bloodninja420

That's about as good of a rate as I ever got quoted for full coverage on a 2005 600. If you have a few speeding tickets and limited riding history, you're out of luck. Liability only for me... no way does paying 20% of the bikes value per year make sense unless you plan on going into full squidmode.

Me too. One of the few female "celebs" with a brain and some wit.

I highly recommend doing it yourself. I've never taking a bike in for an oil change at a dealer, but I do occasionally get lazy and drop my cars off. Without fail they will over-tighten the drain bolt and overfill the car with oil.

Wonder if the guy accidentally shot himself and was trying to cover out of embarassment, or maybe it happen in the course of doing something seedy? Either way, he should have been letting his attorney do the talking for him from the beginning.

Looks like a solution in search of a problem, a product in search of a market.

Oh come on man, they were just evaluating that guy for A-group. CR can't help it if the guy didn't abandon his line and stand er up! See, from the N2 thread:

Not to thread hijack-- but I am wondering if it's ever possible for coolant in the reserve tank to just evaporate slowly? I've had a reserve tank go slowly dry over the course of 2 months. It's not getting onto the oil, so I figure slow leak somewhere or evaporation (if that's even possible.) The rubber cap on that tank seems like a decent seal, but dunno if it's perfect.

My first thought would be to return to more of a stock tune running 87 octane and see how she does before delving into anything mechanical.

35% is the federal rate. 40% rolled off my tongue because that's the rate we use in our models that also need to account for state taxes. If you've every worked for the state of ohio you'd better hope I know what Im talking about-- Im portfolio manager for one of the pension funds! Smccrony-- sorry to come off as a douche. Nothing I say is intended to be ad-hom. I just want to attack arguments that are wrongheaded. For every major stock and corporate bond purchase our fund contemplates, interviews with the CEO and his direct reports are an important step in our due diligence. Without fail taxes are are pain point for every corporation with an international presence. And wouldn't they have to be for all these firms to seriously consider undergoing the cost of a reorg and leaving behind the most favorable bankruptcy and tort system in the world? The US's corporate tax policy just boggles my mind. For these reasons: - It's a form of double-taxation in the presence of capital gains and dividend taxes. Other forms of incorporation such as llcs, sole proprietorships, partnerships, and s-corps whose distributions are taxed only once, at ordinary income rates, are not subject to the double taxation. But our c-corps are. - It doesn't actually raise much money at all. It was around 10% of treasury receipts, give or take, when I last looked. - It incentivizes incredibly unhelpful behaviors on the the part of our corporations. Huge tax preparation bills, convoluted transfer-pricing structures, and in cases like BK, exit from the USA. If our federal government really needs the money currently being raised by the corporate income tax, literally any other taxation option would be preferable. It's the worst tax imaginable.

How it works is this: As a corp headquartered in the USA, BK's tax rate is 35% on any money they repatriate to the US. For income earned in the US, BK writes a check to the IRS for the full 35%. For income earned outside the US, BK still owes uncle same the 35%, but the IRS credits them for any tax bill payed to the foreign country. So if BK payed the Canadian gov 15%, they still owe the IRS 20%. In Strictly Street's example, the reasons for BK's 27.5% current effective rate dont really have anything to do with international strategy. They reduced their bill by taking advantage of accelerated depreciation schedules, and tax credits relevant to the debt financing of machinery, and believe it or not, tax credits that let them classify parts of their business as "manufacturing."

Pardon me for bringing some actual knowledge into play in my 2 posts in this thread. All Im seeing otherwise is shoddy arguments built upon an incorrect understanding of the facts.

You guys realize that BK is still going to pay the full 40% rate on all income generated from US operations. These tax inversions are not about getting out of that tax bill, it's impossible. What they are about is paying the local tax rates on worldwide income. US is the only country I know of that demands it's corporations pay the US rate on global income. It's utterly foolish because it raises only a pittance and encourages our corps to move headquarters. And the whole sick game is made possible by the social justice warriors like you guys in this thead with zero command over the actual facts or economics of tax policy. Pay a fair share, derp!

Nice bike. Is that you I see parked outside of Tip Top fairly regularly?

This question is illustrative of why public debate on the topic of corporate income tax is so sloppy and prone to demagoguery. The lay-public has trouble grasping the concept that there isn't some clean line between businesses on one hand and citizens on the other. The statutory incidence of a tax (e.g. laws stating that a c-corp pays a share of its income) is unrelated to the actual economic incidence of a tax (e.g. which group of individuals--consumers, employees, shareholders-- are actually paying the tax.) Corporations are made up of one group of people (employees) that exist to serve another group of people (shareholders) by providing goods/services to another group of people (customers.) It's people all the way down, and if you tax the corporate entity, it's really one of all of those 3 groups of people who are economically paying for that tax. A faceless entity cannot pay a tax, only people can. And by the way these people are already paying a plethora of taxes on wages, dividends, capital gains, consumption/sales. I wish the public debate would reach the point of acknowledging this, because we can start asking actual interesting questions about efficient forms of taxation. Well, actually there is an entire and mature branch of Economics dedicated to studying this exact question. And the consensus is that a corporate income tax is one of the worst possible ways to raise revenue. Because it brings in very little money while at the same time incentivizing very inefficient choices among actors in the economy. Our President and his council of ivy-league-educated economic advisers are all very well aware of this, but they have chosen instead to demagogue around talking points that play well among our less enlightened electorate.

I am loving the outrage on my Facebook feed over this one. I just can't even relate to the thought process that demonizes a 100% rational business decision instead of a tax code that incentived that behavior.

2lb a week is kind of the consensus upper bound for how much (non water) weight you can lose in a week. Your food intake would need to be about 1000 calories below maintenance per day. You might be able to lose a bit more than 2lb/week if you're really big currently. But that wouldn't be sustainable IMO.

Lol

What year CBR? In my opinion some of the older models sound pretty damn good stock, but it's all personal preference.

I think part of the problem with superintendent pay as it relates to schools is that public schools are so heavily regulated in terms of curriculum, union labor force, etc., that the superintendent isn't really able to move the dial one way or another. It's a commodotized job.. probably the main differentiator is a superintendent's PR skills in keeping up staff morale and community outreach. Teacher pay is the big money sink, though. When you have 200 qualified applicants applying for every public school opening, you know something is out of wack with pay. Unions have done a great job for their incumbent members.

The way you're qualitatively framing this, I completely agree and probably so does everyone else here. But to Butters' point, you have to consider the actual dollars. There is no level of customer service that is worth a $1000 premium on a sub-$15k vehicle, is my opinion.

Looks nice but I am guessing he will have a bitch of a time getting $8000 for that bike.

Pretty damn cool. What happens to the organ now?

Gotcha thx.

When is the next mid-ohio date?

I was worried more in terms or turning/leaning. I'm trying to form a mental picture of the contact patch... it just doesn't seem like much traction could exist at all.