Kiisu Buraun's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.com/user/134376/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/1367361/comments?source=feed#comment-18163931 18163931
You've published two very interesting articles. Thank you.

However, I must apologize for missing both when you first published them ...

If you don't mind my $0.02 ... though I realize it is a lot of work, I believe a 3rd year follow up would be both interesting and useful.

A method which might simplify your data collection process (if you decide to do it again) is when you make your data request:
o ask that the lists be sent by email (to an account specifically created for the purpose)

o provide a hard cut off date for data collection

o ask that the sender's email consist solely of comma-separated stock symbols of companies held by the sender

o reject any email that does not comply with the request

o (optionally) use an auto-responder so the sender knows his email was received.

And because the address is specific for the data collection task:

o your normal or SA email account would not be cluttered

o the account can be deactivated and deleted after the cutoff date to prevent it being hijacked.

Thank you once again.

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> Sat, 27 Apr 2013 07:36:21 -0400
You've published two very interesting articles. Thank you.

However, I must apologize for missing both when you first published them ...

If you don't mind my $0.02 ... though I realize it is a lot of work, I believe a 3rd year follow up would be both interesting and useful.

A method which might simplify your data collection process (if you decide to do it again) is when you make your data request:
o ask that the lists be sent by email (to an account specifically created for the purpose)

o provide a hard cut off date for data collection

o ask that the sender's email consist solely of comma-separated stock symbols of companies held by the sender

o reject any email that does not comply with the request

o (optionally) use an auto-responder so the sender knows his email was received.

And because the address is specific for the data collection task:

o your normal or SA email account would not be cluttered

o the account can be deactivated and deleted after the cutoff date to prevent it being hijacked.

Thank you once again.

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/391871/comments?source=feed#comment-17718371 17718371
My proofreading was not as good as it should have been. The fifth paragraph should have stated:

"For example, $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $4.09 in 1971 (58 years), while $1 in 1971 had the same purchasing power as $5.73 in 2013 (42 years) ... and worse yet $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $23.45 in 2013 (100 years) ..."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Tue, 16 Apr 2013 23:39:43 -0400
My proofreading was not as good as it should have been. The fifth paragraph should have stated:

"For example, $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $4.09 in 1971 (58 years), while $1 in 1971 had the same purchasing power as $5.73 in 2013 (42 years) ... and worse yet $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $23.45 in 2013 (100 years) ..."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/639701/comments?source=feed#comment-17629371 17629371
You can CTRL-F for a date, say "14 Apr" and pick up comments for that date, and then repeat for the next most recent date, etc.

Only works well if you don't let long time periods (months) lapse between checking the comments.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 15 Apr 2013 05:08:39 -0400
You can CTRL-F for a date, say "14 Apr" and pick up comments for that date, and then repeat for the next most recent date, etc.

Only works well if you don't let long time periods (months) lapse between checking the comments.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1339001/comments?source=feed#comment-17624301 17624301
Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 15 Apr 2013 00:57:21 -0400
Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1315581/comments?source=feed#comment-17294531 17294531
I wish inflation was only as bad as what the government claims.

However, I believe the government's inflation numbers are -- to put it kindly -- 'skewed' in such a way as to minimize reality.

As best as I can estimate from the ShadowStats inflation calculator (http://bit.ly/10ChYZ2) the inflation for that period using the same methodology as was used prior to 1980 was >> 20%. (I'm not a subscriber, so I get a graph instead of a number)

Don't get me wrong ... I believe DGI is my best practical option ... but if ShadowStats is anywhere near correct, then the best I can hope for is to minimize my personal economic damage.

You might want to look at both the 1980 and 1990 based "Consumer Inflation - Official vs ShadowStats Alternate" charts (http://bit.ly/lmDmS2)

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 06 Apr 2013 01:34:33 -0400
I wish inflation was only as bad as what the government claims.

However, I believe the government's inflation numbers are -- to put it kindly -- 'skewed' in such a way as to minimize reality.

As best as I can estimate from the ShadowStats inflation calculator (http://bit.ly/10ChYZ2) the inflation for that period using the same methodology as was used prior to 1980 was >> 20%. (I'm not a subscriber, so I get a graph instead of a number)

Don't get me wrong ... I believe DGI is my best practical option ... but if ShadowStats is anywhere near correct, then the best I can hope for is to minimize my personal economic damage.

You might want to look at both the 1980 and 1990 based "Consumer Inflation - Official vs ShadowStats Alternate" charts (http://bit.ly/lmDmS2)

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/391871/comments?source=feed#comment-17294181 17294181
Being conservative is an admirable goal ... but when dealing with government provided numbers, being 'conservative' means you have to assume things are worse than advertised.

History is replete with examples.

For instance, (http://bit.ly/14UyPLb) Pres. Nixon in on 17 Oct 1969 stated that inflation "robs [citizens] of their savings, cheats them of those vacations and necessary extras that they thought they had been working for" followed by his statement "we are not considering wage and price controls."

Of course in 1971 ... he imposed wage and price controls and closed the gold window. With dollars totally disconnected from gold, government spending and inflation really took off ...

For example, $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $4.09 in 1971 (58 years), while $1 in 1971 had the same purchasing power as $5.73 in 1913 (48 years) ... and worse yet $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $23.45 in 2013 (100 years) ...

... but only if you believe the government's CPI numbers (http://1.usa.gov/tj5h8X).

However, as you pointed out, in the last 33 years those numbers have been manipulated in such a way as to make inflation 'look less a problem' than what it really is (http://bit.ly/lmDmS2)

A $1 in 1980 has the same purchasing power as $2.82 now (per the government) ... but (estimated) ~$10+ using the same methodology as was used prior to 1980.

So with ShadowStats a $1 in 1913 would have the same (estimated) purchasing power as ~$100 today.

Thus someone today with a $250K income has the same purchasing power as a person in 1913 who made about $2,500. Furthermore, the income tax bracket (in 1913 nominal dollars) for those making less than $20,000 (the equivalent of $2,000,000 today) was only 1%. (http://bit.ly/VIu564)

And that's the power of government imposed compounded inflation working against you, me, and the majority of the citizens in this fair land.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 06 Apr 2013 01:01:32 -0400
Being conservative is an admirable goal ... but when dealing with government provided numbers, being 'conservative' means you have to assume things are worse than advertised.

History is replete with examples.

For instance, (http://bit.ly/14UyPLb) Pres. Nixon in on 17 Oct 1969 stated that inflation "robs [citizens] of their savings, cheats them of those vacations and necessary extras that they thought they had been working for" followed by his statement "we are not considering wage and price controls."

Of course in 1971 ... he imposed wage and price controls and closed the gold window. With dollars totally disconnected from gold, government spending and inflation really took off ...

For example, $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $4.09 in 1971 (58 years), while $1 in 1971 had the same purchasing power as $5.73 in 1913 (48 years) ... and worse yet $1 in 1913 had the same purchasing power as $23.45 in 2013 (100 years) ...

... but only if you believe the government's CPI numbers (http://1.usa.gov/tj5h8X).

However, as you pointed out, in the last 33 years those numbers have been manipulated in such a way as to make inflation 'look less a problem' than what it really is (http://bit.ly/lmDmS2)

A $1 in 1980 has the same purchasing power as $2.82 now (per the government) ... but (estimated) ~$10+ using the same methodology as was used prior to 1980.

So with ShadowStats a $1 in 1913 would have the same (estimated) purchasing power as ~$100 today.

Thus someone today with a $250K income has the same purchasing power as a person in 1913 who made about $2,500. Furthermore, the income tax bracket (in 1913 nominal dollars) for those making less than $20,000 (the equivalent of $2,000,000 today) was only 1%. (http://bit.ly/VIu564)

And that's the power of government imposed compounded inflation working against you, me, and the majority of the citizens in this fair land.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1306461/comments?source=feed#comment-17007281 17007281
To speed your system, you might want to check out http://bit.ly/Pa8gZl

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 30 Mar 2013 06:33:57 -0400
To speed your system, you might want to check out http://bit.ly/Pa8gZl

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/425211/comments?source=feed#comment-17005841 17005841
"Kiisu, good to see you around again."

=> Good to be back.

It's good I'm now retired ... if I were still employed there would be no time to get anything done. So now I'm catching-up because I was too busy during my last 20 career years to do what I'm doing now.

Advice for those approaching retirement ... a cash reserve fund -to handle unknown contingencies during the first 4+ years after retirement- is *very* useful.

-That's cash over and above normally predicted or reasonably expected expenses-

It is amazing how a bit of cash can solve problems that otherwise would be very painful ... and the extra cash from dividends definitely helps.

Life is full of surprises ... and the surprises didn't stop when I retired ... they merely changed.

But ... then I've always been "blessed" with an "interesting" life. *grin*

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 30 Mar 2013 02:33:40 -0400
"Kiisu, good to see you around again."

=> Good to be back.

It's good I'm now retired ... if I were still employed there would be no time to get anything done. So now I'm catching-up because I was too busy during my last 20 career years to do what I'm doing now.

Advice for those approaching retirement ... a cash reserve fund -to handle unknown contingencies during the first 4+ years after retirement- is *very* useful.

-That's cash over and above normally predicted or reasonably expected expenses-

It is amazing how a bit of cash can solve problems that otherwise would be very painful ... and the extra cash from dividends definitely helps.

Life is full of surprises ... and the surprises didn't stop when I retired ... they merely changed.

But ... then I've always been "blessed" with an "interesting" life. *grin*

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-16974921 16974921
Even that write up appears to be unduly optimistic.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Fri, 29 Mar 2013 07:49:45 -0400
Even that write up appears to be unduly optimistic.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/425211/comments?source=feed#comment-16969961 16969961
I looked at the RMD Table and didn't like what I saw ... the potential for RMDs to kick me into successively higher tax brackets as I age.

So, I did what others have done, decided to fix my problem.

If all goes according to plan, by the time I hit 70.5 my IRAs should be nearly empty ... Starting the year I turned 59.5 I converted a fraction of my IRAs each year to a ROTH (using distribution in kind). The fraction being the amount needed to bring my income near the top of my current tax bracket.

The advantage is I get to decide during those ~10 years how much I want to pay Uncle Sam ... as opposed to him telling me later on how much I must pay.

It's an option you might consider.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Fri, 29 Mar 2013 01:05:43 -0400
I looked at the RMD Table and didn't like what I saw ... the potential for RMDs to kick me into successively higher tax brackets as I age.

So, I did what others have done, decided to fix my problem.

If all goes according to plan, by the time I hit 70.5 my IRAs should be nearly empty ... Starting the year I turned 59.5 I converted a fraction of my IRAs each year to a ROTH (using distribution in kind). The fraction being the amount needed to bring my income near the top of my current tax bracket.

The advantage is I get to decide during those ~10 years how much I want to pay Uncle Sam ... as opposed to him telling me later on how much I must pay.

It's an option you might consider.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/425211/comments?source=feed#comment-16892911 16892911
Exactly right.

It wasn't the academic, Samuel Pierpont Langley, with his assumed requirement of inherent stability who developed human controlled, powered air flight ... it was the practical mechanics Orville and Wilbur Wright.

So when someone states "it's the way all academics define these things" I admit to some skepticism. Just because an academic or a group of academics define something a certain way does not make it so.

When the claim is I "cannot provide the link. But I have posted the findings." The claimant asks for blind trust ... trust that he has accurately summarized the findings; trust that the findings were correctly derived; trust that the data was properly gathered and analyzed; trust that the methodology and simplifying assumptions were appropriate ... he asks us to trust that no mistakes were made because the results came from academics.

But 'blind trust' violates the skeptical rule:

"No one gets the final say: you may claim that a statement is established as knowledge only if it can be debunked, in principle, and only insofar as it withstands attempts to debunk it."

Debunking comes in many forms ... it does not have to be a mathematical proof. Sometimes it is as simple as a successful flight versus a splash in the Potomac River ... or sufficient dividend income to pay the bills year after year versus running out of money before running out of life.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:21:22 -0400
Exactly right.

It wasn't the academic, Samuel Pierpont Langley, with his assumed requirement of inherent stability who developed human controlled, powered air flight ... it was the practical mechanics Orville and Wilbur Wright.

So when someone states "it's the way all academics define these things" I admit to some skepticism. Just because an academic or a group of academics define something a certain way does not make it so.

When the claim is I "cannot provide the link. But I have posted the findings." The claimant asks for blind trust ... trust that he has accurately summarized the findings; trust that the findings were correctly derived; trust that the data was properly gathered and analyzed; trust that the methodology and simplifying assumptions were appropriate ... he asks us to trust that no mistakes were made because the results came from academics.

But 'blind trust' violates the skeptical rule:

"No one gets the final say: you may claim that a statement is established as knowledge only if it can be debunked, in principle, and only insofar as it withstands attempts to debunk it."

Debunking comes in many forms ... it does not have to be a mathematical proof. Sometimes it is as simple as a successful flight versus a splash in the Potomac River ... or sufficient dividend income to pay the bills year after year versus running out of money before running out of life.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1100781/comments?source=feed#comment-16357101 16357101
Though civil service reform removed many of the "spoils system" abuses, it created an entrenched and persistent bureaucracy that also needs reform ... and civil service term limits is definitely an idea worth considering.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:06:51 -0400
Though civil service reform removed many of the "spoils system" abuses, it created an entrenched and persistent bureaucracy that also needs reform ... and civil service term limits is definitely an idea worth considering.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-15730771 15730771
Thank you!

That is one of the best summaries I've ever come across.

I would dearly love to 'steal' the above comment (with attribution). May I?

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 02 Mar 2013 10:19:42 -0500
Thank you!

That is one of the best summaries I've ever come across.

I would dearly love to 'steal' the above comment (with attribution). May I?

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-15722711 15722711
Dang! So that explains it ... I was born without a heart!

I was born conservative ... and as I grew older found neither the liberal nor conservative thought processes fit ... and yes there are other options.

So at certain functions ...just by existing... I tend to upset most apple carts.

Ah well...

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sat, 02 Mar 2013 04:10:53 -0500
Dang! So that explains it ... I was born without a heart!

I was born conservative ... and as I grew older found neither the liberal nor conservative thought processes fit ... and yes there are other options.

So at certain functions ...just by existing... I tend to upset most apple carts.

Ah well...

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/704231/comments?source=feed#comment-15350311 15350311
No. At the farm I raise kids and grandkids ... along with pears, rabbits, chickens, and cattle, but no tea.

"Cha" is the first "ideagram" (kanji symbol) for
the family name given me when I lived in Japan.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Fri, 22 Feb 2013 01:40:18 -0500
No. At the farm I raise kids and grandkids ... along with pears, rabbits, chickens, and cattle, but no tea.

"Cha" is the first "ideagram" (kanji symbol) for
the family name given me when I lived in Japan.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1089151/comments?source=feed#comment-14056571 14056571
I think you somewhat misunderstand the DC mindset...

As best as I can summarize it;

"YOU do not own anything, what you think you own, you merely hold in escrow until WE, the wonderfully kind, benevolent and generous folk in DC, can determine how best to spend it."

Ah...such is the wonderful arrogance of power...

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:32:23 -0500
I think you somewhat misunderstand the DC mindset...

As best as I can summarize it;

"YOU do not own anything, what you think you own, you merely hold in escrow until WE, the wonderfully kind, benevolent and generous folk in DC, can determine how best to spend it."

Ah...such is the wonderful arrogance of power...

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1100781/comments?source=feed#comment-13665661 13665661
When I lived in Japan (back in the 70s), lack of an alternative was a BIG factor. Many folk held their savings in 'Post Office' accounts, which as I recall, paid virtually no interest.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:32:08 -0500
When I lived in Japan (back in the 70s), lack of an alternative was a BIG factor. Many folk held their savings in 'Post Office' accounts, which as I recall, paid virtually no interest.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1100781/comments?source=feed#comment-13665461 13665461
Appreciate the article. Thank you for writing it.

Seems my former colleagues in DC continue to engage in what I call "cartoon economics" (the financial analogue of 'cartoon physics' see: http://bit.ly/VYFADX).

Your comment [rephrased] "$10 of spending for a $1 of benefit" was hilarious...and I believe wildly optimistic. If the problem were only that bad.

As a side note, here in rural NE Texas our local VFD is composed of community volunteers...none are paid...which is as I believe it should be. They work hard, study hard (they are required to meet many of the same requirements as municipal and paid FD) and the department accepts donations and schedules regular fund raisers to meet expenses (insurance, gear, equipment, fuel, training).

Volunteerism solves many of the problems other localities handle by mandatory taxes... along with the abuses that process entails.

But from my POV it seems the increased regulatory and training burdens are an attempt to phase out VFDs and replace them with paid FDs. And that, from many perspectives, would be a real shame.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:22:17 -0500
Appreciate the article. Thank you for writing it.

Seems my former colleagues in DC continue to engage in what I call "cartoon economics" (the financial analogue of 'cartoon physics' see: http://bit.ly/VYFADX).

Your comment [rephrased] "$10 of spending for a $1 of benefit" was hilarious...and I believe wildly optimistic. If the problem were only that bad.

As a side note, here in rural NE Texas our local VFD is composed of community volunteers...none are paid...which is as I believe it should be. They work hard, study hard (they are required to meet many of the same requirements as municipal and paid FD) and the department accepts donations and schedules regular fund raisers to meet expenses (insurance, gear, equipment, fuel, training).

Volunteerism solves many of the problems other localities handle by mandatory taxes... along with the abuses that process entails.

But from my POV it seems the increased regulatory and training burdens are an attempt to phase out VFDs and replace them with paid FDs. And that, from many perspectives, would be a real shame.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13639931 13639931
"It completely depends on the intent of the people barking out the orders."

No. It doesn't.

"There is no error so monstrous that it fails to find defenders among the ablest men."

I could requote Lord Acton's dictum regarding the absolute corruption of absolute power but, we've already been there, done that.

Sadly, even if the TSA were populated by angels and provided true security, eventual corruption and abuse of power would turn it from a guardian of innocents into an abuser of the weak.

And I think we can all agree, the TSA was never populated by angels, nor did it ever provide true security.

Is the TSA now guardian or abuser? Given your assessment, what do you expect from it in ten, twenty, or thirty years? Do you expect reform and eventual perfection? Or will its sins multiply?

"Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity."

Do you admit to yourself you are not your own master, that you are incompetent, incapable of making decisions? Do you accept you are but a minor, easily replaced cog in the ruled collective, unable to act without the permission and guidance of those absolutely wonderful, all-knowing, warm-hearted folk in DC?

I suspect your answer is negatory, but hopefully not nugatory. ;-)

Yet, do you support and re-elect those who know they are better than you?

Some folk deny any problems exist. For others, if a problem exists, it is too many resist what is "good for them." Yet other good folk believe they are part of the ruling elite and thus can circumvent the rules they wish forced on everyone else.

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern."

What do your actions say about your true beliefs?

Are the words "the land of the free" truthful, or are they now obsolete and meaningless?

Is the Constitution merely words written by a bunch of old dead white guys? Do its words mean whatever one wants them to mean --and thus are words without meaning or power? Are they words that do not, cannot and should not restrain those in power who act "for the good of the people"?

Or does the Constitution provide absolute limits on government? Does it mean what it says? Does it legitimately constrain what the good hearted folk in DC who act in our name, can do to us and for us?

"Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought."

Liberty is an individual --not a collective-- attribute.

We definitely live in interesting times...

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> Sun, 13 Jan 2013 00:55:57 -0500
"It completely depends on the intent of the people barking out the orders."

No. It doesn't.

"There is no error so monstrous that it fails to find defenders among the ablest men."

I could requote Lord Acton's dictum regarding the absolute corruption of absolute power but, we've already been there, done that.

Sadly, even if the TSA were populated by angels and provided true security, eventual corruption and abuse of power would turn it from a guardian of innocents into an abuser of the weak.

And I think we can all agree, the TSA was never populated by angels, nor did it ever provide true security.

Is the TSA now guardian or abuser? Given your assessment, what do you expect from it in ten, twenty, or thirty years? Do you expect reform and eventual perfection? Or will its sins multiply?

"Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity."

Do you admit to yourself you are not your own master, that you are incompetent, incapable of making decisions? Do you accept you are but a minor, easily replaced cog in the ruled collective, unable to act without the permission and guidance of those absolutely wonderful, all-knowing, warm-hearted folk in DC?

I suspect your answer is negatory, but hopefully not nugatory. ;-)

Yet, do you support and re-elect those who know they are better than you?

Some folk deny any problems exist. For others, if a problem exists, it is too many resist what is "good for them." Yet other good folk believe they are part of the ruling elite and thus can circumvent the rules they wish forced on everyone else.

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern."

What do your actions say about your true beliefs?

Are the words "the land of the free" truthful, or are they now obsolete and meaningless?

Is the Constitution merely words written by a bunch of old dead white guys? Do its words mean whatever one wants them to mean --and thus are words without meaning or power? Are they words that do not, cannot and should not restrain those in power who act "for the good of the people"?

Or does the Constitution provide absolute limits on government? Does it mean what it says? Does it legitimately constrain what the good hearted folk in DC who act in our name, can do to us and for us?

"Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought."

Liberty is an individual --not a collective-- attribute.

We definitely live in interesting times...

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1066131/comments?source=feed#comment-13617021 13617021
Adding my $0.02...

I do IRA to ROTH conversions (I'm beyond 59.5) to minimize my eventual IRA MRDs. Done now, I can manage the tax consequences. If I wait until I'm subject to mandatory MRDs, managing the requisite tax is more of a problem.

For my specific situation, from my point-of-view, pre-mandatory conversions have a benefit.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:18:25 -0500
Adding my $0.02...

I do IRA to ROTH conversions (I'm beyond 59.5) to minimize my eventual IRA MRDs. Done now, I can manage the tax consequences. If I wait until I'm subject to mandatory MRDs, managing the requisite tax is more of a problem.

For my specific situation, from my point-of-view, pre-mandatory conversions have a benefit.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13471041 13471041
I've been in the Army, I've shot and been shot, but what in the heck are "guns ... with automatic gun magazines"?

To the best of my knowledge, no such device exists.

Please provide a web link, you've raised my curiosity.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Tue, 08 Jan 2013 23:04:06 -0500
I've been in the Army, I've shot and been shot, but what in the heck are "guns ... with automatic gun magazines"?

To the best of my knowledge, no such device exists.

Please provide a web link, you've raised my curiosity.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13425601 13425601
"Maybe we should only allow automatic weapons to anyone who has served honorably in the military."

Automatic weapons have been effectively outlawed for years (see: Gun Control Act 1968 & National Firearms Act 1968). Possession requires a federal license.

Last time I used an automatic weapon was "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" (ie. the US Army).

Haven't seen any grizzlies in Texas, but have seen too many feral pigs. They're a pest. Even in urban Houston, they root up lawns. Here in rural NE Texas, calling them a nuisance can lead folk to believe you are much too fond of the beasties.

Also it's best not to get cornered by a herd. Even armed, that makes life too "interesting" for my taste.

"when Americans overwhelmingly opt to let others fight for our protection (via military service) do we still have the right to bear arms (supposedly to protect the country)?"

Perhaps we could heed the warnings from our founders regarding a standing Army and make the ultimate sacrifice by returning to the militia/Swiss model.

Of course that would by necessity drastically change our foreign policy.

Interesting comments and questions.

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> Tue, 08 Jan 2013 04:46:01 -0500
"Maybe we should only allow automatic weapons to anyone who has served honorably in the military."

Automatic weapons have been effectively outlawed for years (see: Gun Control Act 1968 & National Firearms Act 1968). Possession requires a federal license.

Last time I used an automatic weapon was "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" (ie. the US Army).

Haven't seen any grizzlies in Texas, but have seen too many feral pigs. They're a pest. Even in urban Houston, they root up lawns. Here in rural NE Texas, calling them a nuisance can lead folk to believe you are much too fond of the beasties.

Also it's best not to get cornered by a herd. Even armed, that makes life too "interesting" for my taste.

"when Americans overwhelmingly opt to let others fight for our protection (via military service) do we still have the right to bear arms (supposedly to protect the country)?"

Perhaps we could heed the warnings from our founders regarding a standing Army and make the ultimate sacrifice by returning to the militia/Swiss model.

Of course that would by necessity drastically change our foreign policy.

Interesting comments and questions.

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13408171 13408171
There are of course more fundamental reasons for a well armed population.

But when faced with a herd of feral Texas pigs, a single shot or slow firing weapon is not a wise choice.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:32:24 -0500
There are of course more fundamental reasons for a well armed population.

But when faced with a herd of feral Texas pigs, a single shot or slow firing weapon is not a wise choice.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13405001 13405001
Superior weapons are defined by context...

Examples include the repeating crossbow that could
fire 10 shots in 15 seconds...a Chinese invention from 400BC sometimes used for home defense; or the .51 caliber air rifle used by some sniper detachments in the late 1700s, an "assault weapon" that could fire 22 shots in 30 seconds.

When we look at history, we oftentimes scoff at their (comparatively) primitive historical tech...but the high tech of that day was just as profound to them as our high tech is to us today.

Similarly, I expect folks from 200 years in the future will scoff at our (comparatively) primitive tech.

Regarding 1770 tech...

If you were a British military officer and your tech was such that your troops could get off only 6 shots before their muskets became short, unwieldy pikes, but your opponents could get off 60 shots, all else being equal, that enemy advantage was a fearsome force multiplier that could put you at a severe disadvantage. Facing massed musket fire is bad enough, not being able to shoot back because your musket is now a very short pike makes for a very bad day.

"Infallible constitution"? :-)

Nothing designed or built by man is infallible. The founders were well aware of their failings. But the US Constitution is vastly superior to anything that came before it (ex. the divine right of kinds, the inerrancy of power), and though I believe it could be improved by further limiting what the Federal Government is allowed do to you or me, many of my former colleagues in DC strenuously disagree.

Regarding the right to be left alone...

I agree that "my right ends where your nose begins," but Wickard vs Filburn (1942) makes my actions, actions that have no direct effect on you, subject to Federal Government regulation and control.

When any government regulates and controls secondary, tertiary (and more distantly removed) effects of individual actions, the population subject to those regulations and controls is reduced to bondage... no one can be left alone and no one can take independent action... because individuals who make their own decisions might somehow, in some way, eventually in some fashion adversely effect someone else.

The final end state of such regulation is total control, and when that occurs, one could reasonably claim, "the most perverse form of slavery exists when slaves call their slavery freedom."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 07 Jan 2013 14:33:54 -0500
Superior weapons are defined by context...

Examples include the repeating crossbow that could
fire 10 shots in 15 seconds...a Chinese invention from 400BC sometimes used for home defense; or the .51 caliber air rifle used by some sniper detachments in the late 1700s, an "assault weapon" that could fire 22 shots in 30 seconds.

When we look at history, we oftentimes scoff at their (comparatively) primitive historical tech...but the high tech of that day was just as profound to them as our high tech is to us today.

Similarly, I expect folks from 200 years in the future will scoff at our (comparatively) primitive tech.

Regarding 1770 tech...

If you were a British military officer and your tech was such that your troops could get off only 6 shots before their muskets became short, unwieldy pikes, but your opponents could get off 60 shots, all else being equal, that enemy advantage was a fearsome force multiplier that could put you at a severe disadvantage. Facing massed musket fire is bad enough, not being able to shoot back because your musket is now a very short pike makes for a very bad day.

"Infallible constitution"? :-)

Nothing designed or built by man is infallible. The founders were well aware of their failings. But the US Constitution is vastly superior to anything that came before it (ex. the divine right of kinds, the inerrancy of power), and though I believe it could be improved by further limiting what the Federal Government is allowed do to you or me, many of my former colleagues in DC strenuously disagree.

Regarding the right to be left alone...

I agree that "my right ends where your nose begins," but Wickard vs Filburn (1942) makes my actions, actions that have no direct effect on you, subject to Federal Government regulation and control.

When any government regulates and controls secondary, tertiary (and more distantly removed) effects of individual actions, the population subject to those regulations and controls is reduced to bondage... no one can be left alone and no one can take independent action... because individuals who make their own decisions might somehow, in some way, eventually in some fashion adversely effect someone else.

The final end state of such regulation is total control, and when that occurs, one could reasonably claim, "the most perverse form of slavery exists when slaves call their slavery freedom."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1095031/comments?source=feed#comment-13383931 13383931
"I wonder if it would work for the glazed-eyed women to actually be given money to manage while the husbands are still alive."

Like anything else, it depends.

My experience...

First wife: Her money management skills were exceptional, I learned much from her.

Second wife: It was only after we married, I discovered she was an heiress...with an interesting take on money management. Her stated philosophy: "money saved is money wasted".

Third wife: After marriage, I asked her to estimate annual cost (and helped her with the math) for family gifts (birthdays, Christmas, weddings, and births) and gave her the total amount. She spent it all in 2 weeks. When she asked for more, I discovered she blew the budget because she was afraid if it wasn't spent immediately, I'd confiscate it (ah, the joys caused by first marriage emotional traumas).

She's a warm, loving person with a good heart, but (still) repeatedly demonstrates no understanding of money management. If it's there, she spends it.

We compensate by giving her a negotiated allowance.

That works. She's happy, I'm happy.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 07 Jan 2013 04:54:42 -0500
"I wonder if it would work for the glazed-eyed women to actually be given money to manage while the husbands are still alive."

Like anything else, it depends.

My experience...

First wife: Her money management skills were exceptional, I learned much from her.

Second wife: It was only after we married, I discovered she was an heiress...with an interesting take on money management. Her stated philosophy: "money saved is money wasted".

Third wife: After marriage, I asked her to estimate annual cost (and helped her with the math) for family gifts (birthdays, Christmas, weddings, and births) and gave her the total amount. She spent it all in 2 weeks. When she asked for more, I discovered she blew the budget because she was afraid if it wasn't spent immediately, I'd confiscate it (ah, the joys caused by first marriage emotional traumas).

She's a warm, loving person with a good heart, but (still) repeatedly demonstrates no understanding of money management. If it's there, she spends it.

We compensate by giving her a negotiated allowance.

That works. She's happy, I'm happy.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13372971 13372971
Regarding the VA. Define "evil".

The program was good intentioned at the highest level, but have you ever talked to a vet regarding his or her experience with the VA?

I'm a member of the American Legion, but was fortunate to never experience service related injuries (for those who know, I was a "REMF"). Thus I've never experienced the kind graces of the VA's medical service.

However, as many of my fellow AL post members do have service related injuries, they are intimately familiar with the VA's kind graces. Their comments regarding the VA's bureaucracy and idiocy are rarely less than blistering. Second hand, some of the stories are humorous, first hand, anything but.

Ex. a female vet in my post was repeatedly scheduled for a PSA test and prostate exam (it was apparently part of "standard" battery of tests and the female med-tech apparently didn't know or didn't care that male and female physiology are different). The experiences go downhill from there.

The VA medical service may be better than nothing, but based on my compadres' comments, not by much.

I've been very fortunate. As an ex-military adult, I've been able to choose my own doctors and dentists. And if I don't like the service, I've been able to go elsewhere and hire someone else.

Unfortunately, for a number of reasons, not everyone can afford to do so...they tend to have the choice between no care or poor care...

...which also appears to be the desired end-state for those who desire single-payer, government provided medical care...in essence "VA for all."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Sun, 06 Jan 2013 18:40:08 -0500
Regarding the VA. Define "evil".

The program was good intentioned at the highest level, but have you ever talked to a vet regarding his or her experience with the VA?

I'm a member of the American Legion, but was fortunate to never experience service related injuries (for those who know, I was a "REMF"). Thus I've never experienced the kind graces of the VA's medical service.

However, as many of my fellow AL post members do have service related injuries, they are intimately familiar with the VA's kind graces. Their comments regarding the VA's bureaucracy and idiocy are rarely less than blistering. Second hand, some of the stories are humorous, first hand, anything but.

Ex. a female vet in my post was repeatedly scheduled for a PSA test and prostate exam (it was apparently part of "standard" battery of tests and the female med-tech apparently didn't know or didn't care that male and female physiology are different). The experiences go downhill from there.

The VA medical service may be better than nothing, but based on my compadres' comments, not by much.

I've been very fortunate. As an ex-military adult, I've been able to choose my own doctors and dentists. And if I don't like the service, I've been able to go elsewhere and hire someone else.

Unfortunately, for a number of reasons, not everyone can afford to do so...they tend to have the choice between no care or poor care...

...which also appears to be the desired end-state for those who desire single-payer, government provided medical care...in essence "VA for all."

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1078841/comments?source=feed#comment-13331561 13331561
It's been my experience (I hold a number of foreign dividend paying companies) that in a:

* taxable account, I can use a "Foreign Tax Credit" to offset a portion of my US tax

* tax-deferred account (IRA), Canada _no_ longer withholds a 15% tax. Years ago I used to see a line item in my IRA statements showing dividends credited and Canadian tax withdrawn.

Consult with your CPA or tax adviser for the fine details.

Best wishes,


Kiisu]]> Sat, 05 Jan 2013 05:02:43 -0500
It's been my experience (I hold a number of foreign dividend paying companies) that in a:

* taxable account, I can use a "Foreign Tax Credit" to offset a portion of my US tax

* tax-deferred account (IRA), Canada _no_ longer withholds a 15% tax. Years ago I used to see a line item in my IRA statements showing dividends credited and Canadian tax withdrawn.

Consult with your CPA or tax adviser for the fine details.

Best wishes,


Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/985951/comments?source=feed#comment-13331521 13331521
The most basic and essential freedom is the freedom to be left alone...and today that freedom is in short supply. At one time a person could go his entire life without brushing up against the Federal Government.

Nowadays, the situation is considerably different.

Regarding weaponry, the American firearm (of 1776) would fire approximately 60 times before its flint needed resharpening. The British issued "Brown Bess" musket could only be fired about 6 times before it needed the same maintenance. On that basis alone, one could claim that the colonials' firearms (compared to the British military musket) were the "modern assault rifles" of the age...able to kill many people quickly.

In other words, if the British government of 1750-1780 had successfully controlled the weaponry available to the colonials...and if Gen. Gage had "disarmed" the good folk at Concord, we'd probably still be swearing loyalty to Her Royal Majesty. The historical figures of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Henry, Franklin, etc. would have been hung...and if mentioned in history books at all, they would have been recorded as disgraced traitors to the throne.

If you haven't already done so, you might consider reading the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist papers, American history, and an interesting little book by Bastiat called "The Law".

As you recall, the Constitution went into effect on 4 March 1789, a mere 6 years after our ancestors engaged in armed insurrection (1775-1783) against the legitimate British government and its Monarch, King George.

That Constitution created a powerful Federal Government, but people feared a Frankenstein monster and hobbled it by:
* establishing three competing branches of government;
* specifically enumerating what the government was allowed to do...

...yet debates between those who championed the Federal Government and those who feared it revealed the need for additional restrictions on what their monster could do to them...and to us. Those restrictions, the "Bill of Rights" didn't grant our rights, they merely specified additional things the Federal Government could not constitutionally do to you...or me.

But even a casual reading of history demonstrates none of the political parties in American history are blameless, both modern parties are culpable, and despite protestations to the contrary, both deliberately ignore the restrictions imposed by the Constitution.

In other words, the monster the Anti-Federalists feared has shed its shackles; it roams loose upon the land; and while loose, and unconstrained no citizen is safe.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which the negation of Catholicism and the negation of Liberalism meet and keep high festival, and the end learns to justify the means. You would hang a man of no position like Ravaillac; but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III. ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greatest names coupled with the greatest crimes; you would spare those criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice, still more, still higher for the sake of historical science." --Lord Acton 1887

The immense power in DC, probably not seen since the days of imperial Rome, corrupts, distorts, and debauches.

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern."

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> Sat, 05 Jan 2013 04:50:31 -0500
The most basic and essential freedom is the freedom to be left alone...and today that freedom is in short supply. At one time a person could go his entire life without brushing up against the Federal Government.

Nowadays, the situation is considerably different.

Regarding weaponry, the American firearm (of 1776) would fire approximately 60 times before its flint needed resharpening. The British issued "Brown Bess" musket could only be fired about 6 times before it needed the same maintenance. On that basis alone, one could claim that the colonials' firearms (compared to the British military musket) were the "modern assault rifles" of the age...able to kill many people quickly.

In other words, if the British government of 1750-1780 had successfully controlled the weaponry available to the colonials...and if Gen. Gage had "disarmed" the good folk at Concord, we'd probably still be swearing loyalty to Her Royal Majesty. The historical figures of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Henry, Franklin, etc. would have been hung...and if mentioned in history books at all, they would have been recorded as disgraced traitors to the throne.

If you haven't already done so, you might consider reading the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist papers, American history, and an interesting little book by Bastiat called "The Law".

As you recall, the Constitution went into effect on 4 March 1789, a mere 6 years after our ancestors engaged in armed insurrection (1775-1783) against the legitimate British government and its Monarch, King George.

That Constitution created a powerful Federal Government, but people feared a Frankenstein monster and hobbled it by:
* establishing three competing branches of government;
* specifically enumerating what the government was allowed to do...

...yet debates between those who championed the Federal Government and those who feared it revealed the need for additional restrictions on what their monster could do to them...and to us. Those restrictions, the "Bill of Rights" didn't grant our rights, they merely specified additional things the Federal Government could not constitutionally do to you...or me.

But even a casual reading of history demonstrates none of the political parties in American history are blameless, both modern parties are culpable, and despite protestations to the contrary, both deliberately ignore the restrictions imposed by the Constitution.

In other words, the monster the Anti-Federalists feared has shed its shackles; it roams loose upon the land; and while loose, and unconstrained no citizen is safe.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. That is the point at which the negation of Catholicism and the negation of Liberalism meet and keep high festival, and the end learns to justify the means. You would hang a man of no position like Ravaillac; but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III. ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greatest names coupled with the greatest crimes; you would spare those criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice, still more, still higher for the sake of historical science." --Lord Acton 1887

The immense power in DC, probably not seen since the days of imperial Rome, corrupts, distorts, and debauches.

"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern."

Best wishes,

Kiisu
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1089151/comments?source=feed#comment-13272931 13272931
If you are interested, Dividend Doctor wrote an interesting set of IRA articles:

* Handling an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

* Disposing an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

* Non-Spouse Inheriting an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

I found the collection interesting and informative.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Thu, 03 Jan 2013 15:20:01 -0500
If you are interested, Dividend Doctor wrote an interesting set of IRA articles:

* Handling an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

* Disposing an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

* Non-Spouse Inheriting an IRA http://seekingalpha.co...

I found the collection interesting and informative.

Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/1088351/comments?source=feed#comment-13168061 13168061
I agree with much of what you say.

But having Japanese relatives, and having lived in Japan, I have a slightly different perspective.


Best wishes,

Kiisu]]> Mon, 31 Dec 2012 18:37:35 -0500
I agree with much of what you say.

But having Japanese relatives, and having lived in Japan, I have a slightly different perspective.


Best wishes,

Kiisu]]>