text:
Well, good article. I think there are other financial issues beyond just income taxes the two candidates differ in. For example, Obama wants to eliminate the social security tax income cap, so everyone will have to pay the full 12%. Additionally, Obama wants to extend unemployment benefits I believe. I really don't know how it will turn out in the end, but I am guessing Obama will probably win since the Republicans are so unpopular right now.
McCain or Obama? Who'll be better for your wallet?
I want to keep this factual. This is not an article on who should be the next President, or as these campaigns usually go, who shouldn't be President. This is a simple presentation of facts as they stand today. Bottom line - who'd be better for your bottom line next year...Obama or McCain?
The Tax Policy Center has done some serious analysis of the current tax policies of our two candidates. You can read about it here , and download the 37-page report here . Of course, as these are preliminary figures they're likely to change a little, but not a lot. Sam Pizzigati of the blog Too Much analysed the figures . And the results, while not exactly surprising, do provide food for thought.
As you'd expect, Obama's tax plan will be better for lower-income families. And McCain's tax plan favors the wealthy. There is a simple graph below that outlines the figures.
The analysis
First, Obama. Under his proposed tax plan, the super-rich (around 140,000 households or the top 0.1% of the US population) have a lot to worry about if he becomes President. In fact, in 2009 the top 0.1% will pay roughly $701,885 MORE in taxes than they do currently. If you're making over $2.9 million a year, your taxes will increase to 39.2%.
The middle-income earners (the middle 20% of the US, earning between $37,595 and $66,354) do a lot better under Obama, getting a boost of roughly $1042, or around 2.4%.
And the low-income families (the poorest 20%, earning below $18,981) get the biggest boost of all. They'll be around $567 better off, an increase of 5.5%.
Now McCain. Under his proposal, the super-rich get a little richer. That same 140,000 households get a 4.4% increase in after-tax income, equating to around $269,364.
The middle-income earners get a boost with McCain too, although much smaller. They'll receive a 0.7% increase, or $584.
And the low-income families, well, McCain does offer them some relief. But not much. Around a 0.2% increase in after-tax income, or a whopping $21.
What does this mean?
Politically, McCain is doing what Bush and Reagan did before him. It's the trickle-down effect. You give the super-rich big tax cuts, they in turn use those cuts to boost business and create jobs for the middle and lower classes.
Obama is more in another Republican's camp – namely, Eisenhower. In 1959, the wealthy paid over 45% of their income in Federal taxes. And around 77% on estate wealth.
Personally, leaving all other political agendas aside, I'd have to vote for Obama under this plan. I would receive greater tax benefits from him than under McCain. And if you're in a low income bracket, I'm sure you'd prefer $567 in your pocket rather than the $21 McCain is offering.
Of course, this is subject to change but the point is clear. The more money you have, the better off you'll be under McCain. If you're a super-rich Wisebread reader, the difference between McCain (+$269,364) and Obama (-$701,885) works out to $971,249. That's almost $1 million dollars! With so much at stake for you in 2009, I can see why you'd vote for McCain. But is McCain trying to buy the rich vote and maintain good relations with corporate interests? That's a story for another time.
Disclaimer: The links and mentions on this site may be affiliate links. But they do not affect the actual opinions and recommendations of the authors.
Wise Bread is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
I'm a moderate who's voted for republicans and democrats in the past, Goldwater type I suppose.
I make just over $60,000 and was a little surprised how bad McCain's plan would be for me as this seems like an income firmly in the middle class. I heard him speak once in Ohio and thought from what he said he would be more supportive of the middle income folks like me, but the numbers here don't lie (actually, I checked on both their websites and this is a fairly good analysis of their systems - though simplified, it's accurate).
I guess this means my pocketbook is voting for Obama. That, and all the nuts talking about him not being Christian which is just crap.
Jeff, I'd hold off on that vote.
What Obama doesn't mention is that his proposed tax on the "super rich" includes raising the capital gains tax, which is what the federal government takes from any profits we make from the sale of stocks.
ANYONE -regardless of income level- who has a 401(k), an IRA, or any other retirement vehicle is likely invested in stocks or mutual funds that invest in stocks. Obama's proposal would raise the tax on your retirement money from 15% to 33%. This applies to low income, middle income, or high income families. Again, this applies to us all.
This is not a partisan statement, merely the facts. Obama wants to implement many new government programs, and getting more tax revenue is the logical way to do it.
My wife and I combined earn less than you, so our pocketbooks wanted to know the whole story. Hope this helps.
John Kopmeier
As Xin Lu pointed out, there are many, many factors to consider regarding the candidates and finance. My only hope is that people won't be "one-issue" voters, taking into account the bottom-dollar info from one or two blog posts.
I have been following the tax issue quite closely, and am very familiar with the 37-page report from the "preliminary" analysis. I hope people understand a few things before they cast their vote in stone:
1) The report is based on information gathered in a very early place in the election. As we have seen in the past, candidates "revise" their position continuosly, and often up until the day they are elected (and even afterwards in some instances.)
2) All tax planning is still subject to the joyous workings of our legislative system. We may even see some judiciary action on items that are especially provocative.
With this being said, I personally could fare better under either plan. The numbers put out by both you and Too Much didn't consider a few other things:
- The health insurance reform by both candidates. McCain, in particular is offering "to replace the current exclusion from income tax for health insurance provided by an employer with a refundable tax credit of $2,500 for singles and $5,000 for family coverage. Unlike the current exclusion, the credit would be available for privately purchased insurance as well as insurance provided by an employer. " That's an extra $5,000 that your formula didn't address.
- As a self-employed person who comes from a long line of small but "corporate" farms, I am especially interested in penalties against corporate America. Too often people assume that "corporate" means rich and deserving of high taxes and the revocation of benefits. We must not forget that "corporation" is often just a tax code term.
A few other things that caught my eye were:
- Obama's proposal to not tax any senior citizen making under $50,000 a year. Ever. With millions of Baby Boomers looking to fall into this category, doesn't this seem a bit scary to you? We work hard to pay into Social Security, but the benefits of my hard work now also don't have to pay taxes? ( I would encourage everyone to read this part of the document, in which the Tax Policy Center echoes my concern for the unfairness of this plan.)
We also need to think of America as a whole. While I'm all for getting more cash in my pocket, at what cost? The report clearly states "Overall, the economic effect of the Obama proposals will depend on how the resulting deficits are closed. If the deficits result in higher tax rates in the future, the economy will be harmed. If they are closed by spending cuts, the economic costs will be lower, but the long-term gain in progressivity may also be diminished depending on which programs are cut."
This election will be serious business, as usual. I hope everyone takes the time to really read up on the tax issues (as well as other issues) before deciding thier vote.
Thanks for bringing up this very important matter, Paul!
"McCain, in particular is offering 'to replace the current exclusion from income tax for health insurance provided by an employer with a refundable tax credit of $2,500 for singles and $5,000 for family coverage. Unlike the current exclusion, the credit would be available for privately purchased insurance as well as insurance provided by an employer.' That's an extra $5,000 [emphasis added] that your formula didn't address."
So, McCain's plan gives employers an excuse to transfer the cost of health insurance from the employer to the employee, because a husband and wife can receive a $5,000 tax credit? Great!
The average American spends $4,700 a year on health services and pharmaceuticals. Twelve percent of that is siphoned off by the insurance bureaucrats, and 20% is waste because of inefficiencies in treating the uninsured and underinsurred. Is it an extra $5000 income to the taxpayer?
Sounds more like a transfer of wealth from the average working taxpayer to the corporate employers. The way our healthcare system is now is essentially a huge tax levied on people who have insurance or pay their own health care costs. Our healthcare system is broken. We're 24th in quality of healthcare, behind Costa Rica, and pay twice (14%+ of our GDP) what other more civilized first-world countries pay.
It's time for universal, comprehensive, single-payer healthcare for all Americans, and a law putting the private health insurance industry out of business. Pay for it with a tax shared by employers and employees equally, probably around 12% of the GDP. The savings in California alone would be around 8 Billion dollars annually.
I can see how the numbers look like their in favor of Obama - but I do have a different question - which plan will better america? Do we take from the rich and give to the poor? Or do we give the poor the opportunity to make money? Yes, tax wise McCain's plan will only provide me with $21 - but if I can work more because the rich are able to pay more, what's that worth? I'm currently looking for employment and it is difficult because businesses don't have the money for payroll. If we tax those big businesses, is that going to make them provide more jobs, or fewer?
I don't want to depend on the government giving me money, I want to depend on the government to stop taking my money and allow me to grow. With our deficit I can tell that I'm better at managing my money than the government.
...although corporate loopholes need to be closed, too.
Another important thing to remember is that money was YOURS to begin with! Those "taxes" come from your "income". This has nothing to do with "welfare" or a "hand up".
...will the defecit continue to grow under McCain, who seems to be on a very similar path to Bush at this point? Also, McCain has credit card debt, Obama has none. Another indication of things to come? Who knows. And will the rich use that money to provide more jobs? In an ideal world, yes. But we've seen big business in the past make record profits and lay off hundreds of workers in the same year. When the priority is to the stock holders' best interests, it changes the equation significantly.
The deficit is going to grow under both candidates, thinking any other way is just either your personal bias towards your candidate, or naivety.
Also, your utilization of the number of jobs as a litmus test is tripe. Top it off with your credit card comment, and you have bonafide nonsense. Congratulations!
I am surprised at how bereft this article is of sound economic theory given the subject matter of the blog. Your own bias is seething through your "interpretation" of the numbers, and the rhetoric you are pushing forth.
You use "strawman" techniques to characterize the plan as a "rich get richer" scheme, but ultimately you misrepresent the "spirit" of each plan. I don't even need to mention that the top 1% pay 40% of the income tax in America, do I? (And I certainly am not in that bracket) Do I need to also mention that over 50% of working Americans don't pay any income tax? The representation of the tax plan as a war on the poor is patently absurd...because the poor don't pay income tax as it is.
Your insistence on comparing the top .1% to much larger demographic segments is equally demonstrative of your bias. That is like comparing Ferraris and Toyotas. Just poor form overall.
This is just the beginning, one could go on for days pointing out the inaccuracies in your post, or give more background. Your face value (shallow) analysis leaves a lot to be desired, and is honestly a black mark for this site, which is typically exemplary. You are letting your political bias dictate your copy, regardless of whether it is intentional or not. It is obvious you don't have the capability to remove yourself from political bias, so I would suggest staying far away from the topic.
For the record, I dislike McCain a great deal. I am a Libertarian, and have no affiliation with either party. I just hate the purveyance of economic and fiscal ignorance.
I've never received work from a "poor" person.
I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said (not word for word)that in order to get out of poverty, you need to make being poor so unbearable that you'll work harder to get out of that situation. It reminds me of what our grandparents did for our parents (I'm 30). They grew up in the Depression era, going without and scraping by. When our grandparents were starting their families (our parents), they wanted to make sure that their children wouldn't suffer like they did. It became a double-edged sword: on one hand, you have a generation of people who didn't want for anything but on the other hand, a generation of people who understand entitlement rather than hard work, generally speaking.
I don't know who I'll be voting for yet, but I do know that there is a reason why people are "poor". Throwing money at them will not solve their poverty issues.
Have you considered an article covering the FairTax Plan? If not, you should!!!
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.
A mature political discussion... even though I'm usually in the minority with my views. Regardless of Paul's personal opinions or how they may or may not have come out in his post, I give everyone reading this blog enough credit to research the materials and put together a voting plan that works for them. While I can see how some may be put off by the article, I think it will generate some good conversation, and hopefully, a newfound passion for discovering political truth.
that Warren Buffett, a richer and wiser man than most, has deeply criticized tax cuts for the rich. This, from a Guardian article in 2007:
"There wasn't anyone in the office, from the receptionist up, who paid as low a tax rate (as I) and I have no tax planning; I don't have an accountant or use tax shelters. I just follow what the US Congress tells me to do."- Warren Buffett
There are too many inherent issues with FairTax (National Retail Sales Tax). The theory is sound, but the effects are mostly conjecture.
Flat Tax is a far more pragmatic approach. The IRS won't be abolished in our lifetime. That is for sure.
You are taking his comments out of context. Warren Buffet is often misquoted regarding his stance on taxation (as is Milton Friedman).
But now that you mention it, I think it goes without saying that I would much rather have Warren Buffet, who is an astute businessman, with funds to invest, rather than someone else. As someone above already mentioned, it is typically a safe bet to say that factors contributing to an individuals poor financial state are rarely external. We need to stop living in a victimization society, and start taking some responsibility for our own situations. Stop the blame game!
Just as I thought the economic stimulus payments were absurd, so is your notion that $500 is really going to help. It is too little, too late, and worse yet, appropriated in a poor fashion.
Here is a great video that outlines some of Obamas wonderful tax plans:
If that is true it could harm more than you realize.
Which is better for you: a bigger tax return or a job?
or if you're job-secure, which is better: a bigger tax return or living in a community with low unemployment?
a good job is way better than a bigger tax return. Can you guarantee that larger tax cuts for the rich will result in more jobs? If so, sure.
To all the people who continue to talk about this trickle down theory:
We have been trying to do this for about 8 years now and all it has done is bankrupt our country. The rich don't spend money, they save and invest it in stock. They don't create jobs, unless you count crappy low paying jobs without benefits.
also, to the people who are claiming that most poor people are poor because they don't work hard enough, it's called a cyclical poverty. some people can't pull themselves up by their bootstraps, because they weren't lucky enough to be born with said bootstraps. we need to empower people and restructure the system to allow people to get out of poverty, not continue to punish them for being born into poor families.
It's really very hard to prove or disprove trickle-down theory. I know that on a personal level, I give more, spend more, and employ more services when I am more financially stable. And while my savings tends to stay constant, I see trickle down work well in the lives of "common" people around me every day. You can't say that some companies don't employ the same practices. The ones I've worked for, at least, have had more employee events, done more for charity, and generally provided more employment opportunities during their financial upswings. Seems that would be the way most common sense people would do it. Maybe when we don't see it working, it is due more to a sense of insecurity of the future than anything else.
'To all the people who' is such an absurd post that I am unsure where to begin. First, "trickle down economics" i.e. tax cuts for higher end tax brackets has no effect on bankrupting the nation. Excessive spending bankrupted our nation. You don't overdraft your checking account by earning less money, you do so by spending more than you make. Secondly, in addition to the rich, the higher tax brackets include many small business owners who happen to create a vast amount of jobs.
'Cyclical poverty' is just another way of saying 'failure perpetuate through poor decision making and laziness'. Everyone has the chance to make the decisions necessary to better themselves fiscally. They just CHOOSE to act in ways that prohibit success. The fundamental flaw in your statements lies in a reliance on the system as a tool to lift one's self from poverty when all that is needed is one's self.
You are an idiot and enablers like you are the primary problem with our nation. You drag down this nation like a pair of cement boots.
This is not surprising... what happens to the rest of the population (which is not included in your graph) between the "Middle" and "Rich"? That's nearly 60% of the population the graph does not account for... It's not really fair to compare the tax plans without including the majority of the population.
Well, personally I don't vote because I'm not an American citizen, but I agree that the last 8 years it wasn't the Bush tax cuts that bankrupted America. Obviously a lot of money is being spent on the war, and internally people are just spending a lot of money on their own. I do think that tax cuts are good for the economy, and I don't agree with Obama that we need to help people get out of foreclosure and give them longer unemployment benefits. That does encourage laziness and speculative behavior. I feel that he wants to penalize people who worked pretty hard for their money, and I wrote a post about it here because I think he will win regardless: http://baglady.dreamhosters.com/2008/06/06/more-tax-hikes-ahead/
If you look at the report, Obama will be raising taxes on all Americans making over $200,000 a year. Doesn't sound like the super rich to me. Indeed this will include small business owners and entrepreneurs who are the life blood to this economy.
By raising taxes, the government will be taking more money out of our checks before we ever get to see it. That is money we will never see again. Is this really acceptable to the hard working American?
Again this does not take into account the health care reform of each candidate. In the case of so called universal health care all americans will be paying for this regardless of income levels. Higher taxes for all.
Remember that these numbers we're looking at are simply averages of how you current tax payments will increase or decrease under two plans. It says nothing about which tax rates people are already paying or how those will change.
Bush cut taxes for everybody, but he made the system more progressive; his cuts benefitted the second lowest quintile of earners most and the middle class second. The rich also benefitted, but their taxes were cut 11% whereas a person making $60,000 a year got roughly a 24% cut (this includes ALL tax changes including estate tax). So now Obama or McCain is going to be adjusting those adjustments; it's not like they're starting with a blank slate here.
The rich already pay vastly more taxes than the poor. So of course when there are tax cuts the rich "benefit more." They get more money back because they put more in to begin with. This is fair, rational, and logical. If a rich person buys a $10,000 rug and a poor person buys a $100 rug and they both get a 10% discount then of course the rich person saves more - but how stupid does it sound for the poor person to complain about that?
Raising tax rates on the rich and slashing them for the poor disincents both groups from being productive, working hard, taking risks, (i.e. start businesses) and trying to make more money. When rich people lose moral about the economy they stop spending, stop building, stop taking business risks, and therefore the government loses tax revenue and the economy shrinks. When poor people do the same, the government's expenses (welfare, tax credits, etc) shoot up. Everybody loses.
Tax the Rich...HA!
Dad made well more than $50,000 a year from his New Car Dealership when I was a child in the early 60's.
Probably equivalent today to Half a Million. Did he take home more than $50,000...NO.
Why? Because the marginal Tax Bracket then was 50%..WITHOUT Social Security. 50% of his $50,000...$25,000....went to Federal Income Tax.
And if he had taken what he really made out..more than $150,000 he would have been in a 70% tax bracket..the rate then was 70% on ANYTHING over $103,000.
Why work when you're going to lose so much of it to the Government??? Businessmen worked ways around it..and I am NOT ashamed to say my father or any of his kids haven't taken advantage of any loophole we could find.
Thus came about the Three Martini Lunch, Company Car(s), Stock Options, and Week Long Conventions in Vegas....all Non-Cash (or Taxed) ways of paying someone.
And don't tell me Public Officials don't pig at that trough as well.
Here Police Officers get Free or Discounted rent on apartments, Dominos Pizza show your badge (Firemen as well) any Pizza $3 picked up. Usually 50% off at any restaurant. The patrol car and the gas to go with it...oh! did I forget they can use it on their Off Duty Jobs. Florida says they must reimburse the department for $3 per hour for use of the car. And the biggest perk on HUDs website is the Policeman, Fireman, Teacher Next Door program where if you take a Foreclosed house in a not too desireable neighborhood and live in it for two years you get it at HALF PRICE!!
And what does all this have to do with the candidates Tax Positions?? It shows that they are meaningless as ways are ALWAYS found around whatever law is put into place...and its not just "the Rich" who take advantage of it.
~ Roland
I'm not sure where the policemen and teachers of which you speak are, that get to buy run-down homes in bad neighborhoods for half price and live in them for only two years.
I've looked into this program myself. The homes aren't just waiting there for you to pick them. Most of them go to Katrina survivors. You have to check the site everyday. And the commitment is 3 years, not 2.
It's not that great of a deal. I know two people who bought one of these homes. One has about $60,000 of repairs to put into it. The other did it because she has family members who can do the fix-up, reconstruction work for free. For most teachers and policemen, the trouble isn't worth it.
"Raising tax rates on the rich and slashing them for the poor disincents both groups from being productive, working hard, taking risks, (i.e. start businesses) and trying to make more money"
From 1930-1980 the tax rate for high earners was much higher than it is now. During this time America's economic greatness was born. Right now hedge fund managers pay 15% tax on their income; yeah they take risks- on subprime mortgages.
Ummm, have you ever heard of World War II? Our boom had nothing to do with taxation.
Let's also not forget that the subprime mortgage boom rests at least partial blame on liberal attempts to make housing more "accessible" to those that otherwise shouldn't be given mortgages.
There were screams in 2000+ that housing was just too expensive for most individuals, which caused certain fiscal policies to be implemented that created the subprime culture that has wrecked the mortgage industry.
America loves to legislate...and 99% of the time, we legislate ourselves into a hole.
I am so sick of this crap! When did America become a socialist state? This article focuses on the bottom 20 percent that is not getting a bigger tax break under McCain, but do the math and you will lean that the bottom 20 percent doesn't pay the taxes. The top 1 percent of earners pays 30% of the tax burden and it trickles down from there. I'm so Pi$$ed off that people who didn't pay into the system got a stimulus package. I'm not a big Mc Cain fan, but Obama's plan to reward the unmotivated is just what we need to launch us into an endless recession. Welcome back Carter. When are we going to focus on getting the bottom 20 percent up to the top .01 percent instead of dragging our top down?
I came here expecting an honest analysis of the differences. I was highly disappointed to see a thinly disguised pimping for Obama. I read political blogs for that.
Your credibility took a serious hit with me.
Electing your chosen candidate is not worth compromising your integrity on this blog. And this post is flirting with that.
Make the same type of post about McCain and I will feel the exact same way.
Sign me,
Disgusted Tonight
There's a typo in the toomuchonline.org article that was repeated here. Under Obama's plan, the middle quintile would get a boost of $1042, NOT $1402. I've already contacted toomuchonline.org about this.
This article is a fair snapshot of the candidates stated policies, but as other comments have pointed out, our nation is bankrupt. We are running record deficits, and most people ignore the fact that the money is borrowed, not just printed up on demand. We have to pay ever-increasing INTEREST on this deficit.
To make matters worse, much of this money is borrowed from the central banks of other nations, who have their own agendas.
The Government Accountability Office (don't laugh, I'm not making this up) has an excellent report called:
The Nation by the Numbers:
A Citizen's Guide
A Summary of the FY 2007 Financial Report of the U.S. Government
Financial Condition
Look at the green and white areas on the chart on page 3, titled "Current Trends Are Not Sustainable"
The Democrats have been accused of having a Tax and Spend philosophy, and IMHO that is much more rational than the current Republican Borrow and Spend philosophy.
While nice little wars are always fun, we have to recognize that they are a luxury that we CAN NOT AFFORD. We are going to pay for our invasion of Iraq. Our children will pay, their children will pay, and their grandchildren will pay.
I fully support Barack Obama for President.
The bias of this post along with the shortsightedness of some of the folks leaving comments is shocking! Personally, I don't see any difference between the Republican and Democrat parties anymore. IMO we've "progressed" to the point of having a one-party system. Now, I'm not a McCain supporter, but I do have to say that electing Obama President would put the economy under serious pressure.
The key of this whole discussion is that all of you are assuming that you will have a job. In order to have a job, corporations (gasp--yes, those evil entities that employ most of the people in this country) need to have the money to pay you. They get that money by generating a profit and through folks buying their stocks. Guess what Obama's plan doesn't help in either case.
If you start taking more money from the corporations, you are going to end up with an out-of-control unemployment rate. Just look at what has happened to the economy as a result of raising the minimum wage. What a huge mistake that was. That does nothing to encourage people to better themselves by finding a higher paying job. Instead it encourages complacency and small business cutbacks. I'm heavily involved with a small business on the side and have seen the unfortunate results of this policy.
We don't need more unemployment benefits--we need jobs. Again, that goes back to corporations having the money to hire. We don't need increased capital gains taxes because--we need to encourage saving and investing. We don't need the government to shoulder the colossal burden of nationalized health care--we need people to take care of themselves.
There is so much more to this election than just the personal tax rate. If you want Socialism, move to France. In fact, many Socialist countries are moving more towards Capitalism because they've finally realized that Socialism doesn't work. Did you know that Socialism was tried in this country when it was originally founded? It failed miserably. I wish people would see the big picture.
Long live Capitalism!
You do your readers a disservice by not mentioning that the above is only a small, small portion of the impact the candidates will have on our financial lives, and when you look at the bigger picture it looks vastly different than you portray it to be. Obama will do NOTHING to help energy prices, in fact his plans will make things far worse, his overall economic policy will lose us jobs as he taxes businesses into the stone ages. He's a socialist, pure and simple.
"You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves."
Please, please, rent the movie "Idiocracy". This is where we are headed if we don't make changes NOW!
As I said before, throwing money at problems is not the answer. It hasn't worked for education, the "war" on drugs, Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, etc.
It's time we start voting for candidates who aren't "career politicians". We pay for their healthcare and pension plans while some cannot afford to go to the emergency room!
It's time to make the government work for the people again, not for special interests!
But what do I know, I'm just one person...
The Tax Policy Center is funded by two liberal think tanks in Washington D.C. the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. You should use more sources for an unbiased article.
Obama's economic strategy is based on spending. His current tax plan will not be able to support his plans to spend the economy out of the recession.
Therefore, he will likley increase taxes on everyone, while spending like a mad man. It's that what most politicians do? Bush cut taxes, but increased the debt.
Obama's plans will not work because the country is broke. Their is no more money to tax, print or borrow for Obama to spend. It's doesn't matter what he says, he does not have a good economic plan. Tax and spend is not a good economic recovery strategy.
Is that both the McCain and Obama plans offer certain cuts that are relatively permanent, and some that will be increased or phased out altogether. The amount that will be "extra" in my pocket on my 2008 tax returns (or 2009 - if it takes that long to be approved) is not the same amount I will get in 2010, 2011, or beyond. Temporary relief of anything isn't really relief, IMHO.
Please remember folks, although you may not agree with the article it doesn't reflect the opinions of the other writers at Wisebread. I'd hate to see anyone stop reading their articles because of my piece.
No, you have a fellow writer that is also trying to push forth his agenda. The title of this site is Wise Bread | Personal Finance and Frugal Living...I didn't know that meant Wise Bread | Partisan Proselytizing.
Let's keep the blog on topic, or if you are shifting your focus, be honest about it so the readers can make a choice whether or not to continue their patronage to this site.
Unfortunately I have not been as up to date as I would like for this election period (and I was a little tired of the bickering between Obama and Hillary). This is really interesting. I didn't know that obama was giving tax breaks to the middle class.
(1) Who'll be better for you personally based on economic policy? Well, the poor and middle class benefit more from increased taxes because the services they receive (and yes, we do get services from our taxes despite some wacky thinking here that the money simply disappears) will be a greater relative to their proportion of income than the services received by the wealthy.
(2) The benefits will be most direct for the poor, but the wealthy benefit dramatically by having a more stable social system because they are better able to maintain their current position.
(3) The increases are not "socialism" as some here seem to think - they would increase tax levels from today, but relative to taxes paid under Clinton, taxes will still be substantially lower.
(4) McCain has committed to continuing to spend similarly to how Bush has spent - "big" government has become bigger than ever under, you guessed it, first Reagan, then Bush #43. If you want your taxes to make it back to you and your community in the form of services and benefits (health care, schools, streets, police, firefighters) then expanding the federal government as is the elected Republicans' plan and history (though clearly counter to the plan and hopes of most Republican VOTERS) is not going to help. Out biggest debt, our harshest cuts to schools and service programs, and our loss of moral authority internationally and stability domestically, have been under Republican presidents and congressional control.
*Honestly, why the attacks like sky is falling merely because Paul pointed out Obama is going to give more to the middle class in terms of services (who can afford health care now? It's the biggest growing cost for small businesses, taxes have been the fastest shrinking cost for over a decade but the proportional loss of government provided services has been much greater than the prior cost) and ask for more from the wealthy who have received dramatic increased services and government aid over the past 7 years?
Get real, you're not reading wisebreat because you've got a ton of money, you're a frugal person who's hoping to do better in a reasonable way - that reader may aspire to wealth and fear potentially higher taxes but this fear is irrational, the benefits from services for most readers here will outweigh the minimal cost of increased taxes.
Imagine how many more people would employed by small businesses if they didn't have to pay so dearly for health care under Obama's plan (or better yet, under an expanded medicare program making all providers negotiate bulk costs with the government rather than screwing businesses and individuals with higher costs and worse service?
*Honestly, why the attacks like sky is falling merely because Paul pointed out Obama is going to give more to the middle class in terms of services (who can afford health care now? It's the biggest growing cost for small businesses, taxes have been the fastest shrinking cost for over a decade but the proportional loss of government provided services has been much greater than the prior cost) and ask for more from the wealthy who have received dramatic increased services and government aid over the past 7 years?
It's because his conjured statistics are fallacious at best. It is proffered as an impartial and objective analysis, when it is far from it. Not only does he impart his own brand of bias, his numbers and statistics are generated by partisan and ideologically based sources in the first place. That has no place here on wisebread. Paul knew firsthand what he was getting himself into when he prefaced his piece with a warning.
I commend him for bringing up the topic, but this isn't the place for it. I know that Paul was acting in good faith, I am not asserting otherwise, but I must admit, it was done in poor form, and all but the most myopic should have seen many of the readers would dislike the "analysis".
The fact is, most people don't get reciprocated services valued at the amount that they pay in taxes. Did you know that the average American taxpayer works until the 3rd week of April for Uncle Same? When put into perspective, many take a step and start seeing the wealth redistribution initiative for the sham it is.
Get real, you're not reading wisebreat because you've got a ton of money, you're a frugal person who's hoping to do better in a reasonable way - that reader may aspire to wealth and fear potentially higher taxes but this fear is irrational, the benefits from services for most readers here will outweigh the minimal cost of increased taxes.
Maybe there are readers of Wisebread who DO have a lot of money, and the reason they do is because of their conservative fiscal ideals.
I disagree with you that individuals receive benefits equal to what they pay in. The numbers just don't substantiate that claim. Ultimately that would be the goal, but it certainly isn't true. Why do you think "governmental efficiency" is considered an oxymoron?
My next few topics should interest everyone, they are not political in any way. Thanks for the comments. And if there's anything you'd like to see any of us, including me, cover on WB then please feel free to ask.
Paul, let me be clear, I commend you for taking a step out of the box and trying to put something like the tax plans into perspective. I really do.
The more I think about it, the more I am happy you put the post up, although I would have ventured to say a full disclosure of your political affiliations might have been in store.
You aren't the only one getting election fever. Forgive me if I am a bit brash, diplomacy isn't my strong suit.
However strong individuals push back, if you get the discussion going, you are doing something right. To be honest, neither candidate is going to be good for your wallet, and that is the truth.
I should have researched the Tax Policy Center more rigorously, and I took the numbers presented by Sam Pizzigati as a fair and unbalanced representation of the report, which was another mistake. I don't think the figures are conjured though, that gives the impression that they came out of thin air. If this was the case, wouldn't the Tax Policy Center and Too Much be at risk of a lawsuit from either candidate?
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Mark Twain
This is probably a semantic argument, but statistics can be spun or "conjured" to say just about anything you want them to. Regardless of whether or not the statistic itself is accurate, even semantic differences can be made to completely change the perceived meaning of the statistics.
For example, let's say there was the following statistic:
25% of people want the war in Iraq to stay its current course
You could rewrite the "statistic" to say, 75% of people are against the current Iraq war
Your statistics are probably correct except for the mistake that was already pointed out, but they were used to paint a picture that push forth the agenda of the group manipulating the numbers.
So did they come out of thin air...yes and no. I think it depends on how you look at it.
You obviously don't understand how numbers can be massaged and manipulated to say whatever you want to say. Because they can, there is no grounds for a lawsuit.
You may be a smart guy. But stick to stuff you know. And be honest. I am still irked that you posted political mongering under the guise of personal finance.
We all had better care about the .01 -- under any plan, they put alot of money into our system. The moment we start "doing away" with any portion of our population by taxing them to death, we are in essence punishing them for their behaviour. This, in my opinion, is against the spirit of capitalism. But I think we all knew that already. :)
Paul, you haven't done your research. If you're going to write a post like this, you need to look at both sides of the spectrum and stop reading liberal blogs. "The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer" is a liberal democratic slogan to manipulate poor, uneducated people to vote for Democrats.
Barack Obama is NOT in support of making the 2001 Bush tax cuts permanent. The Bush tax cuts lowered the lowest tax bracket from 15% to 10%, a 33% decrease.
If Obama does not make that permanent, he will be effectively agreeing to increase the middle class tax bracket by 50%
Obama will increase capital gains taxes from 15% to 28%, almost a 100% increase. There are millions of lower-middle class Americans with stock and real property investments that will be effected by this. The rhetoric about the 50 hedge fund managers who made billions of dollars in the past few years is just a dumb argument. They represent .00001% of the population with stock investments.
I also agree with the other commenters on here that when you have a tax plan that only penalizes the rich, you are penalizing the very people that create jobs for poor people. Why would you want to hurt businesses and corporations that ACTUALLY add value to this country. The government doesn't produce any good or service. They just take money. Obama wants more government and more bureaucracy so that he can have more power and more control over our lives. I definitely won't be voting for him.
I'm confused. The "rich" already pay a huge share of the taxes- certainly more than their share. See this link if you don't believe it... http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
Real quick-
• Top 1% makes 21% of Total AGI but pay 39% of all taxes
• Top 5% makes 36% of Total AGI but pay 60% of all taxes
• Bottom 50% makes 13% of Total AGI but pay only 3% of all taxes (Wow! That means the top 50% paid 97%!)
• Table 6 shows the shares of AGI for the various income levels. It shows the top 1% consistently paying a larger share of the tax burden- more in 2005 than in any Clinton year.
• Table 5 shows that from Clinton's last full year in office through 2005 that the AGI share by income group has changed very little; in fact, it went up in Bush's first couple of years for the lower 50%.
People should quit being selfish and voting which for whichever candidate is going to buy their vote- which is the essential point of this article. It's amazing how many have said- "Oh, I'll vote for Obama because he'll put more money in my pocket!". What's happened to America? Vote for the candidate who's going to uphold the constitution of our country. That's ALL that matters.
The best candidate is one who supports taking away power from the FED and dismantling the FED altogether. For our founding fathers did not want a central bank to begin with. It was one of the reasons the colonies wanted independence from British rule who supported the idea.
Too bad Ron Paul is out of the race.
Since your article has become so popular, maybe you can correct your $1400 number to $1040? Your source article has made the correction.
I really think it's worth linking and emphasizing two points that came in different comments:
a. it's important that the people providing jobs aren't given reason to employ fewer people
b. "corporation" is a tax-jargon word - it doesn't always mean *big* corporations. Even tiny companies are often wise to "incorporate" as a financial decision.
When doing an economic analysis, I would hope that readers would take smaller businesses into account. Having previously owned and operated a small "corporation" (less than 10 employees), I can tell you that not all corporate types are fat cats! Furthermore, in any small service business, employees are by far the single largest expense to a company. (Especially here in Canada where even the smallest of employers contribute a *lot* of taxes on behalf of our employees.) If we feel financial pain, we unfortunately *have* to take it out on our employees by reducing hiring, not raising wages or even letting staff go.
There has been interesting analysis done to indicate that raising minimum wage, for example, ends up hurting the working poor most of all. (As others have said, a tax break or a small raise can't quite compare to having vs. not having a job!) This is an idea that sounds like the rich justifying keeping the working guy down, and ff course, there's always bias, spin and agenda, but the ideas behind it have merit. I take it with a grain of salt, of course, but use ideas like that to remind myself that the picture is never quite as simple as it seems to be, and there are very few "no brainers" in economic decisions! :)
As a Canadian, I'm simply watching with interest and have no candidate to promote. I enjoyed this post, but agree that the data presented is only a small, small portion of the info on which to base an economic analysis of the candidates' respective positions.
"Why would we need the Federal Reserve? The whole point is to manipulate the money system in order to have a more stable economy. Tell me… is the economy stable? Was the economy stable in 1929 and the "Dirty 30's"? The Federal Reserve has never done a good job."
"Who'll be better for your wallet"? or "Who'll be worse for public works projects, education budgets, grants for arts, federal research, college financial aid, social welfare, and other things that we need taxes for"? People act like they get nothing out of taxes.
bottom 20 + middle 20 + 0.1 equals 40.1 What about the other 59.9% of us? I doubt Obama will be as good for someone making 250K as someone making 39k. What a HORRIBLE and MISLEADING graph!
How does Bob Barr figure into that, since the LP wants to cut back taxes on both rich _and_ poor? Seems to me he'd be the best vote.
Several posts here assert that by letting the rich and businesses keep more of their money, they'll create jobs.
I'm not understanding, entirely, how that works. If I have a profitable business, and my taxes are cut, I get more money, but I might not necessarily hire anyone else.
Granted, I probably would create a job, to try and grow the business. BUT, if there's not enough demand for the service or product, I might lay this new hire off.
One problem we have these days is the decline in demand.
Maybe it's time to seriously look at Keynsian demand-side economics again. (Too bad Obama claims to be a Chicago school supporter.)
I trust neither with the economy. I trust neither with the war. I trust neither with social issues.
America doesn't really want change.
If the "rich" are the top one percent (or less), then by virtue of receiving such LARGE sums of money, they inherently pay most of the taxes collected by the federal government.
You see, there is only so much money in the economy. Liberal bashers use it in so many arguments against so called left wing issues and causes.
But if there is only so much money, and such a tiny percent of the population collects most of it, then there are only crumbs left for the rest of us. This is obvious. It has much less to do with laziness, or choosing to be poor, and more to do with political brainwashing and manipulation of people with latent prejudicial tendencies.
We always hear the notion that "the rich provide all of us with our jobs" and "the rich pay the most taxes", and "the rich shouldn't be punished, because then they will put less in to the system" and other hollow claims to perpetuate trickle down economics theory.
Such ideas should be offensive to every strong willed, motivated, and hard working American. What nerve some people have!!!
This suggests that ALL of US are too STUPID and LAZY to be able to start our own new businesses and create a new revolution of jobs. And it completely misses the fact that many of us provide OUR OWN JOBS!
People will always have needs and wants. There will be important issues that face society. This is called "opportunity" and it's where progress and innovation develop and grow and evolve. It spawned the industrial revolution, and the information age. Rich people don't give us jobs, opportunity for innovation to fulfill the wants and needs of the people is what creates jobs.
Furthermore, rich people don't spend their money like average people, that's what makes them wealthy. Average people spend a large portion of their earnings every year, though some may save a decent chunk. Some rich people spend lavishly, but some don't, but what makes them wealthy is KEEPING their money. They invest it. To make the most money possible, not because they want to create jobs and give back to society.
They invest it aggressively in markets that are expected to grow. Or they find one of any number of creative investment strategies, which are more about stock value than productivity or real jobs.
Additionally, they gamble by hedging billions of dollars guessing which way the interest rates are going to go. No matter what people tell you, this does not create jobs.
Speculative investment banking is not what helps the middle class. This does not create real employment opportunities for Americans in need. Anyone who suggests it needs to investigate further and follow the money.
Investing in corporations like Walmart doesn't provide jobs either. Yet similar things are commonly products of trickle down economics. Low paying, part time jobs, with no benefits. Competitive prices at the expense of the employees, while the management and stockholders get the reward. Investment into Walmart (or any company, even a start-up venture) is not to provide jobs, it is to earn a return. It is to use existing wealth to make more money, aside from having a job like the working class folks do. Rich getting richer is not just liberal rhetoric, it's a known phenomenon also. To suggest otherwise is terribly naive.
Working class people do not have the funds to invest like this, and earn a living from dividends and interest. That lifestyle does little to benefit average Americans.
The model for this argument is based on an interesting paradigm.
It recognizes that wealth is sometimes inherited and sometimes earned.
But it also suggests that those who accumulate the wealth are more worthy to receive it than everyone else, and that they alone can make best use of that wealth and save us all with their benevolent spending, which theoretically injects money into the economy, which will then flow down to all of us while we can sing Kumbaya and hold hands and frolic in the glory of their kindness and the rewards which they so generously bestow upon us. (sounds rather liberal to me)
It explains this by claiming that if the rich don't have enough extra money, then they can't hire as many people, so there are less jobs. Because only the people who are CURRENTLY rich, are smart enough to create jobs for the rest of us who rely on them.
These are arguments from people who claim to be all about personal responsibility and making your own opportunities and creating your own destiny. It's strange how people who hold such noble ideals, turn around and claim dependence on corporations for jobs. It's not so different from the "hand up" type programs they so vehemently oppose. Just a different institution doling out the benefits.
But aside from the more obvious holes, there are even further problems with this flogic (flawed logic). First of all, large corporations with LOTS of money often manipulate markets and strongarm their industry into exclusive contracts, and use their power and might to eliminate competition. They also author legislation designed to hide behind a shared agenda (environment, civil rights) but are really designed to give themselves a unique advantage. This is beyond capitalism. It is eradication.
So if rich get taxed more, and hire less people, and large corporations become less mighty and powerful and offer less jobs to the public. This creates opportunity, in the way closer to that which Adam Smith described as a free market. There needs to be competition, and a system devoid of morals (capitalism) needs to be tempered with consideration of what is good and in the best interest of everyone, not just the few.
If the rich choose to stop putting money into the system, they will no longer be able to maintain their competitive edge through money and power, then new businesses emerge and take us into a new era. These periods of growth and evolution of the market are where the serious up-trends manifest.
When this opportunity exists, the finite amount of wealth begins to distribute more evenly, which actually would lead to less individual income tax per person overall, and less need for individual services like welfare and unemployment insurance (as opposed to roads and police). Each person would earn significantly less than the top 1% currently do, so they would pay less taxes by being in a lower tax bracket. The same amount of money in our economy but there wouldn't be such disparaging differences in wages and opportunities.
The bottom line is that some people earn $5 an hour, some earn $20, some earn $50. Some get benefits, some even a pension. Then others earn $500k a year plus bonuses and fringe benefits, plus traditional benefits of a standard compensation package. Some earn a million a year plus the other goodies.
Does the million dollar a year guy REALLY work 20 times harder than the $50 an hour guy? Is he 20 times smarter, or 20 times more worthy of having more wealth? Who is qualified to say that he deserves so much when some people have so little?
But is it really about taxes anyway?
Do you want to vote for people who said that there were too many regulations in the securities and equities market, and fought hard to eliminate them. Now, without any real oversight, the industry is collapsing before our eyes. And some of these same politicians are allowing the taxpayer to pick up the burden for the greed of a relatively small portion of the population.
Or maybe you wish to vote for people who destroyed the constitution, and created vast new powers for the Executive Branch of our federal government, perverting our founding fathers great design of checks and balances. The president of our nation can unilaterally declare war with a pre-emptive strikenow, without the UN, and pull out of treaties that took years to establish. This instantly eroded decades of work in trying to get the world community to agree to certain minimum standards of human decency and common ground.
How can we expect growing nations to abide by rules that our government refuses to recognize? Or better yet, how can we let these people REPRESENT US???
jealousy and greed are the motivation's here.
greed never being satiated.
jealousy of those that have more than you.
until you all realize this, you will be slaves to them.


text:
822 Series Overview
Incon Lighting 822 Series post mount lighting is our decorative acorn post top fixture. This series has a variety of wattage and bulb types as well as additional options. The 822 series is a well built product that is American Compliant.
Series 822 has a polycarbonate housing that comes in either a black or white finish and has a clear pebblex polycarbonate acorn. This post mount fixture fits a 3″ OD pole.
This series comes with one of several types of ballasts and is wet location listed. All lamps are included unless ordered with an incandescent lamp or no lamp (NL) option.
The available color temperatures range from warm (2700K & 3000K), medium (3500K) and cool (4100K) and a white to full spectrum (5000K) kelvin temperature. This fixture can also be equipped with:
- Philips Advance Ballast
- High Power Factor
- No Lamp
- Philips Lamp
- Pier Mount Black
- Pier Mount White
- Sylvania Ballast
- Sylvania Lamp
- ULT Universal Ballast
Ask a Question or Find a Rep
Please fill out the contact form below.
Comments or questions are welcome.
Specification Sheet
822-LED Specification Sheet
NOTE FOR PDF DOWNLOADS : Some browsers may open the PDF in a new tab instead of downloading it. If this happens to you, right click on PC (or command on Mac ) and save link as… (or save target… something along those lines, varies from browser to browser).

subset: commoncrawl


text:
As with other fruit trees, the main goal of pruning apple trees is to increase fruit quantity and quality. On young trees, training and pruning establish a healthy framework of branches. Continue pruning once or twice a year to maintain the structure.Tools and Materials
When to prune. The most important time to prune is late winter before you see any signs of new growth. Prune off damaged limbs as well as branches that grow too close to the main branches. Thin out crowded and crossing twigs. Choose limbs to form another layer of main structural branches above the previous layers, and remove competing branches. Trim back by two-thirds the new growth at branch ends and from the central trunk (leader).
In midsummer, remove all new shoots that grow straight up or down from the limbs and from the base of the tree. If the main trunk is forked, remove the weaker shoot.
Where to cut. Don't randomly shorten branches; remove them all the way to their bases. Start by locating the branch bark ridge, a raised area on the upper surface where the branch meets the trunk or larger branch. Begin your cut just outside this ridge, angling it down to the outside of the branch collar, the bulge that forms at the base of the branch where it intersects with the trunk. Leaving the branch collar intact will help the cut close over more readily. Don't cut branches flush to the trunk, and don't leave stubs.
To avoid tearing the bark as you cut through a branch that is too heavy to hold up yourself, divide the cut into three steps. Cut first from the bottom, 6 to 8 inches out from the location of the final cut and half way into the branch. Make the second cut from the top, about an inch further out than the first cut. The branch will break off once this second top cut reaches the area of the first bottom cut, and a stub will remain. Remove the stub in one cut just outside the branch collar.
Prune twigs back to within 1/4 inch of a bud that points in the desired direction, usually toward the outside of the tree.
Training young trees. On 2- to 3-year-old trees, remove all branches within 30 to 36 inches of the ground and large branches that grow parallel with the main trunk (central leader) at the top of the tree. Choose three or four well-placed branches spaced evenly around the trunk and 6 to 10 inches apart vertically. Branches should form a wide angle with the trunk (not narrower than 45 degrees). These become your permanent scaffold branches. Prune off the other branches. Do this in late winter while the tree is dormant. In subsequent years, add one or two more layers of scaffold branches, spaced 12 to 15 inches apart.
Spread the branches. Branches that form a 45 degree to 60 degree angle with the trunk produce more fruit and are less likely to break under stress than ones at narrower angles. To widen the angle of otherwise desirable branches, wedge a notched stick between the branch and trunk to spread them apart. Install the spreaders in late winter and remove in late summer.Tips
Use pruners for cutting limbs up to 3/4 inch diameter. Loppers can handle up to 1-1/2 inch cuts. Use a pruning saw to remove larger branches.
When apple trees reach a desirable height, cut the central leader back to the uppermost branch and remove subsequent upward-growing shoots.
Photography by National Gardening Association.


text:
Latest Westport property transfers: $16.3M total
The Town Clerk's office reports the following property transfers took place in Westport from May 6-10.
11 Calumet Road, sold to Muhammad K. Gill and Saadia E. Ahmed by Albert Pizzirusso, $735,000.
60 Edgewater Commons Lane, sold to Jeffrey R. and Mara U Barth by Lisa R. Bernard, $823,500.
9 Willowbrook Drive, sold to Elenee Argentinis by James T. and Jodi M. Grogan, $603,000.
53 Partrick Road, sold to Robert and Rachel Phillips by James A. and Melanie C. Nangle, $1,907,500.
30 Whitney Glen, sold to Teri Klein by Timothy B. Lewis and Michael B. Lewis, et al, $425,000.
23 Burnham Hill Road, sold to John Francis and Danielle Mary McGrath by Bluewater Burnham 23 LLC, $3,312,500.
8 Danbury Ave., sold to Daniel E. Kahn by Teri Klein, $1,000,000.
40 Washington Ave., sold to Tyree Montague and Dany Lennon-Montague by Michael K. and Melissa Scouvart, $915,000.
30 Colony Road, sold to Ali Hemdan and Ingi Soliman by Joseph and Lori Lewis, $1,270,000.
6 Scofield Place, sold to Russell B. Melzer by Liam and Deborah King, $837,500.
14 Franklin Ave., sold to Jonathan S. and Natalie J. Kroft by MGTP Revocable Trust, $1,895,000.
9 Brightfield Lane, sold to Teresa Padilla by Andrew F. and Mary Warner McGrade, $1,485,000.
101 Greens Farms Road ½ Int, sold to Mousumi and Bivash Bhattacharya by Monika Dye trustee, $275,000.
101 Greens Farms Road ½ Int, sold to Mousumi and Bivash Bhattacharya by Steven Trefzger trustee, $275,000.
9 Willowbrook Drive, sold to Jonathan L. Rohner and Jonathan I. Gordon by Peter and Mary J. Ludovicy, $510,000.
Total value of the properties sold is $16,269,000, generating conveyance taxes of $40,672.50.


text:
Meet your newest baby obsession.
The Columbus Zoo welcomed an elephant calf early Thursday morning, and the small pachyderm is already showing off its star power with a series of photos that highlight cuteness. The gender of the calf has not yet been determined, but zoo officials say it appears strong.
Mother Phoebe gave birth to the calf at 3:09 a.m. on December 6th.
The calf joins the herd of six Asian elephants in the Asia Quest region. There have been three successful Asian elephant births at the Columbus Zoo throughout its history, all born to Phoebe. But this baby is the first elephant born at the Columbus Zoo in almost 10 years.
Its also the first to be born at the Columbus Zoo as a result of artificial insemination. The father of the calf is not yet known, and will be determined with a DNA test in the coming weeks. The Zoo says artificial insemination is still a rare procedure for elephants but is becoming more frequent in an effort to boost the number of elephants as the population in the wild keeps declining.
Obviously, everyone will want to see the adorableness in person. But the zoo says to give Phoebe and her new baby time to continue developing a strong bond, they're going to remain in a behind-the-scenes area for a while. They'll make sure to let guests know when public viewing information is available.
The public will also get a chance to help name the calf; those details will be announced later.


text:
NEW YORK -- The New York Knicks signed first-round draft pick Tim Hardaway Jr. to a contract on Monday.
Hardaway Jr. was the 24th selection in the draft and played at the University of Michigan where he averaged 14.3 points, 4.1 rebounds and 2.1 assists in 107 games and helped lead the Wolverines to the NCAA championship game last season.
He is the son of five-time NBA All-Star Tim Hardaway Sr.
The Knicks also signed free agent forward C.J. Leslie to a contract.
Leslie declared for the draft after his junior season at NC State. He averaged 13.7 points, on 49.7 percent shooting, 7.3 rebounds and 1.37 blocks in 99 games with the Wolfpack. As a junior, he averaged 15.1 points, on 51.9 percent shooting, and 7.4 rebounds and 1.23 blocks in 32.4 minutes in 35 games.
Both players are expected to play for the Knicks' entry at the NBA Summer League in Las Vegas.


text:
How to attract hungry hummingbirds to your yard
According to the National Audubon Society, to sustain their supercharged metabolisms, hummingbirds must eat once every 10 to 15 minutes and visit between 1,000 and 2,000 flowers per day. When you provide a safe, reliable food source, it's like putting out a welcome mat for hummingbirds.
Some flowering plants are particularly attractive to hummingbirds, like trumpet honeysuckle, bee balm and sage, says Cole's. Try planting these in your yard, and hang a hummingbird feeder since it's one of the most effective ways to consistently entice hummingbirds.Cleaning
There is a proper way to clean your floor
Clean floors don't need to translate to hour-long scrubbing sessions on your knees. Instead, it should take minimal work to get the job done and it shouldn't matter what type of floor you have. Here are some tricks and tips from Rejuvenate to get your floors looking new and spotless in no time:Laminate floors: Regularly vacuum or mop the floors with a multi-surface spray mop. Linoleum floors: Vacuum them to prevent scratches and wipe up any spills as soon as they happen. Spray the floor in sections and wipe with a damp cloth. Hardwood floors: Dust mop and vacuum daily. Depending on the amount of traffic or abuse the floor takes, consider a safe, non-toxic floor cleaner. Tile and grout flooring: For stubborn stains, spray on a deep grout cleaner, let sit for a few minutes and scrub. Tip of the week
Simple tips for comfort and energy savings
These quick fixes will help homeowners save energy and stay comfortable all summer long, according to Lennox:Schedule an annual routine check-up for your heating and cooling equipment to keep the system running as efficiently as possible, and check the air filter each month to see if it needs to be replaced. Add extra insulation to the attic, which will help prevent your home's heating and cooling system from having to work harder to regulate the indoor temperature during the hottest months of the year. Breathe easier this summer by installing a whole-home air purification system. Flowers
Smart consumer tips for sending flowers
For Americans, sending flowers to show love, caring and concern is a longstanding tradition appreciated by both givers and receivers. Consider these tips from 1-800-flowers.com when selecting fresh flowers for your loved one.Think ahead. Ordering online well ahead can offer you peace of mind and save you money by allowing the flower company to make the delivery a few days before or after a holiday. Know their favorites. Delight your loved one by finding out ahead of time which flowers they prefer, then contacting your florist ahead to ensure it can secure that variety.


text:
Ms. Barton writes: "I am a 17-year-old student living in Shropshire, a central county on the Welsh border, England, studying for my A-levels in History, English Literature, French, and General Studies. In fact, my Victorian interest comes from my A-level history course, which has also provoked my interest in European affairs, 1815-1939, Italian Unification, and German Unification. I am interested in all historical periods and locations and hope to read history at one of the top British universities, beginning September 2001.
I am a member of The Historical Association of Great Britain and the British Association for Local History. Since I have a particular interest in the history and politics of the Victorian era, I chose to share some of my ideas on the topic with the wider world through the Victorian Web, from the Great Reform Act to reasons for Imperialist expansion. If you have any thoughts on my writing, please feel free to e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.com
Added April 2000


text:
You Are Hero Core. You Make Me - Er - Hero.
Mr Perkins pointed me in the direction of the newly-released Hero Core, from Daniel Remar who you may know from Ilj from a couple of years back. It's the sequel to Hero, and I loved it within seconds of starting. A sprawling, non-linear shooter which will recall either old-skool NES or old-skool Ultimate: Play The Game, depending which side of the Atlantic you're on. If you're from elsewhere… well, you tell me. Go gets! Trailer follows.


text:
And it's really pretty ok, once you see what's going on. But it's a pretty veiled reference. A very physics-y friend of mine just looked confused when he read it.
The thing is, I've seen a whole bunch of people laugh really hard at this, and then when I ask them what they think the joke is (i'm a pretty annoying friend) they can't really describe it. But they know it has to be funny! It's xkcd and there's sex! Try it on your friends and see what they say.
This is what we are up against, people: xkcd has such a reputation for Laffs And Giggles that people will laugh and think it's amazing even if they have no clue what it's talking about and totally miss what the author is intending.
I thought some variation on the phrase "Come On, Randall" might be a very clever title for this post but decided against it. Didn't want it to disappear entirely though, so here it is.
On a related note, the super intense arguing going on for comic 513 has somewhat overwhelmed me, and I do apologize again for not being able to respond to all the comments. It happens to be a busy week. In any case, I decided that I could use a short break from the blogging, for mostly creative artistic (ha!) reasons so starting next Monday (probably) we are going to have a guest contributor. It's...frequent commentor Rob! woo hoo! So you'll have to start paying attention to that line on the bottom of the posts where it says who wrote it. Or I could tell him to publish in a different font. Or something. Whatever. The plan is for this to last one or two weeks, and I will still be around commenting and maybe posting if needed.
Let's give a BIG XKCDSUCKS WELCOME to rob, everyone.


text:
Pakistani minister denies release of Christian blasphemy accused
Thrissur, India, November 22 (ENInews)--There is confusion about the fate of a Christian woman sentenced to death under Pakistan's draconian blasphemy law after a minister in the country's government denied reports that President Asif Ali Zardari has ordered her release.
"This is not true," Shahbaz Bhatti, the federal minister for minorities, told ENInews on 22 November from his office in Islamabad regarding the release of Aasia Bibi, who was sentenced to death on 9 November for blasphemy.
The verdict had led to widespread international criticism ranging from human rights groups to the churches, with Pope Benedict XVI calling for her release.
The government minister had been contacted to confirm news reports that President Zardari had ordered the release of the 45-year old Christian mother of five who had been in custody since June 2009 on the blasphemy charges.
Several news sources including the Kuwait News Agency, KUNA, quoted Pakistani government sources and reported that the Pakistani president had accepted the clemency plea of Bibi and she had been released.
While minorities minister Bhatti, who is a Christian, said the reports are not true, he noted, "We are making all the efforts to get her released and to present a report after studying the case to the president by Wednesday [24 November]."
He said that family members of the Christian woman had met him on 21 November.
"This is a clear case of a false allegation [of blasphemy] against the Christian woman," Bhatti stated.
Peter Jacob, the executive secretary of the Justice and Peace Commission of the Roman Catholic Church in Pakistan, told ENInews that the blasphemy charge against Bibi was "yet another instance of a Christian being charged with dreadful blasphemy case to settle even petty quarrels".
Bibi, said Jacob, had a quarrel with her Muslim neighbour on the flow of drain water from their houses at Itanwalli village in Mankana Sahib district in Punjab province.
The quarrel continued in the fruit field where they worked together and the Muslim women had abused Bibi for using the common glass provided to the workers to drink water.
"The blasphemy charge was brought against her for standing up to the taunts," Jacob stated.
The Catholic commission has long stated that the blasphemy law that provides a mandatory death sentence or life imprisonment even for unintentional blasphemy offences is often misused against Christians and others to deal with property and personal disputes.
The commission has said that although more than 1035 people have been charged under the blasphemy law since 1987, not a single accused has been found guilty by higher courts on appeal.
However, the commission stated, at least 35 people, Christians and Muslims, charged with blasphemy have been killed during court proceedings.
Christians account for about two percent of Pakistan's 184 million people, of whom more than 95 percent are Muslim.


text:
Sign In
Sheet Music
Bonnie K. Winn
Bonnie K. Winn is the author of twenty-five published novels, most of which have been translated into over twenty languages. Fourteen-million copies of her books are in print. Curr...
view more
Bonnie K. Winn is the author of twenty-five published novels, most of which have been translated into over twenty languages. Fourteen-million copies of her books are in print. Currently, Bonnie is one of the top ten bestselling authors in Harlequin's highly successful Steeple Hill/Love Inspired inspirational fiction program. Named as one of the top ten romance authors in America by Affaire de Coeur, Bonnie K. Winn began her career with the launch of her Wildflower series in the early 1990s. Her first novel, Summer Rose, climbed to the top of three national bestseller lists. Her historical novel, Forbidden Fire, won Affaire De Coeur's Best Overall Historical Romance of 1994. That same year, she was named Utah Writer of the Year. Newlywed Game, lauded by Romantic Times as "a great talent making a smashing contemporary debut," was her first Harlequin American romance book. The Accidental Mrs. MacKenzie, which hit number one on the Walden Books and B. Dalton romance bestsellers lists, was nominated by Romantic Times for best contemporary romance of 1999. Her first Silhouette Intimate Moments release, The Hijacked Wife, appeared on numerous bestseller lists as well. Besides writing novels, Bonnie also lends her talents to screenwriting, and her screenplay Heroes placed as a finalist at the Sundance U.S. Film Festival. Formerly a public relations executive, Bonnie devotes her time exclusively to writing. She resides in the foothills of the Rockies with her husband and dog, and with her grown son nearby.
view less
Books Authored
View More
Skip carousel
carousel previous
carousel next
Close Dialog
Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?


text:
The FiiO E07K Andes USB DAC Headphone Amplifier (Black) is the successor to the E7, with updated 24/96 USB DAC and a powerful headphone amp. With a host of new features including gain selection, hold key and independent bass and treble adjustments. It can bring you to experience the high quality acoustics playback. Lossless music format (96 KHz/24 Bit) contains details that ordinary CD (44.1 KHz/16 Bit) does not embody. On the basis of former E7, ANDES (E07K) added some functions which include right & left channel balance settings, bass and treble adjustment, line output, gain selection and hold key.
Receive Our Latest Deals
Connect With Buydig


text:
We all need love. Dating is one good way of finding love and a life partner. My ladyboy date is a very interesting dating site that has over the years transformed lives by creating a platform for people to find their perfect match in life.
My ladyboy site covers all countries in the world and is a well trusted place for getting the right person for a serious relationship that could lead to marriage. This dating site is for the ladyboys as they are special women and it helps them get the perfect men for them.
For the ladyboys, there arises many controversies around their love lives because they are rare as well. Their transsexual nature makes it difficult for most people to understand them as well as fully accepting them. However, because of their transsexuality, most of them get confused because of the extra attention that they get but at the end of it all, they are still special women that need love.
My ladyboy site makes it possible for the ladyboys to get foreign boyfriends which is a chance to meet people of different cultures and traditions and with this, people are able to get to know new methods of living. Most of the transwomen are stable with good jobs therefore do not take the chance to rely completely on their boyfriends for financial aid.
The ladyboys in the site are all gorgeous and their portfolio is good enough to attract any serious man. The people behind the working and organization of the site is a team of well dedicated ladyboys who have dedicated their time to find the perfect match for their clients. The transgender dating is very interesting and brings meaning to people.
Because most of the transsexual women are very independent, most of them end up neglecting their social life and the dating for lady boys site comes in as a very handy solution to this problem The transgender woman is a unique one and having a transgender identity must not be a hindrance for one to find love.
Special measure has been taken to keep off fake clients who may want to use the sight for their own selfish reasons such as pornography or prostitution for making money. All the people included in the site are all serious people who are honest and are looking for love online.
My ladyboy date is a very well-known dating site in Asia known by many transsexual women. It is among the first dating site that actually works in helping people find love. It was formed with the major mission of helping out transgender women, to get equal rights, when it comes to the matters of love. The transgender women are so common in South East Asia, where they are commonly referred to as the ladyboys.
Many dating sites for the transgender woman have been existing online but they have never taken the transsexual women seriously as most of them have been used for the business of porn and prostitution. This is one of the reasons that led to the creation of the My ladyboy site which believed in creating a descent platform for these special women to get nice guys interested in them.
The dating site is controlled purely by women and the headquarters is based in the Philippines. It is a fact that the society views the ladyboy differently and this makes it hard for them to get a serious relationship going on for them. This project was formed in order to change the perspective of the society on the transgender women and help them live normal and free in a world that does not alienate them. The project is aimed at proving to the world that the t6ransgender women are more than just sexual workers and social scammers as they have been put by the previous dating sites.
Perfect love stories that have been successful and which resulted from this dating site include the stories of couples such as Joey and Paula who are from USA and Brazil respectively, Marc from Germany and Loren from Philippines and also Peter and Chloe.
Other couples that have successfully met and dated by the help of the site include Gabrielle and Rex, who have dated for one year now, Joel and Carla, not forgetting Frederic and Gabiara.


text:
Search WeAreHairy.com:
Kaysy strips off dress and lingerie on red chair
Kaysy has on an elegant dress in her red room. She takes it off with her lingerie and lays naked on her red chair. She poses with her 52 year old hairy pussy and perfect 34D breasts in full beauty.
Home |
Members |
Help & Support |
Terms & Conditions |
Privacy Policy |
Webmasters |
Sitemap |
Mobile Hairy Porn |
Subscribe to our weekly hairy porn list for fresh hairy girls
or visit We Are Hairy Free for more hairy pussies
18 U.S.C 2257 Record Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement
© 2009—2019 WeAreHairy.com All Rights Reserved. …


text:
juuni 9
Hosted by one of the country's oldest colonial towns, this race will wind you through history. You might even spot a bald eagle or a rare white-tailed Sika deer.
LimitedRegister ▻
Reasons to Race IRONMAN 70.3 Eagleman
The 2019 IRONMAN 70.3 Eagleman will offer 40 qualifying slots to the 2019 IRONMAN 70.3 World Championship in Nice, France.
View the full list of 2017 IRONMAN 70.3 Athletes' Choice Awards here.


text:
Marvel Heroes - Saturday and Sunday from 2pm
Latest Disney XD Shows
Danger Mouse
Danger Mouse explodes back into action and is instantly dismissed for destroying half of London. Can the world survive without Danger Mouse?
LEGO Star Wars: The Freemaker Adventures
Rowan, Kordi and Zander Freemaker scour the galaxy for scraps in order to build their own vehicles. But when the trio's youngest sibling Rowan discovers part of the ancient Kyber Saber, the three siblings become a prime target for Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader. Join the Freemakers as their unforgettable adventure begins to find the missing pieces of the Kyber crystals before the Empire get their hands on it.
Rob The Robot
Join Rob, the galaxy's most curious and adventurous robot as he explores the wondrous planets with his friends Ema, the alien linguist, TK the walking toolkit, and Orbit the quirky artist, in this 3D animated preschool series full of fun and laughter.
Mr. Bean: The Animated Series
He is mischievous and makes numerous disasters and always encounters problems in a roundabout way. He is shown to be both immature yet surprisingly resourceful when he needs to be. He wants every environment around him to be clean and out of trouble. In A Royal Makeover, it is revealed that he lives in 112 Arbour Road as seen in the packages Elizabeth II sent to him and Mrs. Wicket.
Tayo The Little Bus
The series features four main characters. Tayo (Bus 120, blue) is a playful and sometimes mischievous. Rogi (Bus 1000, green) is his brother and best friend, although the two often get into fights with each other. Funny and mischievous himself, Rogi also has an interest in detective work, as can be seen in "Rogi the Detective!" and "Prank Call Madness". Both friends resemble a Hyundai Super Aero City.[citation needed] Lani (Bus 02, yellow) is youngest of the four. She is cheerful and kind. Possessing little tolerance for arguments, she often acts as a mediator between Tayo and Rogi. The main cast is rounded out by Gani (Bus 1339, red), who is hardworking, warm-hearted, and shy. He is the oldest of the four.


text:
Meet The Restoration Expert
Brian Vanderhorn
Born in Bayonne, NJ and Raised from childhood in Cape May County. Brian has been experimenting with carpet cleanup since childhood when he would have to quickly fix a spill before his mother would ground him. This turned into his current career where he has been able to assist many families both with general protective maintenance as well as emergency repairs.
Expert Services
They enjoy their work and it shows! They look forward to welcoming you as a customer and being your preferred restoration and cleaning services company in the future. Here is a list of the many services they offer:
- Fire, Smoke, Mold, Water Damage Restoration & More
- Water Damage
- Fire & Smoke Damage Restoration
- Mold Remediation
- Board-Up & Tarp-Over Service
- Carpet & Cleaning Services
- Spot, Stain & Odor Removal
- Drapery & Upholstery Cleaning
- Overspray Protection
- Air Duct Cleaning
- Content Inventory & Pack-Out
- Crawl Space Mold Remediation
- Tile, Grout & Hard Surface Cleaning


text:
Woodwind music majors in all degree programs are required to pass a sophomore technique proficiency, to be taken at the end of the fall semester of their sophomore year. (Transfer students should arrange the date of their proficiency with their private teacher.) Students should consult their private teachers for specific requirements and procedures.
556-12100 through 556-47100 Flute I-V -- Major Instrument, Music Majors
556-12101 through 556-22101 Flute I-II -- Major Instrument, Music Minors
556-12102 through 556-32102 Flute I-III -- Secondary Instrument, Music Majors
Emphasis placed on tone production, breath control and support, embouchure flexibility, and articulation and technique. Weekly repertoire classes.
Taffanel-Gaubert, 17 Daily Exercises; Marcel Moyse, De la Sonorité; Trevor Wye, Practice Book no. 1 -- Tone. Harmonics, vibrato, and tone color. Representative études including Andersen, 18 Studies, op. 41; Andersen, 24 Exercises, op. 33; and Berbiguier, 18 Exercises. Representative repertoire including Debussy, Syrinx; Handel sonatas; Bach sonatas; Bloch, Suite Modale; selections from flute music by French composers.
Taffanel-Gaubert, 17 Daily Exercises; Marcel Moyse, De la Sonorité; Trevor Wye, Practice Book no. 4 -- Intonation. Articulation studies, including multiple tonguing. Representative études including Andersen, 24 Études, op. 21 and op. 30; and Demerrseman, 50 Melodic Studies, op. 4. Representative repertoire including Honegger, Danse de la Chèvre; Telemann, Twelve Fantasies; Bach sonatas; Hindemith, Sonata; Mozart concertos; Poulenc, Sonata; and Quantz concertos.
Taffanel-Gaubert, 17 Daily Exercises, and Marcel Moyse, Tone Development through Interpretation. Orchestral excerpts. Representative études including Altes, 26 Selected Studies; Andersen, 24 Études, op. 15; and Andersen, 24 Technical Studies, op. 63. Representative repertoire including Bach, Partita;
Hindemith, Acht Stücke; Varese, Density 21.5; Bach sonatas; Martin, Ballade; Reinecke, "Undine" Sonata; and Schubert, Introduction and Variations.
Representative études including Andersen, 24 Virtuoso Studies, op. 60 and Karg-Elert, 30 Caprices. Orchestral excerpts. Representative repertoire including Berio, Sequenza; Bozza, Image; Jolivet, Cinq Incantations; Bach sonatas; Copland, Duo; Griffes, Poem; Ibert, Concerto; Muczynski, Sonata; Nielsen, Concerto; and Prokofiev, Sonata.
556-12300 through 556-47300 Oboe I-V -- Major Instrument, Music Majors
556-12301 through 556-22301 Oboe I-II -- Major Instrument, Music Minors
556-12302 through 556-32302 Oboe I-III -- Secondary Instrument, Music Majors
The basic elements of technique (fingers, embouchure and tonguing, blowing) are related to artistic concept through long tones, scales in all note values, and the "Forty Progressive Melodies" from Barret's Oboe Method. Representative repertoire is selected from the Albinoni and Handel concerti, Nielsen, Phantasy Pieces, op. 2, and the Geiser Sonatine.
Technique continued, including long tones and scales as before. Études include articulation scale patterns (transposed), 12 articulation studies, and sonatas from Barret. Representative repertoire includes Handel and Telemann sonatas, the Comarosa-Benjamin Concerto, C. P. E. Bach concertos, and the Piston Suite.
Technique continued as before, including long tones for endurance, and scales and triads in all keys and in all note values. Études from Ferling and the Vade Mecum. Representative repertoire selected from the Mozart, Graun, Stamitz, Fischer, and Vivaldi concertos, and the Saint-Saëns, Hindemith, and Poulenc sonatas.
Technique continues as before. Études selected from Rothwell, Belinsky and deLancie's Orchestra Studies, and G. Gillet's Advanced Études. Representative repertoire selected from Bach and Telemann cantatas; Mozart, Oboe Quartet K. 370; Vaughan Williams, Concerto; Ibert, Symphonie Concertante; Riccardo Malipiero, Sonata; Britten, Quartet and Metamorphoses.
Repertory class for oboe majors includes the principles of reed making. (F-S)
556-12500 through 556-47500 Clarinet I-V -- Major Instrument, Music Majors
556-12501 through 556-22501 Clarinet I-II -- Major Instrument, Music Minors
556-12502 through 556-32502 Clarinet I-III -- Secondary Instrument, Music Majors
Emphasis is placed on production of good tone, correct posture, breathing, embouchure formation, hand position, finger motion, and articulation. All major and minor scales, thirds, and arpeggios. Symmetrical scale and chord patterns. Albert, 24 Varied Scale and Chord Exercises; Bonade, Clarinetist's Compendium; Williaman, Modulation Exercises. Representative études including Hite (ed.), Melodious and Progressive Studies; Rose, 40 Studies; Muller, 30 Studies in All Tonalities; Gates, Odd-Meter Études. Representative repertoire including Delmas, Promenade; Avon, Fantasie de Concert; Finzi, Five Bagatelles; Carter, Pastorale; Barat, Pièce en Sol Mineur; Vaughan Williams, Six Studies in English Folk Song; Pierne, Serenade; Coquard, Melodie et Schezetto; Grovlex, Lamento et Tarentelle; Barlow, Lyrical Piece; Schumann, Drei Romanzen; Arias by Bozza and Roussel; Sonatinas by Heiden, Honegger, and Szalowski.
Continued refinement of all fundamentals. Bender-Jettel, Scale Exercises; Baermann, Method, part III; Stubbins, Essentials of Technical Dexterity. Representative études including Rose, 32 Études; Rose-Rode, 20 Grandes Études; Stark, Arpeggio Studies; Baermann, books IV and V. Representative repertoire including Marty, 1st Fantasie; Templeton, Pocket Size Sonata; Gallois-Montbrun, Six Pièces Musicales; Arnold, Sonatina; Solos de Concours by Rabaud and Messager; Spohr, Six German Songs; Widor, Introduction and Rondo; Schumann, Fantasiestücke; Weber concerti; sonatas by Saint-Saëns, Bernstein, Bax, Etler, and Hindemith.
Hamglin, Scales and Exercises. Representative études including Cavallini, Thirty Caprices; Stark, 24 Studies in all Tonalities; Jeanjean, 16 Modern Études, and 18 Études; Perier, 30 Études; Uhl, 48 Études; Voxman (ed.), Classical Studies. Representative repertoire including Schubert, The Shepherd on the Rock; Milhaud, Trio; Stravinsky, Three Pieces for Unaccompanied Clarinet; Bozza, Bucolique; Bonade (ed.), Orchestral Studies; Spohr concerti; sonatas by Brahms and Poulenc; concertos by Hindemith and Mozart.
Concentrated review of every aspect of performance. Representative études including Stark, 24 Grand Virtuoso Studies; Perier, Recueil de Sonates; Starlit, 25 Études de Virtuosité. Representative repertoire includes orchestral studies of Bonade, McGinnis, and Cailliet; Debussy, Rhapsodie; Ravel, Fantasie; Bartók, Contrasts; quintets by Mozart and Brahms; concertos by Copland, Tomasi, and Nielsen. (F-S)
556-12700 through 556-47700 Bassoon I-V -- Major Instrument, Music Majors
556-12701 through 556-22701 Bassoon I-II -- Major Instrument, Music Minors
556-12702 through 556-32702 Bassoon I-III -- Secondary Instrument, Music Majors
Technique to include pattern for all first-year bassoon students. Long tones on all major scales, correct embouchure, fingerings, breathing and tonguing, and reed making. Representative études including Weissen-born, Method, books I and II; Milde, Studies in All Keys. Representative repertoire including E. Bourdeau, Premier Solo; Telemann, Sonata in F Minor; D. C. Smith, Caprice; Max Vox Lenz, Cicero; Beethoven, Adagio Cantabile; and Weissenborn, Capriccio, op. 14.
All major and minor scales (80 mm). All scales in thirds. Chord study. Articulations (slur two-tongue; tongue one-slur two-tongue two; slur three-tongue one, etc.). Chord cycle of I-IV-V((7))-I. Representative études including Kopprasch, books I and II; Oubradous, Methods I; Piard, Methods I. Representative repertoire including Ferdinand David, Concertino, op. 12; Galliard, Six Sonatas for Bassoon and Piano; Milde, Andante and Rondo; Pierne, Concert Piece; Burrill Phillips, Concert Piece; Vivaldi, concerti in A Minor and B Minor, Sonata in A Minor.
Technique including interval study in all major keys of thirds, fourths, fifths, sixths, and sevenths. Continuation of long tones, legato and staccato tonguing. Representative études including Milde, Studies, book I; Jancoutt Studies; Oubradous, Method, no. 2; Piard, Method, no. 2. Representative repertoire including Siennicki, Ballade for Bassoon; C. von Weber, Concerto in F; A. Stadio, Orchestra Studies; Hindemith, Sonata for Bassoon and Piano; Casarino, Sonata for Bassoon and Piano.
Technique including all scales (100 mm). Continued study of all basic material. Representative études including Milde, Studies, book 2; Paird, Method, no. 3; Oubradous, Method, no. 3. Representative repertoire including Mozart, Bassoon Concerto in B; V. Bruns, Concerto for Bassoon; Etler, Sonata for Bassoon and Piano; Villa-Lobos, Ciranda das Sete Notas; sympho-nies of Beethoven, Brahms, and Tchaikovsky; and Studio book. (F-S)
556-12900 through 556-479000 Saxophone I-V -- Major Instrument, Music Majors
556-12901 through 556-22901 Saxophone I-II -- Major Instrument, Music Minors
556-12902 through 556-32902 Saxophone I-III -- Secondary Instrument, Music Majors
Technique from L. Teal, Saxophonist's Workbook; tone studies, vibrato studies, articulation studies, alternate fingering studies, major/minor scales, major/minor thirds, low and high register studies. S. Rascher, Top Tones; R. Lang, Beginning Studies in the Altissimo Register; J. M. Londeix, On the Exactness of Intonation. Representative études including J. L. Small, Rhythmical and Technical Studies; H. Voxman, Selected Studies; Ferling, 48 Études. Representative repertoire including Teal, Solos for the Alto and Tenor Saxophone Player; H. Eccles, Sonata; Mule, Classics for the Saxophone; E. Bozza, Aria; P. Lantier, Sicilienne; B. Heiden, Sonata; P. Hindemith, Sonata; W. Schmidt, Sonatina; and various chamber works.
Technique including L. Teal, Saxophonist's Workbook; S. Rascher and R. Lang, altissimo studies; J. M. Londeix, intonation studies; Giamperi, Daily Studies. Études including C. Koechlin, Études; W. Schmidt, Contemporary Études; and continued work in previous methods. Representative repertoire including various transcriptions; P. Creston, Sonata; L. Van Delden, Sonatina; H. Villa-Lobos, Fantasia; W. Benson, Aeolian Song; P. Maurice, Tableaux de Provence; A. Glazunov, Concerto in E-flat; L. Lunde, Sonata; and various chamber works.
Technique to include continuation of previous material with emphasis placed on increasing technical facility. Representative études including G. Lacour, 28 Études on Modes of Messiaen; E. Bozza, 12 Études and Caprices; R. Caravan, Paradigms; G. Lacour, 8 Very Difficult Studies. Representative repertoire including W. Hartley, Duo for Saxophone and Piano; W. Benson, Concertino; R. Caravan, Sketch; K. Husa, Élégie et Rondeau; Milhaud, Scaramouche; R. Muczynski, Sonata; P. Bonneau, Caprice en Forme de Valse; and various chamber works.
Continued emphasis is placed on technical facility in various keys and modes. Continued study of extended techniques such as multiphonics, altissimo, timbre changes, tonguing effects, etc. Representative repertoire including concertos by Creston, Dahl, Husa, and Tomasi; sonatas by DiPasquale, Denisov, and others; L. Basset, Music for Saxophone and Piano; J. Ibert, Concertino da Camera; and various chamber works. (F-S)
A. Ozolins, Office of Creative Services, 15. July, 2005


text:
Join the weekly Classic Castle set review discussion. Please post your opinions on the set play ability, piece selection, design, etc. Which sets stand up to our catapult of critique and which ones crumble in shame!
This week's set is 2586 LEGO Chess Promotional Set.
LEGO Chess Promotional Set was released in 1998 as part of the CD chess game. This set is also known as "The Crazy LEGO King". The King sits on a throne complete with his scepter. Reportedly this set was also available separately from the Chess Game.


text:
2 August 2012 at 10.24am | Comment on this article
According to recent government research, Thurrock in Essex is the unhappiest town in the country. The Office for National Statistics questioned people across the country to find out how happiness levels vary and Thurrock was bottom of the list.
But local resident involved in activities at ROH's High House Production Park in Thurrock are helping to prove that the creative arts can actually help turn that around. Thurrock resident, Margaret Nathan, tells us, "[Participating in] things like the Thurrock Community Chorus can raise levels of satisfaction – when the whole of Tilbury Cruise Terminal was filled with people singing, nobody was unhappy." Fellow resident, June Christine Bull, agrees that activities and events that involve the whole community make people happier. "When the Olympic torch went through our town centre, it brought everyone together. All local organizations and groups had a good time," she said.
Researchers would agree with Margaret and June's theory. George MacKerron, from the London School of Economics, has been doing a study into what makes us content and has found that when people engage in the arts and theatre, they feel happier. MacKerron's study is being done via a mobile phone app and, he told The Arts Journal, "Someone at the theatre is around six points [out of 100] happier than someone who isn't."
There are plenty of opportunities to get involved in the arts in ROH Thurrock as it runs events all year round, often with local schools and community groups. Recently, people attending High House Production Park were able to pitch in to help build props for a Royal Opera House production Hot House. And, in August, people of all ages are welcome to join the Thurrock team for a series of creative workshops. These are open to anyone interested in film-making, audio production or theatrical stagecraft.
Further activities will be announced soon so keep an eye out – there's a real benefit to getting involved at ROH Thurrock!
For more information on the Thurrock Community Chorus or to get involved in Royal Opera House activities in Thurrock, email email@example.com