text:
Refraining from taking as much in tax money, which is what the home mortgage interest deduction amounts to, is not a handout.
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
Refraining from taking as much in tax money, which is what the home mortgage interest deduction amounts to, is not a handout.
"The problem is that America cannot make meaningful cuts to federal spending without hacking away at some of its core insurance business."
This is an utterly ridiculous conclusion.
Programs like welfare, medicaid, and unemployment insurance are "needs-based" programs. Slashing the rate of unemployment with business reform (energy) would reduce federal spending by $300B-$400B, while generating higher tax revenues from newly employed citizens. Society would be absolutely better off as citizens would have the independence of employment and taxpayers would see a decrease in Federal deficits and the growth of national debts.
Furthermore, Social Security does not function like insurance; instead, it functions like an annuity. We allow US citizens to enjoy tax-subsidized private retirement accounts, and we give them access to social security. Naturally, financial advisers have taught their clients how to double dip these benefits, drawing from both their private retirement and their SS benefits each year, without incurring significant phase-out or tax penalties. To make matters worse, we allow federal employees to double dip social security by drawing a public pension in addition to SS benefits. The US also engages in such social engineering as giving Medicare benefits to seniors so they have a competitive advantage in the workforce over the young people who pay for Medicare. The US government is also keen to allow working seniors to have SS benefits, which essentially allows them to underbid other middle class workers. Who wouldn't do a $40,000 job for $25,000, if they knew the government was going to make up the difference?
Socialism is like medicine. When medicine is administered by competent experts, it can work wonders. When medicine is administered by quacks, who act as channel-stuffing errand boys for drug manufacturers, medicine becomes a destructive addiction.
The argument is whether we should dial back the dosage, which will improve overall health and wealth of the taxpaying citizenry (tax cuts for productive Americans) or whether we should alter the prescriptions to address the problems we have intentionally neglected to pursue our addiction (shift benefits to the middle class and American youth).
The inevitable windfall of entitlement reform can only be scuttled by drug-addled citizens who gnash their teeth at the prospect of losing their opium pipe.
Interesting post.
"The US government is also keen to allow working seniors to have SS benefits, which essentially allows them to underbid other middle class workers. Who wouldn't do a $40,000 job for $25,000, if they knew the government was going to make up the difference?"
Given that the bulk of SS benefits are paid for by the beneficiary, doesn't that change the equation?
In other words, wouldn't not allowing SS beneficiaries to work be like not allowing seniors with annuities to work?
And, given that productive folks grow economies, ideally don't we want everyone to work, if they want to, as long as possible?
Beneficiaries do not pay for the benefits. The government does not have a financial mechanism that delivers a defined benefit/contribution for a nominal payment. Instead, your payment varies by your income, and your tax rates/brackets are adjusted based upon the current and near long-term liabilities of Social Security and Medicare.
The purpose of Social Security is self-explanatory. The program covers exogenous spending for elderly individuals who lack financial means. It isn't designed to supplement tax-deferred private retirement nor is it designed to function as an annuity. If we want Social Security to function as an annuity and we want Medicare to function as a defined benefit healthcare plan, the system needs to be overhauled, and we need to levy an enormous wealth tax on everyone over the age of 50.
The 401K and IRA systems were created to encourage people to save for their own retirement, thereby reducing the perverse incentives for individuals to under-tax themselves in the present and then over-tax their progeny. Unfortunately, many retirees have been able to keep SS benefits and enjoy tax-deferred pensions, which means they've been dodging taxes and inflating their benefits for decades.
To make matters worse, the residual benefits of this fraud are inherited by their descendants, often via real estate transfers, which means we have a tax program that redistributes wealth from the middle class to the trust fund class.
Given the plight of the American middle class over the previous decade, who could hypothesize a silver lining to this arrangement?
Hmmm. Very interesting, thought-provoking post. I'm going to mull on it a bit, and see if I disagree. Or agree. A lot of great stuff there. :)
Social security is actually more of a transfer program than anything else. Current payments go to current beneficiaries, or are loaned to the government (reduces today's deficit and need for additional taxes in current period, increases repayment expense for future taxpayers).
To call it an annuity would imply that it's one's own investment being paid back, whereas that is not at all the scheme of social security. *Admittedly, recipients are paying federal taxes other than payroll taxes, so some of their benefit is self-funded.
The only solution to sensibly re-structuring entitlement programs must be a dedicated source of funding, in the form of a consumption tax. That would enable the political will for both reform and for expansion of benefits to cover a broader swath of the population. It would have the added benefit of encouraging savings (reducing the need for benefits) and making domestic labor less expensive relative to foreign labor.
"Social security is actually more of a transfer program than anything else."
My understanding is that beneficiaries pay something like 90% of what they withdrawal, on average. So, the transfers are relatively low. Medicare, however, is a completely different deal.
"It would have the added benefit of encouraging savings (reducing the need for benefits)..."
I believe that was the original intent of IRAs and 401-Ks.
"beneficairies pay something like 90% of what they withdraw"
Yes, that would support the equity of the proposition, but I was speaking to the nature of it. An annuity is a return of funds invested arrangement (sort of a bailor-bailee scenario), whereas social security is a collective payor-payee arrangement. The benefits are not pre-funded by the beneficiary, but rather by current workers (future beneficiaries). Hence the largely accurate ponzi comparisons.
What would make SS more like a true annuity would be if the payroll taxes were invested in foreign government bonds or corporate bonds, with the proceeds of those bonds used to fund benefits.
"What would make SS more like a true annuity would be if the payroll taxes were invested in foreign government bonds or corporate bonds..."
I believe the funds have been invested in Treasuries.
I believe you're right, and that's the issue I'm pointing at--the funds are not 'invested' outside the government system. They're spent when collected, and an IOU is put on the books (Treasury obligations). When the Treasuries are called upon/redeemed to pay future benefits, the redemption must be paid from current tax receipts or additional borrowing by the government. This would be like a husband and wife deciding to loan each other money and count the IOU's as retirement savings.
Actually, I believe the Social Security Administration holds Treasuries. That is, they're not "IOUs", but rather bonds.
Lose benefits.
I love it. Pubplatus whisker-thinker is your best name ever. After that is Pompatus of the Faedrian Imperium. But yeah, I agree. Americans need to lose some of their benefits.
"they benefit... government social program... 94% had used at least one"
The author cites research that many Americans receive some spending or tax benefit from the federal government to support the conclusion that "Americans... benefit" from them. This is a popular, but flawed, argument in favor of various government expenditures. An individual's acceptance of a tax or spending benefit from the federal government is not inconsistent with that individual's belief or the actual fact that such benefit, and it's cost to the economy, are on net harmful to that individual. Even if one opposes various ways in which the federal fire hydrant spews forth money, one might as well put his hat out to catch some like everyone else. This flawed argument can be used erroneously to support collective actions large and small.
If I am out to dinner with friends, even if the benefit to me of having a drink is positive and less than the cost of sharing the price of drinks for the group, if the group decides to share the price drinks, I might as well have a drink.
If I was a Soviet citizen in the '80s, and the government was handing out small, unreliable, dirty cars, I might as well accept one, even if I believe, and it is in fact true, that my fellow citizens and I would all be better off if cars were produced and sold in a competitive market.
If I was an American retiree eligible for Medicare, even if I thought Medicare was a terrible idea and bad for the country, I might as well collect Medicare like all the other retirees. I might decide to use some of the fungible resources I obtain to lobby against the continuation of Medicare.
It's like being against the Designated Hitter rule in baseball and then being called a hippocrit for having one in your lineup when you play the game.
If the author is trying to make that point... it's a pretty weak one.
Very well put.
This article is all full of utility. I completely disagree with author's conclusion, if not some of the premises, but I think the analogy serves as a good foundational point in which to have an honest discussion of the role government ought to play in the individual's life.
There are some juicy statements in here to have good discussions on which get to the heart of the matter.
"AN INSURANCE company with an army. That is how some have described the American government. And for good reason."
The army itself is a retirement plan. A servicemember can complete 20 years of service by the age of 40. After that, he can receive a pension plan and health care for the next 40 years of his life assuming he lives to the age of 80. For every one year of service, he/she receives two years of pension. Some positions like infantry warrent it. Many positions are uniformed paper-pushers (I was one) do not.
"But when those respondents were asked about specific programmes—like Social Security, unemployment insurance, student loans and the home-mortgage interest deduction—94% had used at least one."
The last one- when did the home-mortgage interest deduction count as a "Social Program"? You want to go down that route, let's just call any money the government lets you keep as a "Social Program". I'm not necessarily an advocate for that specific deduction, but we start treating tax deductions as government handouts we start flipping the relationship between citizen and government. The government takes from the citizen via taxes, it doesn't give to the citizen via not taxing.
The home mortgage interest deduction is a social program because it is justified on the grounds that it is good for society if more people own their own homes. That's why you can deduct that, but not rent and not interest on things like car loans . . . not to mention not being able to deduct other expenses of life.
Actually, every deduction is justified because the government wants to encourage you to spend money on the things that it allows you to deduce. Otherwise, we would fund the government on a flat tax.
What you say all has the sound of logic but we're talking government here. The home mortgage deduction exists because politically any politician that speaks of abolishing it will themselves be abolished from office. Whatever "justifications" made during a debate are besides the point. If there were no home-mortgage deduction, effective tax rates would be higher, and the electorate would not tolerate it. Progressives here and there throw the idea around of abolishing it regardless of the "justification", but those progressives aren't running for office. It's why the 90% tax rate of the 1950s was accepted- because nobody really paid it because of the deductions involved. The effective tax rate was something different.
Your last paragraph shows the skewing of the language. The original purpose of taxation is to support the necessary functions of government. When the absence of taxation is converted to that "governments want to encourage", we're changing the relationship.
I support the government, and the government is my servant, not the other way around. If it's changed to where the government really supports me, then who is the servant in the relationship?
I was using "justification" for the home mortgage deduction in the sense of "why it was instituted in the first place." The reasons why it remains are, as you say, less about why it originated than what would happen if it was repealed. But those didn't apply before it existed.
The original purpose of taxation was indeed to support the functions of government. But deductions are no different than direct payments -- they are the government putting money into some things, rather than other things. "Absence of taxation" would be some things (income, property, imports, etc.) not being taxed. Once you tax them, deductions for some kind of expenditures are not absence of taxation; just allocation of resources that government gained by setting the tax rate.
The government is our collective servant. It doesn't really support you as an individual; it can't. It would be more accurate to say that it passes along support of others. And, like any servant passing along things, it charges for doing so.
I believe from your perspective, I really am paying a massively high tax rate and the Economist's stats about paying lower taxes than that of Europe are off the mark... Even though I may be paying an effective tax rate of say, 20%, I really am paying a tax rate of something closer to 35%. It's just that I'm getting a whole bunch of direct payments, i.e. tax deductions, that make it bearable.
I can go with that! 35% is too dam high!
It would definitely change the discource regarding taxes.
Set a rate (even a progressive set of rates) which will pay for the government, and eliminate all deductions. And the (headline) rates would be substantially lower that the current ones.
It sounds like there is only one downside: it will be really hard on the politicians if that level of transparency in what they spend money on comes into force. Pity that those are the people who would have to make the changes....
Amen to that Jouris.
Honesty sucks...
Damn I look GOOD- look at these guns! I don't understand why people want gun control. Makes me feel like I'm walking around illegal. I need to get these babies registered.
Yeah, honesty sucks.
" But when those respondents were asked about specific programmes—like Social Security, unemployment insurance, student loans and the home-mortgage interest deduction—94% had used at least one."
I think the question should have been - "if you were offered the cash value of those programs in tax rebates, would you opt out?". In the past, government benefits like social security made sense- you were at the top of the ponzi pyramid and could cash out good at the expense of the younger suckers. It is also true during times of low cost financing deficit spending, via the same mechanism. Party is always fun when someone else is paying for it.
However, it won't last forever. Social security is crossing the break even point when the number of suckers at the bottom is running out. Deficit financing can continue for a bit longer, i suppose, but it's pissing off old people. They want both Medicare and high interest CDs, when in truth you can have only one or the other.
Anyway, going forward, government benefits will cost more to society than the value they deliver, since it'll be more difficult t find nonexistent future people to pick up the tab. As it'll be happening, i expect people to change their view of government.
Many seem to assume that the social security crisis is an inherently permanent condition. When the generational football winds its way through the fiscal snake around 2030, things will appear much better again. That is, unless the true radicals eliminate social insurance entirely (which appears to be their real goal). Somewhere about 2050-2060, another generation will wake up and realize they got screwed and will eat dog food in their old age. Those who believe the future is an infinite bed of roses if only they make the right choices are the same delusional souls who believed "Dow 30,000".
Not so. It isn't the case that an enormously large generation will pass through and then the problem will be solved. The generations after are about as large, as immigration offset the baby bust.
We have a problem because we no longer have the temporary benefit of SMALL generations in old age, not because we have the burden of an unsually large generation approaching old age.
"Somewhere about 2050-2060, another generation will wake up and realize they got screwed and will eat dog food in their old age."
Because Generation Greed felt entitled to more than it was willing to pay for. The political divide within Generation Greed is whether those other generations should pay vastly more in tax, and have a vastly lower standard of living while working, or face deprivation in old age, because of what they have done. And both sides claim they are doing it for the children.
You are assuming that the same generation which is going to absorb all those benefits is going to be willing to decide that immigration ought to be increased. Substantially. But so far, they seem to be leading the charge to keep out "those people."
Not sure where to fit this comment-
Isn't there also an assumption that the new immigrants will want to continue the wealth transfers... You get off the boat, you break your butt off working, and some guy born here demands that you fund his pension via the state to pay for his McMansion because he's
"contributed" to the previous generation and now wants his in return.
What he is saying may be entirely true, but what does that have to do with you? Wouldn't you vote to shut down Social Security and utilize your taxes in some other fashion?
Not saying there's any chance of that politically happening- just noting that the premise that new American immigrants will feel obligated to support a 1930s/1960s wealth transfer agreement/insurance plan may be false. The people benefitting ain't their parents.
I've looked at CBO's SS projections - it's not looking pretty all the way out to 2085 without tax hikes or benefit cuts. To balance the thing, you'd need 15% tax hike. The question will become- is it worth it?
This is an education in the root of partisanship in America.
Republicans believe that benefits should decrease and believe they are preserving the taxation satus quo and the others are radical.
Democrats believe that taxation sould increase and believe they are preserving the benefit status quo and the others are radical.
A compromise would be to do a bit of both. Republicans dont believe in compromise so they grind the country to a halt trying to achieve all of their objective and none of the Democrat one.
Republcans believe in all sorts of things, including only they are Americans.
Republicans believe that...
Democrats believe that...
And those of us who don't belong to a party and are old enough to remember the last tax reform (under Reagan), know that "tax reform" is just a rest stop.
Even after the 1986 tax reform Congress STILL added more breaks for the special interest.
Kasich has his version in Ohio.
A small tax cut for the business and slapping taxes on anything that they can, in order to get more money back in order to pay for the HUGE tax cuts for big businesses.
COLUMBUS, Ohio - About 80 percent of Ohio's small-business owners potentially affected by Gov. John Kasich's proposal to slash income taxes would save $400 or less per year.
Basically, he's following the game plan that Bush did in 2001 for personal income tax cuts.
Didn't the Republicans agree on tax hikes for people making over $400k?
Yes they did and it might have given me hope except that they only did so at 'gunpoint' and then proceeded to kick the rest of the can (sequester) down the road whilst avoid solid compromise (grand bargain).
And @hedgefundguy - agreed.
And they also agreed on a 2% tax hike of all those making less than $100k.
The Social Security tax went back up 2% to about 6.1%
as it expired.
And @hedgefundguy - agreed.
Politicians and certain economists are funny.
When they want to transfer wealth from the lower earners to the upper earners, it's called "tax reform."
When others want to get the rich to pay their fair share (afterall, most laws they get passed benefit them), they jump up and down yelling, "Wealth Redistribution!" and start calling people socialists, populists, etc.
Well technically what they agreed to is to let some temporary cuts, which they had put in place earlier, expire. Then they reinstituted a smaller number of cuts. Granted, it's somewhat contorted "reasoning," but the contortions seem to be a minimum requirement.
It is almost funny if it wasnt so sad to see the contortions that politicians go through to justify a tax cut for the rich (tax reform as you say) as somehow benefitting everyone else.
There are two different rules: Tax cuts incentivise the rich to behave properly apparently while punishments (reducing benefits etc) are what is needed for the poor.
In the UK, tax evasion costs the government between 50 and 100 times more than social security fraud and yet fraud is targetted and droned on bout - tax evasion is ok.
How is that different from Democrats? For all the spending cuts i keep hearing about, federal budget continues to grow from the projections i've seen. What gives?
If you were reffering to my latter comment then it isnt, in this case all politicians are similarly corrupt.
If you refer to my earlier one then the differences is that Demoracts were willing to enter into 10:1 spending cuts / tax rises but Republicans refused. In other words the Dems took nine of the ten steps towards the republican position but one step towards the democrat position was one step too far for Republicans.
Was 10:1 deal an actual proposal, or a debate question? Don't get me wrong, Republicans would have been stupid to reject such a deal if it actually was proposed. From what I've seen though, it was just silly campaign rhetoric. Sort of like Obama voting against debt ceiling increase in 2006.
Allow me to elucidate, Omricon.
Republicans know that entitlements must be reformed. Democrats know that entitlements must be reformed. The global economic community knows that US entitlements must be reformed.
Republicans have been waiting for this day since 1981. Democrats have been dreading this day since 1981.
Democrats must concoct a political subterfuge to obfuscate their political blockade of entitlement reform for the last 30 years by painting their opposition as racist, sexist, homophobic, war-mongering, senior-citizen-killers. The same political subterfuge must also mask reforms. For instance, Obamacare is really just a penny-dreadful attempt to reform Medicare and Medicaid, while creating the illusion of universal health insurance with an imaginary public option.
The sad reality is that Democrats will benefit if socialism actually works, but they are so distrusting of the common man, they can't reform anything for fear of electoral backlash. They would rather perpetuate your political stupor and deflect your rage to the doorstep of the Republican party, while they figure out how to package and sell the reforms they've filibustered for decades.
This is not to say that the Democratic platform is wrong, but their rhetoric is socially destructive, and the fundamental lack of accountability within the party and its constituency is alarming, to say the least.
That is a little partisan. I think democrats could have introduced some very decent entitlement reform for example in the form of 'death panels' eg the sensible rationing of healthcare as is the case in most other western systems (like NICE in the UK) which are cheaper and more successful than the US. In this as with most cases the Republicans were more interested in shooting down Obamacare than working with democrats on the cost side of healthcare and the democrats were cowards to work with Bush on Medicare Part D.
Republicans balked at Obamacare provisions, like death panels, b/c they are markedly worse than any 'Darwinistic' market-based proposals made during a Republican administrations. Furthermore, the proposed body of reforms were not consistent with one another. Pre-existing conditions cannot be denied, but the government has the right to examine the cost-benefit of your life and adjust treatments? Democrats were not working on the cost-side of healthcare services; instead, they were working on acquiring new governmental powers.
I don't care about the platform differences between the parties, which are akin to a debate regarding the merits of diet or exercise to cure obesity. However, I am genuinely gobsmacked by the ineptitude and lack of leadership from the Democratic Party. The party has been overrun by beta-personalities, and the aimless meanderings of US policy initiatives are a reflection of the party's inadequacy.
The centerleft government in Denmark has just announced it's newest competitiveness improvement reform. Corporate taxes and fees to be reduced and more public spending on infrastructure. All of it financed via cuts to entitlements and less spending on the public sector until 2020. Basically, there will be tough budget control, productivity improvement reforms and tough prioritizing decisions there simultaneously will increase spending on research and education.
It is worth mentioning, that if we take the population size into account has the Danish government managed to identify money reprioritizing for a larger amount of money on an annual basis compared to the amount of money that USA is reducing it's budgets via the Sequester.
Seems to me, that in Denmark are we reducing the entitlements in the mandatory programs and eliminating low value public programs in order to finance tax cuts and increased investment via discretionary spending upon growth generating activities (infrastructure, science, education)
Seems to me, that In USA are the politicians reducing discretionary investments into future growth in the hope they can avoid cuts in entitlements while the risk increase for future tax increases due to the massive US budget deficit
"The truth is that ultimately Americans have a choice: raise taxes or lose some of their benefits."
I heard a statistic recently that the wealthiest 550 Americans have more wealth than the next 150 million.
I say we raise taxes.
How dare you! Haven't you heard? - The Market in America is Free.
All this tells me is that 150 million consume more than they produce. Troubling? Sure. But not for the reasons you are implying.
Are you really trying to say that that wealthiest 550 produced as much as they were paid? Because justifying that value add for all of them is going to be a real challenge.
As long as they did so without putting a gun to anybody's heads, yes, they did. You may not like Bill Gates, WalMart family, or Kochs, but a lot of people like PCs, shopping, and toilet paper. To the extent that they used government to get their way, it is wrong, but fundamentally, they make a product that people (maybe not you in particular) like, so they earn keep.
"All this tells me is that 150 million consume more than they produce."
So, if you're not worth $60 billion, you consumed more than you produced?
"How dare you! Haven't you heard? - The Market in America is Free."
I heard on a program on NPR recently, that's it's nearly impossible for auto companies to legally compete with local auto sales firms, and/or to break a contract with them, given that the latter are usually protected by local laws from such competition.
So, I guess it's not THAT free. :)
Well, strictly speaking, i believe that if every person on the planet had produced $60 billion worth of goods and services for their fellow human beings, world would be a fantastical paradise. Unfortunately, it seems like too much to expect, but the greater the number the better. More to the point, if you look at wealth distribution, you'll see that those closer to the bottom are either negative or zero. That is troubling.
"More to the point, if you look at wealth distribution, you'll see that those closer to the bottom are either negative or zero [production of wealth]."
According to this, bottom 40% have negative household net worth. That means they consume more than they produce. The next 20% are slightly better, but I bet their numbers are skewed to the top.
"According to this, bottom 40% have negative household net worth. That means they consume more than they produce."
Actually, no.
Many of those on the list bought a home at the top of the housing market, took a mortgage out on that loan, the value of the home dropped precipitously, and they now owe more than the value of the home.
See Nevada, California, Florida, Arizona, and a number of other states.
However, it does not mean that they consume more than they produce. They're still consuming the same amount of square feet of the home. It's just that they value of the home dropped.
What's the benefit to society as a whole? A few minutes of wealth redistribution, after which, the American consumer returns all funds to the American producer, who utilizes the redistributive tax policy (demand subsidy) to shift larger amounts of surplus to the producers?
The problem is not money. The problem is productivity, and the inadequacy of the current relationship between the educational markets (compulsory and elective higher education) and the labor markets. All of the risks associated with worker training and employment 'signalling' are focused on the laborer. A majority of the training benefits are being focused on the producer.
This has nothing to do with the hegemony of the wealthy, and everything to do with the market failures that are created, ignored, and sponsored by government officials.
There's some of that, I'm sure, but even for bottom 90% (financial, non-home) wealth is not looking very hot either. Data from 2006 is slightly better, but still pretty poor.
"...after which, the American consumer returns all funds to the American producer..."
Anybody gainfully employed, including a stay-at-home mom and the retiree working in his/her garden and taking care of an elderly parent, is a producer.
Talk about producers and non, like the "makers and takers" argument, is an appeal to tribalism, an argument created to impact folks emotionally, and not helpful to the broader discussion regarding policy, IMHO.
Per my note to L3x, talk about producers and non, like the "makers and takers" argument, is primarily an emotional appeal to tribalism, and doesn't really apply to discussions regarding policy, IMHO.
So, if you're a mechanic in the Bronx, you're a producer.
And, if you're a stay-at-home mom taking care of the kids and an elderly parent, you're a producer.
Therefore, to say that someone isn't a producer because he/she doesn't have $60 billion in net assets, like Warren Buffet, is a specious argument, IMHO
D18, I haven't read anything yet in this thread after my last reply to your reply. This is just to respond in the same spirit as the previous one: How dare you watch NPR. That is the Station of Yellow Big Bird. Big Bird distorts reality. Didn't your parents tell you that?
On "Free", whether something is FREE or not, is entitlement or not, is insurance or not, is a Q established by an emphatic declaration. "It is because I say it is". All facts are by established by emphatic declarations. Didn't your parents tell you that too?? Shame on you! :)
Ash, I must admit that I did listen to NPR (aka, National People's Radio), once.
However, my conservative bonafides are still intact.
I understand, for example, that the best way to win an argument is to say the same thing over and over, and eventually IN CAPS!, and to ply the other side with continued ad hominems until the opposition quits in frustration, at which point I claim victory now and forever, amen.
"the "makers and takers" argument, is primarily an emotional appeal to tribalism, and doesn't really apply to discussions regarding policy, IMHO."
It has no place, yet, you've still fallen prey to its siren's song.
I was referring to a singular transaction with a producer/supplier and a consumer/demander of goods and services. If you had read the entire post, you would have gained a better understanding of the context as a referred to the labor productivity of the aforementioned consumer. Furthermore, if you had continued reading to gain greater contextual understanding, you would have realized that, if there is such a thing as a 'taker', this phenomenon is created by a government-sponsored imbalance in the consumptive and productive marketplaces, imo. A redistributive tax would only exacerbate the situation as so demand subsidies before it.
I made no emotional appeal to tribalism nor did I make a specious argument about stratifying the worth of individuals by their wealth. I said that demand subsidies are an ineffective means to help someone who has trouble making his revenues exceed his expenses. Demand subsidies actually shift the balance of surplus away from the middle class.
L3x, I commended you yesterday for a thought-provoking post, which I appreciated.
However, I'm unclear where this last one came from. It reminds me of the observation that academic disagreements are so emotional because the stakes are so low.
In short, you need to chill.
BTW, I'd politely suggest that providing nutrition to the children of poor families is not a "demand subsidy".
It's food.
So they bought houses they shouldn't have been able to afford. And anyway, you're not really suggesting that 40% of people bought houses as values were at their highest, are you?
No. It means they bought houses which dropped in value.
BTW, the mortgage companies gave them mortgages, and the banks bought the mortgages, and banks created CDOs with the mortgages, and more banks created virtual CDOs with the mortgages, and other banks provided SWAPS (i.e. CDO insurance) for the mortgages, for houses which dropped in value.
In fact, as far as I know, virtually every house in the US, from 2008 to 2011, dropped in value.
"The truth is that ultimately Americans have a choice: raise taxes or lose some of their benefits."
Lalalala, or raise prosperity for the bulk of the population making < $80k. That means pushing wages up.
Then resolve health v cost.
PS, How much of the military budget is health care?
If employers aren't hiring NOW because US workers are not competitive compared to those in China or Vietnam or whatever, how many people do you think are going to lose their jobs if keeping existing workers becomes more expensive for employers?
If employers aren't hiring NOW because US workers are not competitive compared to those in China or Vietnam or whatever, how many people do you think are going to lose their jobs if keeping existing workers becomes more expensive for employers?
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the value of the productivity gains of the last 30 years have gone to executives and shareholders, while the basic worker has seen their prosperity erode.
If workers can't afford stuff, then they don't have much to tax.
And business can't sell stuff to po' folk.
Henry Ford understood this.
"PS, How much of the military budget is health care?"
My ex-military dad recently had a heart attack, and two ambulances showed up when he called 911.
My dad was also quite happy about how little the whole thing cost him.
If you stay in long enough, the military's a sweet gig.
"If employers aren't hiring NOW because US workers are not competitive compared to those in China or Vietnam or whatever..."
Chinese and Vietnamese labor costs of about $10/day gives a sense of their relative productivity, and competitiveness.
Per capita incomes in the US, in the meantime, are about $50,000/year.
But insurance, really, is the federal government's "core business".
You've got that right!
We insure that export nations can safely manufacture and transport their goods to our shores. (And we don't even charge them for that service.)
We insure that those whose main source of income is capital gains pay a lower rate. (Saint Reagan said 28% was low enough, and people still invested at that rate.)
We insure that lobbyists have access to our politicians.
We insure that banks stay afloat and profitable.
We insure that people who live in hurricane areas get new infrastructure.
We insure that pharmaceutical companies can charge Medicare a high rate.
We insure...
(The list is endless.)
I think you mean ensure (or was the post a pun?)
Nonetheless you are correct
I figured if our blogger can allude to the
gov't insuring that social benefits are paid,
instead of ensuring that the benefits are paid....
Goose, gander, you know the old saying.
"But Americans have a poor understanding of how this core business works, and how they benefit. Instead of thinking about entitlement programmes as insurance against economic hardship, they think of them as a kind of charity that goes to other people. They are quick to scold others for taking "handouts", unaware that they are stretching out their own hands."
You bet. The Republican Party has desperately driven that outrageous wedge between groups of poor and middle class Americans with identical economic interests - with the help of racism, of course - because they would be dead meat if those voters, united, ever caught on to what they've been up to.
But that game is nearly over, and if the GOP doesn't change, it is dead meat.
Hayek approved of comprehensive, government-provided social insurance, including health care. Read *all* of The Road to Serfdom, and you can't miss it, because it's discussed in a whole chapter.
bampbs is to the race card as great uncle clive is to the homemaker's allowance. A post about insurance? Republicans are racist! A post about the post office? Republicans are racist! A post about racist Democrats? No such thing. Only Republicans are racist.
As for the Road to Serfdom, I really doubt you've read it. He discusses state insurance against "acts of God" including accidents in one paragraph. The rest of chapter 9 is devoted to arguing against income insurance.
bampbs it's time to get yourself on back to the Karl Rove 50+1 thought train. He's been annoying that blonde-headed bimbo, Greta Van Susteren, for the first few minutes (ago) of her show with his stupid little whiteboard of meaningless statistics ever since he erroneously predicted Romney would win Ohio.
Why did she even broadcast one of her shows from North Korea? It's not like she changed anything. We still have a broad nuclear threat regardless of her best effort. And what did her (Benghazi) interview with Hillary Clinton accomplish? Nothing.
The Economist writes:
"The problem is that America cannot make meaningful cuts to federal spending without hacking away at some of its core insurance business. ...
... The truth is that ultimately Americans have a choice: raise taxes or lose some of their benefits."
- - - - -
The problem is that America's institutions of democracy are dysfunctional.
Americans need to be able to vote on issues of public importance directly. The Swiss learned this along, long time ago, and adopted a very clever system of government.
America badly needs fiscal reform.
It needs democratic reform even more.
Californicate the whole country? No thank you.
Isn't California out of debt right now? I suppose it would be hard for a conservative to want to elect an overwhelming democratic majority and then balance the budget.
Time to move on to Greece as a backup.
I didn't know you opposed gay marriage. Oh you meant you only support the liberal stuff that California does and we should all ignore the illiberal stuff. Got it.
I don't need to but I could move on to Illinois where Democrats hold an overwhelming majority. I know you have this knee-jerk impulse to defend liberalism and the Democratic Party but I didn't criticize either. I criticized direct democracy.
Sorry, you're right. My bad.
California does not have a system of government like Switzerland, although a century ago they put in place features that a superficially similar.
Swiss government works because the government always has the right to propose modified initiatives; the rigth to force a vote means the politiicans cannot keep kicking problems down the road; and the right to force a vote prevents well funded interest groups from simply buying a majority of votes in the legislature as happens in America. The corporatisation of government, which is what has led to legislative gridlock in America, is simply not possible when the voters have the final say.
It is a subtle and clever system of government - and it works exceptionally well.
California has the right to force a vote. It means untold sums of special interest group money is poured in. Instead of paying off a few politicians, you now need to court everyone. Californians are always complaining about how some group spent so much money to affect the vote.
I have recommmended Swiss government, not government as in California.
But you seem determined to misrepresent and confuse, so continue on ...
And I gave you an actual example of it failing in the US but you keep on insisting that the US needs to Swissify.
America once had a very powerful check on the central government -- the right of its sovereign member states to secede. It's hard to imagine that one coming back on any terms we'd find palatable but we need not a swiss model when there's a perfectly useful homegrown version.
Not so hard to believe. When we complain about the hypocrisy of politicians who adhere to ideology over evidence, we forget that we are largely seeing the preferences and thought processes of the electorate writ large.
I agree with RR in the sense that far too many of the social welfare programs no longer serve social insurance purposes. Social security is one that has turned into a pure transfer and pension program rather than the old-age insurance program it was designed to be. Regardless of the merits of such an initiative, it's clearly not something that needs to be solved with collective (i.e. government) action. On the other hand, there are plenty of legitimate social insurance schemes out there that should be preserved, albeit with a modicum of reforms (e.g., delay UI payments until after a certain amount of time).
Let's clear something up. Insurance is risk-pooling. Charity is cost-shifting. Not the same thing. Our entitlements have both. The confusion contributes to the problem. People feel entitled to benefits vastly more generous than a sober accounting of risk and contributions would allow. And yet many want to promote the confusion to strengthen public support for the program and if it ends up costing too much, hey we can always tax the rich. I hold the uncommon view it seems. If it's just insurance, leave it up to the free market. If it's charity, I can support it.
Should we name SSDI something other than Social Security Disability Insurance?
So Social Security is charity for everybody who did not, in fact, pay into it over the years as much as they are taking out of it. Which certainly was true for most people for the first half century of its existance (and may still be). Got it.
Perhaps we should also include investment. Government supplied education is an investment in future generations. Basic Healthcare could be seen as investment in the working population (we can haggle over the definition of basic). Programs that reduce crime and poverty could, under the correct guidance be seen as investment, but may include payments to the poor (cheaper then keeping criminals in prison). Cost benefit analyses would need to be performed, but once you agree that, as a country, we need certain things (low crime, infrastructure, educated citizens, healthy citizens etc), then certain payments become investment, even if you think the payments themselves are onerous, they are cheaper than the alternative.
Meth money.
I don't know why people assume it'll save money. Vaccinations could. Kidney dialysis? Probably not.
I think it's actually dangerous to advertise it as an investment. So what if cost-benefit analysis shows that it won't save money? Let people die? Americans are too adverse to the word "charity." We need charity. Lots of it. And it won't pay back.
I am trying to follow your reasoning and define what constitutes charity, as opposed to insurance.
Let us consider unemployment benefits, and contributions to them. Statistically, poor people tend to experience unemployment more often than non-poor people. However, their contributions to unemployment benefits schemes are considerably lower than those of the non-poors, at least on a per-capita basis. So should we dramatically increase poor people's contributions to the scheme, in line with their statistical chance of losing their jobs? Basically a flat tax?
As an added layer of complexity, while poor people's individual contributions to unemployment benefits are low taken individually, the unfortunately large number of poor people does result in a not-so-insignificant collective contribution by poor people to the scheme's pool. Large enough that it could, in times of low unemployment, be enough to cover the needs of this at-risk segment of the labour force.
Do we then accept that unemployment benefits are charity because of business cycles and their disproportionate impacts on poor people's level of employment? Or do we treat it as insurance and simply increase premia in times of full employment and cut them during recessions and recoveries?
If you have to think about how to design it to help the poor, there's probably some charity involved. You can have charity in insurance just as you can have charity in any business. But they're not the same thing was my point and we should recognize that entitlements involve both.
Insurance doesn't require the insurer to profit off or break even on every policy, only that it probably will. It doesn't matter if it's one person or a million. More policyholders means you'll get closer to the expected probability in reality but it doesn't change the equation.
Ideally, we'd have compulsory savings instead of unemployment insurance. If we must have insurance, we can mandate private insurance.
I did say we could haggle over the definition of basic. I was adding a third arm to your description. Not everything would be seen as investment and a lot of things would be charity, but it is wrong to assume that many payouts, even those that are superficially charity, aren't investment.
We go through this same recitation over and over and no one listens.
There are two basic reasons why people don't listen:
1. Inability to comprehend.
2. Refusal to believe.
Let's assume the first doesn't apply, that Americans are capable of basic math, Fox & Friends excepted. That leaves refusal to believe.
Why refuse to believe? Because other belief conflicts and that other belief says something else must be true.
You can't get believers to listen by reciting facts. Won't happen.
It doesn't have to be a refusal to believe, necessarily. You just define what you get from the government as something you paid for and are entitled to. As opposed to what others get, which is defined as unearned, and undeserved, charity. That's what leads to signs like "Government hands off my Medicare!"
So it isn't even a matter of (futilely) reciting facts. The definitions have to change in order to get anywhere.
Just change the labels - A horse is a cow, a cow is a sheep, a sheep is a goat, a goat is a dog, a dog is a monkey, a monkey is a disability, a disability is charity, charity is left, left is not right, right is insurance, insurance is golden parachute, golden parachute is free market, free market is America. Voila!
You can get believers to listen by changing the paradigm of the belief. That's a lot easier said than done, similar to someone changing his/her religion. My humble hypothesis is this: Medicare subscribers view their enrollment as a reward for "working hard and playing by the rules." My evidence is the 30% of Americans who believe "the government should get their hands off my Medicare." It's not a proven hypothesis, though, so fire away.
"Just change the labels - A horse is a cow,..."
They tried this in Europe. But I don't think that it worked out too well.
I bet Mr. Jenkins gives you an A!
An insurance business with an army and a printing press to pay the claims.
Thoughts and opinions on America's kinetic brand of politics. The blog is named after Alexis de Tocqueville's study of American politics and society
The Economist explains: Who would pay a "mansion tax"
The Economist explains
Football and British politics: David Cameron's own goal
Game theory
Britain's election campaign: April 26th: The silence of David Cameron
The week ahead: A very normal affair
Football and politics: David Cameron's own goal
America's Ukrainian mission: Training wheels
Have you listened to The Economist Radio on Facebook?
The Economist Radio is an on-demand social listening platform that allows you to listen, share and recommend The Economist audio content
Test your EQ
Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines
Want more from The Economist?
Visit The Economist e-store and you'll find a range of carefully selected products for business and pleasure, Economist books and diaries, and much more


text:
From "binders full of women" to Clint Eastwood's empty chair, here are some of the best memes of the 2012 election.
The views expressed are not those of this site, this station or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments you agree to accept our terms of use.blog comments powered by Disqus

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Top Definition
When a dude stretches his scrotum tightly to one testicle and displays it. He could put it right next to a sleeping person's face, for instance. You could also just tightly wrap it to two testicles.
Dude, get your rat brain out of my face.
Joe W.가 작성
2004년 10월 10일 (일)
2 more definitions
When a man squeezes his balls so that the scrotum bunches up slightly and takes on the appearance, shape, and texture of brains.
Carl pulled his balls out and showed everyone his rat brains.
Crabkilla2001가 작성
2009년 01월 16일 (금)
When wearing shorts you pull out one nut to show a suprised victim, thus ratbrain.
"Hey man wanna see a ratbrain?"
"Huh, a what...oh ewwww!!!"
"Huh, a what...oh ewwww!!!"
the killa가 작성
2003년 10월 25일 (토)


text:
"The Smithsonian Bird," a prehistoric porphyry granite birdstone that is considered the finest discovered thus far could sell for as much as $600,000 in a June 23, 2012 auction hosted by Dan Ripley. Its name is derived from the fact that it was once part of the permanent collection at the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian in Washington, D.C. Read More +
Tag Archives: artifact sale
Butterfly bannerstone brings $245K in Native American artifact auction
INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – Smashing auction records was the name of the game when Dan Ripley's Antique Helper Auctions offered Part I, approximately one quarter, of the Townsend collection of Native American artifacts for sale Dec. 3, 2011. Popeye birdstone. … Read More +


text:
AACD Past President, Jeff Golub-Evans, Remembered For Work as a Fine Artist
Best known for the now-iconic AACD Celebration of Excellence statuette, past president Jeff Golub-Evans is being remembered for his work as a productive fine artist. Dr. Golub-Evans, who died Aug. 1, 2013, had his work featured in a show called "Im 'Print" at The Gallery at Hunt Hill Farm in New Milford, CT. The Sunday, August 21, edition of the New York Times posted a notice about the artist's showing and featured an image of Evans' "Big Apple" linocut. Dentist-and-artist Evans also opened his studio in Warren for a lino and woodcut hands-on demonstration.
"In truth, there is not any art piece, gallery show, or museum placement that I have done," said Evans, "that has meant as much to me--or that gave me as much joy--as the creation of the award for an Academy which nurtured me, guided me, taught me, and befriended me through the years. I am forever grateful that I was given the opportunity to give back to the Academy which has done so much for us all."


text:
Pokéstar Studios
this wiki
Pokéstar Studios ポケウッド Pokéwood | |
Information about Pokéstar Studios | |
Region: | Unova |
Connecting locations: | ↓ South - Virbank City |
Weather: | Normal |
Kind: | Area |
Needed HM: | None |
Pokéstar Studios is an area in southwestern Unova situated north of Virbank City whose function as a movie studio replaces the Pokémon Musical function of Black and White in Pokémon Black and White Versions 2, allowing the player to choose a script and enact various scenes to create a movie. Roxie's father appears in one movie but fails to obtain a good ending. The bad outcome makes him give up on an acting career. Sabrina co-stars with you in the Mystery Doors of the Magical Land series and Brycen in the Brycen-man series created in the PStudios.
[show]Making movies
To make a movie, the player walks into an area with a green screen and faces a person in a motion capture suit. Here the player enters a battle scene where he/she uses their Pokémon against the character in the motion capture suit.
In battle, the player will get a variety of script options to follow and these options will determine the course of the movie. Once the script is run through, the movie is complete and the player can watch the result.
Special Shine
After you've completed a movie, you have the ability to enter the movies with your own Pokémon. However, if you deviate from the script and say things out of character but ultimately don't fail the mission, then you will get the "Strange" ending of the movies. An example would be defeating Brycen-man's Pokémon within the "Brycen-man Strikes Back" movie.
If you successfully accomplish this, your Pokémon will have a special intro animation that will show a star bouncing upwards as the Pokémon enters battle.
This also will make the crowd happier if the Pokémon with the special shine is in another movie.
If your shiny party Pokémon participate in "strange" ending movies then their sparkling upon entering battle will no longer appear, instead being replaced by the bouncing star introduction only.
In the anime
Pokéstar Studios debuted in the anime episode BW084.
List of PokeStar/Pokewood Movies series
1: Brycen-man Series.-Super Hero Films.- Action/Adventure
2: Full Metal Cop Series.-Thief Villain Films.-Adventure
3: Invaders Series.-Space Cadet/City Protector Hero Films.-Sci-Fi/Action
4: Big Monster Series.- Space Cadet/City Protector Hero Films.-Sci-Fi/Action
5: Time Gate Traverler Series.- Scientist/Lab Professor Hero Films.- Sci-Fi
6: Spainsh-Amor a Primera Vista Engish- Traniner and Pokémon, That love Series.- School Kid/Student Hero Films.- Horror/Romance
7: German-Die Pforten des Zauberreichs Engish- The Magical Kingdom's Mysterious Door Series.- Royalty Hero Films.- Fantasy
8: Japanese: The Giant Woman!- Engish- OL The Giant!! Series.- School Kid/ Student Hero Films.- Horror
9:Italian-La Nebbia Rossa- Engish-The Nightmarish Red Mist Or The Red Mist Series.-School Kid/Student Hero Films- Horror
10: An Unforgettable Memory Series.-Scientist/Lab Professor Hero Films- Sci-Fi
11: Ghost Eraser Series.-School kid/Student Hero Films- Horror/Sci-Fi
All Movies Are In Order.
List of Parodies
- Full Metal Cop is a parody of RoboCop or Full Metal Jacket.
- Big Monster is a parody of Godzilla.
- Time Gate Traveler is a parody of Planet of the Apes and The Time Machine.
- The Giant Woman is a parody of the Attack of the 50 Foot Woman.
- Ghost Eraser is a parody of Ghost Busters.
List of costumes
1:Rilou Kid/Rilou Girl.
2:The Space Cadet/City Protector.
3:Lab Professor/Scientist.
5:School Kid/Student.
6: Thief Villain.
Pokéstar sprites
Back Sprites | |||||
Back Sprites | |||||


text:
Navy living out its 'heyday,' but rough seas ahead
Friday - 1/18/2013, 6:12am EST
Jared Serbu reports on the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium
With several serious budget puzzles on the table and no immediate solution at hand, there are a lot of gloomy faces in the Pentagon at the moment. Robert Work, the undersecretary of the Navy, is not one of them — he thinks the Navy's better off than at any point since World War II.
Work often makes the case that, yes, today's Navy is smaller than it was a few decades ago when counted by its numbers of ships and sailors, but it's also vastly more capable. He made that argument in forceful fashion Wednesday to an audience at the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium in Arlington, Va.
"Yes, things might get worse. In fact, they probably will get worse. But this is the heyday of the U.S. Navy," he said. "And, if you're not excited, you ain't breathing."
In the 1980s, the Pentagon wanted to build a fleet of ships numbering 600 in size. It never got there. By Work's reckoning, the size of the surface fleet topped out in 1989. DoD's 2014 budget, he said, will call for a fleet of about 300.
But Work unleashed a barrage of figures over the course of about 30 minutes, making the case that it's time to stop worrying about sheer numbers. He said it's the characteristics of the ships that matter, not just how many there are.
For instance, he said, the Navy has focused its surface fleet dollars on building high-end cruisers and destroyers, and across the fleet, ships are more standardized than ever before, leading to lots of efficiencies in resourcing and training. They're also linked together in cyberspace in a way that no potential adversary's fleet can match.
"People say we're having a lot of problems. But they forget that back then, you had to worry about steam power plants, you had to worry about all different types of maintenance paths. I cannot imagine an officer saying they would rather fight in the 1989 surface fleet over the fleet we have now, given the capabilities we have," he said. "Yes, we are down by a total of about 28 ships, which buys you about seven ships present all the time. We have fewer ships, but we're building up."
"They'll wake up crying every two hours"
Even while cheerleading the Navy's current capabilities, Work freely acknowledged the future is likely to be less rosy, with Congress and the President facing March deadlines to come up with an alternative to sequestration and to deal with an expiring continuing resolution.
With so many moving parts to the various budget deadlines that will come together in March, it's foolish to make predictions about what the political process will yield, Work said, but he did so anyway.
His guess is that DoD will remain under a continuing resolution for the rest of the year, but that there will be a deal to avert the automatic budget cuts.
"I can't imagine that Congress will let [sequestration] happen," he said to the audience in attendance. "It could. But we are planning as if sequestration occurs and a year-long continuing resolution occurs. And if that happens, ladies and gentlemen, the world as we know it will end. There's just no way that you'll be able to keep the Navy whole or the Marine Corps whole if that happens. No way. So if anybody tells you just take the shave, we're bloated, blah, blah, blah. Tell them to come sit in my shoes for maybe half an hour. They'll sleep like a baby. They'll wake up crying every two hours too."
The Pentagon already has directed the Navy to make plans to cancel all ship maintenance availabilities in the second half of the fiscal year in case the impact of the two pending budget emergencies coincide. If sequestration happens, procurement budgets would be immediately reduced by roughly 9 percent as with all other accounts in the DoD budget. The Navy believes it would have to cancel hard-fought, multi-year agreements for shipbuilding, since it would no longer have sufficient funds to pay suppliers under the original terms of the competition.
But like the other military services, the Navy's also worried about the readiness impacts of a sudden funding cut in the middle of the fiscal year. Work said the Navy's people are stretched thin as it is.
"Operational tempo right now is killing the Navy," he said. "We do not have enough time to do the maintenance we need to do, we do not have enough time to train. We need to exercise and test, we just don't have the time to do so. There's a very major push to keep more carriers out all of the time, and that kind of sucks [operations and maintenance funding] out that way. And you cannot scrimp on maintenance. So what's the right mix between manning, operations and training? It is tough."


text:
Image may not necessarily represent the actual item -Please read the title and description before purchasing.
Our Price: $43.02
The Black Widow holster is a compact belt slide with the security of a thumb break. The open muzzle design provides for pistols of the same model with different barrel lengths to be carried. Widely spaced belt slots allow the pistol to ride close to the body for both comfort and concealability. Fits most popular revolvers and autos. Available in tan or black unlined finish.
Please Note: This description may represent a general group of products. Please read the item's title and specifications for more specific information about this particular item.
Type : Belt HolsterColor : TanMaterial : LeatherSize : Fits Belts up to 1 3/4"Model : Black Widow Concealment Holster 5Finish : SmoothGun Mod : Fits For Glock 20,21,29 and 30.Add Mod : N/A
DISCLAIMER: GLOCK is a federally registered trademark of GLOCK, Inc. and is one of many trademarks owned by GLOCK, Inc. or GLOCK Ges.mbH. Neither Hinterland Outfitters nor this site are affiliated in any manner with, or otherwise endorsed by, GLOCK, Inc. or GLOCK Ges.mbH. The use of GLOCK on this page is merely to advertise the sale of GLOCK pistols, parts, or components. For genuine GLOCK, Inc. and GLOCK Ges.mbH products and parts visit www.glock.com.
Reviews of Bianchi Black Widow Ultra High Ride Holster w/Dual Slots & Open Muzzle, Tan, Model 16862, For Glock 20, 21, 29 & 30.
As thanks for your feedback, we will send you a $5 coupon code for writing a product review!
Just click the 'Write Review' button on the product's information page.
Enter your UPS tracking number to track your order
Firearms | Handguns | Rifles | Shotguns | Tactical Rifles | Tactical Shotguns | All Manufacturers


text:
Photographs of the Barrington Hills Area
Books about Barrington Area History
History of Cook County, Illinois
Andreas, A.T.
Stowaway to Heaven
Barsumian, Nazareth Sarkis
They Builded Better Than They Knew
Benson, Barbara L.
Echoes of a Century
First Baptist Church (Barrington, IL).
A Club in the Country: The Story of Barrington Hills Country Club
Schmitz, Patty Dowd.
Hark Back to Barrington: Fifty Years with the Fox River Valley Hunt
Fitch, Victoria R., and D. Susan Johnson.
A History of Barrington, Illinois
Lines, Arnett C.
Tales of Old Barrington
Sharp, Cynthia Baker


text:
Greenpeace activists prevent Europe's largest fishing PFA vessel, the 'Margiris KL749, a Dutch owned super trawler sailing under Lithuanian flag from leaving IJmuiden port. The activists occupy the anchor chain and stay there since Wednesday 27 June. They hang two banners at the ship reading "STOP exporting overcapacity! Greenpeace" and "The sea gives the Margiris plunders". These ships catch such enormous amounts of fish that the local fishery community in the countries of where they fish close by get into problems.06/28/2012
© Greenpeace / Cris Toala Olivares
133 - 144 of 178 results.
Sign the petitionFind out more
Take action now
Sign the petition now


text:
Off-Road Sport Pedal
Shimano M520 MTB SPD Pedals are an open design pedals at an economical price. The open binding mechanism is designed to better shed mud. Low maintenance sealed bearing cartridge axle.
Look at other great pedals we have to offer.
Really good pedals, easy in easy out. Im really happy with them
I was looking for some super cheap shimano pedals so I wouldnt have to use another pair of shoes to throw on my beater bike and these are just as nice as my deore xt's
Great entry-level clipless, these are the first pair I've owned and learned on. My buddy has xtr pedals and these by far have more pro's, like better space between clips to allow dirt and mud to fall threw. Less money, with not a big difference between xtr and xt. easier in and out. I ride with the tension all the way out so I can pull my foot out in an emergency bail situation and never once have gotten hung up. I stay clipped in unless I click out even with minimal tension, which is a plus by how fast and smooth you can hurry and pull out of the clip if you're trail riding and are about to tip over, bail, or wreck. These pedals have given me confidence in riding clipless because of the fast releasing capability
I have this set of pedals in my training bike, the maintenence its so simple, just need some soap, wáter and dw40, an ready to go....
Best deal I've found on these pedals.
I saw the price on these pedals and decided it's time to go clipless. The overall quality is good and weight is not bad. so far so good.
AWESOME! Don't wait, don't hesitate to go clipless! I recently started commuting to work daily. Today was my first ride clipless. The M520 is a great product! Extra efficient! Simple to install, simple to lock in and release! I bought these along with the Setta Element MTB Shoe. Great pairing, great price, fast delivery!!!
AWESOME! Don't wait, don't hesitate to go clipless! I recently started commuting to work daily. Today was my first ride clipless. The M520 is a great product! Extra efficient! Simple to install, simple to lock in and release! I bought these along with the Setta Element MTB Shoe. Great pairing, great price, fast delivery!!!
Excellent pedals. Easy to clip in and out. Easy to adjust the tension. Also the cleats that these pedals use are very common and very durable which is a plus. Finally, the pedals are nearly indestructible. My first set lasted over 10 years and probably could have gone longer if I bothered to take them apart and grease the bearings.
Seems like a great pedal for the money, but I have two sets and one had to be returned only after a few hundred miles one developed an annoying tick that got louder and more frequent. They were replaced on warranty, but the replacement and other set occasionally tick sometimes...
For the price, you cannot beat this pedal. I have ridden several models (Time Atac, WTB Stealth, Speedplay Frog) and these are my favorites. Not only do they hold up well, require no maintenance, look great, have easy (adjustable) entry and exit; but they cost so little I can readily outfit all my bikes with them, and have no problem replacing when needed. With both the Time and Frog pedals I was constantly falling over from not being able to get out of the pedals. With the WTB's I was constantly coming out when I didn't want to (they were too easy to exit), but with these, I have found the perfect balance. I highly recommend them!
These pedals actually allow me to alter gravity to the point where I can climb hills like an antelope. I am now sure-footed and faster than anyone else in the woods for 25 miles around. The bearings in my old pedals were turning to a fine, powdery dust with each successive ride, so it was time for an upgrade. They were an older version of the same model, so I knew I wouldn't be disappointed. Seriously love them and I recommend them highly. Plus, they arrived with brand new cleats, so you get to upgrade both pedals AND cleats for slightly more than the cost of new cleats. WHAT A DEAL!!! BUY A SET, TA-DAY!!!! :-)
So you can buy some cleats for $20 or new pedals with cleats for $35...These things are ridiculously cheap for what you get--a quality pedal that engages/releases reliably and will never leave you stuck mid ride from bad bearings or broken bits. Can't say that about crank bros. After a year or two they sometimes start to squeak. Easy fix--pull the spindle out, clean out the old grease, put in a ton of new grease, re-install. Done. These are great.
I have been riding these for about 3 years, along with a pair of XT pedals which have a slightly larger platform. These M520's are a solid, durable, nicely-weighted choice. I have never had a single problem with these pedals and would highly recommend them. I have used these mainly Cross-Country but also doing some downhill in Northern California. Great price for a super solid pedal.
I buy these pedals exclusively. They work great and if one gets mangled on a rock or something, cheap enough to replace without worry.
I got these pedals mid summer 2013 and they have been nothing but great. Easy clip in/out. Smooth pedal action. A very solid feeling platform. Plus, they are a great buy for the price.
I've had these for almost a year now and never had an issue. Priced very well and so far they've held up great. I'd buy again.
Got these to start riding clipless and I couldnt be happier. The higher level ones might be lighter or possibly last longer but I have been riding these on trails for a year and have zero complaints. The have adjustable tension and are easy to get into and out of. They also have a hex hole on the end of the axle so if you dont have a pedal wrench you can still install them.
I have XTR pedals and XT pedals on my high dollar carbon bikes. Thought I would try some M520 pedals on some of my older cheaper bikes. Other than the expected weight difference, the performance is the same at a fraction of the price. what a deal!
These are strong well built pedals. I decided I like platform better for my riding, but I can't say anything bad about these pedals, they clip in very securely and for the most part release when they are supposed to.
Great bang for the buck. Durable
I've had the same type of pedal for around 5 years. Some years I ride a lot some others not that much but I've always used these pedals. Now I need to replace them but they are a good choice if you are looking for SPD pedals that are durable and cheap.
Just tried these pedals for the first time today. Worked like a charm ! I used Shimano SH56 cleats with them and had no problems clipping in or out . Great pedal and a great price !
Have these pedals since 2010...very reliable. Got a new pair last year, and getting this pair now, they are on sale you know!?. May new Motobecane Phantom will marry these pedals, no doubt. Best clipless so far at a great price.
Been using these pedals on all three of my MTBs. Great pedals, never fail, secure clip in, but release exactly as I set them to do. If you're concerned with a few grams, spend 10 times the money and get the XTRs. If you want solid performing, quality pedals at a great price, these are the pedals you want.
I have these on my single speed commuter bike. they're great for the money.


text:
All Categories
- Blueberry Hill
- Busch Stadium
- Chaifetz Arena
- Edward Jones Dome
- Fabulous Fox Theatre - St. Louis
- Family Arena
- Hollywood Casino Amphitheatre
- Lumiere Place Casino
- Old Rock House
- Peabody Opera House
- Pops
- Powell Symphony Hall
- River City Casino
- Scottrade Center
- Sheldon Concert Hall
- more
- The Firebird - MO
- The Muny
- The Pageant
- The Ready Room
- fewer
We're sorry, but we currently have no tickets available for this event.
Check out our full selection of tickets or sign up to be notified when tickets for this event are available.
The Ambassador Ticket Information
Have you heard a rumor that an event at The Ambassador is sold-out? At Vividseats.com we have a large selection of tickets to all events at The Ambassador and we sell them at a discount! Don't believe us? View the upcoming schedule of The Ambassador and click on "Find Your Seats" and you will find the tickets you want to fit almost any budget. In addition to providing tickets to The Ambassador events, we also information such as seating charts, venue information, maps, and directions. When buying tickets for an event at The Ambassador always use Vividseats.com.


text:
Jack's American Pub opening Thursday on Brady
With a late-night menu and a bar emphasizing American beers and spirits, Jack's American Pub opens at 4 p.m. today at 1323 E. Brady St.
It takes the place of Crisp Pizza Bar, which closed in June. »Read Full Blog Post
J. Cole takes on the challenge
A battle is brewing in hip-hop: a battle of talent, a battle of ego and a battle for critical and commercial superiority. And Jermaine Cole, the 28-year-old, German-born North Carolina artist known as J. Cole, is on the front lines.
In August, a Big Sean song called "Control" was released online and to radio, and a verse from rising rapper Kendrick Lamar ignited a firestorm, naming his competitors and essentially declaring war. And Cole's name was called out first. »Read Full Article
New York Times covers Milwaukee Bucks' old and new floors
The New York Times today published a photo slideshow chronicling the story about Robert Indiana's basketball floor for the Milwaukee Bucks and Marquette University for 11 years. The Times slideshow highlights the transformation of the old 1977 floor into a sculpture at City Hall and the brand new floor the Milwaukee Bucks unveiled over the weekend that is an homage to Indiana's original MECCA floor.
A few new things are revealed by the New York Times coverage, including the name of an artist that was also floated in 1977 to make the floor and some thoughts about the floor and Milwaukee from Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. »Read Full Blog Post(2)
Swings to return on Marsupial Bridge
UPDATE: Response from Ghassan Korban, commissioner of the Department of Public Works, included below.
Beloit College hires Jeanne Gang for power plant conversion
Beloit College has selected one of the more celebrated architects in the U.S. to convert an electrical power plant into a recreation center that will showcase sustainable design and revitalize the river front.
The college's board of trustees has selected Studio Gang Architects of Chicago to transform the century-old power plant, currently owned by Alliant Energy. The plan calls for a transition of ownership of the electrical Blackhawk Generating Station on the Rock River in Beloit from the Wisconsin utility to the school in 2016. »Read Full Blog Post
On Tap Today: The Girls in the Band
The documentary "The Girls in the Band," screening tonight as part of the Milwaukee Film Festival, shines a spotlight on overlooked female jazz musicians dating back to the 1930s. Photo provided by Milwaukee Film Festival. »Read Full Blog Post
Milwaukee Film Festival pick: Day Thirteen
Filmmakers write about what they know, and their work often shows the influence of their family, good or bad. But what happens when they discover that their family was not what they thought it was?
That's the premise behind "Stories We Tell," by writer-director-actress Sarah Polley. »Read Full Blog Post


text: You are posting a comment about... Summer Reading Program Drawing Winners Our end-of-summer-reading children's prize drawing took place earlier this week. Winners are: Tricycle - Hayden Larsen, age 3 "Stitch" pillow pet and book - Maia Day, age 4 "Pooh" pillow pet and books - Donovan Denter, age 2 "Mercy Watson" plush toy and books - Alivia Leoncini, age 6 "Elephant and Piggie" plush toys and books - Leo Gilbert, age 7 4 Big Beginner Books - Samuel Martin, age 6 Boxed set of Wimpy Kid books - Bridger Mortensen, age 8 Boxed set of Percy Jackson books - Ariana Price, age 10 Boxed set of Fablehaven books and T-shirt - Jadenlynn Stewart, age 10 Congratulations to all the winners, and thanks to everyone who took part in our Children's Summer Reading Program! |


text:
Sexually Transmitted Infections Among African American Women Who Have Sex With Women (WSW)
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
The purpose of this study is to determine the rates of sexually transmitted infections (STI) among a group of African American women who have sex with women (AA WSW). The first study hypothesis is that AA WSW are at risk for acquiring and transmitting STI, including the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The second study hypothesis is that AA WSW participate in multiple high-risk sexual activities that may facilitate transmission of STIs, including HIV.
Condition |
Sexually Transmitted Infections HIV Infections |
Study Type: | Observational |
Study Design: | Observational Model: Case-Only Time Perspective: Cross-Sectional |
Official Title: | Prevalence Rates of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Sexual Risk Behaviors Among African American Women Who Have Sex With Women |
- Prevalence rates of sexually transmitted infections [ Time Frame: 18 Months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
- Associated sexual risk behaviors [ Time Frame: 18 Months ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Biospecimen Retention: Samples With DNA
Endocervical and vaginal secretion specimens are being retained for future research studies in this field of sexually transmitted diseases.
Estimated Enrollment: | 300 |
Study Start Date: | February 2009 |
Estimated Study Completion Date: | June 2012 |
Primary Completion Date: | December 2011 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) |
Historically, women who have sex with women (WSW) have been thought to be at low risk for acquiring sexually transmitted infections (STI), presumably due to the absence of genital mucosal contact present during vaginal-penile sex or due to the assumption that the vaginal mucosa experiences a lesser degree of trauma during female sex than during heterosexual sex. This assumption has been challenged and debated over the past two decades. In addition, the sexual health risks of WSW are only beginning to be understood.
To date the majority of research regarding STI in women has occurred in heterosexuals. National and local surveillance data that estimate the risk for STI transmission between WSW are limited, especially among African Americans. This is a group of women that may exhibit distinctive behavioral characteristics that may put them at higher risk for sexually transmitted infections STI and HIV than their Caucasian counterparts. This group of women has traditionally been reluctant to discuss their sexual orientation with physicians for fear of being stigmatized. The burden of STIs, including HIV, experienced by this group of women is largely unknown.
Ages Eligible for Study: | 18 Years and older |
Genders Eligible for Study: | Female |
Accepts Healthy Volunteers: | No |
Sampling Method: | Non-Probability Sample |
The study population is African American women, aged 18 or above, who present to the Crossroads Clinic (STD Clinic) in the Jackson, MS metropolitan area for STI screening/evaluation who have engaged in sexual contact with another woman within the past 6 months.
Inclusion Criteria:
- Female
- Age 18 years or older
- African American race
- Sexual contact with another female within the past 6 months
- Ability to give written informed consent
Exclusion Criteria:
- Male
- Age less than 18 years old
- Race other than African American
- No sexual contact with another woman within the past 6 months
- Pregnant
- Prior enrollment in this study
- Participants who, for any reason, in the opinion of the investigator, do not have the ability to give written informed consent or may not be expected to comply with the requirements of the protocol
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01043081
United States, Mississippi | |
Crossroads Clinic | |
Jackson, Mississippi, United States, 39216 |
Principal Investigator: | Leandro A Mena, MD, MPH | University of Mississippi Medical Center |
No publications provided by University of Mississippi Medical Center
Additional publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):
Responsible Party: | Leandro Mena, M.D., University of Mississippi Medical Center, Division of Infectious Diseases |
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: | NCT01043081 History of Changes |
Other Study ID Numbers: | 2008-0143 |
Study First Received: | January 4, 2010 |
Last Updated: | April 2, 2012 |
Health Authority: | United States: Institutional Review Board |
Keywords provided by University of Mississippi Medical Center:
African American women who have sex with women Sexually transmitted infections Homosexuality Human papillomavirus Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Herpes simplex virus types 1 and 2 |
Chlamydia Gonorrhea Trichomoniasis Bacterial vaginosis Syphilis Human immunodeficiency virus |
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Genital Diseases, Female Genital Diseases, Male Virus Diseases |
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on May 05, 2015


text:
I am married (38 years), we enjoy being outdoors, fishing, going for drives on the back-roads. I enjoy taking pictures of everything and I really enjoy seeing everyones pictures they put on this site. We live in a very small town that is where the White and Black Rivers meet. The town has a State Park here, has a lot of history, there is a video that was made for AETN TV, if you click on Visit My Website, you can see it. Create your own visitor map!
WunderPhotos Upload
This image does not contain EXIF data.
March 3, 2013 Photo Series
Viewer Comments
Post Your Comments
You must be signed in to leave comments.
Sign In or Register Sign In or Register
Members can leave comments, upload and share photos in our Wunder Photos section and participate on the WunderBlogs.


text:
Andrew W.K. Tickets
Andrew W.K. Biography & News
Andrew W.K. Details
Genre | Official site |
Rock | http://www.andrewwk.com |
About Andrew W.K.
About Andrew W.K.
Andrew Fetterly Wilkes-Krier, known by his stagename Andrew W.K. works as hard as he parties. He is a singer, songwriter, instrumentalist, producer, motivational speaker and served as the host of the television series "Destroy Build Destroy."
Considering his background (classical piano, college prep school where he studied jazz keyboard, and a father who is a well-known legal scholar), it's not hard to believe Andrew called his first public recording "Mr. Surprise." He would bounce around a number of bands in Michigan and became involved in a number of other projects before going solo.
It was 1989 when Andrew W.K. released "Room to Breathe," which was considered his first official album. The catch? The release was cassette-only and just 35 copies were made. Another tape went missing, and he had similar luck with a track for the soundtrack of "Poltergeist" when that went missing for over 10 years before ultimately resurfacing.
Despite the early 'bad luck,' Andrew's career took off. He also began performing as a self-help, new age motivational speaker in 2005. Two years later he started a series of one man shows, and in March of that year was featured on the front page of the Arts section of the The New York Times. He also developed a following from appearances at "My Little Pony" conventions, one of which was featured in Rolling Stone.
There are so many projects Andrew has been involved in that it would be impossible to list them all here. His latest initiative is a documentary film, "Party Safari," detailing his trip to a safari park.
Andrew W.K. Discography
Album name | Release date |
I'm a Vagabond | 2010 |
Daytrotter Session | 2010 |
Close Calls With Brick Walls / Mother of Mankind | 2010 |
牙 | 2010 |
55 Cadillac | 2009 |
Gundam Rock | 2009 |
Premium Collection: The Japan Covers | 2008 |
Close Calls With Brick Walls | 2006 |
Specialty Radio Sampler | 2003 |
The Wolf | 2003 |
Tear It Up | 2003 |
She Is Beautiful | 2002 |
I Get Wet | 2001 |
We Want Fun Demo | 2001 |
Party Hard | 2001 |
Top 10 Andrew W.K. Songs
Rank | Track Name | Play Count | Listener Count |
1 | Party Hard | 60,301 | 20,096 |
2 | She Is Beautiful | 32,251 | 10,733 |
3 | Ready To Die | 32,010 | 9,150 |
4 | It's Time To Party | 22,269 | 8,404 |
5 | I Get Wet | 19,427 | 6,615 |
6 | Girls Own Love | 15,578 | 6,140 |
7 | I Love NYC | 14,745 | 5,810 |
8 | Take It Off | 13,579 | 5,516 |
9 | Party Til You Puke | 13,649 | 5,459 |
10 | Fun Night | 11,456 | 4,838 |
Next 4 Concerts
Andrew W.K Party Messiah Tour Coming to Save Your Fall
Andrew W. K. Concert Tickets & Tour Dates Andrew W. K. Concerts Andrew W. K. Video for "Party Hard" Andrew W. K. Party Messiah Tour In case you ever had doubts that one man and a keyboard could truly party hard, the Andrew W. K. Party Messiah Tour is heading your way this fall to…
Read moreAndrew W.K. Ticket Prices
Find TicketsPast 12 Months
$87Average Price
$526High price
$24Low price
Next 10 Concerts
Past 10 Concerts
Cheapest Andrew W.K. Shows of All Time
Most Expensive Andrew W.K. Shows of All Time
Past Tour Dates for Andrew W.K.
Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2015
date city state venue 05/01/2015 Saint Louis MO The Firebird 04/28/2015 Cleveland Heights OH Grog Shop 04/24/2015 Grand Rapids MI The Pyramid Scheme 03/14/2015 Phoenix AZ Downtown Phoenix 03/13/2015 Chicago IL Riviera Theatre 02/01/2015 Miami FL Norwegian Pearl 01/31/2015 Miami FL Grand Central 01/30/2015 Orlando FL The Beacham 01/29/2015 Saint Petersburg FL State Theatre 01/17/2015 New York NY Gramercy Theatre 01/11/2015 Brooklyn NY Union Hall Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2014
date city state venue 12/31/2014 Chicago IL Thalia Hall 12/29/2014 Poughkeepsie NY The Loft 12/28/2014 Boston MA House of Blues Boston 12/26/2014 Boston MA House of Blues Boston 12/20/2014 Houston TX Warehouse Live 12/19/2014 Corpus Christi TX House of Rock 11/22/2014 Brooklyn NY Knitting Factory 10/31/2014 Regina SK Brandt Centre 10/19/2014 Fargo ND House of Rock 10/11/2014 Dallas TX The Door 09/13/2014 Chicago IL Beauty Bar 09/10/2014 New York NY Santos Party House 08/20/2014 Rapid City SD Sports Rock 08/19/2014 Billings MT Carlin Hotel Events Center 08/18/2014 Missoula MT Stage 112 08/08/2014 Pontiac MI Crofoot Ballroom 08/01/2014 Matlock Mouldridge Lane 07/31/2014 Liverpool Mersyd East Village Arts Club 07/30/2014 Glasgow Glg The Classic Grand 07/29/2014 Leeds Yorkshire The Cockpit 07/27/2014 Tilburg NB 013 07/26/2014 Amsterdam Nhl Paradiso 07/25/2014 Hannover NI Capitol Hannover 07/24/2014 Copenhagen Pumpehuset - Lille Sal 07/23/2014 Hamburg HH Headcrash 07/22/2014 Berlin BE Magnet Club 07/20/2014 Brighton Bnh The Haunt 07/18/2014 Abingdon Hill Farm Steventon 07/18/2014 Coventry Wmd Coventry Kasbah 07/12/2014 Cincinnati OH Sawyer Point 07/11/2014 Cincinnati OH Sawyer Point 07/11/2014 Cincinnati OH Sawyer Point 07/07/2014 Pamplona Plaza de los Fueros 07/05/2014 Santander Escenario Santander 07/03/2014 Karlskoga Putte I Parken Festival Grounds 07/02/2014 Warsaw Zaklete Rewiry 06/26/2014 Piestany Topfest 06/25/2014 Ostrava Brrak Music Club 06/24/2014 Berlin C-Club 06/22/2014 Colmar C1 Grillen 06/21/2014 Ourense Festival Derrame Rock 06/19/2014 Granada Andalusia El Tren 06/17/2014 Valencia La3 06/16/2014 Barcelona City Hall 06/08/2014 Quebec QC Le Cercle 06/07/2014 Wichita KS Wichita Riverfestival Star Floating Stage 05/23/2014 Seattle WA Neumos 05/16/2014 Gulf Shores AL Gulf Shores Beach 04/26/2014 New York NY SubCulture 04/25/2014 New York NY SubCulture 04/24/2014 Newark DE University of Delaware 04/19/2014 Washington DC Black Cat 03/29/2014 St. John's NL CLB Armoury 03/28/2014 Halifax NS The Marquee Ballroom 03/27/2014 Ottawa ON Mavericks 03/26/2014 Montreal QC Foufounes Electriques 03/25/2014 Toronto ON Hard Luck Bar 02/22/2014 Brooklyn NY Brooklyn Bowl Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2013
date city state venue 12/31/2013 New York NY Irving Plaza 12/30/2013 Stanhope NJ Stanhope House 12/28/2013 West Chester PA The Note 12/26/2013 Worcester MA Worcester Palladium 12/19/2013 Scottsdale AZ Pub Rock 12/07/2013 Denton TX Hailey's 11/19/2013 Los Angeles CA Echoplex 11/16/2013 New York NY 45 Bleecker Theatre 10/31/2013 Pomona CA Fairplex At Pomona 10/25/2013 Glasgow Glasgow City The Garage 10/24/2013 Manchester Gtm Manchester Academy 2 10/23/2013 London London Electric Ballroom 10/19/2013 Reno NV The Holland Project 10/18/2013 Temecula CA The Vault 10/17/2013 Santa Barbara CA Velvet Jones 10/16/2013 Fresno CA Strummer's 10/15/2013 Los Angeles CA Fonda Theatre 10/12/2013 San Francisco CA The Independent 10/10/2013 Seattle WA Neumos 10/08/2013 Chicago IL Metro 10/06/2013 Philadelphia PA Theatre of Living Arts 10/05/2013 New York NY Irving Plaza 10/04/2013 Boston MA Paradise Rock Club 10/02/2013 Washington DC 9:30 Club 09/29/2013 White Plains NY Westchester County Center 09/27/2013 Detroit MI The Shelter 09/26/2013 Cleveland Heights OH Grog Shop 09/25/2013 Columbus OH A and R Music Bar 09/24/2013 Battle Creek MI Planet Rock 09/22/2013 Madison WI Majestic Theatre 09/20/2013 Saint Louis MO Fubar 09/19/2013 Iowa City IA Blue Moose Tap House 09/18/2013 Omaha NE Sokol Underground 09/17/2013 Lawrence KS Granada 09/15/2013 Denver CO Marquis Theater 09/14/2013 Salt Lake City UT In The Venue 09/13/2013 Chicago IL Double Door 09/13/2013 Chicago IL Humboldt Park 09/13/2013 Chicago IL Humboldt Park 09/12/2013 Bellingham WA Wild Buffalo House of Music 09/10/2013 Portland OR Hawthorne Theatre 09/03/2013 Los Angeles CA Los Angeles Sports Arena 09/01/2013 Las Vegas NV MGM Grand Garden Arena 08/30/2013 Phoenix AZ US Airways Center 08/26/2013 Mountain View CA Shoreline Amphitheatre 08/24/2013 George WA Gorge Amphitheatre 08/22/2013 Vancouver BC Rogers Arena 08/18/2013 Noblesville IN Klipsch Music Center 08/16/2013 Tinley Park IL First Midwest Bank Amphitheatre 08/14/2013 Toronto ON Air Canada Centre 08/10/2013 Philadelphia PA Wells Fargo Center 08/08/2013 Uncasville CT Mohegan Sun Arena 08/06/2013 Clarkston MI DTE Energy Music Theatre 08/04/2013 Holmdel NJ PNC Bank Arts Center 08/02/2013 Bristow VA Jiffy Lube Live 07/31/2013 West Palm Beach FL Coral Sky Amphitheatre 07/30/2013 Gainesville FL High Dive 07/16/2013 Bilbao Basque Country Kafe Antzokia 07/13/2013 Madrid Gruta 77 07/10/2013 Caceres 57 SALA BARROCO 07/09/2013 Lisbon 11 Santiago Alquimista 07/06/2013 Sopron Volt Fesztival 06/30/2013 Helsinki Esx The Circus 06/28/2013 Murcia Auditorio Municipal Parque Fofo 06/07/2013 Springfield VA Empire 06/05/2013 Virginia Beach VA Shakas 06/04/2013 Greensboro NC Greene Street Club 06/02/2013 Wilmington NC The Soapbox 06/01/2013 Jacksonville FL Brewsters Roc Bar 05/31/2013 Tampa FL The Orpheum 05/29/2013 Douglasville GA The 7 Venue 05/28/2013 Johnson City TN The Hideaway 05/26/2013 Covington KY Madison Theater 05/25/2013 Howell MI Hartland Performing Arts Center 05/24/2013 Joliet IL Mojoes 05/23/2013 Des Moines IA Vaudeville Mews 05/22/2013 Saint Louis MO The Firebird 05/19/2013 Pittsburgh PA Altar Bar 05/18/2013 Jackson NJ Six Flags Great Adventure 05/10/2013 Rome Crossroads Live Club 05/03/2013 New York NY Santos Party House 05/01/2013 Brooklyn NY Brooklyn Masonic Temple 04/20/2013 Syracuse NY The Lost Horizon 04/19/2013 Hartford CT Arch Street Tavern 04/17/2013 Portland ME Studio 250 04/15/2013 Buffalo NY Soundlab 04/14/2013 Hamilton ON Club Absinthe 03/28/2013 Boston MA Paradise Rock Club 03/15/2013 Austin TX The Belmont 03/14/2013 Austin TX Cheer Up Charlie's 03/12/2013 Houston TX Boondocks 03/11/2013 San Antonio TX The Korova 03/10/2013 Houston TX Boondocks 03/09/2013 San Antonio TX The Korova 03/06/2013 New York NY 285 Kent Avenue 03/06/2013 Brooklyn NY 285 Kent 02/03/2013 New York NY Santos Party House 01/30/2013 New York NY Santos Party House Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2012
date city state venue 12/30/2012 Amityville NY Revolution Bar & Music Hall 12/29/2012 Stanhope NJ Stanhope House 12/28/2012 Poughkeepsie NY The Loft 12/11/2012 New York NY Santos Party House 12/07/2012 Brooklyn NY The Bell House 11/29/2012 London London Cable 11/06/2012 Los Angeles CA Echoplex 09/28/2012 Strongsville OH Canterlot Gardens 09/22/2012 Dallas TX Gexa Energy Pavilion 09/22/2012 Dallas TX Gexa Energy Pavilion 09/15/2012 Chicago IL Humboldt Park 09/15/2012 Chicago IL Humboldt Park 09/09/2012 Toronto ON Fort York National Historic Site 07/13/2012 San Diego CA Avalon San Diego 04/07/2012 Fort Lauderdale FL Revolution Live 04/06/2012 Orlando FL The Beacham 04/05/2012 Atlanta GA Masquerade 04/02/2012 New York NY Webster Hall 04/01/2012 Washington DC 9:30 Club 03/30/2012 Philadelphia PA Theatre of Living Arts 03/28/2012 Boston MA Paradise Rock Club 03/26/2012 Cleveland OH House Of Blues Cleveland 03/25/2012 Chicago IL Riviera Theatre 03/24/2012 Detroit MI Saint Andrews Hall 03/23/2012 Milwaukee WI The Rave/Eagles Club/Eagles Ballroom 03/22/2012 Minneapolis MN First Avenue 03/20/2012 Denver CO Bluebird Theater 03/11/2012 Tempe AZ Marquee Theatre 03/10/2012 Pomona CA The Glass House 03/09/2012 Las Vegas NV Body English 03/08/2012 Los Angeles CA Avalon Hollywood 03/06/2012 San Francisco CA The Regency Ballroom 03/05/2012 Portland OR Wonder Ballroom 03/03/2012 Vancouver BC Venue Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2011
date city state venue 05/10/2011 Los Angeles CA Echoplex Andrew W.K. Tour Dates 2010
date city state venue 07/29/2010 Milwaukee WI Marcus Amphitheater 07/28/2010 Cincinnati OH Riverbend Music Center 07/26/2010 Atlanta GA Aaron's Amphitheatre at Lakewood 07/24/2010 West Palm Beach FL Coral Sky Amphitheatre 07/23/2010 Saint Petersburg FL Vinoy Park 07/21/2010 Virginia Beach VA Farm Bureau Live at Virginia Beach 07/20/2010 Columbia MD Merriweather Post Pavilion 07/18/2010 Oceanport NJ Monmouth Park Racetrack 07/17/2010 Uniondale NY Nassau Coliseum 07/16/2010 Camden NJ Susquehanna Bank Center 07/15/2010 Scranton PA Toyota Pavilion At Montage Mountain 07/14/2010 Darien Center NY Darien Lake Performing Arts Center 07/13/2010 Mansfield MA Xfinity Center 07/11/2010 Hartford CT Xfinity Theatre 07/10/2010 Montreal PQ Parc Jean-Drapeau 07/09/2010 Mississauga ON International Centre 07/08/2010 Cleveland OH Time Warner Cable Amphitheater at Tower City 07/07/2010 Burgettstown PA First Niagara Pavilion 07/06/2010 Noblesville IN Klipsch Music Center 07/05/2010 Maryland Heights MO Hollywood Casino Amphitheatre 07/03/2010 Dallas TX Gexa Energy Pavilion 07/01/2010 San Antonio TX AT&T Center 06/29/2010 Phoenix AZ Ak-Chin Pavilion 06/27/2010 Ventura CA Seaside Park 06/26/2010 Mountain View CA Shoreline Amphitheatre 06/25/2010 Carson CA StubHub Center 06/24/2010 Chula Vista CA Sleep Train Amphitheatre


text:
Willem Kat, his daughter Babe and who?
We need help identifying the person in top of the photo. Does anyone have an idea as to who it is? Photo courtesy of Bill Amborn.
- Login or register to post comments
- Thumbnail
- Preview
- blockthumbs
- 18779 reads
or send your donation payable to: Yosemite Climbing Association P.O. Box 89, Yosemite, CA 95389 Please make sure to provide your complete contact information, including email address.


text:
Cart (0) Account Newsletter Contact
866-539-4278866-539-4278 - Shipping - FAQ
Stallions, Mares, Ponies, Mustangs, Appaloosas and more. These images of majestic horses are one of the most popular subjects for jigsaw puzzles. If you love to ride, or collect horse imagery as decoration - a new jigsaw puzzle would make the perfect addition.
Use the filters to the left or simply scroll down to begin viewing all pages.
Free shipping and flat rate offers for US only but excludes HI and AK.
Need to return or exchange a puzzle? It's easy. Simply call us at 866-539-4278 or email firstname.lastname@example.com to request a Return Authorization Number, and we will send you a prepaid return label for the item.
Please note:


text:
New York Jets Gear
New York Jets Mens
New York Jets Mens Home Office & School
New York Jets Mens Home Office & School School Supplies
(15 items)
Product ID: 777152
Main Content
You're one smart cookie! You attached this Jets Badge Reel to your work ID and now you don't get that "oh man, I gotta go to work" feeling - you get that "oh, yeah, one day closer to watching New York football" feeling! It features a vibrant domed Jets logo on the front and back, and it also has a heavy-duty metal clip and a thirty-six inch retractable nylon cord. Now you find yourself humming the "J-E-T-S Jets, Jets, Jets" cheer to yourself as you sit down at your desk and envision long touchdown passes to receivers making circus catches - before you know it, it's time to head home!
- Acrylic team logo inlay
- Clip measures approximately 1.5" x 2.5"
- Lobster claw clip
- Officially licensed New York Jets badge reel
- Plastic snap button loop to hold ID or security card
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game
or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are
received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items
are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite
number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
Other Brands by Spelling Enterprise
- Design House: Spelling Enterprise
- Fragrance Notes: A soft, youthful floral bouquet with hints of citrus.
- Year Introduced: 1992
- Recommended Use: daytime
No reviews written for this product
1 - 5 (of 2 Reviews)
Something sweet'n'trashy is sweeping the halls of my junior high heart... Brenda's continental scarf collection, Dylan's feline smile, all encapsulated in one heady squirt!
Written by Joanie on November 25, 2006
Read Review details ►I loved this scent in high school. Perfect for any teen girl
Written by julie.trickler on June 26, 2006
Read Review details ►1 - 5 (of 2 Reviews)