I must say that I am aware that the average white  person could not relate to what I have just said. But once a Black man steps outside the confines of his home, IT’S ON. Too often you walk by a white person and they clutch their bags; you walk by a car and the power locks are in effect; you go into a store and have to make a quick exit due to the stress from being watched like a criminal; the police stops and search you like a common criminal for no apparent reason; in college you are perceived to be stupid for no other reason than the fact that you are black and therefore could only get your place through some easy access scheme. Then net effect on a person who has to endure  all these stressful situations on a daily basis, is a lower self esteem and stress (no wonder blacks suffer so much from high blood pressure and heart disease).  In my opinion, the only environmental factor stemming from the home is TV watching and the negative messages that it sends to black kids about themselves on a daily basis. And what does this have to do with performance on an intelligence test? Living in a negative environment like this will have a devastating effect on a person’s self esteem, as I have said before. Self esteem is a key factor for improvement in any field. If a person doesn’t feel good about himself or his self worth, then this will act as an impediment to performance in any field. But to counter my argument, you will claim that the environmental influences on IQ are only a factor before age 5. But From what I have heard, tests have conclusively shown that environmental factors does influence, and cause a persons IQ to vary over their lifetime.      

Actually the research shows that black children are more precocious than whites or Asians, and do accelerate at a young age with intervention resulting in higher achievement scores. But this seems to be a genetic pattern of ability presenting itself later in life for Asians and whites. The enhanced learning that is effective in raising the achievement scores of blacks when young fade out by the time adulthood is reached. The effects are temporary. All attempts to change this pattern of fading have been futile. In addition, Hispanics also are of lower intelligence, and they are not an involuntary minority. Also, blacks have an even lower IQ in Africa. All of these facts makes the racialist argument for blacks generally low cognitive ability only speculation and wishful thinking.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Newsgroups: alt.discrimination,alt.activism,alt.current-events.usa,alt.fan.rush-limbau gh,alt.politics.cli nton,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.libertarian,a lt.politics.reform,alt.p olitics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.republican,soc.culture.african.american, talk.politics.libert arian,talk.politics.misc,soc.couples.intercultural,ca.politics Organization: scruz-net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.   It’s very refreshing to hear different viewpoints from all the usual angry rich white male conservatives that populate the net. I’m glad you’re here to add your voice to the debate. My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.   It’s not just providing better educational systems, though. Poverty affects childhood development as well. We need to reduce poverty, especially child poverty. We have a 20 percent child poverty rate in America — a disgrace! Europe has significantly reduced poverty through child welfare programs. It’s the best investment in people you could possibly make. If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent. You wouldn’t even have your education if conservatives could establish the sort of "meritocracy" they wanted. (Meritocracy = those who already have money and power get more.)

Meritocracy= those who have the best tests scores regardless of what strings daddy can pull for you. Get a grip. The black racialists insistence on disallowing testing for jobs has put the good old boys back in control. It is too subjective and they go to the best schools. Testing lets everyone compete based on their current ability. Of course it doesn’t address past errors and omissions in education. But then nothing can. The past can’t be revisited.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Somewhat means in some slight degree. Unfortunately, blacks score substantially below the average in IQ. No amount of racism or deprivation could account for this. Most of our ancestors had to put up with environmental deprivations much more severe than any welfare queen has to put up with today. Malnutrition and a lack of an education was the norm some 100 years ago. So what is your excuse? My ancestors over came such hardships. And they didn’t  blame anyone, they just got on with their lives and tried to do better for their children than what they had. Stop the whining already! well actually I beg to differ.  The methods in which you are treated during childhood affect your entire life.  I did extremely poorly in school, my family moved around alot and I had problems meeting new friends (usually beat the crap out of them, at least until I stopped growing and they didn’t)…  I’m not black, jewish, or any other minority.  However I did extremely poorly in school because of lack of parenting…   queen has to put up with today. Malnutrition and a lack of an education was the norm some 100 years ago. So what is your excuse? My actually, in Ontario, Canada the estimates are that somewhere near 65% of elementary students go to school hungry…  this HAS BEEN PROVEN to affect their education… I did poorly on all my tests almost up until high school…  But, I read, and read, and ignored everything else… I managed to ‘get rid’ of my parents about that time… and my grades began to go up…  until I finally graduated with honours, and went to college… environment has much to do with what your IQ ends up at…  perhaps once I got rid of the constant divorces hanging over my head, the constant strife between varying parental units, the constant moving from one location to another, and many other factors I began to do well… frankly I don’t think genetics have all that much to do with things… according to that theory because both sets of my grandparents were poor polish peasants, who had come from thousands of years of peasantry, I should basically be some thick-headed peasant… (well, at times my wife would probably say I am…)

It is too bad you didn’t stay in school longer so someone could explain to you the difference between IQ and achievement. I just finished an article on learning disabilities. The whole criteria for measuring someone’s disability is to test their innate intelligence (IQ) against what they have learned. The experts assume a constant IQ but a varying achievement score depending on problems, motivation, parenting, etc. This seems to be where everyone just doesn’t get it. If you read the journals on education, especially with regards to gifted and LD’s you will find out that IQ is assumed to be held constant for each individual. That is why anyone with an IQ below 80 is not even supposed to be tested for a learning disability. What you lacked was achievement. Totally different attributes.

Response:

I doubt that reading what I said would have made a difference, you appear to have just wanted to vent. It would have been *smart* of you to have read my previous post more closely before responding.  I said that my privately educated cousins and friends achieved far more in their lives than my publically educated ones.

Well, maybe that is what you meant to say, but to quote you, you actually said: "My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives."  No mention of friends here…. Same genes, different educational opportunities, different levels of achievement.

- Not really the same genes…no doubt education makes a difference, but that is not the only factor.  It’s true that my family is smart

This is what I suggested…. My father has a talent for math, and is extremely artistic.

More support for the genetic possibility…Thanks once again. Those with money and opportunity succeed, those without do not.

50% right, Opportunity is the key, yes money can make it easier, but not always. I am from a middle-class family with 4 bothers and sisters, my parents did not have the money to send me to collage, but made too much for me to qualify for any form of assistance. My grades were good even though I went to a public school in Detroit. I went in the military and then to Collage on the GI Bill. After collage I went to work for a fortune 500 that paid the tab for my post-grad work, but extracted heavy dues in work. It took me a little longer, but then again I had a pretty nice portfolio by the time if got my masters, instead of a $90K debt. (To each his own) My private school did not weed out *underachievers* in any way.  I was not required

Not worth a lot of ink, I said "some" private schools screen, not all. The graduation rate in the high school is still close to 100%.  In my 13 years of attendance, one girl got pregnant.  Drugs and crime within this school are nonexistent.   Racial discrimination is not tolerated.  SAT scores are among the highest in the city.

All of this can be attributed to "smarter" parents and "smarter" kids also, I don’t, for a second, argue that these are not very good things, but they do not prove or dis-prove the IQ question. and the absence of disillusionment, hopelessness and boredom.

If you are looking for the school system to solve these problems then you are looking to the wrong folks. These are community issues, with the possible exception of boredom, but then I found most of school boring and somehow managed to get an education out of the deal. May I also suggest that before you start generalizing about the brain power of people you personally know nothing about

I have not generalized, I said the IF there are IQ/genetic based contributing factors to the success of black, then shouldn’t these be reviewed? If you will accept Sickle-Cell as a race oriented genetic pre-disposition, and take a hard look at that, then why not other areas? you go visit some inner-city schools. Speak to some of the students. Talk to the teachers.

As a matter of fact I have done this more than once, setting up computers, in schools in Pacomia, East LA, and Watts in LA, was a Big Brother until I moved recently, my boss and my next store neighbor are black also, in addition to many roommates in the service. Find out what it really is that is keeping Black kids back.  Lack of intelligence?  Or lack of hope?

Where do you think the lack of hope comes from???? It comes from peers telling them that only a financially unobtainable private school education will do, that all whites are racists and hold them down, that the last 100 years of oppression MUST apply to them also. I’ll tell you where the hope has been lost, in the black community, with the ADULTS!!!!!. Is there cause, perhaps, but cause or not, losing hope, and not being able to picture the future as a better place, or a place at all does not work. Furthermore, I ask that you look at your own motivations in forming your opinions. Is Black *underachievement* something that you feel should be addressed and changed, or are you seeking self-aggrandizement by membership in a *superior race*?

That is significant nerve, you come off in holier-than-thou tones and accuse me of acting though I was from a superior race. First, according the same studies that started this thread, I am not a member of a superior race, I’m down in 3rd or 4th place. I’ll tell you where my opinions form, they form from seeing program after program fail, the form from seeing the misery that poverty and crime and hopelessness bring, they from knowing that there has to be better answers, there has to be solutions. They form from exploring new ideas, by not excluding anything from the potential solution set. Where do you get off thinking everything is a plot of whitey? How do you think it benefits the white people to have these problems in our inner-cities? Most of us are looking to improve things, we do it on the job, in our communities, in our schools, and most importantly, in the voting booths. With the overwhelming majority being "white" nothing would have to change, it’s the majority white that support the change.  Are there bad white people, of course, racists and every other kind of jerk, but then again we don’t have an exclusive on stupidity, these issues appear in people of every race. BobJ.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Speaking as a black man, I can say that the environmental influences that could possibly affect my performances on intelligent tests would most definitely stem from outside my home. In my opinion, the greatest environmental factor affecting a person’s performance on such tests would be related to the stress and low self esteem that is derived from living in an environment that continually tries to denigrate and demean you. Before I go on, I must say that I am aware that the average white  person could not relate to what I have just said. But once a Black man steps outside the confines of his home, IT’S ON. Too often you walk by a white person and they clutch their bags; you walk by a car and the power locks are in effect; you go into a store and have to make a quick exit due to the stress from being watched like a criminal; the police stops and search you like a common criminal for no apparent reason; in college you are perceived to be stupid for no other reason than the fact that you are black and therefore could only get your place through some easy access scheme. Then net effect on a person who has to endure  all these stressful situations on a daily basis, is a lower self esteem and stress (no wonder blacks suffer so much from high blood pressure and heart disease).  In my opinion, the only environmental factor stemming from the home is TV watching and the negative messages that it sends to black kids about themselves on a daily basis.

But IQ is determined before age 5.  So the environmental influences on intelligence must be in the home.  The societal influences you’re describing are primarily experienced after age 5. — Matt Beckwith                         http://users.southeast.net/~beckwith/

Response:

Newsgroups: alt.discrimination,alt.activism,alt.current-events.usa,alt.fan.rush-limbaug h,alt.politics.cli nton,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.libertarian,al t.politics.reform,alt.p olitics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.republican,soc.culture.african.american,t alk.politics.libert arian,talk.politics.misc,soc.couples.intercultural,ca.politics Organization: scruz-net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.  

It’s very refreshing to hear different viewpoints from all the usual angry rich white male conservatives that populate the net. I’m glad you’re here to add your voice to the debate. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  

It’s not just providing better educational systems, though. Poverty affects childhood development as well. We need to reduce poverty, especially child poverty. We have a 20 percent child poverty rate in America — a disgrace! Europe has significantly reduced poverty through child welfare programs. It’s the best investment in people you could possibly make. If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

You wouldn’t even have your education if conservatives could establish the sort of "meritocracy" they wanted. (Meritocracy = those who already have money and power get more.) Steve Kangas http://www.scruz.net/~kangaroo/ Pat sez: I am shocked, shocked that a PhD  c a n d i d a t e would give such an unscholarly definition of a meritocracy. It is only in a meritocracy that the Naomi’s of this world can achieve their potential. I am only sorry she does not feel her $90,000 education was not worth it. It will be  returned to her many times over.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.  My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

Your case can just as easily be used to support the genetic argument. You site that it’s you, your family, and your close relatives, all in a similar environment and all achieved success where the "others" failed. That fits the genetic point of view well, that your family tree contained above average "smart genes" and thus the effect is limited to your relatives. You have inadvertently isolated the environment in your own argument – I think this is called shooting ones self in the foot…. As for the private schools?, you could go to a private school because both your parents have professions that pay well above poverty levels, this is likely to be the result of higher intelligence, which they passed down to their children. Many private schools weed out underachievers through screening and testing, an option public schools don’t (and should not) have. This means that private school results are highly biased, when you start out with smarter kids on average, it follows that you would  end up with better educated kids at the end. I will also note that many kids going though the same inner-city public schools as those that fail, do well and succeed, including going on to higher education, further weakening the notion that environment is everything… Environment no doubt plays a large role in the final results, the genetics just set up the pre-disposition, a natural edge if you will, the individual must still have the opportunity to use that edge. Broken homes, drugs, violence, hunger, and fear have to impact a kids ability to learn. The problem is that society readily accepts the problems and has spent billions trying to figure out how to mitigate the impact – but that’s another argument…., what we don’t accept is that there maybe innate causes or contributors, this gets us into the whole "inferior" deal and things go down hill from there fast. If there is a 15 or even a 5 point average IQ spread then we should also consider devising education methods tuned to that level. If we put the content out in methods to complex for the students to follow and learn the results would be similar to what we have today? Fix the problem and the symptoms will go away all by themselves, just ask your brother…. BobJ.

Response:

| Compare the "innate intelligence" of Mozart, Einstein, and Nicola Tesla. | Who’s smartest of the three? Mozart probably couldn’t do math to save | his life. Einstein couldn’t figure out how to tell if two colors | matched. And Tesla thought that he could invent machines to talk to | the dead. And yet, all three are undoubted geniuses: Mozart wrote some | of the most beautiful and complex music of all time. Einstein helped | unravel some of the fundamental mysteries of the universe. And Tesla | invented technologies that we continue to use every day. (Such as | broadcast radio, and AC light bulbs.) You can’t really compare the | three – they have different *kinds* of intelligence. So how is a single | numeric value going to quantify that? People have a wide range of differing cognitive skills.  We can catalog individual differences in the degree to which different people possess these skills, and then look for structure in them. My understanding is that this is what psychologists who research individual cognitive differences have done, and they have come up with a fair bit of agreement that there is a general trait of intelligence underlying all (or most) of these skills, in that possession of the skills tends to correlate strongly with this general trait.  This "g", as it is called in some theories, underlies a few more specific forms of intelligence, which in turn underlie a few even more specific forms of intelligence, etc. This hierarchy could be thought to  bottom out at the most specific sets of cognitive skills imaginable. Jensen likens "g" to the processor speed of a computer.  Two chess-playing computers running the same program will differ in the "chess playing" intelligence they demonstrate insofar as their processor speeds differ.   The actual program itself would be an example of a more specific form of intelligence.  If one machine had a slower processor, but a better program, it might exhibit better chess playing intelligence, but be "dumber" overall when it ran other programs to do other tasks.  So the fact that some people seem intelligent in some areas and not so intelligent in others is not incompatible with the claim that there is a general notion of intelligence that is applicable to all areas to varying degrees. | For example: I finished my PhD in computer science last thursday – I’m | a doctor of computer science now, working for one of the top research | labs in the world. What earned me that degree wasn’t the fact that I | can recite lists of facts. It’s not the fact that I can rattle off the | work done by other researchers. What earned me that degree is the fact | that I was able to figure out, on my own, how to solve a problem that | no one else has ever solved. It takes more than facts do something | like that – it takes *real* education. Probably, general intelligence also helps.  The average IQ of the people who have done this, I imagine, is quite a bit higher than the average of those who have not.  Work ethic would be another factor.  And in my experience, a large number of the "problems" solved are really pretty uninteresting and trivial, so that the ability to put aside other things and focus on something of this nature would also be important. Interesting articles in the Village Voice and the Nation a while back referred to some of the other "quotients" that might be relevant in explaining difference success, namely, the "Acquiescence" quotient and the "Unscrupulousness" quotient, respectively. | Now we bring the groups back together again and there is a disparity | in many of the traits that were selected for by   geographic location. | I suggest  you read any of the many books on evolution to get a handle | on race, intelligence, diversity, etc. It is really very simple when | you are exposed to the facts (of course I am assuming a normal to | above normal intelligence). | | I suggest that you try doing the same, because you clearly have no | understanding at all of how evolution works. I don’t see how this is evidence by Nuenke’s remarks.   He seems to have a basic understanding of how evolution works in theory.   What might be questioned is whether he has an accurate understanding of the particular course of human evolution on this planet. | The prime mechanism by which evolution causes genetic change in | populations is selective pressure. In a large population competing for | resources, a subgroup has a survival advantage if that subgroup has | some advantage that allows them to either reproduce more than the rest | of the group, or allows their young to survive where others die. Now | ask yourself this: among the white population, are the less | intelligent members less likely to have children? The answer is pretty | obviously no. Are the children of the less intelligent white people | more likely to die than the children of the more intelligent? While | it’s possible that they do die more often, it’s not something | statistically significant. (Unless there’s a different of survival | rate between the smart and the stupid that’s on the order to 30% or so | – and that’s assuming that smart and stupid have the same number of | kids, which may well not be true.) | | So… Given that you seem to believe that evolution could have | affected this – just what mechanism to you propose for selection that | could make the stupid people reproduce successfully at a far lower | rate than the smart people? There are many differing mechanisms that would be relevant here, but probably one of the main ones would be that smart people were more attractive to people of the opposite sex, because of their clearly demonstrated abilities.  These abilities would include the ability to use their intelligence in solving problems of social interaction and the obtaining of necessities of life, but they would also include the mere demonstration of intelligence itself. The *current* relationship of parental intelligence to number of offspring is not relevant to the issue of how the human species managed to acquire the high intelligence that it did over evolutionary time.   "Stupid" people reproduced at a lower rate at the times when our species was evolving because they died off before they could reproduce, or were unsuccessful at winning mates.  It is easy to imagine how "stupidity" would have contributed to this.  And it is not so easy to imagine how intelligent people, otherwise, could have managed to come to predominate and serve as the based for the development of even more intelligent descendants. People make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.         — Karl Marx, "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte" People make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.         — Karl Marx, "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female. What does that mean? Are you 100% black or are you a mixture of black and white. And if you are a mixture how much of one race are you over the other?  My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs. They skipped college? What you mean is they were of such low intelligence that they never had any consideration of going to college.

Or maybe, they never had the chance to develop the skills that could have gotten them into college. You can’t get into college if you’ve never been to a school that tried to prepare you for it. If you went to a school that didn’t care whether you could read or not, didn’t care if you could do simple arithmetic or not, and grew up in a home with parents who went to the same lousy schools that you did, then you’ll never have the opportunity to make it to college.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education. It is obvious that you are unaware that intelligence is the raw ability and education is the means of feeding data into the IQ machine itself, the brain.

It is obvious that you are an ignorant idiot. First: Intelligence isn’t a single thing – it’s a complex of interrelated skills and abilities. You can’t measure true intelligence on an absolute scale, because there are two many components. Compare the "innate intelligence" of Mozart, Einstein, and Nicola Tesla. Who’s smartest of the three? Mozart probably couldn’t do math to save his life. Einstein couldn’t figure out how to tell if two colors matched. And Tesla thought that he could invent machines to talk to the dead. And yet, all three are undoubted geniuses: Mozart wrote some of the most beautiful and complex music of all time. Einstein helped unravel some of the fundamental mysteries of the universe. And Tesla invented technologies that we continue to use every day. (Such as broadcast radio, and AC light bulbs.) You can’t really compare the three – they have different *kinds* of intelligence. So how is a single numeric value going to quantify that? Second: Education is far more than just pumping facts into the brain – and anyone with any kind of real education will understand that. Knowledge isn’t just facts. Facts are the *tools* which an educated person uses, but the accumulation of facts isn’t learning – it’s memorization. Education is about learning to *understand* things – and that goes far beyond simple facts. For example: I finished my PhD in computer science last thursday – I’m a doctor of computer science now, working for one of the top research labs in the world. What earned me that degree wasn’t the fact that I can recite lists of facts. It’s not the fact that I can rattle off the work done by other researchers. What earned me that degree is the fact that I was able to figure out, on my own, how to solve a problem that no one else has ever solved. It takes more than facts do something like that – it takes *real* education. Third: IQ is not a measure of something innate, because it can *change*.  The abilities measured by IQ are developed during early childhood. Children who receive proper stimulation as young children have higher IQs than those who don’t. Your post mentioned the 15 point difference in IQ between black and white children – try taking a look at the statistics on the Head Start program… Guess how many IQ points are gained by children enrolled in Head Start? … You need to be intelligent to be smart, but you can never be smart if you have a lot of education but no intelligence to learn what is being fed you. The levels of intelligence varies between groups, based on the lineage of the family. Call it what you want but the people who call themselves African-American test out, on pure IQ tests that have nothing to do with education, 15 IQ points below the average.

        That translates into one very stupid group of people trying to blame their problems on racism, the educational system, or anything else they can come up with. But the most resilient hypothesis is that the "group" that calls itself African-American is very stupid, and the group that calls itself Jews is very smart. Did each group become stupid or smart because of the group they belonged to? Of course not.

Bzzzzzt. Wrong! Culturally, Jewish people have valued education above all else for hundreds of years. Growing up in a Jewish home, you’re *constantly* pressured to learn, to read, to study. You’re taught from the time that you’re a tiny baby that education is THE number one priority, THE key to future success. Jewish parents will skrimp and save and deprive themselves in order to make sure that their children get the education that they need to succeed. Blacks in America don’t get the same opportunities as whites. Just a few generations ago, blacks were prevented from getting any education. Now too many of them grow up in neighborhoods with the most appallingly horrible schools. They’ve never developed the cultural priority to get an education, because they’ve never had the opportunity to discover what an education can do for them. Just look at what happens to africans who actually get a chance. Listen to the poster that you responded to: her parents did what it took to get her an education. And look at the results! An educated, intelligent professional – a valuable asset to our society. Someone far more valuable than gutter trash like yourself. It has to do with the genealogy of each persons ancestors. It just so happens that smart genes are not evenly distributed around the world, based on environmental pressures in certain hostile environments. Blacks coasted along on what they needed to survive, whites and Asians were forced by hardship to select for the more intelligent lineage.

Bullshit again. Now we bring the groups back together again and there is a disparity in many of the traits that were selected for by   geographic location. I suggest  you read any of the many books on evolution to get a handle on race, intelligence, diversity, etc. It is really very simple when you are exposed to the facts (of course I am assuming a normal to above normal intelligence).

I suggest that you try doing the same, because you clearly have no understanding at all of how evolution works. The prime mechanism by which evolution causes genetic change in populations is selective pressure. In a large population competing for resources, a subgroup has a survival advantage if that subgroup has some advantage that allows them to either reproduce more than the rest of the group, or allows their young to survive where others die. Now ask yourself this: among the white population, are the less intelligent members less likely to have children? The answer is pretty obviously no. Are the children of the less intelligent white people more likely to die than the children of the more intelligent? While it’s possible that they do die more often, it’s not something statistically significant. (Unless there’s a different of survival rate between the smart and the stupid that’s on the order to 30% or so – and that’s assuming that smart and stupid have the same number of kids, which may well not be true.) So… Given that you seem to believe that evolution could have affected this – just what mechanism to you propose for selection that could make the stupid people reproduce successfully at a far lower rate than the smart people?         <MC — Mark Craig Chu-Carroll          || "I’m not dumb, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center || I just have a command of thoroughly useless

Response:

:

: :Racial propagandists assert a 15 point IQ difference between blacks :and whites is due to innate racial inferiority based on genetics. :However, where racial stock is identical a similar difference :is evident where a minority is forced to perform  demeaning and :low paying tasks. The hereditary form of such socially enfored :inferiority assure that even where minority members overcome :discriminatory sabotage of education and opportunity, a maximum f the more desirable economic and social niches are apparently :reserved to the majority. : :In the U.S., blacks have the same opportunities as whites. Really? :Besides, the :environmental effects on IQ happen before age 5. : :Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s :psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary :scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." It :hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear :and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the :national average. : :But that’s not what the previous poster denied.  He denied that the :difference in IQ is genetic.  If it isn’t genetic, then it’s :environmental.  Then he argued that the environments are different with :regard to economic opportunity.  I don’t think that’s true in the U.S. :The environmental influences that make black children less intelligent in my opinion) are to be found in the home. : Speaking as a black man, I can say that the environmental influences that could possibly affect my performances on intelligent tests would most definitely stem from outside my home. In my opinion, the greatest environmental factor affecting a person’s performance on such tests would be related to the stress and low self esteem that is derived from living in an environment that continually tries to denigrate and demean you. Before I go on, I must say that I am aware that the average white  person could not relate to what I have just said. But once a Black man steps outside the confines of his home, IT’S ON. Too often you walk by a white person and they clutch their bags; you walk by a car and the power locks are in effect; you go into a store and have to make a quick exit due to the stress from being watched like a criminal; the police stops and search you like a common criminal for no apparent reason; in college you are perceived to be stupid for no other reason than the fact that you are black and therefore could only get your place through some easy access scheme. Then net effect on a person who has to endure  all these stressful situations on a daily basis, is a lower self esteem and stress (no wonder blacks suffer so much from high blood pressure and heart disease).  In my opinion, the only environmental factor stemming from the home is TV watching and the negative messages that it sends to black kids about themselves on a daily basis. And what does this have to do with performance on an intelligence test? Living in a negative environment like this will have a devastating effect on a person’s self esteem, as I have said before. Self esteem is a key factor for improvement in any field. If a person doesn’t feel good about himself or his self worth, then this will act as an impediment to performance in any field. But to counter my argument, you will claim that the environmental influences on IQ are only a factor before age 5. But From what I have heard, tests have conclusively shown that environmental factors does influence, and cause a persons IQ to vary over their lifetime.       :– : :Matt Beckwith                         :http://users.southeast.net/~beckwith/

Response:

Pat notes the ‘Roo’s non-sequitur: It is precisely a meritocracy that allows the Naomi’s of the world to progress. I am disappointed that she does not think her education worth the $90,000. It will be returned to her many times over.

Response:

Pat notes the ‘Roo’s non-sequitur: It is precisely a meritocracy that allows the Naomi’s of the world to progress. I am disappointed that she does not think her education worth the $90,000. It will be returned to her many times over.

Somehow you missed something.  What do you make of the Repubs. attempts to reduce or eliminate student loans and spending om public education, vs. the Dems. stubbornly clinging to the notion that funding is needed in these areas (in fact, expanded) in order to actually have a meritocracy behind educational opportunity, instead of an aristocracy.                 Dave Braun

Response:

Somewhat means in some slight degree. Unfortunately, blacks score substantially below the average in IQ. No amount of racism or deprivation could account for this. Most of our ancestors had to put up with environmental deprivations much more severe than any welfare queen has to put up with today. Malnutrition and a lack of an education was the norm some 100 years ago. So what is your excuse? My ancestors over came such hardships. And they didn’t  blame anyone, they just got on with their lives and tried to do better for their children than what they had. Stop the whining already!

well actually I beg to differ.  The methods in which you are treated during childhood affect your entire life.  I did extremely poorly in school, my family moved around alot and I had problems meeting new friends (usually beat the crap out of them, at least until I stopped growing and they didn’t)…  I’m not black, jewish, or any other minority.  However I did extremely poorly in school because of lack of parenting…   queen has to put up with today. Malnutrition and a lack of an education was the norm some 100 years ago. So what is your excuse? My

actually, in Ontario, Canada the estimates are that somewhere near 65% of elementary students go to school hungry…  this HAS BEEN PROVEN to affect their education… I did poorly on all my tests almost up until high school…  But, I read, and read, and ignored everything else… I managed to ‘get rid’ of my parents about that time… and my grades began to go up…  until I finally graduated with honours, and went to college… environment has much to do with what your IQ ends up at…  perhaps once I got rid of the constant divorces hanging over my head, the constant strife between varying parental units, the constant moving from one location to another, and many other factors I began to do well… frankly I don’t think genetics have all that much to do with things… according to that theory because both sets of my grandparents were poor polish peasants, who had come from thousands of years of peasantry, I should basically be some thick-headed peasant… (well, at times my wife would probably say I am…) somehow I don’t think those fears are vastly different from the fears of a child in a bad neighbourhood where there are not only those issues to deal with, but the issues of stray gunshots, gang violence, the rape and murder of friends… what child can do well with those items hanging overhead ?… ttyl jason — "No commercial software package has ever sold in any volume in an interpreter. It’s silly to think that you would sit down and use a piece of software on a regular basis that would be interpreted in your computer". – Microsoft CEO Bill Gates talking about interpreters, Upside, April, 1996

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.  My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

Great post.                 Dave Braun

Response:

It would have been *smart* of you to have read my previous post more closely before responding.  I said that my privately educated cousins and friends achieved far more in their lives than my publically educated ones.  Same genes, different educational opportunities, different levels of achievement.  It’s true that my family is smart, but that’s hardly exceptional.  The private school that I attended from kindergarden through 12th grade is 50% White and 50% Black.  The valedictorian of my senior class was a Black male who lived 2 blocks from me.  He too is an architect today, the child of a single mother who landed a job at the post office, enabling her to stay off welfare and get her son off to a good start.  My father has a talent for math, and is extremely artistic.  He taught me to read, add and draw at age three.  But coming from a poor, inner-city family of 9 children, he could not afford college.  He did receive a football scholarship to a small school in West Virginia, but shattered his kneecap in his freshman year, and had to drop out.  I know dozens of families with similar stories to tell.  Those with money and opportunity succeed, those without do not.  My private school did not weed out *underachievers* in any way.  I was not required to take any tests in order to attend.  The philosophy of my school was to provide quality education to those who did not trust the public system.  Remedial courses were offered for kids who entered late and were not up to par.  The graduation rate in the high school is still close to 100%.  In my 13 years of attendance, one girl got pregnant.  Drugs and crime within this school are nonexistent.   Racial discrimination is not tolerated.  SAT scores are among the highest in the city.  It’s very true that a public education is not a guarantee of failure.  The classes I took in high school were not more or less difficult than those offered in the public system.  In fact, my curriculum was limited because my school was (back then) so small.  The difference was the presence of academic competition,  adequate learning materials and well-maintained facilities, and the absence of disillusionment, hopelessness and boredom.  We were not a bunch of Black kids to be kept of the street until age 18. That made all the difference.   May I also suggest that before you start generalizing about the brain power of people you personally know nothing about, you go visit some inner-city schools. Speak to some of the students. Talk to the teachers.  Find out what it really is that is keeping Black kids back.  Lack of intelligence?  Or lack of hope?  I also suggest you read up on some Black history.  A very good start would be *The Negro in the Making of America*  by Benjamin Quarles.  This book will provide you with some insight into the struggle that Blacks have had to put forth in the past 100 years to legally seek education, and give you a feel for the nature of our discouragement.  Furthermore, I ask that you look at your own motivations in forming your opinions.  Is Black *underachievement* something that you feel should be addressed and changed, or are you seeking self-aggrandizement by membership in a *superior race*?

Response:

Racial propagandists assert a 15 point IQ difference between blacks and whites is due to innate racial inferiority based on genetics. However, where racial stock is identical a similar difference is evident where a minority is forced to perform  demeaning and low paying tasks. The hereditary form of such socially enfored inferiority assure that even where minority members overcome discriminatory sabotage of education and opportunity, a maximum of the more desirable economic and social niches are apparently reserved to the majority.

In the U.S., blacks have the same opportunities as whites.  Besides, the environmental effects on IQ happen before age 5. Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." It hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the national average.

But that’s not what the previous poster denied.  He denied that the difference in IQ is genetic.  If it isn’t genetic, then it’s environmental.  Then he argued that the environments are different with regard to economic opportunity.  I don’t think that’s true in the U.S. The environmental influences that make black children less intelligent (in my opinion) are to be found in the home. — Matt Beckwith                         http://users.southeast.net/~beckwith/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Huh, the spam artist strikes again. How did you generate over 15 ng from 2? Anyway, after reading the original post, I was very interested in hearing what the racial IQ proponents had to say. I must say that I am disappointed in your attempt to discredit this new evidence which shatters your racist crap. If anything, your line of argument even serve to further substantiate his argument. :Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s :psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary :scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." And what if he is? It is a well known fact that racists and intellectuals go hand in hand in America.

Or maybe it is just a well known fact that blacks are all paranoids! What kind of statement is this anyway. If only people could get a glimpse into the sophomoric minds of the black intellectual we would not have to debate the ‘IQ controversy.’ It would be obvious to everyone. : It hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear :and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the :national average. But Jews are 15 IQ points above the national :average. But isn’t that what he was saying. Blacks have lower IQ scores because of the discrimination and demeaning lifestyle that they have to endure. Jews, on the other hand, being the corporate magnates that they are, suffer no such fate.

Are you claiming that Jews have never suffered discrimination? And also, the corporate magnates to the best of my knowledge have been WASPS, not Jews. You have a lot of history to catch up with. But no amount of discrimination can make a group of people stupid, only uneducated or unmotivated. Intelligence is like hair color or height or introversion. It can be modified slightly but it is inherently genetics that determines one’s mental acumen. :Gee, do you think all of the racial propagandists are :secretly Jewish? But you’re story about caste and intelligence is meaningless without :the complete data. A caste system through selective breeding can :produce a genetically less intelligent group. Selective breeding?! Please. If this "selective breeding" is going to result in a negative trait, then wouldn’t it be more likely to manifests itself in a physical form? You sound like a drowning man clinging to anything for life. Somebody please throw this man a lifeline.

How is intelligence a negative or a positive trait? A brain is an expensive toy to carry around. Some environments select for higher intelligence, others for people who can run fast and throw a spear accurately. The environment selects for phenotypic traits. They have nothing to do with superior or inferior as you are using the term. Some traits are more selective for specific environments. :That’s what we have done :by breeding dogs. Some are innately intelligent, others as dumb as a :fire hydrant. For example the Japanese leather workers may achieve :lower levels of education until they leave Japan and "show their :stuff" in a different culture. After all, culture does matter in :academic achievement somewhat, as does motivation. There you go again, substantiating his claim. I’ll substitute some words in your quote from above: "For example, Blacks may achieve lower levels of education until they leave America and "show their stuff" in a different (less racist) culture. After all, culture (racist ones)  does matter in academic achievement somewhat, as does motivation."

Somewhat means in some slight degree. Unfortunately, blacks score substantially below the average in IQ. No amount of racism or deprivation could account for this. Most of our ancestors had to put up with environmental deprivations much more severe than any welfare queen has to put up with today. Malnutrition and a lack of an education was the norm some 100 years ago. So what is your excuse? My ancestors over came such hardships. And they didn’t  blame anyone, they just got on with their lives and tried to do better for their children than what they had. Stop the whining already! : However, raw :intellectual horse power is still a mighty important criteria which :most blacks just don’t have, nor do Gypsies. They are white and as a :group they have an average IQ on a par with blacks. There you go again for the upteenth time. This is getting repetitive and boringly easy. And what does Blacks and Gypsies have in common? We all know that Gypsies have always lived in a minority  setting where they experience severe discrimination from the majority group. Do we see a parallel with Blacks?

Not really. The article I read concerning Gypsies pointed out how intelligent Gypsies left the clan while stupid whites were recruited by Gypsies. The obvious conclusion is that the Gypsies, because of their unique environmental circumstances, selectively bred stupid, whereas the Jews selectively bred smart. Both groups suffered discrimination. The conclusion I reach is that intelligence of course has to be genetic. Otherwise how are we any different than the chimpanzees? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -:Is it race, caste, :history, or what? It doesn’t really matter to the smarts genes. : You’re stuck with them and they can’t be rationalized away. Listen to yourself. You are finally conceding to the truth. You don’t seem to be  so sure about your racial basis for IQ anymore.  You seemed to have argued yourself into a corner. As you said, even if it is not race, it’s still due to some genetic factor, "smart genes" as you have so aptly named them. But if it’s due to some negative genetic trait, which is not necessarily race based, then why does Blacks have it; why  does a select group of Caucasians have it; why does  a select group of Indians have it; and why does a select group of Japanese have it? But wait a minute, what is the common thread which connects these seemingly dissimilar groups? They all suffer severe discrimination at the hands of the majority ruling class. I think the standard scientific approach would use this common thread as the basis to explain any disparity between the IQ of this select group and the general group (at least before they jump into some off the wall crap as selective breeding).

I have never said that race is the causation of intelligence. All I have ever claimed is that intelligence is genetic, and that different people, depending on their ancestors, have different genes that select for intelligence. Now given that most of our ancestors have come from specific geographical locations, any evolutionist  would tell you that you would expect to see a great deal of genetic diversity between groups that were separated for thousands of years. All of my ancestors came from europe, with little or no admixture from black sub-Saharan Africa but probably some Asian. Many sub-Saharan are pure African. What this means is we can expect a great deal of diversity in genes. Just what part of this don’t you understand? Evolution is based on the separation of the same species geographically, with eventual speciation if the groups do not reunite. Humans were scattered over the globe and only  within the last 500 years have we been  brought back together. Under these circumstances any evolutionist would expect to see a large diversity of genes in the different groups. And genes that code for intelligence are ones that seem to follow the evolutionary diversity we would expect to find. If intelligence is what makes humans unique, then it is also what make us different from one another, otherwise we could not have evolved the level of intelligence that we have. This is basic evolutionary biology 101.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.   It’s very refreshing to hear different viewpoints from all the usual angry rich white male conservatives that populate the net. I’m glad you’re here to add your voice to the debate. My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.   It’s not just providing better educational systems, though. Poverty affects childhood development as well. We need to reduce poverty, especially child poverty. We have a 20 percent child poverty rate in America — a disgrace! Europe has significantly reduced poverty through child welfare programs. It’s the best investment in people you could possibly make.

Its easy. Just make sure that every child that is not born to family with the resources to take care of the kid is aborted. That is, force welfare queens to have an abortion. That will take care of the problem and help the gene pool to boot. No more money for the defective scum the infects the planet. Let nature take her course and be done with this lot! Educate the gifted who have something to offer the future of mankind. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent. You wouldn’t even have your education if conservatives could establish the sort of "meritocracy" they wanted. (Meritocracy = those who already have money and power get more.) Steve Kangas http://www.scruz.net/~kangaroo/

Response:

I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.  My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

Response:

: :Thursday’s Wall Street Journal  had an article on India’s :caste system and the means used to enforce a last class :status on the "lowest" of the Untouchables. It almost seems that :although more efficient  sanitary means for disposal f human waste have been available for a considerable time, :an archaic method of hand cleaning of latrine pits is maintained :for it’s effectiveness in enforcing a last class caste. :Japan and other nations also have hereditary lowest castes based on :"unclean" professions. These castes were determined by less desirable :and even unnecessarily demeaning (in light of present and even some past :technology) work that it’s members were and in some cases still are :forced to perform. : :Racial propagandists assert a 15 point IQ difference between blacks :and whites is due to innate racial inferiority based on genetics. :However, where racial stock is identical a similar difference :is evident where a minority is forced to perform  demeaning and :low paying tasks. The hereditary form of such socially enforced :inferiority assure that even where minority members overcome :discriminatory sabotage of education and opportunity, a maximum f the more desirable economic and social niches are apparently :reserved to the majority. : Huh, the spam artist strikes again. How did you generate over 15 ng from 2? Anyway, after reading the original post, I was very interested in hearing what the racial IQ proponents had to say. I must say that I am disappointed in your attempt to discredit this new evidence which shatters your racist crap. If anything, your line of argument even serve to further substantiate his argument. :Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s :psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary :scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." And what if he is? It is a well known fact that racists and intellectuals go hand in hand in America. : It hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear :and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the :national average. But Jews are 15 IQ points above the national :average. But isn’t that what he was saying. Blacks have lower IQ scores because of the discrimination and demeaning lifestyle that they have to endure. Jews, on the other hand, being the corporate magnates that they are, suffer no such fate. :Gee, do you think all of the racial propagandists are :secretly Jewish? : :But you’re story about caste and intelligence is meaningless without :the complete data. A caste system through selective breeding can :produce a genetically less intelligent group. Selective breeding?! Please. If this "selective breeding" is going to result in a negative trait, then wouldn’t it be more likely to manifests itself in a physical form? You sound like a drowning man clinging to anything for life. Somebody please throw this man a lifeline. :That’s what we have done :by breeding dogs. Some are innately intelligent, others as dumb as a :fire hydrant. For example the Japanese leather workers may achieve :lower levels of education until they leave Japan and "show their :stuff" in a different culture. After all, culture does matter in :academic achievement somewhat, as does motivation. There you go again, substantiating his claim. I’ll substitute some words in your quote from above: "For example, Blacks may achieve lower levels of education until they leave America and "show their stuff" in a different (less racist) culture. After all, culture (racist ones)  does matter in academic achievement somewhat, as does motivation." : However, raw :intellectual horse power is still a mighty important criteria which :most blacks just don’t have, nor do Gypsies. They are white and as a :group they have an average IQ on a par with blacks. There you go again for the upteenth time. This is getting repetitive and boringly easy. And what does Blacks and Gypsies have in common? We all know that Gypsies have always lived in a minority  setting where they experience severe discrimination from the majority group. Do we see a parallel with Blacks? :Is it race, caste, :history, or what? It doesn’t really matter to the smarts genes. : You’re stuck with them and they can’t be rationalized away. Listen to yourself. You are finally conceding to the truth. You don’t seem to be  so sure about your racial basis for IQ anymore.  You seemed to have argued yourself into a corner. As you said, even if it is not race, it’s still due to some genetic factor, "smart genes" as you have so aptly named them. But if it’s due to some negative genetic trait, which is not necessarily race based, then why does Blacks have it; why  does a select group of Caucasians have it; why does  a select group of Indians have it; and why does a select group of Japanese have it? But wait a minute, what is the common thread which connects these seemingly dissimilar groups? They all suffer severe discrimination at the hands of the majority ruling class. I think the standard scientific approach would use this common thread as the basis to explain any disparity between the IQ of this select group and the general group (at least before they jump into some off the wall crap as selective breeding). I think that the original post, coupled with the feeble attempt to discredit its argument, proves what we have known all along. The claim that race is a factor in IQ was invented by racists to support their practice of  maintaining a despised group in a lower social and economic state. But why do they try so hard to push this crap anyway. I don’t think that white people have to make excuses for their discriminatory practices anymore. Its a well accepted fact. Maybe you all have the "racist genes"

Response:

I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.

What does that mean? Are you 100% black or are you a mixture of black and white. And if you are a mixture how much of one race are you over the other?  My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.

They skipped college? What you mean is they were of such low intelligence that they never had any consideration of going to college.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.

It is obvious that you are unaware that intelligence is the raw ability and education is the means of feeding data into the IQ machine itself, the brain. You need to be intelligent to be smart, but you can never be smart if you have a lot of education but no intelligence to learn what is being fed you. The levels of intelligence varies between groups, based on the lineage of the family. Call it what you want but the people who call themselves African-American test out, on pure IQ tests that have nothing to do with education, 15 IQ points below the average. That translates into one very stupid group of people trying to blame their problems on racism, the educational system, or anything else they can come up with. But the most resilient hypothesis is that the "group" that calls itself African-American is very stupid, and the group that calls itself Jews is very smart. Did each group become stupid or smart because of the group they belonged to? Of course not. It has to do with the genealogy of each persons ancestors. It just so happens that smart genes are not evenly distributed around the world, based on environmental pressures in certain hostile environments. Blacks coasted along on what they needed to survive, whites and Asians were forced by hardship to select for the more intelligent lineage. Now we bring the groups back together again and there is a disparity in many of the traits that were selected for by   geographic location. I suggest  you read any of the many books on evolution to get a handle on race, intelligence, diversity, etc. It is really very simple when you are exposed to the facts (of course I am assuming a normal to above normal intelligence). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thursday’s Wall Street Journal  had an article on India’s caste sytem and the means used to enforce a last class status on the "lowest" of the Untouchables.It almost seems that although more efficient  sanitary means for disposal of human waste have been available for a considerable time, an archaic method of hand cleaning of latrine pits is maintained for it’s effectiveness in enforcing a last class caste. Japan and other nations also have hereditary lowest castes based on "unclean" professions. These castes were determined by less desirable and even unnecessarily demeaning (in light of present and even some past technology) work that it’s members were and in some cases still are forced to perform. Racial propagandists assert a 15 point IQ difference between blacks and whites is due to innate racial inferiority based on genetics. However, where racial stock is identical a similar difference is evident where a minority is forced to perform  demeaning and low paying tasks. The hereditary form of such socially enfored inferiority assure that even where minority members overcome discriminatory sabotage of education and opportunity, a maximum of the more desirable economic and social niches are apparently reserved to the majority.

Well then apparently you are including most of the nation’s psychologists, sociobiologists, evolutionary biologists, and ancillary scientific disciplines in your category of "racial propagandists." It hardly leaves any scientist out of your group. The evidence is clear and overwhelming that blacks on average are 15 IQ points below the national average. But Jews are 15 IQ points above the national average. Gee, do you think all of the racial propagandists are secretly Jewish? But you’re story about caste and intelligence is meaningless without the complete data. A caste system through selective breeding can produce a genetically less intelligent group. That’s what we have done by breeding dogs. Some are innately intelligent, others as dumb as a fire hydrant. For example the Japanese leather workers may achieve lower levels of education until they leave Japan and "show their stuff" in a different culture. After all, culture does matter in academic achievement somewhat, as does motivation. However, raw intellectual horse power is still a mighty important criteria which most blacks just don’t have, nor do Gypsies. They are white and as a group they have an average IQ on a par with blacks. Is it race, caste, history, or what? It doesn’t really matter to the smarts genes. You’re stuck with them and they can’t be rationalized away.

Response:

I beg to differ, by using my own family as an example.  I am a Black female.  

It’s very refreshing to hear different viewpoints from all the usual angry rich white male conservatives that populate the net. I’m glad you’re here to add your voice to the debate. My brother and I, as well as several of my numerous cousins, attended private schools throughout our lives.  My family is not wealthy-my father was a garbage collector and my mother is a nurse-but we scrimped and saved to afford tuition.  Many times I begged my parents to let me go to public school like the *other kids,* but they refused.  Today I have an ivy-league master’s degree in architecture, my brother is pre-med, and my privately-educated cousins are doctors and accountants.  Many of my publically-educated cousins and  the neighborhood kids I grew up with skipped college, went to jail, deal drugs, or have low- paying blue-collar jobs.  The point is this:  intellegence is genetic, yes, but not along racial lines.  Intelligence is discovered and cultivated through quality education.  Quality inner- city schools are a disgraceful rarity in this country.  If educational opportunity was equal at the lower, middle and high school levels, the *bell curve* would show no disparity between the races.  

It’s not just providing better educational systems, though. Poverty affects childhood development as well. We need to reduce poverty, especially child poverty. We have a 20 percent child poverty rate in America — a disgrace! Europe has significantly reduced poverty through child welfare programs. It’s the best investment in people you could possibly make. If all school districts were funded equally from tax revenues, and if Black families come to realize that early education is the ticket out of the inner city, all of America would benefit.  I have one regret-$90,000 in student loans.  The price for being poor, Black and intelligent.

You wouldn’t even have your education if conservatives could establish the sort of "meritocracy" they wanted. (Meritocracy = those who already have money and power get more.) Steve Kangas http://www.scruz.net/~kangaroo/

Response: