ness

NEVER!

Re-reading a couple favorites right now: 'In Cold Blood' and 'Another Autumn: The Rufus Chronicle'. If you're a dog lover, and especially if you're a bird hunter, The Rufus Chronicle is a must read. The author is Charles Gusewelle, a Kansas City Star columnist, who tells the story of his Brittany from start to end with a lot of funny stories about Rufus at home, and a year-by-year chronicle of his hunting. Reminds me an awful lot of our older Brit Molly. Justin -- I've heard really good things about O'Rielly's Lincoln and Kennedy books -- gonna add them to the wish list.

OK -- the level of BS has risen to where I can't let it go any longer. Ward Clever had a pipe, but he NEVER smoked it. NEVER. Beaver and Larry smoked some coffee grounds in it, but that's it.

I didn't say diseases like diabetes are taxed! Alcohol causes a lot of problems, and is taxed pretty heavily, requires a license to sell, etc.

I don't buy that, Wayne. Everybody eventually gives up smoking. No question there are other health issues mucking things up -- and they generally get taxed pretty heavily.

That's a good question, Justin. I'm on a group plan through work, and I don't personally disclose any health information to get it. But, I'd bet the insurance company gets information about us as a group before they set the price each year. I'm gonna ask our HR lady about that. I just Googled and it appears Medicare and Medicaid don't discern between smokers and non-smokers (or diabetics, etc). There have been some attempts to put a surcharge on smokers, but I don't know if any have passed. When I redid my life policy a few years back, I had to give blood and they said they checked for smoking and other stuff with those tests.

Boy, this argument that comes up about the poor not being able to afford smokes sure misses a lot of more important points. Can 'they' afford emphysema? Heart disease? Lung cancer? Wayne, as to more stable sources -- that would sure be nice, but I think turning down a stream of revenue because it may go away doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Your Social Security may go away, so can I have it?

Agreed -- but we just keep voting in the same knuckleheads, so we pretty much get the same results. I heard between $6 and 9 B spend on this round of elections, but we're essentially where we were before it. Here's a pretty good piece from 60 Minutes that shows how messed up our Congress is. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50134480

Went to school at Baker; remembered you lived there; lake sizes you quoted were about right. Just drove through over Maple Leaf and swung by the 'Old Lake' for grins. Did some prairie restoration work along the road to the county lake. Used to hunt quail below the dam. Other assorted shenanigans at both lakes.

Baldwin City Lake, Douglas County Lake by chance?

That way of thinking is extinct in Washington. They pay lip service to the notion, but nobody is suggesting significant change that would get us there in a reasonable amount of time. We had War Bonds in the old days. In WWI, the government borrowed binoculars from citizens and returned them after the war with a nominal fee (I think maybe $1). As few as 50 years ago there was a real emphasis on balancing the budget -- when we had just come out of a world war and had a lot of work to do. When you owe money, you lose control of your destiny.

Agreed -- you're kind of a fool if you don't take what's available to you. I just wish we could review these programs, and a lot of others -- really the whole flippin' budget -- and figure out what makes sense given where we are right now. But the programs are so entrenched, nobody wants to cut anything if it might cause some citizen (voter) a little pain, and they just keep adding layers. When the issue comes up, everyone wants to point at something else and say cut that, or that. Or turn it into a red vs. blue thing.

Never mind. Thanks Justin.

I always appreciate it when there is support given for statements made, and you're one of the best at doing it here, but there's an implication without context in your statement. Sure, 3/4 of a million dollars is a lot of jack, but it's over a 15 year period for one -- or about $51M a year. Still a lot of money, but I suspect it's proportional to the size of the operation to a large extent. If your point was that Republicans farmers take, I'll grant you that. If it was that they take more, well we need more info. Regardless, agriculture subsidies are one of the biggest black holes for spending, and are riddled with outdated and unnecessary expenditures. Too bad our government can't seem to figure out -- or anything else really.

Holy chit, there's a lotta nonsense in this thread. Tax on poor...huh? Those packs of smokes cost the same regardless of who buys them. More poor people smoke than rich, so it's targeting the poor and downtrodden? Cheaper butts stimulate the economy....how dat? Health is behind the initiative?...nope -- soaking smokers (and drinkers) is a time-honored way to raise money. Why would the petroleum industry care? Wrench -- I need a translation MO tax the lowest in the US just highlights a missed opportunity. But, I guess you're all content with the performance of your schools -- especially St. Louis and KCMO districts

Yeah, but you gotta agree Snyder's pretty special. Lots of top 25s and 10s in over 20 years. One of the best coaches around and had always run a clean program.

Somebody mounted a pretty good campaign against that tax. Seems like I was seeing ads, billboards and even hand written signs at convenience stores. Common theme was the 700% increase, or something like that. A tax like that is about as close as you get to free money. Too bad for your schools. Maybe open a bunch more casinos?

Hunting!

Put one one in the plus column for global warming

I should study up on this. I said earlier that it's a zero sum game, and I still do believe it is to a large extent. Money spent there is not spent elsewhere, but there is no doubt the jobs created boost the local economy. If that somehow gets folks off the government 'teet' (as dad used to say) that's a good thing. I think it comes at the expense of somewhere else though -- that's just the way stuff works. I don't think crime is a real factor anymore. That's mostly the reputation from the old days when the mobsters were so involved. Sure, some granny will gamble away her Social Security check and have to resort to armed violence, but that's probably the exception to the rule. If she's foolish enough to try that in JD's neighborhood -- well, we know how that'll go down. I suppose my fundamental issue is that there's the 'something for nothing' mentality at the core of this. The time and money spent on all this could be spent so much more effectively on other things. You know -- good old hard work and smart work. I don't gamble at casinos, because I know the odds are stacked against me. And, I recognize the way the casinos pay for all their glitz and glamor is on the suckers that think they'll be 'the one'. I know that for every big winner you hear about, there are many times that many that lost (and they tend to keep to themselves). Some lost more than they can afford, but most just pissed away some money for the excitement. I just get mine elsewhere.

Lotta truth in that, John.

Easy -- any thread can be jerked off topic and over to politics. All it takes is a little jerk Gramps, I hear you man. About the best thing I can offer is to stick to your morals -- because they're the right ones. Don't let a knucklehead ruin your day.

Yeah, I gotta agree with you. Sure, they create jobs, bring in tax revenues and provide entertainment, but it's a zero-sum deal. Most of the money spent there won't get spent elsewhere. So, whatever other entertainment and dining options you've got around there (where?) will suffer.

Every time a rabbit get's a sniffle, it's off to the doctor for an antibiotic! Seriously, this is something I've kept my eye on for years -- and I don't think it gets enough attention. Chemicals, radiation, pollution, climate change -- they're all bad things. But a breakout bacteria or virus could wipe us out. Think 1918 flu.

Being of the landed gentry, I typically have my angling garments tailor made. Generations of ness' have patronized Robjent's in Hampshire. They have my measurements and preferences on file, and those of ness men going back over 600 years. Give them a ring at 06-58-775-8-668-1, ask for Clive and tell him ness sent you. I assure you he'd be happy to discuss the matter with you. He'll be in the states early next month (delivering a fine, jewel-encrusted cane rod to Britney Spears, who apparently has decided to use the time afforded by her new found sobriety to learn the gentle art of fly angling) and you could possibly engage in a confabulation at that juncture. Cheers.