Our home-made rink:
Kids out x-country skiing on the lake:
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Home Hockey
Minnesota may be cold, but it does come with some benefits. Even with the mild winter, the lake stay permenantly frozen. As such, it's fit for a skating rink, and cross country skiing (even though there is no natural snow anywhere else). The kids have taken to hockey pretty well despite the fcat they have never played before.
Our home-made rink:
Kids out x-country skiing on the lake:
Our home-made rink:
Kids out x-country skiing on the lake:
Monday, January 30, 2012
You can deceive some of the people, most of the time
From the Daily, "And the more one looks at the Buffett Rule, the more it looks like a solution in search of a problem.
Buffett says he pays around 17 percent tax on all his income, while his assistant for the past two decades pays more than twice as much, at 35.8 percent. That weird disparity — one that confuses even tax experts unless she makes $200,000 to $500,000 a year — would certainly strike many as unfair, not just a president trying to score political points during election season.
But their example shows how unwise it is to legislate from anecdotal evidence. The U.S. tax code overall is amazingly progressive. The rich pay much higher average effective rates than middle- or low-income folks. According to the Tax Policy Center, in 2010 the top 0.1 percent paid an average tax rate — including income and payroll taxes — of 30.7 percent, right at the Buffett Rule level. By contrast, middle-income voters — defined as those in the middle fifth of income distribution — paid just 12.8 percent. The bottom 40 percent of taxpayers had an average total tax rate of even less, just about 3 percent when you take into account various tax credits.
And if you look at the tax burden by amounts paid rather than tax rates, the system looks even more lopsided. In 2009, the top 1 percent paid 36.7 percent of federal income taxes as they earned 16.9 percent of adjusted gross income. And the richest of the rich, the top 0.1 percent, paid 17.1 percent of income taxes while earning 7.8 percent of adjusted gross income, according to the Tax Foundation. The bottom 50 percent pays just 2.3 percent of income taxes.
There are certainly some rich investors, such as Buffett or Republican presidential contestant Mitt Romney, who pay far less than 30 percent because their income is taxed at the preferential capital gains tax rate of 15 percent. And it’s those folks whom Obama is targeting with this new alternative minimum tax. But to achieve some level of “shared responsibility,” he’s effectively raising the tax on investment income to 30 percent — at least for those who make more than $1 million.
But why would that be a good idea?"
You want to debate whether dividends, capital gains and carried interest tax treatment should change? By all means, let's begin. But to promote higher taxes because it's "fair" or "not fair" is bogus, and using an example that is not at all real-world applicable, is complete populist deception.
Buffett says he pays around 17 percent tax on all his income, while his assistant for the past two decades pays more than twice as much, at 35.8 percent. That weird disparity — one that confuses even tax experts unless she makes $200,000 to $500,000 a year — would certainly strike many as unfair, not just a president trying to score political points during election season.
But their example shows how unwise it is to legislate from anecdotal evidence. The U.S. tax code overall is amazingly progressive. The rich pay much higher average effective rates than middle- or low-income folks. According to the Tax Policy Center, in 2010 the top 0.1 percent paid an average tax rate — including income and payroll taxes — of 30.7 percent, right at the Buffett Rule level. By contrast, middle-income voters — defined as those in the middle fifth of income distribution — paid just 12.8 percent. The bottom 40 percent of taxpayers had an average total tax rate of even less, just about 3 percent when you take into account various tax credits.
And if you look at the tax burden by amounts paid rather than tax rates, the system looks even more lopsided. In 2009, the top 1 percent paid 36.7 percent of federal income taxes as they earned 16.9 percent of adjusted gross income. And the richest of the rich, the top 0.1 percent, paid 17.1 percent of income taxes while earning 7.8 percent of adjusted gross income, according to the Tax Foundation. The bottom 50 percent pays just 2.3 percent of income taxes.
There are certainly some rich investors, such as Buffett or Republican presidential contestant Mitt Romney, who pay far less than 30 percent because their income is taxed at the preferential capital gains tax rate of 15 percent. And it’s those folks whom Obama is targeting with this new alternative minimum tax. But to achieve some level of “shared responsibility,” he’s effectively raising the tax on investment income to 30 percent — at least for those who make more than $1 million.
But why would that be a good idea?"
You want to debate whether dividends, capital gains and carried interest tax treatment should change? By all means, let's begin. But to promote higher taxes because it's "fair" or "not fair" is bogus, and using an example that is not at all real-world applicable, is complete populist deception.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Profits for the People
Reported in the Wall Street Journal today - "The Federal Reserve turned $76.9 billion of its profits over to the U.S. Treasury last year [2011], close to the record amount transferred to government coffers in 2010 amid gains generated in its expanding portfolio of securities."
Hmmm, profits made by the Fed due to "bailouts" put into the country's treasury. That's over $160 billion [billion with a B] the Fed has earned [not returned, EARNED] in profits over two years. Corporate handouts and sweetheart deals and bailouts. It's the best use of government funds the country has seen in three years!
Hmmm, profits made by the Fed due to "bailouts" put into the country's treasury. That's over $160 billion [billion with a B] the Fed has earned [not returned, EARNED] in profits over two years. Corporate handouts and sweetheart deals and bailouts. It's the best use of government funds the country has seen in three years!
New Year
A whirlwind of Holiday activity. After enjoying a belated Christmas in Westchester, we spent New Year's Eve at Boston's family First Night Celebration for the third year in a row.New Year's Day, Emily and I watched the Patriots secure homefield advantage against the Bills in Foxboro.
Our flight home was tough. After connecting thru Atlanta (from Providence), we didn't return home until 1am.
Love my birthday present (which I had a little more than a hand in picking out), but unfortunately, it can't be used for a while. I think I'm switching to celebrate my HALF birthday going forward. Surfs Up!
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
The Bostonians
The week of Thanksgiving we did a few compulsatory Boston activities:
Visited the Patriots Hall of Fame at Gillette Stadium.
City view from the top of the Custom House
Visited the Patriots Hall of Fame at Gillette Stadium.
City view from the top of the Custom House
Make way for those ducklings. They aren't really ducklings anymore...
Monday, December 5, 2011
Christmas is here
No, I can not acknowledge Christmas before Thanksgiving is over, unlike most of the retail outlets of this country these days.
We picked out our tree in October, and cut it down December 3rd, and put it up Dec 4th.
We picked out our tree in October, and cut it down December 3rd, and put it up Dec 4th.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
1927-2011
Sadly, I write that my Dad passed away Early Friday morning [Nov 18]. I flew to Boston Tuesday night when it was clear the end was near. As a family, we had a great 4 days with him in October when he was still highly functional. See my facebook profile, that was taken the last day.
On Wednesday, all 5 kids were there and he was pretty cognitive and we all had or chances to speak. By Thursday, he was mostly out of it and clearly struggling. He passed a 4am with my Mom at his side.
His last words, with most of us there, were to his beloved hospice nurse, who asked how he was. He responded, ok...with faith. Touching and fitting.
Link
Thomas A. Moore, 84
November 19, 2011
SOUTH YARMOUTH — Thomas A. Moore of South Yarmouth, formerly of Waban, died November 18, 2011, at the age of 84. Beloved husband of Mary L. (DeRusha) Moore for 60 years.
Devoted father of Thomas A. Moore Jr. and his wife Sylvie Martin-Moore of South Yarmouth. Paul G. Moore and his wife Donna Gerhauser of Scotch Plains, N.J., Mary A. Hurley and her husband Paul of Naples, Maine, Daniel J. Moore and his wife Fiona of Needham and William H. Moore and his wife Alison of Mound, Minn.
Brother of Ralph Moore of Murphy, N.C., Catherine Carlin of Springfield and the late William Moore and Claire Oppel.
Loving grandfather of 9 grandchildren. Also survived by many nieces and nephews.
Late retired treasurer of William Carter Company of Needham. Former trustee of Carroll Center for the Blind. He received his BA from Boston University and MBA from Babson College. WWII Navy veteran.
Expressions of sympathy may be made in Thomas' memory to the YMCA Campus, Burgess and Hayward Scholarship Fund, 79 Coddington St. Quincy, MA 02169.
On Wednesday, all 5 kids were there and he was pretty cognitive and we all had or chances to speak. By Thursday, he was mostly out of it and clearly struggling. He passed a 4am with my Mom at his side.
His last words, with most of us there, were to his beloved hospice nurse, who asked how he was. He responded, ok...with faith. Touching and fitting.
Link
Thomas A. Moore, 84
November 19, 2011
SOUTH YARMOUTH — Thomas A. Moore of South Yarmouth, formerly of Waban, died November 18, 2011, at the age of 84. Beloved husband of Mary L. (DeRusha) Moore for 60 years.
Devoted father of Thomas A. Moore Jr. and his wife Sylvie Martin-Moore of South Yarmouth. Paul G. Moore and his wife Donna Gerhauser of Scotch Plains, N.J., Mary A. Hurley and her husband Paul of Naples, Maine, Daniel J. Moore and his wife Fiona of Needham and William H. Moore and his wife Alison of Mound, Minn.
Brother of Ralph Moore of Murphy, N.C., Catherine Carlin of Springfield and the late William Moore and Claire Oppel.
Loving grandfather of 9 grandchildren. Also survived by many nieces and nephews.
Late retired treasurer of William Carter Company of Needham. Former trustee of Carroll Center for the Blind. He received his BA from Boston University and MBA from Babson College. WWII Navy veteran.
Expressions of sympathy may be made in Thomas' memory to the YMCA Campus, Burgess and Hayward Scholarship Fund, 79 Coddington St. Quincy, MA 02169.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Open letter to Thomas A. Moore, Sr.
Dear Dad,
I sit here a thousand miles away a full year younger than the age you were when you had me. That thought is mind boggling to me as I reflect over the last 42 years. There aren't many who are given the chance, nay - the opportunty, to say thank you to the ones that have loved them their whole lives. And with that I say, thank you.
I am proud of who I have become in what is hopefully my mid-life. But a large degree of the credit is yours. I am the man, the husband, the father that I am because of my respect and admiration of you. Your dedication to our family, your faith, your constant support of me individually are all idol worthy.
Today is Veterans Day, and I can't help but recall your early patriotic call. Too young, in theory, to serve in the WWII effort didn't stop you from packing your things (or just a toothbrush, if I recall the story correctly) and joining the Navy. "Dinty" Moore may not have made it out of the Carribbean due to the war's end, but your dedication to serve demontrates the value of honor in life.
Unlike many people today, you worked at the same company my entire life. You had a daily routine that showed dedication and consistency. As a small child, I loved visiting your office. You were respected and influential. I can vividly recall one specific day when I was sitting in your office and you were on the phone working with the banks moving millions of dollars around to fund your company's business with a single phone call. That was a day where I looked at the man behind the desk and said - I want to do this, and finance became my calling.
Your work ethic was instilled in me early. I understood the value of a dollar, and the value of education. By the sixth grade I struggled in the less than structured public education system. Despite having left the hardship of just putting the education expenses of three other private school tuitions behind you, you recommitted to sending me to private school. Although not my favorite decision at the time, it's the one individual decision that probably most shapped the rest of my life. Although it wasn't much in the scheme of things, you required me to commit 50% of every dollar I earned from the time I was 12 to go towards my own education. I may have hated turning over all those Christmas tips from the paper route, and it probably contributed to the value of only a few textbooks, but it created something in me that lasted a lifetime.
Work wasn't the most important thing in your life by any stretch. Despite your tireless dedication to your work, you made it home for supper each night. Maybe its more legend than reality, but it's a feat that still amazes me to this day. You drove me to school every day. You made basketball games and cross country meets. We attended scores of great sporting events together, and had vacation moments that I will always treasure.
Throughout life your steady, quiet nature was a subtle, but driving force. I may not share your calm level-headedness, but such a temperment was reassuring. If you were mad, I knew it and learned from it. It was a stable environment that fostered being both inquisitive and opinionated, yet tolerant. Your faith was a guiding force throughout that, and your love of God and the Church were heartening. The way you have handled the last few months has been inspiring. I can not imagine a more honorable and healthy way. Your amazing dedication to assisting Mom in the face of your own battle is worthy of story telling. But being the centerpoint of the story is not you. You view it as your humanly duty, just like you did the day you left Springfield with just the toothbrush. You've raised a family that understands the need to care for each other, and understand that what you view as your duty will dutifully be carried on.
I am lucky to have thousands of lasting great memories of our time together, and even further lucky to have zero bad ones. I was unfortunate not to know either of my grandfathers. In earlier years, as health waxed and waned, I worried my children would not know some of theirs. Thankfully that is not the case. You have created wonderful memories for them as well - and for that we are all lucky.
May God be with you,
Your loving son,
Bill
I sit here a thousand miles away a full year younger than the age you were when you had me. That thought is mind boggling to me as I reflect over the last 42 years. There aren't many who are given the chance, nay - the opportunty, to say thank you to the ones that have loved them their whole lives. And with that I say, thank you.
I am proud of who I have become in what is hopefully my mid-life. But a large degree of the credit is yours. I am the man, the husband, the father that I am because of my respect and admiration of you. Your dedication to our family, your faith, your constant support of me individually are all idol worthy.
Today is Veterans Day, and I can't help but recall your early patriotic call. Too young, in theory, to serve in the WWII effort didn't stop you from packing your things (or just a toothbrush, if I recall the story correctly) and joining the Navy. "Dinty" Moore may not have made it out of the Carribbean due to the war's end, but your dedication to serve demontrates the value of honor in life.
Unlike many people today, you worked at the same company my entire life. You had a daily routine that showed dedication and consistency. As a small child, I loved visiting your office. You were respected and influential. I can vividly recall one specific day when I was sitting in your office and you were on the phone working with the banks moving millions of dollars around to fund your company's business with a single phone call. That was a day where I looked at the man behind the desk and said - I want to do this, and finance became my calling.
Your work ethic was instilled in me early. I understood the value of a dollar, and the value of education. By the sixth grade I struggled in the less than structured public education system. Despite having left the hardship of just putting the education expenses of three other private school tuitions behind you, you recommitted to sending me to private school. Although not my favorite decision at the time, it's the one individual decision that probably most shapped the rest of my life. Although it wasn't much in the scheme of things, you required me to commit 50% of every dollar I earned from the time I was 12 to go towards my own education. I may have hated turning over all those Christmas tips from the paper route, and it probably contributed to the value of only a few textbooks, but it created something in me that lasted a lifetime.
Work wasn't the most important thing in your life by any stretch. Despite your tireless dedication to your work, you made it home for supper each night. Maybe its more legend than reality, but it's a feat that still amazes me to this day. You drove me to school every day. You made basketball games and cross country meets. We attended scores of great sporting events together, and had vacation moments that I will always treasure.
Throughout life your steady, quiet nature was a subtle, but driving force. I may not share your calm level-headedness, but such a temperment was reassuring. If you were mad, I knew it and learned from it. It was a stable environment that fostered being both inquisitive and opinionated, yet tolerant. Your faith was a guiding force throughout that, and your love of God and the Church were heartening. The way you have handled the last few months has been inspiring. I can not imagine a more honorable and healthy way. Your amazing dedication to assisting Mom in the face of your own battle is worthy of story telling. But being the centerpoint of the story is not you. You view it as your humanly duty, just like you did the day you left Springfield with just the toothbrush. You've raised a family that understands the need to care for each other, and understand that what you view as your duty will dutifully be carried on.
I am lucky to have thousands of lasting great memories of our time together, and even further lucky to have zero bad ones. I was unfortunate not to know either of my grandfathers. In earlier years, as health waxed and waned, I worried my children would not know some of theirs. Thankfully that is not the case. You have created wonderful memories for them as well - and for that we are all lucky.
May God be with you,
Your loving son,
Bill
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Movember
November (a.k.a Mo-vember for people who grow mustaches in respect for mens health issues) is Pancreatic Cancer Awareness month. Get aware. But then again its also Native American Heritage Month, COPD Awareness month, National Novel Writing Month, Alzheimer's Disease Awareness Month, American Diabetes Month, Lung Cancer Awareness Month, National Homeless Youth Awareness Month, Crohn's & Ulcerative Colitis Awareness Month, National Pomegranate Month, and International Drum Month - so you might be busy.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Mobility
I've posted numerous times about the flaws in income inequality analyses. Most assume that people stay at the same income level. Particularly, it assumes that the same 1% are always making the most money. When they aren't. Just one stat from teh exhibit below - 5% of those in the top quartile were in the LOWEST quartile six years later, while 2% in the lowest quartile were in the top. Here is someone else's take:
From Carpe Diem:
We hear a lot these days about "increasing income inequality" and "stagnating household income," but those discussions rarely include what is probably the most important factor when it comes to income over time: income mobility. In fact, even if: a) income inequality was increasing over time, and b) median household income was stagnant over time, those outcomes wouldn't necessarily be a problem if there was significant income mobility. Reason? If there is substantial movement of households over time from lower-income to higher-income quintiles, households may only be earning the median household income for a short period of time on their way up to a higher quintile.
In other words, it's more likely that most households are "typical" or at the "median" level" only temporarily on their way to a higher income group. The fact that median household income might be stagnant over time seems far less important than what happens as households exceed median income and move up to a higher-income category. In the case of significant income mobility over time, wouldn't households actually benefit from increasing income inequality over time if that allowed them to earn higher incomes relative to the median or low-income quintiles once they arrived at one of the top two quintiles?
Most of those complaining about income inequality and stagnating income seem to statically assume that households or individuals stay in the same income group (by quintile, or the "top 1%," "top 10%," bottom 50%, median income, etc.) forever, with no movement over time. If we assume that you're stuck in the bottom income quintile for life, or even earn the median household income for life (both highly unrealistic), then the concerns about rising income inequality or stagnating median household income have greater strength. But with dynamic movement over time in the income of households and individuals, the "problems" of income inequality and stagnating income seem much less important, and might even be "non-problems."
Thomas Sowell offers this key insight (emphasis added):
“Only by focusing on the income brackets, instead of the actual people moving between those brackets, have the intelligentsia been able to verbally create a "problem" for which a "solution" is necessary. They have created a powerful vision of "classes" with "disparities" and "inequities" in income, caused by "barriers" created by "society." But the routine rise of millions of people out of the lowest quintile over time makes a mockery of the "barriers" assumed by many, if not most, of the intelligentsia.”
Contrary to prevailing public opinion that households get stuck at a given income level for decades or generations, there is strong empirical evidence that households actually move up and down the economic ladder over even very short periods of time.
For example, recent research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis is summarized in the table above, based on income data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics that followed the same households from 2001 to 2007. The empirical results answer the question: For households that started in a given earnings quintile (20 percent group) in 2001, what percentage of those households moved to a different income quintile over the next six years? Short answer: a lot.
From Carpe Diem:
We hear a lot these days about "increasing income inequality" and "stagnating household income," but those discussions rarely include what is probably the most important factor when it comes to income over time: income mobility. In fact, even if: a) income inequality was increasing over time, and b) median household income was stagnant over time, those outcomes wouldn't necessarily be a problem if there was significant income mobility. Reason? If there is substantial movement of households over time from lower-income to higher-income quintiles, households may only be earning the median household income for a short period of time on their way up to a higher quintile.
In other words, it's more likely that most households are "typical" or at the "median" level" only temporarily on their way to a higher income group. The fact that median household income might be stagnant over time seems far less important than what happens as households exceed median income and move up to a higher-income category. In the case of significant income mobility over time, wouldn't households actually benefit from increasing income inequality over time if that allowed them to earn higher incomes relative to the median or low-income quintiles once they arrived at one of the top two quintiles?
Most of those complaining about income inequality and stagnating income seem to statically assume that households or individuals stay in the same income group (by quintile, or the "top 1%," "top 10%," bottom 50%, median income, etc.) forever, with no movement over time. If we assume that you're stuck in the bottom income quintile for life, or even earn the median household income for life (both highly unrealistic), then the concerns about rising income inequality or stagnating median household income have greater strength. But with dynamic movement over time in the income of households and individuals, the "problems" of income inequality and stagnating income seem much less important, and might even be "non-problems."
Thomas Sowell offers this key insight (emphasis added):
“Only by focusing on the income brackets, instead of the actual people moving between those brackets, have the intelligentsia been able to verbally create a "problem" for which a "solution" is necessary. They have created a powerful vision of "classes" with "disparities" and "inequities" in income, caused by "barriers" created by "society." But the routine rise of millions of people out of the lowest quintile over time makes a mockery of the "barriers" assumed by many, if not most, of the intelligentsia.”
Contrary to prevailing public opinion that households get stuck at a given income level for decades or generations, there is strong empirical evidence that households actually move up and down the economic ladder over even very short periods of time.
For example, recent research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis is summarized in the table above, based on income data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics that followed the same households from 2001 to 2007. The empirical results answer the question: For households that started in a given earnings quintile (20 percent group) in 2001, what percentage of those households moved to a different income quintile over the next six years? Short answer: a lot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)