I was surprised to see that a lot of US drivers don't have auto insurance coverage when driving in Canada. Normally there is a simple declaration on the back of your proof of insurance card.
Printable View
I was surprised to see that a lot of US drivers don't have auto insurance coverage when driving in Canada. Normally there is a simple declaration on the back of your proof of insurance card.
Or, you can do all of the above.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Apparently, I don't get physical cards anymore. I looked it up on my phone, but when I turned the phone over...there was nothing on the back side.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Maybe you need a phone with those new wraparound screens. Of course the only safe way to handle those without triggering weird edge-tap flyins, etc. etc. is with fingertips holding the phone by the top and bottom edges which are not screen real estate (yet).
Does make me wonder what you present to Dudley when he pulls you over on horseback though.
https://youtu.be/NLqti1Yw5_k
Mine has an Apple logo.
I forgot, mine is in a protective case. I can't SEE the back side of the actual phone. Therefore, I cut it in half, and now it doesn't show anything....but what's this white smoke?
It does seem that I should have a physical card.
Salt Lake City to Boise train service:
Oregon rail-biking:Code:https://www.ksl.com/article/50478925/a-utah-train-to-idaho-salt-lake-boise-leaders-are-working-to-restore-old-service
Code:https://jbrailriders.com/
https://www.tillamookrailriders.com/
https://www.mthoodrr.com/train-rides/railbikes/
Well, I would be allowed on the first of those three, and maybe on the third, but not on the second.
I have never been foolish enough to think I could choose winning stocks or "play" the market. I chose a large well established investment firm, as I've got older I've moved most of my investments into low/moderate risk diversified funds that are @ an even mix of equities/bonds and some small amount of other assets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I always thought when stocks are dropping that the bond market would be going up but this last year has proved that wrong. I definitely have no idea how the markets actually work. I've been watching the daily markets lately and it seems crazy. Somedays Stocks/Bonds, Oil, Gold and Treasury Bonds will ALL decline. Where is all that money going? Today they're all up. lol
Usually, when stocks drop, bonds go up. That hasn't been happening this time, and it has some people puzzled. After all, where is that money going? When stocks drop, bonds go up because the global pool of money is rushing to safety, which means buying treasuries, which causes the price to rise. That hasn't been happening, so...where's the money going?
I asked first. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
My guess is it has to be going into cash but with such high inflation that doesn't make sense. All I know for sure is it's not going in my account.
We are also in the years of the largest shift into retirement we've ever seen. People who were working, paying in, have flipped to retirement and begun cashing out to use their savings just as intended.
I see no evidence that this was ever planned for though it has obviously been coming for decades. I won't be surprised to see more states levy taxes on pensions and retirement savings plan distributions in violation of both written and implied social contracts. It happened here where the state Constitution even has a provision that state pensions "shall not be diminished." Courts just reinterpreted that despite its established meaning and both Parties rubber-stamped new taxes on pensions to fund corporate tax relief.
Do you not pay state income tax on disbursements (assuming you have a state income tax)? I always assumed that I would be, so there isn't any 'flip' in my mind...it just always was.
Not on Roth accounts... yet.
Another head of the serpent is scheduled to inject more venom into the economy within weeks: "student loan forgiveness." However its scope may be too limited to do much harm even if it survives court challenges.
Well, it didn't take long for the Browns to go back on the downswing. Unfortunately it looks like the Saints are right there with y'all.
That would be quite a change. The whole point of Roth accounts is that you've already been taxed on that money. If they taxed you on the disbursements, that would be double taxation. That's a much higher bar to cross, as being taxed up front is the sole reason that Roth accounts exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Yeah, I was mighty surprised at the beatdown the Pats put on them last weekend. They should have kept running, that's the weakness of the Pats defense, and the strength of the Browns, but the Browns moved away from the run early.Quote:
Originally Posted by homer13j
There is precedent with the death tax.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
It is a high bar, but there is precedent nonetheless.
You also don't have to pay taxes on any of the money earned from the Roth. Plus you can pull your money out at any time. For young people this is a great type of IRA. But so many want that initial tax break and go with traditional IRA's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
It's possible they could could make changes to the laws, it depends how bad they need money. But the government has a lot of other "lower bar" ways to increase revenue.
Yeah, remove the carried interest loophole, remove the distorting (though popular) deduction for mortgage interest. There are plenty of options better than taxing retirement savings.
What's the carried interest loophole???Quote:
remove the carried interest loophole
I don't think it applies to normal people at all. Last I looked it was a scheme that allows money managers to treat their income as capital gains for preferential taxation treatment.
That's it. It's straight up income by some of the wealthiest people in the country. The loophole allows them to pay taxes on it at the capital gains rate rather than as regular income, which it is. That saves them a HUGE amount.
Trump said he'd close it, but didn't even try. It was in the Inflation Reduction Act, but dropping that was the price Kyrsten Sinema required for her vote.
We must rise up and defeat the owls.
Owl take up that call.
Just don’t commit any fowls.
Or make any cheep shots.
I guess you could chicken out.
But don’t post a giant goose egg.
Ok, I’ve beaten it to death. Omelette it stop.
I appreciate that you group me in with the normal people.Quote:
I don't think it applies to normal people at all.
Cute. I had written "honest people" at first and then hurriedly adjusted it before posting. Crooks seem to be a protected group and I didn't want to risk a ban for intolerance. Oops! Perhaps the correct term now is "differently moralled" or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
It's the shepherd lobby. They're always protecting the crooks.
I don't give a hoot about all those puns, though.
Owl be back, later.
@shaggy - I am not sure of where you are at, geographically speaking, in the state, but what do you think of the eastern side of Oregon being apart of Idaho?
Man, the Liz Truss sure didn't last long. That poor lady sort of had that, deer in the headlights look. With the current inflation and energy problems it's a tough time to be a leader. Everyone wants a solution NOW. It's still safe to be in politics as long as your lower on the ladder. You can always find a way to blame the "other guy". But if your at the top it's sort of do or die on a daily basis.
I have a hard enough time dealing with the stress of deciding what to have for dinner. lol
The border between OR and ID is a bit on the bizarre side. Part of the border is the Snake River, and Hells Canyon, which makes an obvious border. There aren't any bridges across that canyon, so it's a border no matter how you look at it. However, the Snake River is the border a ways south of where the canyon begins, then the border turns into a straight line. The more obvious border would have been to take the line along the Owyhee River, which goes through a canyon all its own. Because of how the border was drawn, there is a part of OR that is difficult for people from OR to get to, but easy for people from ID to get to. VERY few people live in that area, largely because of a distinct lack of water.Quote:
Originally Posted by dday9
The other oddity is that the time zone doesn't run along the OR/ID border, but through some seemingly arbitrary line west of the border, which means that Ontario, OR, is in the mountain time zone, while the rest of OR is in Pacific time zone. That has never made any sense.
Still, there is a push by some in OR to leave OR and join with ID. That isn't about making a rational border, that's about politics, and it is mostly about doing to others what you don't want done to you. Eastern OR is predominantly red, but the state is blue. The eastern OR Republicans want to join with solid red Idaho, because they don't like being in a liberal state.
The problem with that is simply that if eastern OR was just a bit more conservative, the state would be red. There are lots of conservatives in Portland. They get outnumbered by Democrats, but not by such a large number that eastern OR wouldn't outnumber the Democrats...if a significant majority of those in eastern OR were actually conservative, but they aren't. Basically, the west is a bluer shade of purple, while the east is a redder shade of purple, and the 51% in the east want to pretend that the 49% don't exist.
So, those wanting to join ID are a minority because of how the borders are drawn, and they just want to draw different borders so that they can be a majority. They want to be able to do to the minority what they object to when done to them.
It would take an act of Congress, though, and that won't happen, so it's just a bunch of whining.
To be fair, her solution caused a rout in the British economy. She backed off on the more extreme parts of that, which caused a rift in her supporters cause they supported her original position. At that point, who was she? She got elected on a platform that caused the market to recoil. When she stepped back, she no longer had a platform, so what was left?Quote:
Originally Posted by wes4dbt
Basically, she was all about an idea. When the idea was rejected, there was nothing left. I don't think she was a, "say anything to stay in power" person, she had an agenda. Once that was rejected, then so was she.
I had seen several polls where something like 60% in all but two of the eastern counties want to switch. Also, I know that there is precedent in congress approving state border changes, but I tend to agree with you in that I doubt it could happen today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
It's broader than politics. Culture might be a more accurate differentiator.
I'd have to say I like her willingness to walk away so quickly and let someone else have a shot at working the problem. There probably wasn't a way to survive anyway but it's pretty rare to see someone except that fact so quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I wonder what the record is for the shortest time in office for the PM of the UK. Excluding death. Never paid any attention to UK politics until I retired. Maybe this is just normal.
That could be. Idaho is seen as a rural, agricultural area with little rainfall. That could describe much of OR, as well. However, I have never heard the argument framed in those terms. It has always been objecting to the liberal Portland area. The same thing could likely be said for Boise, and just a few other enclaves within Idaho. There is a pretty real urban/rural divide, especially in the west.Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
Growing up in NH, the state was considered pretty rural, but it might be more accurate to call most of it suburban. There seems to be a much bigger difference out here, than what I remember from growing up. In Idaho, that is partly due to the funding model. We recently came in last on the list of lowest state support for school funding. NH was always near the bottom of that list while I was growing up, too, but in NH, lots of towns were fairly wealthy, so school funding wasn't horrible...it was just local, and paid for by high property taxes. In Idaho, the divide between the tax bases in places like Boise and places like Stites, is pretty extreme, and that seems to be reflected in the schools.
I have never seen data for eastern OR, but eastern WA is a similar situation. The rural, eastern, counties receive a net inflow of cash from Seattle. I would expect that the same is true in OR. It might even be true in Idaho, but there also might not be all that much cash flow in any direction in this state.
We should just outlaw politicsQuote:
Originally Posted by dilettante
And then what??? Thunderdome.Quote:
Originally Posted by dclamp
I think you're being overly generous. You're dead right that she took the reigns at a uniquely difficult time but the mini budget was entirely her own choice and it was that that killed her. Demonstration: Jeremy Hunt reversed it and the economy was back on (an admittedly slow) track within two days.Quote:
Man, the Liz Truss sure didn't last long. That poor lady sort of had that, deer in the headlights look. With the current inflation and energy problems it's a tough time to be a leader. Everyone wants a solution NOW. It's still safe to be in politics as long as your lower on the ladder. You can always find a way to blame the "other guy". But if your at the top it's sort of do or die on a daily basis.
I do think we've got a problem brewing in that we still haven't really addressed the economic fall out of Brexit. Covid and Ukraine have provided a smoke screen for the cost of Brexit but watching the other European economies recover while ours stagflates makes it increasingly difficult to deny. I think Truss's mini-budget was partly driven by an attempt to turn the UK into one massive tax haven which was one of the selling points promised by the Leave campaign. However, that ignores that pure tax take may be able to support a relatively small economy like Jersy or the Dominican Republic but it can't sustain an economy the size of the UK. That requires industry and/or a service sector.
Are you going to get Boris back?
We're going to see something rare, today: Rain. It will be the first rain we've had in...longer than Liz Truss was PM.
So apparently this Russian guy who was streaming on Twitch was just banned.
He setup a 24/7 livestream of his gas stove burner turned on. There was a message that said "From Russia With Love" and "1.44 EUR\Month" I guess to indicate how much running the burner constantly would cost him.
I don't care where you are at in terms of the current Russian/Ukraine situation, but that is hilarious! Trolling can be one of the funnier things on the internet.
This was from a Vice article:
Quote:
russiangas1 is an obvious troll, but it’s an effective one. It’s avatar is an orc—a common pejorative Ukrainians use for Russians—and a message in Russian at the top asks everyone to be nice to each other. In the bottom left hand corner is a photo of a laughing man next to a rubber duckie wearing aviators, a gold chain, and a helmet with a propeller on it.
It's possible and polls show he has more support among the party membership than anyone else but I personally think this would be a stupid move for the Tories. The attack line would be "the most qualified person you have to lead the party is a convicted criminal". (calling him a criminal is a bit harsh for the whole partygate thing but that would be the attack line).Quote:
Are you going to get Boris back?
I don't want to head down the US politics line but imagine if Trump was actually successfully impeached and then the Reps renominated him. It'd be an open goal.
Edit>I should add some nuance to that, imagine he was impeached and the public at large agreed with it)
Quote:
To be fair, her solution caused a rout in the British economy.
I wasn't trying to defend or make excuses for her in any way. She failed spectacularly. I did feel a little sorry for her.Quote:
I think you're being overly generous.
My interest was in how fast she was gone. Not a long drawn out process of denial and excuses.
If there was an election today, my guess is he would win. He still might in two years. The Republicans are afraid of him and the Democrats don't seem to have anyone new or interesting. Biden may run again. Isn't that sad.Quote:
I don't want to head down the US politics line but imagine if Trump was actually successfully impeached and then the Reps renominated him. It'd be an open goal.
Edit>I should add some nuance to that, imagine he was impeached and the public at large agreed with it)
If inflation continues my guess is the Republican could run Hilary and win.
This answers my question.
A new record.Quote:
That tenure, which likely will fall short of 60 days, would give her a claim to being Britain's shortest-serving prime minister. George Canning, who is usually thought to hold the record, served for 119 days in 1827 until his death from tuberculosis
Yeah, and he cheated. He didn't even get to resign. Her departure is voluntary...more or less.