Can anyone explain how the Romney tax plan works. We've all heard it doesn't add up, so I'll just summarize that below. What I'm looking for are explanations of how it makes sense. I heard Ryan not explain it. He talks about "broadening a base" via eliminating deductions. What does that mean?
Summary of the tax plan (taken from Romney website): 1) No AMT, no estate tax 2) No tax on Dividends, INterest or Cap gains. 3) cut maximum tax bracket by 20% from bush maximum: that is to say 15% on ordinary income. 4) Eliminate "most" deductions but keep home mortgage deduction.
Other bullet points (taken from Romney web page).
1) wont lower revenues 2) upper income earners wont pay a smaller "share". (unclear) 3) won't raise taxes on taxes on middle class. (presumably in aggregate).
Clear areas lacking explanation:
Consider that top teir earners pay most of the tax in the US right now and that they earn most of their income from Cap gains not Ordinary income like wages. If you remove the tax on cap gains, then they pay only a few percent on their combined income. This will drastically reduce not just their "share" but strongly imapct total revenue.
Note that lowering deductions barely affects this analysis. Even if you set the ordinary income tax rate at 110% on the wealthy, the fact that nearly all their income is cap gains means they still pay almost no tax. Furthermore since there is no estate tax, this situation does not correct itself at death.
SO how can this meet the claims about revenue neutral, not lowering the share of the upper income earners, or not push more taxes on the middleclass.
I'm looking for explanations not anti romney propganda. And what does "broadening the base" mean if there's no cap gains tax?
At home I have a couple macs. They do the job I need a computer to do. But to service the whole families needs, to provide a media center, and to provide something for on the go usage I need another work station plus a tablet. Eventually my other computers will get old and I'll need to replace them.
Now if I could just use a tablet hooked to a big screen I'd need ferwer devices and I'd be happier. The tablets would let me use apps that are touch freindly with ease and the attached screen for typing and mousing apps. It would allow on the go use. Media use (where you want to move it to the chair or the amplifer or tv). perfect.
so far all the tablets seem to only mirror their small screens if they have video out at all. Or they lack a desktop mode for mouse and KB usage.
Windows 8 is going to have both.
I had been wondering why win8 had both metro and desktop modes but suddenly I get it. this use case is a killer app.
it fits my profile exactly. it fits my moms profile. it fits my kids needs.
What sucks is that I don't like windows or the apps made for windows. I'd prefer to use the ones I have on my macs.
No one yet answered this question, what is the speed of information? What is the speed of the universal laws? What is the speed of the gravitational force??????
It works in reverse. All information is known at all points in space but as you go faster, you start to forget things.
This is like the secret fortune cookie decoder. add "in bed" after the phrase. Always works. IN this case it's take any known thing and add "using a computer".
Listen to this 1983 (pre mac) recording of his vision of computing. It's not equal to Doug Ebehart's mother-of-all demos in technical detail but it imagines the modern computing ecosystem and the times scales with breathtaking accuracy, right down to the economic need for the app store.
moreover, the earth is a collector of solar and lunar energy. We call it wind and sunshine and tides, there's even solar "wind" if one goes a bit outside the atmosphere. Together these have more than enough energy to power all of the earths needs. Harvesting these may not be simple, but it would be a lot simpler than a dyson sphere. ergo, no dyson spheres will ever be built unless the planet is too far from the sun to collect enough solar energy on its crossection.
What the earth lacks is a perpertual supply of transportation fuels or a means to adequately replace them. But replacing them is forseable and we don't absolutely need them--we just over exploit them now because we can.
The there's that name. Makes me think of urinate every time someone says it. Yeah it's silly and irrelevant. But now try to get that our of your head. I'm telling you it's an unfortunate problem.
I'm wondering if the accuracy of these things is better or worse than a conventional shell. I'm thinking worse. At first blush one thinks, well it's faster so it must be better since wind velocity is less.
But let's do some calculating. Since this is a kinetic energy weapon you have to fire it at full velocity to achieve the full energy delivery. For any given range that you could hit with a conventional heavy explosive shell the faster to fire it the LONGER it takes to arrive. The reason for that is that you have to fire it increasingly upward to limit the range as you fire it faster. Thus it takes longer and longer to reach the target and the horizontal velocity gets lower and lower. Thus wind has a longer time to act on it.
Additionally the shell is lighter weight and it is going higher in the atmosphere were the wind velocity increases. So this makes the defelction even worse. I suppose at some point this thing gets to negligible atmosphere and it stops getting worse.
But it seems to me that as long as we require the kinetic energy then were stuck with a less accurate system for any conventional shell range. Of course for ranges beyond conventional then this is the only way to get there.
That's what properly implemented QOS is for. Voice traffic goes to the front of the queue (possibly at the cost of dropping a bulk data packet) and emergency voice traffic can bump other voice packets into the bit bucket if necessary.
right. And yet india moves to an system indifferent to data types then poof goes your QOS
Voice is lower total bandwidth but requires low latency and no interruptions to be high quality. When data connections are not strained then there is no challenge to provide that but it can become important and thus much more expensive than the data it bears. Personally I do use VOIP and so I know it's not as good as non-voip some of the time.
I don't think Steve would have allowed such as shitty product to completely be release.
Well you nailed it. Like Paul Mason, jobs would release no wine before its time. Moreover, someone would get fired. Like it or not his process worked. It could be that this is just going to be the learning experience they need to get back their Wu.
But in a way we are lucky. In the case of these maps, the Jobs reality distortion filed probably would have convinced us that the maps were right and the earth was wrong. If it was strong he might have just distorted the reality to match.
Indeed. My point was that the reason we don't think wifi is dangerous is that we can envision a mechanism other than cooking (thermal) where non ionizing, low energy photons with enormous wavelengths could damage cells. Yet we once thought that rare x-ray events could not be harmful till we learned about DNA damage. and We now have some reason to believe that maybe long wavelength terrahertz can resonantly manipulate DNA. So it becomes less far fetched to imagine that WiFi could have a physiological effect even if we don't really know the details of how yet. I'm not saying it does. I'm just saying that the same arguments that dimissed other phenomena were wrong.
So if everyting is HTML5 then presumably this is going to be like WebOS or apple's Dashboard apps? Didn't Facebook recently retreat from HTML5 to native? Then there's the grim history of javas early promise of write once run everywhere. Has HTML5 grown up so much that it can finally pull it off? or is this more than HTML5
It has been demonstrated in the lab that exposure to terrhertz radiotion causes non-thermal changes in cellular development and signalling. a theoretical mechanism modeled and shows that low level terrahertz is capable of resonantly exciting bends and strand openings in Double stradded DNA. Since those are in fact the primary mechanisms of signal transduction at the molecular level it would not be surprising if this was the explanation for the experimental observations. However these studies are still at the preliminary stages. they are peer reviewed but there has not been a lot of other investigators yet to isolate and confirm the phenomena. Just a growing body of not fully chartcterized and explained observational phenonema of strong changes in cell regulation under low dose terrahertz. It has been noted to be frequency dependent which both is in line with the reonant effects argument and also could be why it is hard to study at this stage in a reproducible manner in different labs.
The reason this model is interesting is that, just as X-rays were thought safe until the mechanism of amplified effects from DNA damage became accepted, the problem is that terrhertz are individually too low in energy to break chemical bonds. Thus if there is means of affecting cells it has to be resonant, high field gradient effects, or something that works at a vibrational or rotational level in cells. All of these might have very different depths of penetration in multi-celluar organisms and their affects might be very indirect.
Apple computer seeded this when they partnered with Acorn micro to create the ARM company (producing the modern ARM6). It went in to the newton. The newton we all know failed. But the iphone is the re-incarnation of the newton. And it is this that is really responsible for the rise of the RISC ARM processors. Even the Marvel processors derive from this same origin. Their partnership with IBM on the powerPC shows how they still believed in RISC even after they sold off ARM.
It's remarkable how apple is an early adopter. dynamic memory, integrated graphics, mouse, postscript,.... and Risc.
Without iPhone/iPad, Apple would still makes lots of money. Apple would make an estimated $30B in revenue instead of $140B (based on Q3 estimates). Profit margin might be in the 30% range instead of the 40% though.
Apple's wife has been piling that cash up in a rented foreign storage locker. She can't figure out how to launder it all back to the US to dividend to stock holders without paying taxes on it.
Maybe apple will realize it has enough money and see the danger of trading patents with Tuco Samsung-manca.
Another rational for not cross licensing patents in this case is that Apple's patents are design patents and Samsungs are methods implementations for standards. Design patents are intended to distinguish a product so licensing them makes no sense. Standards are intended to unify operations so licensing their methods for money in non-discriminative ways makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Can anyone explain how the Romney tax plan works. We've all heard it doesn't add up, so I'll just summarize that below. What I'm looking for are explanations of how it makes sense. I heard Ryan not explain it. He talks about "broadening a base" via eliminating deductions. What does that mean?
Summary of the tax plan (taken from Romney website):
1) No AMT, no estate tax
2) No tax on Dividends, INterest or Cap gains.
3) cut maximum tax bracket by 20% from bush maximum: that is to say 15% on ordinary income.
4) Eliminate "most" deductions but keep home mortgage deduction.
Other bullet points (taken from Romney web page).
1) wont lower revenues
2) upper income earners wont pay a smaller "share". (unclear)
3) won't raise taxes on taxes on middle class. (presumably in aggregate).
Clear areas lacking explanation:
Consider that top teir earners pay most of the tax in the US right now and that they earn most of their income from Cap gains not Ordinary income like wages. If you remove the tax on cap gains, then they pay only a few percent on their combined income. This will drastically reduce not just their "share" but strongly imapct total revenue.
Note that lowering deductions barely affects this analysis. Even if you set the ordinary income tax rate at 110% on the wealthy, the fact that nearly all their income is cap gains means they still pay almost no tax. Furthermore since there is no estate tax, this situation does not correct itself at death.
SO how can this meet the claims about revenue neutral, not lowering the share of the upper income earners, or not push more taxes on the middleclass.
I'm looking for explanations not anti romney propganda. And what does "broadening the base" mean if there's no cap gains tax?
thanks!
Someone needs to hack into their street view car scheduling so we can all stand out front mooning them. Few would willingly click on it again.
Combining the very best of Chatroulette and streetview.
At home I have a couple macs. They do the job I need a computer to do. But to service the whole families needs, to provide a media center, and to provide something for on the go usage I need another work station plus a tablet. Eventually my other computers will get old and I'll need to replace them.
Now if I could just use a tablet hooked to a big screen I'd need ferwer devices and I'd be happier. The tablets would let me use apps that are touch freindly with ease and the attached screen for typing and mousing apps. It would allow on the go use. Media use (where you want to move it to the chair or the amplifer or tv). perfect.
so far all the tablets seem to only mirror their small screens if they have video out at all. Or they lack a desktop mode for mouse and KB usage.
Windows 8 is going to have both.
I had been wondering why win8 had both metro and desktop modes but suddenly I get it. this use case is a killer app.
it fits my profile exactly. it fits my moms profile. it fits my kids needs.
What sucks is that I don't like windows or the apps made for windows. I'd prefer to use the ones I have on my macs.
No one yet answered this question, what is the speed of information? What is the speed of the universal laws? What is the speed of the gravitational force??????
It works in reverse. All information is known at all points in space but as you go faster, you start to forget things.
It's a bit like finding the get away car for the bank job in your house and all the neighbors agree you use it to drive to work.
This is like the secret fortune cookie decoder. add "in bed" after the phrase. Always works. IN this case it's take any known thing and add "using a computer".
My Precious.
Listen to this 1983 (pre mac) recording of his vision of computing. It's not equal to Doug Ebehart's mother-of-all demos in technical detail but it imagines the modern computing ecosystem and the times scales with breathtaking accuracy, right down to the economic need for the app store.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/10/02/steve-jobs-speech-from-1983-foretells-rise-of-mobile-computing-ipad
amazing for 1983.
facebook.pl
it's just one script in perl.
moreover, the earth is a collector of solar and lunar energy. We call it wind and sunshine and tides, there's even solar "wind" if one goes a bit outside the atmosphere. Together these have more than enough energy to power all of the earths needs. Harvesting these may not be simple, but it would be a lot simpler than a dyson sphere. ergo, no dyson spheres will ever be built unless the planet is too far from the sun to collect enough solar energy on its crossection.
What the earth lacks is a perpertual supply of transportation fuels or a means to adequately replace them. But replacing them is forseable and we don't absolutely need them--we just over exploit them now because we can.
A wee scotty antenna, lassy.
The there's that name. Makes me think of urinate every time someone says it. Yeah it's silly and irrelevant. But now try to get that our of your head. I'm telling you it's an unfortunate problem.
Do you belong to the flat earth society?
I'm wondering if the accuracy of these things is better or worse than a conventional shell. I'm thinking worse. At first blush one thinks, well it's faster so it must be better since wind velocity is less.
But let's do some calculating. Since this is a kinetic energy weapon you have to fire it at full velocity to achieve the full energy delivery. For any given range that you could hit with a conventional heavy explosive shell the faster to fire it the LONGER it takes to arrive. The reason for that is that you have to fire it increasingly upward to limit the range as you fire it faster. Thus it takes longer and longer to reach the target and the horizontal velocity gets lower and lower. Thus wind has a longer time to act on it.
Additionally the shell is lighter weight and it is going higher in the atmosphere were the wind velocity increases. So this makes the defelction even worse. I suppose at some point this thing gets to negligible atmosphere and it stops getting worse.
But it seems to me that as long as we require the kinetic energy then were stuck with a less accurate system for any conventional shell range. Of course for ranges beyond conventional then this is the only way to get there.
That's what properly implemented QOS is for. Voice traffic goes to the front of the queue (possibly at the cost of dropping a bulk data packet) and emergency voice traffic can bump other voice packets into the bit bucket if necessary.
right. And yet india moves to an system indifferent to data types then poof goes your QOS
Voice is lower total bandwidth but requires low latency and no interruptions to be high quality. When data connections are not strained then there is no challenge to provide that but it can become important and thus much more expensive than the data it bears. Personally I do use VOIP and so I know it's not as good as non-voip some of the time.
To paraphrase the AC.
I don't think Steve would have allowed such as shitty product to completely be release.
Well you nailed it. Like Paul Mason, jobs would release no wine before its time. Moreover, someone would get fired. Like it or not his process worked. It could be that this is just going to be the learning experience they need to get back their Wu.
But in a way we are lucky. In the case of these maps, the Jobs reality distortion filed probably would have convinced us that the maps were right and the earth was wrong. If it was strong he might have just distorted the reality to match.
Back in the 1990s this was developed at Los Alamos and a few other accelerator centers. it's not new or unique to belgium.
http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/science21/ATW.html
http://www.world-nuclear.org/sym/1999/venneri.htm
wifi doesn't work in the terrahertz range...
Indeed. My point was that the reason we don't think wifi is dangerous is that we can envision a mechanism other than cooking (thermal) where non ionizing, low energy photons with enormous wavelengths could damage cells. Yet we once thought that rare x-ray events could not be harmful till we learned about DNA damage. and We now have some reason to believe that maybe long wavelength terrahertz can resonantly manipulate DNA. So it becomes less far fetched to imagine that WiFi could have a physiological effect even if we don't really know the details of how yet. I'm not saying it does. I'm just saying that the same arguments that dimissed other phenomena were wrong.
Well maybe you should just start with slashdot and work forward in time:
http://www.science.slashdot.org/story/09/10/30/1216230/How-Terahertz-Waves-Tear-Apart-DNA
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/416066/how-terahertz-waves-tear-apart-dna/
So if everyting is HTML5 then presumably this is going to be like WebOS or apple's Dashboard apps? Didn't Facebook recently retreat from HTML5 to native? Then there's the grim history of javas early promise of write once run everywhere. Has HTML5 grown up so much that it can finally pull it off? or is this more than HTML5
It has been demonstrated in the lab that exposure to terrhertz radiotion causes non-thermal changes in cellular development and signalling. a theoretical mechanism modeled and shows that low level terrahertz is capable of resonantly exciting bends and strand openings in Double stradded DNA. Since those are in fact the primary mechanisms of signal transduction at the molecular level it would not be surprising if this was the explanation for the experimental observations. However these studies are still at the preliminary stages. they are peer reviewed but there has not been a lot of other investigators yet to isolate and confirm the phenomena. Just a growing body of not fully chartcterized and explained observational phenonema of strong changes in cell regulation under low dose terrahertz. It has been noted to be frequency dependent which both is in line with the reonant effects argument and also could be why it is hard to study at this stage in a reproducible manner in different labs.
The reason this model is interesting is that, just as X-rays were thought safe until the mechanism of amplified effects from DNA damage became accepted, the problem is that terrhertz are individually too low in energy to break chemical bonds. Thus if there is means of affecting cells it has to be resonant, high field gradient effects, or something that works at a vibrational or rotational level in cells. All of these might have very different depths of penetration in multi-celluar organisms and their affects might be very indirect.
so it's not implausible, but is very murky.
Apple computer seeded this when they partnered with Acorn micro to create the ARM company (producing the modern ARM6). It went in to the newton. The newton we all know failed. But the iphone is the re-incarnation of the newton. And it is this that is really responsible for the rise of the RISC ARM processors. Even the Marvel processors derive from this same origin. Their partnership with IBM on the powerPC shows how they still believed in RISC even after they sold off ARM.
It's remarkable how apple is an early adopter. dynamic memory, integrated graphics, mouse, postscript,.... and Risc.
Without iPhone/iPad, Apple would still makes lots of money. Apple would make an estimated $30B in revenue instead of $140B (based on Q3 estimates). Profit margin might be in the 30% range instead of the 40% though.
Apple's wife has been piling that cash up in a rented foreign storage locker. She can't figure out how to launder it all back to the US to dividend to stock holders without paying taxes on it.
Maybe apple will realize it has enough money and see the danger of trading patents with Tuco Samsung-manca.
Another rational for not cross licensing patents in this case is that Apple's patents are design patents and Samsungs are methods implementations for standards. Design patents are intended to distinguish a product so licensing them makes no sense. Standards are intended to unify operations so licensing their methods for money in non-discriminative ways makes sense.