So here's how it works. You buy the same stuff from Amazon that you normally buy. Don't change your buying habits at all. But instead of going to amazon.com to buy your stuff, you click on the Amazon link just to the right of this post. Your stuff costs you the same amount of money but I get a little commission. Hopefully enough to keep me in vodka. Good vodka, that is. Stolychnaya.
Or change your buying habits, buy lots of stuff, and I will buy even more vodka. Or maybe something else.
Tools. That's it. I could use a fuel pressure gauge.
Bookmark the link and I will appreciate you anonymously. Every time I drink vodka or measure fuel pressure. Thanks.
Monday, May 6, 2013
Bird books
So a couple years ago my parents were doing some downsizing.
Mum: Take any books you want.
Me: OK. Nice bird identification book.
Mum: Take it. We never look at that.
Fast forward about a year and a half.
Mum: We used to have a really nice bird identification book. I wish I could find it. Your dad and I would love to be able to identify all these birds that we see on our walks.
Me: blink
Mum: Sigh.
Me: Umm, you gave me that book.
Mum: Oh. Can we have it back?
Me: Sure.
Fast forward to two weeks ago.
Me: I need to get a bird book so that I can figure out what birds I have at my feeder.
Mum: We have a really nice one around here that we never use.
Me: blink
Mum: Here you go.
Me: Thanks.
Sigh.
By the way, it is a really good birding book. Color pictures, song identification info, habitat maps, and profile drawings for quick identification. My copy is from 1966 and sells for $65 on Amazon (crazy, there's apparently a collectors market for old bird books) but you can get a new edition for about twelve bucks...
and I will get a small commission. If you wanted a good bird book, now's your chance.
Mum: Take any books you want.
Me: OK. Nice bird identification book.
Mum: Take it. We never look at that.
Fast forward about a year and a half.
Mum: We used to have a really nice bird identification book. I wish I could find it. Your dad and I would love to be able to identify all these birds that we see on our walks.
Me: blink
Mum: Sigh.
Me: Umm, you gave me that book.
Mum: Oh. Can we have it back?
Me: Sure.
Fast forward to two weeks ago.
Me: I need to get a bird book so that I can figure out what birds I have at my feeder.
Mum: We have a really nice one around here that we never use.
Me: blink
Mum: Here you go.
Me: Thanks.
Sigh.
By the way, it is a really good birding book. Color pictures, song identification info, habitat maps, and profile drawings for quick identification. My copy is from 1966 and sells for $65 on Amazon (crazy, there's apparently a collectors market for old bird books) but you can get a new edition for about twelve bucks...
and I will get a small commission. If you wanted a good bird book, now's your chance.
Thursday, April 4, 2013
I Pay Taxes Too, You Know
But apparently I don't count.
A few months ago (right before my motorcycle accident, actually) I ponied up $500 of my hard earned cash to get an appraisal done on my house. I wanted to refinance. Didn't want any money, just wanted to take advantage of the 2.99% interest rates they were offering on a 15 year loan. Figured I could cut about four years off my current mortgage for a bit less each month than I was currently paying.
Happily taking my $500, the bank then informed me that the $160,000 appraisal was not enough to qualify me for the 80% requirement for financing. Apparently doesn't matter that I've been making payments on this house for fourteen years, have never missed a payment, and have almost perfect credit. (Side note: Not sure why they can't do informal appraisals for free using the interweb and let you know that you would probably be under the limit BEFORE they take your money, but I guess that might fall under the heading of "Good Customer Service".)
Anyway, the President has a solution. He has proposed that banks need to lower their standards so that people who can't afford to pay back their mortgage should be able to buy a house anyway. Never mind that this is, in part, what caused the original housing bubble that led to the crash in 2008; never mind that this shows a clear lack of understanding of how markets work; never mind that you'd have to be an idiot to lend money to people who have already demonstrated that they can't be trusted to lend money to. No, let's focus on the important stuff.
I am a taxpayer. I had to pay to bail out the last bunch of idiots after the crash. I can't refinance my house because the housing market went into the tank after the incompetent nimrods in Washington created a completely unsustainable bubble by implementing idiotic policies to "increase home ownership". And now they want to do it again. While I pay more than I should be for the mortgage that I have been working two jobs to pay for over the past thirteen years. For the past four years I have not qualified for one single federal assistance program because I pay my mortgage on time, because my mortgage is not in default, and because by being responsible I have managed to keep my mortgage below the actual value of my house no matter how big the crash. I can't refinance, I don't get federal assistance, I get nothing for being responsible except higher taxes.
Thanks for nothing, jackasses.
A few months ago (right before my motorcycle accident, actually) I ponied up $500 of my hard earned cash to get an appraisal done on my house. I wanted to refinance. Didn't want any money, just wanted to take advantage of the 2.99% interest rates they were offering on a 15 year loan. Figured I could cut about four years off my current mortgage for a bit less each month than I was currently paying.
Happily taking my $500, the bank then informed me that the $160,000 appraisal was not enough to qualify me for the 80% requirement for financing. Apparently doesn't matter that I've been making payments on this house for fourteen years, have never missed a payment, and have almost perfect credit. (Side note: Not sure why they can't do informal appraisals for free using the interweb and let you know that you would probably be under the limit BEFORE they take your money, but I guess that might fall under the heading of "Good Customer Service".)
Anyway, the President has a solution. He has proposed that banks need to lower their standards so that people who can't afford to pay back their mortgage should be able to buy a house anyway. Never mind that this is, in part, what caused the original housing bubble that led to the crash in 2008; never mind that this shows a clear lack of understanding of how markets work; never mind that you'd have to be an idiot to lend money to people who have already demonstrated that they can't be trusted to lend money to. No, let's focus on the important stuff.
I am a taxpayer. I had to pay to bail out the last bunch of idiots after the crash. I can't refinance my house because the housing market went into the tank after the incompetent nimrods in Washington created a completely unsustainable bubble by implementing idiotic policies to "increase home ownership". And now they want to do it again. While I pay more than I should be for the mortgage that I have been working two jobs to pay for over the past thirteen years. For the past four years I have not qualified for one single federal assistance program because I pay my mortgage on time, because my mortgage is not in default, and because by being responsible I have managed to keep my mortgage below the actual value of my house no matter how big the crash. I can't refinance, I don't get federal assistance, I get nothing for being responsible except higher taxes.
Thanks for nothing, jackasses.
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Interesting post titles
It's sort of hit or miss for me. I peruse Small Dead Animals with envy as Kate has the perfect title for each category of post, and apparently perfect recall as she whips them out at just the right time. Every once in a while I come up with something clever, but mostly it's just a rehash of the subject matter, with little to recommend it in the way of wittiness, cleverness, or just plain old "people will read this because it has an interesting title" -ness.
Maybe there's a book that I should read.
Maybe there's a book that I should read.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
This one's for the Captain
So say you teach ballroom dancing. Turns out there is a tax in Washington state for "providing the opportunity to dance". Yep. That's right. If I provide you with the "opportunity" then you have to pay sales tax.
Turns out not many people knew about this. The Department of Revenue says "they should have" so they owe back taxes. Of course, that's what law enforcement agencies always say. How many regulations are there? Well, enough that they won't sell you a printed copy, only a CD, which costs $39. That's just the WAC (Washington Administrative Code). But you are supposed to know that in Washington Administrative Code Title 458, Chapter 458-20, Section 458-20-183 under "Amusement, recreation, and physical fitness services", Subsection (2) Definitions, sub-subsection (b) there you are, listed along with basketball courts, tennis courts, handball courts, and swimming pools, "providing the opportunity to dance". What kind of scofflaws are these people that didn't know they were supposed to collect sales tax?
Anyway, Century Ballroom, where basically all they do is promote dancing by "providing the opportunity to dance" apparently owes $250,000 in back taxes, but the folks with the hearts of gold over at the DoR are willing to reduce it to $92,000. How nice of them.
Turns out not many people knew about this. The Department of Revenue says "they should have" so they owe back taxes. Of course, that's what law enforcement agencies always say. How many regulations are there? Well, enough that they won't sell you a printed copy, only a CD, which costs $39. That's just the WAC (Washington Administrative Code). But you are supposed to know that in Washington Administrative Code Title 458, Chapter 458-20, Section 458-20-183 under "Amusement, recreation, and physical fitness services", Subsection (2) Definitions, sub-subsection (b) there you are, listed along with basketball courts, tennis courts, handball courts, and swimming pools, "providing the opportunity to dance". What kind of scofflaws are these people that didn't know they were supposed to collect sales tax?
Anyway, Century Ballroom, where basically all they do is promote dancing by "providing the opportunity to dance" apparently owes $250,000 in back taxes, but the folks with the hearts of gold over at the DoR are willing to reduce it to $92,000. How nice of them.
Sunday, March 31, 2013
The one where I embarrass myself
I can't tell women's ages. No idea whatsoever and when I guess, I'm always wrong.
So today a woman stops by to buy a raffle ticket. We were set up at the Haggen (grocery store chain in the Pacific NW) in Burlington. She has a young lady in tow. As she fills out a ticket I point out to the young lady that she stands to inherit the bike. She starts laughing hysterically and tells me that she is the younger sister, and only by three years.
Boy did I feel like a jackass. So that's what I said. Where else do you go with that one?
So today a woman stops by to buy a raffle ticket. We were set up at the Haggen (grocery store chain in the Pacific NW) in Burlington. She has a young lady in tow. As she fills out a ticket I point out to the young lady that she stands to inherit the bike. She starts laughing hysterically and tells me that she is the younger sister, and only by three years.
Boy did I feel like a jackass. So that's what I said. Where else do you go with that one?
A blow against official abuse
Finally, the SCOTUS unanimously rules that the law means what the law means. Government officials can no longer hide behind immunity when they violate your rights.
Synopsis: a prisoner was abused. The Third Circuit ruled that the government officials had immunity. In 1974 Congress passed a law giving the people more right to sue (28 U.S.C. § 2680(h)). Circuit courts have been chipping away at this right ever since, and especially since 1986 (Pooler vs United States), according to the commentary linked below. Once the Circuit Court ruled in Pooler, that became binding precedent for many courts, even though it was a poor decison (stare decisis is the legal term for the requirement to follow precedent).
In this era of militarized police forces and SWAT teams, perhaps this ruling will cause local police departments to rethink how they conduct their business. There are far to many recent cases of invasive tactics by police which result in the deaths and humiliation of citizens who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Perhaps this ruling is what we needed to turn back the clock just a little.
http://www.litigationandtrial.com/2013/03/articles/attorney/civil-rights-1/prisoner-tort-case/
Original link from Overlawyered.
Synopsis: a prisoner was abused. The Third Circuit ruled that the government officials had immunity. In 1974 Congress passed a law giving the people more right to sue (28 U.S.C. § 2680(h)). Circuit courts have been chipping away at this right ever since, and especially since 1986 (Pooler vs United States), according to the commentary linked below. Once the Circuit Court ruled in Pooler, that became binding precedent for many courts, even though it was a poor decison (stare decisis is the legal term for the requirement to follow precedent).
In this era of militarized police forces and SWAT teams, perhaps this ruling will cause local police departments to rethink how they conduct their business. There are far to many recent cases of invasive tactics by police which result in the deaths and humiliation of citizens who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Perhaps this ruling is what we needed to turn back the clock just a little.
http://www.litigationandtrial.com/2013/03/articles/attorney/civil-rights-1/prisoner-tort-case/
Original link from Overlawyered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)