annual interruptus

[Denny]

Well, Fat Albert still sits on jacks at Steve's shop... Not much
happening... The vaunted new engine hoses have yet to arrive despite
being paid for in advance...

The #1 radio was sent out to the radio shop - the King KI-214 VOR
heading had suddenly gone off about 12 degrees - though the ILS was
working right... He started out mumbling about some tuning capacitors
that change value, but what he found was a dirty pot in the KI-214...
He was able to spray it with cleaner and get it working again... He
left it on the test bench over night and it held alignment... But,
says he can't get certified replacement pots any more so if it goes
out again the 214 is junk... Having spent part of my life in
industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
<sigh>

The #3 radio was tuning erratically... We decided to look at it
ourselves before sending it out... Found the kilocycle tune knob was
turning on the shaft at times... Managed to take the fancy, schmancy
knob with it's ultra tech wedge screw mechanism apart and repair it...
So, that is good to go now...
: Note to manufacturer: Ya know, a simple set screw has worked for 80
+ years, why get complicated?

So, on to week #3... "I wanna go flying!" <sob, sob>

denny

[Vaughn Simon]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>Having spent part of my life in
> industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
> proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
> and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
> <sigh>

If you were to install an exact replacement pot would there be any reason
to mention it to anyone? Another possibility might be buying someone else's
junked out unit as a source for genuine certified parts.

Vaughn

[RST Engineering]

Tell me where in the FARs is the reference to a "certified pot" or a
certified electronic part of any sort, please?

Jim



"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...

Having spent part of my life in
> industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
> proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
> and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
> <sigh>

[[email protected][_1_]]

On 19 Feb 2007 05:17:40 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

snip
>out again the 214 is junk... Having spent part of my life in
>industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
>proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
>and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
snip

[Federal Register: March 5, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 43)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9923-9925]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05mr97-3]

================================================== =====================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 21

[Docket No. AIR-100-9601]


Replacement and Modification Parts: ``Standard'' Parts;
Interpretation

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of interpretation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FAA is notifying the public that the interpretation of an
acceptable U.S. government or Industry accepted specification may
include specifications that may be limited to detailed performance
criteria, complete testing procedures, and uniform marking criteria.
Manufacturers of parts that conform to such specifications are
excepted
as ``standard parts'' from the requirement to obtain FAA Parts
Manufacturer Approval. The FAA is aware that specifications meeting
the
above criteria exist for discrete electric or electrical component
parts.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 31, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bruce Kaplan, Aerospace Engineer, Aircraft Engineering Division, AIR-
100, FAA, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, (202)
267-9588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 21.303(a) of Title 14 of the Code
of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Replacement and Modification Parts,
prohibits a person from producing a part for sale for installation on
a
type certificated product unless that person produces the part
pursuant
to an FAA Parts Manufacturer Approval (PMA). Section 21.303(b)
provides
four exceptions to the requirement in Sec. 21.303(a). One of these
exceptions is for ``Standard parts (such as bolts and nuts) conforming
to established industry or U.S. specifications.'' (14 CFR
Sec. 21.303(b)(4).)
``Standard part'' is not otherwise defined in Title 14. Section
21.303(b)(4) has come to be understood by the aviation and
manufacturing public as meaning a part, the specification for which
has
been published by a standard setting organization or by the U.S.
government, and the FAA has traditionally regulated parts production
with that understanding. Examples of such ``traditional'' standard
part
specifications include National Aerospace Standards (NAS), Air Force-
Navy Aeronautical Standard (AN), Society of Automotive Engineers
(SAE),
SAE Aerospace Standard (AS), and Military Standard (MS). The FAA will
continue to consider parts conforming to these specifications as
standard parts.
Prior to this notice, for a specification to be acceptable, it had
to include information on the design, materials, manufacture, and
uniform identification requirements. The specification had to include
all the information necessary to produce the part and ensure its
conformity to the specification. Furthermore, the specification must
be
publicly available, so that any party is capable of manufacturing the
part. The above examples of accepted specifications fulfill those
criteria.
In the past the FAA has applied Sec. 21.303(b)(4) to parts that
have specifications where a determination of physical conformity to a
design could be made. This application largely excluded classes of
parts where the parts are conformed not on the basis of their physical
configuration but by meeting

[[Page 9924]]

the specified performance criteria. These types of parts are best
exemplified by discrete electrical and electronic parts.
Much of the componentry used in electronic devices are
manufactured
under standard industry practices, often to published specifications
developed by standards organizations such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE), the American Electronics Association, Semitec, Joint
Electron Device Engineering Council, Joint Electron Tube Engineering
Council, and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Such
standards development by these bodies is overseen by the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the IEEE Standards
Committee, as well as the electrical and electronics industry, at
large, who depends upon characteristic design standards for
consistency
in operation and performance.
The FAA has determined that certain kinds of electrical and
electronic parts fit within the limits of the Sec. 21.303(b)(4)
exception; these include resistors, capacitors, diodes, transistors,
and non-programmable integrated circuits (e.g. amplifiers, bridges,
switches, gates, etc.). Conversely, large scale, application-specific,
or programmable integrated circuits; hybrids, gate arrays, memories,
CPU's, or other programmable logic devices would not be considered
standard parts, such components are not `discretes' since they require
programming that controls their timing, functionality, performance,
and
overall operating parameters.
It is important to remember that 14 CFR Part 21 Sec. 21.303 deals
with the production of parts for sale for installations on type
certificated products. Installation of replacement or modification
parts including owner/operator-produced and standard parts, must be
accomplished in compliance with part 43 of Title 14 of the CFR (Part
43). Generally, a standard part may be replaced with an identical
standard part, in accordance with the manufacturers maintenance
instructions, without a further demonstration of compliance with the
airworthiness regulations. Substitution of a standard part with
another
would require a demonstration of acceptability in accordance with part
43.

Discussion of Comments

The FAA published (61 FR 47671, September 10, 1996) a proposed
expanded interpretation for ``standard part'' and requested comments
from the public on the ability of producers to conform discrete
electrical and electronic parts, and other kinds of parts, to
specified
performance criteria. The FAA also requested comment on the ability of
producers to distinctly identify such parts.
A total of 19 comments were received in response to the notice.
These commenters represent air carriers, aircraft manufacturers;
associations representing aircraft manufacturers, aircraft maintenance
personnel, and fixed base operators/air charter/air taxi operators/
scheduled operators; component manufacturers; and the Joint Aviation
Authorities. All but one commenter voiced general support for the
proposal. Five commenters concur with no additional comment. Six
commenters concur and express the desire to include specifications for
other types of parts (beyond discrete electrical and electronic parts)
under this expanded intrepretation.
The substantive issues raised by the commenters are discussed in
the following discussion of comments.
Comment: Two commenters expressed concern about standard parts in
general. They commented that some manufacturers claim to build their
parts to these standards but do not have any proof that the parts meet
the requirements and that just because a part is marked with the
standard part type number or marking does not demonstrate that the
part
in fact conforms to the established industry or U.S. Government
specifications. One commenter suggested the FAA survey suppliers to
determine if they are reliable candidates to meet the requirements of
various standards.
FAA Response: A standard part is one that conforms to the
established specification. Beyond just physical configuration and
performance testing almost all specifications have quality control and
testing requirements. The FAA in conducting an investigation of
standard part manufacturers would be looking for complete compliance
with the specification, and would look for the existence and proper
execution of records necessary to prove conformity. Non-conformities
would be cause for enforcement action by the FAA and could be cause
for
a criminal investigation by the appropriate law enforcement agencies.
The marking of a part is the manufacturer's certification that the
part conforms to the specification. The ability of the manufacturer to
make that certification at the time of manufacture is based on the
specification requirements which include production system
requirements, test and acceptance procedures, and any additional
internal quality control requirements. The marking of parts also
serves
as a means by which an installer may identify a part and establish its
eligibility for installation on an aircraft. The end users confidence
in that manufacturer's certification is based on their experience with
that manufacturer and is supplemented by their receiving inspection,
and the final determination of airworthiness as required by FAR 43.13.
Standard part manufactures are subject to continuing in-depth
audits by their customers whether they be commercial airplane
manufacturers, the automotive industry, or the U.S. Government. The
FAA
feels that these continuing process checks provide an appropriate
degree of confidence.
Comment: Three commenters expressed concern that a part meeting a
standard specification may be used by a design approval holder in an
application that is safety-critical or outside the specified operating
tolerances requiring greater scrutiny of that part. For this reason
one
commenter stipulated that parts must be designated as standard by the
design approval holder.
FAA Response: The qualification and quality control requirements
for any part installed on a product is established by the design
approval holder for that product. If a design approval holder utilizes
a standard part design in a safety critical application (and/or an
application requiring the part to perform outside its specified
operating tolerances) but imposes qualification or quality control
requirements beyond those of the standard specification for the part,
then that altered part would no longer be a ``standard part''.
Certain design approval holders are required to provide
instructions for continued airworthiness including data necessary for
maintenance. It is these maintenance instructions that are to be
followed by maintenance personnel. It would be incorrect for a design
approval holder to identify a part as a ``standard part'' in their
maintenance instructions when their qualification or quality control
procedures exceed those of the standard part specification.
Comment: Several Commenters voiced the need for including I.S.O.
and European government and industry standards.
FAA Response: The FAA can recognize any industry established
specification regardless of country of origin. However, under present
language of Part 21 21.303(b)(4) acceptable government specifications
are limited to those published by the U.S. Government. The Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), Aircraft

[[Page 9925]]

Certification Procedures Issues Group (Part 21), Parts & Production
Working Group is currently developing a draft notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), for submittal to the FAA, addressing the approval
of
replacement and modification parts. This issue is under consideration;
changes could be incorporated into the forthcoming NPRM.
Comment: Several commenters expressed the desire to allow various
other categories of parts such as lamps electrical connectors, and
bearings.
FAA Response: The FAA's Notice solicited information as to the
merits of including categories of parts other than discrete electrical
or electronic components under the interpretation. The commenters did
not state how the conformity of the parts could be established solely
on the basis of meeting a performance specification. Thus, the FAA
still regards the standard parts exclusion as applicable to a narrow
segment of the entire population of part designs.
Comment: One commenter expressed the desire to allow programmable
devices to be considered standard parts when there are approved pin-
for-pin alternatives. Such components only become notionally non-
standard after programming for a specific application.
FAA Response: Programmable devices were specifically excluded in
the proposed expanded interpretation because their performance
characteristics may vary with the instruction programmed within or
provided to such devices, or due to different applied voltages and
signals affecting logical switching conditions. Even though such
devices may be pin-to-pin compatible, the performance characteristics
cannot be assured, thus making such devices ineligible for
consideration of the ``performance'' based interpretation of the
definition.
The interpretation for standard parts is effective on January 31,
1997. The FAA is compiling a list of standard setting bodies and U.S.
government entities that establish specifications for standard parts.
That list will be published on the Aircraft Certification Home Page on
the World Wide Web by June 30, 1997.

Issued in Washington, DC on January 31, 1997.
Elizabeth Yoest,
Deputy Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 97-5437 Filed 3-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M

[Denny]

Well, for what it is worth, the local radio shop refuses to install,
work on, or sign off as airworthy, any radio that contains parts that
are not traceable to a part number approved by the holder of the type
certificate, KING in this case... King for it's part will not put
itself at legal risk by allowing deviation from their engineering
drawings - understandable when the get rich quick activities of the
trial bar are viewed...
The radio guy, Ron, is not a bad guy and I can understand his refusal
to put his license to make a living at risk... I get the same thing
all the time, people asking me to do something that is against either
some regulation or contrary what I know is considered acceptable... I
have to say NO also...
As far as changing out the part, I am capable of that, though I do not
have a VOR signal generator to align it... Nor do I have a schematic,
nor alignment instructions... Taint as easy as it may seem since
adjustments may interact...

I am currently waltzing with a low noise, +7dBm oscillator in the 10
megacycle range which is to be injected into a passive FET balanced
mixer, 'cept the ouput is not a clean sine wave, which means one half
of the mixer output will not be the same amplitude as the other half
- bad news - as those who play with mixers will understand... I need
to play with the windings ratio of the output transformer to see if
that cleans it up... Otherwise, the original author is 'all' wrong...

denny

[Dan Luke]

"Denny" wrote:

> Well, Fat Albert still sits on jacks at Steve's shop...

>
> So, on to week #3... "I wanna go flying!" <sob, sob>

Yet more evidence that all owners should have 2 airplanes; primary & backup.

Wanna buy mine?

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[RST Engineering]

"Denny" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> Well, for what it is worth, the local radio shop refuses to install,
> work on, or sign off as airworthy, any radio that contains parts that
> are not traceable to a part number approved by the holder of the type
> certificate, KING in this case... King for it's part will not put
> itself at legal risk by allowing deviation from their engineering
> drawings - understandable when the get rich quick activities of the
> trial bar are viewed...

What the hell did you not understand about Toecutter's post about "radio
parts is parts"?



> The radio guy, Ron, is not a bad guy and I can understand his refusal
> to put his license to make a living at risk... I get the same thing
> all the time, people asking me to do something that is against either
> some regulation or contrary what I know is considered acceptable... I
> have to say NO also...

THere are tens of thousands of "radio guys" in this country. FInd one that
knows what the hell (s)he is doing.



> As far as changing out the part, I am capable of that, though I do not
> have a VOR signal generator to align it... Nor do I have a schematic,
> nor alignment instructions... Taint as easy as it may seem since
> adjustments may interact...

What do you not understand about VOTs, grasshopper?



>
> I am currently waltzing with a low noise, +7dBm oscillator in the 10
> megacycle

Now we've got an old fart who hasn't transitioned into Hertz yet...


range which is to be injected into a passive FET balanced
> mixer,

and as stupid DS to boot that says that a FET balanced mixer is passive.
FETs are active. How the hell do you get into a passive FET?



'cept the ouput is not a clean sine wave, which means one half
> of the mixer output will not be the same amplitude as the other half
> - bad news - as those who play with mixers will understand... I need
> to play with the windings ratio of the output transformer to see if
> that cleans it up... Otherwise, the original author is 'all' wrong...


We play with mixers all the day long. You haven't a clue, bozo. Go peddle
your papers elsewhere.

Jim

[Ron Natalie]

RST Engineering wrote:

>
> Now we've got an old fart who hasn't transitioned into Hertz yet...
>
>
Hertz rents cars.

There once was a woman named Mavis,
Who thought that the hertz was depravis,
Said if number one isn't enough,
and if number two tries hard enough,
Kilohertz would soon become Kiloavis.

[Denny]

<hostile ranting snipped>

> We play with mixers all the day long. You haven't a clue, bozo. Go peddle
> your papers elsewhere.
>
> Jim

Jim, you really need to get back on your Lithium...

denny

[RST Engineering]

I canna give you more power, Cap'n, the dilithium crystals are gonna blow...

Jim


> Jim, you really need to get back on your Lithium...
>
> denny
>

[Jay Honeck]

> So, on to week #3... "I wanna go flying!" <sob, sob>

I was going to post about our lovely flight to St. Louis this past
weekend (just got back today)...but your post convinced me that this
would amount to cruel and unusual punishment....

:-)

Sorry, Denny -- I feel your pain. Mine starts in March.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Denny]

>
> Sorry, Denny -- I feel your pain. Mine starts in March.
> --
> Jay Honeck

Thanks Jay, it's not a real bad pain, more like a 3 year old throwing
a tantrum because he can't have candy for supper...

Anyway, the new teflon engine hoses are on... We re-installed the
radios yesterday... The squawk list is all tick marked... He is going
to test run the engines today and vacuum the floor and wash the
belly... Should be good to go for tomorrow afternoon - cept we are
spoze to have a wind/rain storm......

He has a really nice F model Aztec he is trying to sell me - his Part
135 machine... Ahhh temptation, get thee behind me!

Our Governor, Ms. Granholm, is busily working up a new set of service
taxes for airplane mechanics, hair dressers, doctors, etc., in order
to fund her spending programs now that the auto industry has ceased
being the states cash cow...

Steve has recently laid off his part 135 pilot, his mechanic, and his
two flight instructors, all his planes are up for sale and I suspect
he is 99 & 44/100% of the way to GONE - to Arizona probably.... He
says her new taxes are the last straw...
Along the way, he has lost 20 pounds from having to do everything
himself now...

denny

[Jay Honeck]

> Steve has recently laid off his part 135 pilot, his mechanic, and his
> two flight instructors, all his planes are up for sale and I suspect
> he is 99 & 44/100% of the way to GONE - to Arizona probably.... He
> says her new taxes are the last straw...
> Along the way, he has lost 20 pounds from having to do everything
> himself now...

That's awful. My sister lives near Lansing, MI, and she regales me
with tales of that state's fiscal woes nearly every week. She's a
retired school teacher who is worried because their pension fund has
been raided by the state in order to fund...who knows what.
Technically, her income is now vapor-based.

(Of course, we could debate the merits of a system that allowed her to
retire -- with full benefits -- at age 55, but perhaps we shouldn't?)

It sure sounds like the Michigan Gummint is having a hard time
learning to live within its (somewhat diminished) means. I suppose
that means that their GA airports will be on the chopping block soon.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Montblack]

("Denny" wrote)
> He has a really nice F model Aztec he is trying to sell me - his Part 135
> machine... Ahhh temptation, get thee behind me!


"All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them:"

So, got a name picked out for the Aztec, yet? <g>

What's the difference in:

Fuel burn
Speed
Useful load
Speed
Avionics/radios
Speed
Comfort
Insurance
Etc.


Mont-out-of-the-blackness

[Denny]

On Feb 22, 3:10 pm, "Montblack" <Y4_NOT!...
> wrote:
> ("Denny" wrote)
>
> > He has a really nice F model Aztec he is trying to sell me - his Part 135
> > machine... Ahhh temptation, get thee behind me!
>

>
> So, got a name picked out for the Aztec, yet? <g>
> Mont-out-of-the-blackness

Ahhh jeez Monty.... You are about as helpful as an alcoholic-on-the-
wagon who has drinking buddys who tell him "just one won't hurt"....

>
> What's the difference in:
>
> Fuel burn
> Speed
> Useful load
> Speed
> Avionics/radios
> Speed
> Comfort
> Insurance
> Etc.
>

in order:
If ya gotta ask ya can't afford it, pilgrim...
Lots faster than Fat Albert the Apache - 165 knots typical
Whatever you can get the doors closed on (which is why they are used
as lobster haulers)
Like sitting in your easy chair at home, and you will not rub
shoulders...
Well, it's a twin - but not near as bad is if I were ASEL wanting my
first twin...
It's loaded, Radar and a GNS430, alcohol props, etc...
Gets you respect on the ramp at strange airports... Good paint..
Average interior...

denny

[Jim B]

Go for it Denny... the ability to fill the tanks, seats, and baggage is
awesome, and you'll love the extra power. The center seats are on rails, so
if the rear bench is empty, the center passengers can slide the seats back
and almost disappear from view! I did my initial MEL in an Apache and my
first reaction with the Aztec was HOLY CRAP! :))) There is a big difference
between dual 150/160's to dual 250's. After the carburetor fun that you had
last year, you'd probably love the injected engines.

We plan for 160ktas in our C model at 23"/2400 rpms burning 25gph between
8000 and 10,000 MSL. We've have found those figures to be quite accurate.
Ours will true at 180kts, but at 2500rpms, the extra noise and fuel burn
doesn't make it very much fun.

There were two different F models with differences centered around the
horizontal stab. I'd have to do a little research to remember the
difference, anyway, the end result was that Piper changed the stab, nobody
liked it, so they changed it back to an older version.

I'll add more fuel to the fire and beg you to take it for a spin around the
patch, do some single engine work, and some short field takeoffs.... you'll
be hooked.

Jim


"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Feb 22, 3:10 pm, "Montblack" <Y4_NOT!...
> > wrote:
> > ("Denny" wrote)
> >
> > > He has a really nice F model Aztec he is trying to sell me - his Part
135
> > > machine... Ahhh temptation, get thee behind me!
> >
>
> >
> > So, got a name picked out for the Aztec, yet? <g>
> > Mont-out-of-the-blackness
>
> Ahhh jeez Monty.... You are about as helpful as an alcoholic-on-the-
> wagon who has drinking buddys who tell him "just one won't hurt"....
>
> >
> > What's the difference in:
> >
> > Fuel burn
> > Speed
> > Useful load
> > Speed
> > Avionics/radios
> > Speed
> > Comfort
> > Insurance
> > Etc.
> >
>
> in order:
> If ya gotta ask ya can't afford it, pilgrim...
> Lots faster than Fat Albert the Apache - 165 knots typical
> Whatever you can get the doors closed on (which is why they are used
> as lobster haulers)
> Like sitting in your easy chair at home, and you will not rub
> shoulders...
> Well, it's a twin - but not near as bad is if I were ASEL wanting my
> first twin...
> It's loaded, Radar and a GNS430, alcohol props, etc...
> Gets you respect on the ramp at strange airports... Good paint..
> Average interior...
>
> denny
>

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>So, on to week #3... "I wanna go flying!" <sob, sob>
>
>
> I was going to post about our lovely flight to St. Louis this past
> weekend (just got back today)...but your post convinced me that this
> would amount to cruel and unusual punishment....
>
> :-)
>
> Sorry, Denny -- I feel your pain. Mine starts in March.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
Ours is about the same time, but I'm going to suggest to Ron we do it
early. The next 3 weekends are shot for us so we might as well do it
early, while it's still cold.

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>Steve has recently laid off his part 135 pilot, his mechanic, and his
>>two flight instructors, all his planes are up for sale and I suspect
>>he is 99 & 44/100% of the way to GONE - to Arizona probably.... He
>>says her new taxes are the last straw...
>>Along the way, he has lost 20 pounds from having to do everything
>>himself now...
>
>
> That's awful. My sister lives near Lansing, MI, and she regales me
> with tales of that state's fiscal woes nearly every week. She's a
> retired school teacher who is worried because their pension fund has
> been raided by the state in order to fund...who knows what.
> Technically, her income is now vapor-based.
>
> (Of course, we could debate the merits of a system that allowed her to
> retire -- with full benefits -- at age 55, but perhaps we shouldn't?)

Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.

Margy (now in museum education and NOT in the classroom)

>
> It sure sounds like the Michigan Gummint is having a hard time
> learning to live within its (somewhat diminished) means. I suppose
> that means that their GA airports will be on the chopping block soon.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
> able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
> expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.

Why should we pay any young person to sit around doing nothing?
Nowadays, 55 is YOUNG -- VERY young -- and there is simply no way to
make paying every 55 year old to sit around doing nothing work,
mathematically.

Unless you've found some new actuarial tool that I've never seen.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Whiting]

Margy Natalie wrote:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>> Steve has recently laid off his part 135 pilot, his mechanic, and his
>>> two flight instructors, all his planes are up for sale and I suspect
>>> he is 99 & 44/100% of the way to GONE - to Arizona probably.... He
>>> says her new taxes are the last straw...
>>> Along the way, he has lost 20 pounds from having to do everything
>>> himself now...
>>
>>
>>
>> That's awful. My sister lives near Lansing, MI, and she regales me
>> with tales of that state's fiscal woes nearly every week. She's a
>> retired school teacher who is worried because their pension fund has
>> been raided by the state in order to fund...who knows what.
>> Technically, her income is now vapor-based.
>>
>> (Of course, we could debate the merits of a system that allowed her to
>> retire -- with full benefits -- at age 55, but perhaps we shouldn't?)
>
>
> Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
> able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
> expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.

That is a different problem and is the one that should be addressed, not
providing early retirement for teachers.

Matt

[Jay Honeck]

> That is a different problem and is the one that should be addressed, not
> providing early retirement for teachers.

So, what are you saying, Matt? That an actuarial system should be
devised that allows every 55 year old to be able to retire with full
pension? Or only teachers?

IMHO, the former is impossible, while the latter is unfair and silly.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>That is a different problem and is the one that should be addressed, not
>>providing early retirement for teachers.
>
>
> So, what are you saying, Matt? That an actuarial system should be
> devised that allows every 55 year old to be able to retire with full
> pension? Or only teachers?

No, I'm saying the classroom environment should be fixed so that
teachers last more than 5 years in the profession and don't need to
retire at age 55 due to burn-out.

Matt

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>> That is a different problem and is the one that should be
>>> addressed, not providing early retirement for teachers.
>>
>>
>> So, what are you saying, Matt? That an actuarial system should be
>> devised that allows every 55 year old to be able to retire with full
>> pension? Or only teachers?
>
> No, I'm saying the classroom environment should be fixed so that
> teachers last more than 5 years in the profession and don't need to
> retire at age 55 due to burn-out.
>
> Matt

There are several factors other than burn-out that lead to that 5 year in
the profession figure. My son is now in 9th grade. Looking back at his
elementary teachers 1-5th grade teachers look like this as far a careers go.

1st- She was in her second year teaching. 1 year after my son was in her
class he got married and pregnant and stayed home with her new baby. Hasn't
returned to teaching.

2nd- Been there for many years and was in her mid 30s still teaching.

3rd- 2nd year teaching and that was 2 years too many she quit teaching and
went on to something else.

4th- Retired the next year at age 65.

5th- Had been teaching 2 or 3 years, got married the next year and became a
stay at home wife.

The point I'm getting to is that teachers change careers like lots of people
and for a number of reasons.

[Jay Honeck]

> The point I'm getting to is that teachers change careers like lots of people
> and for a number of reasons.

The latest figures I've seen say that a child born today will have 13
different jobs in their lifetime.

Things sure have changed since I was born in '58. When I was growing
up, it was just expected that you'd start working for a company, and
die there 45 years later...

Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
contemplating "retirement" in 2007. I have no plans to *ever*
retire, but -- assuming that eventually health reasons will prevail --
I certainly don't want to become a burden on society until I am
physically forced to be.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
> contemplating "retirement" in 2007.

That's weird, I'm only 44 and not a day goes by where I don't
contemplate retirement. I'm pretty sure I won't work past 59 1/2 (401K
withdraw age) unless I get some airport related "retirement job".

--- Jay


--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[Ross]

Jay Masino wrote:
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
>
>>Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
>>contemplating "retirement" in 2007.
>
>
> That's weird, I'm only 44 and not a day goes by where I don't
> contemplate retirement. I'm pretty sure I won't work past 59 1/2 (401K
> withdraw age) unless I get some airport related "retirement job".
>
> --- Jay
>
>

Curious, what is your plans for insurance? However, you are only 44 and
a lot can change. I am 61 and that is a concern. My company has good
insurance plan. It would be costly to retire, but I am ready.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Bob Noel]

In article om>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
> contemplating "retirement" in 2007. I have no plans to *ever*
> retire, but -- assuming that eventually health reasons will prevail --
> I certainly don't want to become a burden on society until I am
> physically forced to be.

I'm looking forward to retirement... but in my case I'll be depending
on my retirement account.

There's lots of things I'd like to do, especially when compared to
working in a (*@#&$(* cubicle.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Dan Luke]

"Jay Masino" wrote:

>> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
>> contemplating "retirement" in 2007.
>
> That's weird, I'm only 44 and not a day goes by where I don't
> contemplate retirement. I'm pretty sure I won't work past 59 1/2 (401K
> withdraw age)

That's what I said when I was 44.

As things turned out, I could have retired comfortably at 55. Now, I've just
turned 60 and am planning to cash out in two years...but that's what I said
two years ago.

Retirement can be scary when you actually face it.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>The point I'm getting to is that teachers change careers like lots of people
>>and for a number of reasons.
>
>
> The latest figures I've seen say that a child born today will have 13
> different jobs in their lifetime.
>
> Things sure have changed since I was born in '58. When I was growing
> up, it was just expected that you'd start working for a company, and
> die there 45 years later...
>
> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
> contemplating "retirement" in 2007. I have no plans to *ever*
> retire, but -- assuming that eventually health reasons will prevail --
> I certainly don't want to become a burden on society until I am
> physically forced to be.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
Jay,

If someone retires at 70 after working 30 years at a company (or govt.
agency) would it be different than 55 and working 30 years?

Margy

[Vaughn Simon]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> As things turned out, I could have retired comfortably at 55. Now, I've just
> turned 60 and am planning to cash out in two years...but that's what I said
> two years ago.
>
> Retirement can be scary when you actually face it.

And expensive when you actually look at everything that is involved,
particularly medical insurance. I am now 6 years past my retirement date, and
still working the same job. I am now working for 19% of my pay, for benefits,
(that is the main thing) and for a small increment (2.2% per year) on my future
retirement pay.

I suppose it would pay me to go ahead and collect my pension and look for
another job with benefits ... but I HAVE a job.

Vaughn

[Dave[_3_]]

Ummm... what if we save enough to pay OURSELVES?

At 59?

Dave (60 days away, and "nothing " is not the plan) :)



On 22 Feb 2007 17:23:13 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>> Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
>> able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
>> expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.
>
>Why should we pay any young person to sit around doing nothing?
>Nowadays, 55 is YOUNG -- VERY young -- and there is simply no way to
>make paying every 55 year old to sit around doing nothing work,
>mathematically.
>
>Unless you've found some new actuarial tool that I've never seen.

[Dave[_3_]]

Oh Crap.. shoudda read on, I am not a teacher.

Sorry..

Dave

On 22 Feb 2007 17:23:13 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>> Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
>> able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
>> expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.
>
>Why should we pay any young person to sit around doing nothing?
>Nowadays, 55 is YOUNG -- VERY young -- and there is simply no way to
>make paying every 55 year old to sit around doing nothing work,
>mathematically.
>
>Unless you've found some new actuarial tool that I've never seen.

[The Visitor]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Things sure have changed since I was born in '58.


Ha! You're an old man. I was born in 59.

As for retirement, nobody retires. They just change gigs and say they
are retired, but keep earning money one way or another. It's what keeps
you young.

John

[RST Engineering]

>
> 1st- She was in her second year teaching. 1 year after my son was in her
> class he got married and pregnant and stayed home with her new baby.
> Hasn't returned to teaching.

If HE got married and pregnant, HE wouldn't have ever worked a day in HIS
life again. HE would be able to write a book on how HE got pregnant and
retired very wealthy.

Jim

[Montblack]

("RST Engineering" wrote)
> HE would be able to write a book on how HE got pregnant and retired very
> wealthy.


[Book excerpts]

"When a man and a woman love each other very, very much..."

"Beer belly?"
"Nope, preggers."

"C-Section?"
"Nope. Natural birth."
"Um, ...WHY?"
"I heard it gets a little bigger afterwards."

"When the doctor offers to have you cut the cord, please cut ONLY the cord."

"That's your focal point???"
"Yeah. What's wrong with it?"
"It's a football game!"
"Better still, I've got my contractions timed to the commercials."

"Oh look, it's all purple, and shriveled, and gooey."
"What, the baby?"
"Yes, what did you think I meant?"


Montblack :-)

[Jay Masino]

Ross > wrote:
> Jay Masino wrote:
> > Jay Honeck > wrote:
> >
> >>Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
> >>contemplating "retirement" in 2007.
> >
> >
> > That's weird, I'm only 44 and not a day goes by where I don't
> > contemplate retirement. I'm pretty sure I won't work past 59 1/2 (401K
> > withdraw age) unless I get some airport related "retirement job".
> >
> > --- Jay
> >
> >
>
> Curious, what is your plans for insurance? However, you are only 44 and
> a lot can change. I am 61 and that is a concern. My company has good
> insurance plan. It would be costly to retire, but I am ready.
>

--

Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are"
http://www.JayMasino.com
http://www.OceanCityAirport.com
http://www.oc-Adolfos.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:07:45 -0400, Dave
> wrote:

>Ummm... what if we save enough to pay OURSELVES?
>
>At 59?
>
>Dave (60 days away, and "nothing " is not the plan) :)
>
>
>
>On 22 Feb 2007 17:23:13 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
>wrote:
>
>>> Jay, go spend a week in a classroom and then say teachers shouldn't be
>>> able to retire with 30 years at full pension. The average life
>>> expectancy of a teacher is 5 years in the classroom.
>>
>>Why should we pay any young person to sit around doing nothing?
>>Nowadays, 55 is YOUNG -- VERY young -- and there is simply no way to
>>make paying every 55 year old to sit around doing nothing work,
>>mathematically.
>>
>>Unless you've found some new actuarial tool that I've never seen.

Keem them young people working to support us retired ones. BTW, had I
not gone back to college I'd have had enough time in to take full
returement at just over 52 working in the chemical industry.


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Gig 601XL Builder]

RST Engineering wrote:
>> 1st- She was in her second year teaching. 1 year after my son was in
>> her class he got married and pregnant and stayed home with her new
>> baby. Hasn't returned to teaching.
>
> If HE got married and pregnant, HE wouldn't have ever worked a day in
> HIS life again. HE would be able to write a book on how HE got
> pregnant and retired very wealthy.
>
> Jim

That "S" key is so far over to the left of the keyboard I forget about it
some times.

[Jay Honeck]

> BTW, had I
> not gone back to college I'd have had enough time in to take full
> returement at just over 52 working in the chemical industry.

I doubt those types of retirement plans will be around much longer.
(Well, except for our ruling class, of course.)

Medically, there is no justification for them, and actuarily, they
can't be sustained.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Roger[_4_]]

On 19 Feb 2007 05:17:40 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>Well, Fat Albert still sits on jacks at Steve's shop... Not much
>happening... The vaunted new engine hoses have yet to arrive despite
>being paid for in advance...
>
>The #1 radio was sent out to the radio shop - the King KI-214 VOR
>heading had suddenly gone off about 12 degrees - though the ILS was
>working right... He started out mumbling about some tuning capacitors
>that change value, but what he found was a dirty pot in the KI-214...
>He was able to spray it with cleaner and get it working again... He
>left it on the test bench over night and it held alignment... But,
>says he can't get certified replacement pots any more so if it goes
>out again the 214 is junk... Having spent part of my life in
>industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
>proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
>and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
><sigh>
>
>The #3 radio was tuning erratically... We decided to look at it
>ourselves before sending it out... Found the kilocycle tune knob was
>turning on the shaft at times... Managed to take the fancy, schmancy
>knob with it's ultra tech wedge screw mechanism apart and repair it...
>So, that is good to go now...
>: Note to manufacturer: Ya know, a simple set screw has worked for 80
>+ years, why get complicated?
>
>So, on to week #3... "I wanna go flying!" <sob, sob>

Which reminds me, I have a few photos of "Albert" at one of EAA
Chapter 1093's pancake breakfasts. The files are pretty big to e-mail.



>
>denny
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:55:20 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
> wrote:

>
>"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>>Having spent part of my life in
>> industrial electronics I have no doubt I can install a pot of the
>> proper value and taper... The problem is it won't be certified if I do
>> and the radio shop will refuse to align it with an uncertified pot...
>> <sigh>
>
> If you were to install an exact replacement pot would there be any reason
>to mention it to anyone? Another possibility might be buying someone else's
>junked out unit as a source for genuine certified parts.

There are a lot of Cessna 150s flying around with automotive voltage
regulators in them. They just put the cover off the certified one
back on the new one. (No I don't have a 150 or a plane that uses
automotive parts)

>
>Vaughn
>
>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On 26 Feb 2007 08:48:37 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>> BTW, had I
>> not gone back to college I'd have had enough time in to take full
>> returement at just over 52 working in the chemical industry.
>
>I doubt those types of retirement plans will be around much longer.
>(Well, except for our ruling class, of course.)

Why not? They work. The plans are growing. Both the employee and
company pay. For the CAP the company has a base 3% of your salary
that goes in and then they match 50/50 for a few more %. of what you
put in. You can put up to 15% of your salary into the account if you
wish. On top of that is the standard retirement plan. The money for
both plans is held by an investment firm and the company has no claim
to any of it.

>
>Medically, there is no justification for them, and actuarily, they
>can't be sustained.

Again, why not? I had over 35 years in and had earned that company
plenty. Unlike many companies that kept their own retirement accounts
they were smart enough to put the retirement plan in the hands of a
company that does that for a business. That meant the temptation to
use that money to cover expenses, or a short fall *temporarily* was
not an option. IOW they could not rob the employees retirement fund
as so many companies have done. Even though the company has fewer
employees now than when I retired the regular retirement plan is still
growing with earnings and their contributions combined.

Our accounts are investment based. I retired 10 years ago and my
account is worth more now (even after today's little correction and
the _dot_com_crash) than when I retired. Prior to the dot com crash
my cap was earning more than I was and I was putting every cent into
it they'd let me.

Michigan's financial woes are kinda like the dot com boom and bust,
but with blind reliance on the automotive industry instead of a
particular stock market segment. The industry has been blindly
following the path to building what people say they want, not what
they buy. Not too long ago the US industry was selling more trucks
than cars and those trucks are not noted for economy. Take the so
called "flex fuel" vehicle. The industry gets mileage credits for
them as they "could" be called green even though few of them will ever
run on anything but gas. They aren't even designed to use E85 for
extended periods. Their fuel systems are not designed to withstand the
abuse of E85 over prolonged periods. That leaves us with them still
making gas guzzlers that end up sitting on the lot when gas prices are
thought to be high. We haven't yet seen high gas prices in the US,
but we most likely will. We certainly will if the average driver
doesn't change their ways of driving.

Now those automotive employees represent a sizeable voting force. They
don't appear to want change and they probably have considerably more
political clout that the automotive companies themselves. Where else
can you get laid off for a while at full pay? OTOH they are making
some concessions now.

We had "planned obsolescence" which was great for the industry when
they had no competition. I had a 61 or 62 Mustang that rusted out
about 6 months after I purchased it new. of course the company stood
behind it. They'd pay half of the body shop work if I used a Ford
body shop. I got it done for less than that at the local body shop
that did better work. In 1980 I ended up with one that didn't have the
belly pan welded in. They had to strip the interior and redo the whole
thing, but at least I didn't have to pay that time. Up through the
70's US cars had an average life span that was pretty short. If it had
more than 50,000 miles you were getting concerned. If it had much more
than 60,000 it was almost worthless. Sure there were some outstanding
exceptions, but those were few. That approach gave foreign
manufacturers a foot in the door and it didn't take them long to
surpass the US made cars in quality. The Japanese went from "Junk" to
high quality at low cost in just a few years. Now they are having a
similar problem with Korea who is having the same problem with China.

Now days it's difficult to call a car US, Japanese, or what ever.
Assembled in USA would be more accurate The foreign manufacturers
(Particularly Japanese) build cars here, they make some parts here
and we use their parts (made here or there) in our "US" made cars.

Michigan has been unable to wean itself from the auto industry and
with the inertia of that industry and its employees, it's probably
going to get far worse before it gets better. OTOH we do have the
*possibility* of agriculture and alternative energy sources/fuels, but
only time will tell. If they think Michigan and the auto industry are
in bad shape now, wait until gas goes above $3.50 a gallon and stays
there. I doubt it's all that far off and increasing oil production
capacity is one of the worst things they can do.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On 23 Feb 2007 09:21:58 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>> The point I'm getting to is that teachers change careers like lots of people
>> and for a number of reasons.
>
>The latest figures I've seen say that a child born today will have 13
>different jobs in their lifetime.

That's not a great deal different than when I was young. However you
did say jobs rather than professions. A person is currently expected
to change professions about three or four times over their life.
If I count the jobs I've had I've already passed your figure of 13.

I do believe that people are not as success oriented or have as high a
work ethic on average as they "did back then".

>
>Things sure have changed since I was born in '58. When I was growing
>up, it was just expected that you'd start working for a company, and
>die there 45 years later...

We live in different worlds. I was born in 40 and graduated in 58. By
58 we were already seeing those changes.
BTW I was raised on a small farm and I was a farmer until age 21 when
I figured "there had to be a better way" at least for me.
>
>Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
>contemplating "retirement" in 2007. I have no plans to *ever*
>retire, but -- assuming that eventually health reasons will prevail --
>I certainly don't want to become a burden on society until I am
>physically forced to be.
BTW you are approaching my age when I graduated from College.

You have a far different vision of retirement than many of us.
With planning and foresight, retirement should be a time to enjoy
life, not be a burden on society.

If a person invests a little at a time in addition to their retirement
there is no reason they shouldn't be able to retire by the time they
are 50 to 55 and then go "play" and do so without being a burden to
society. I used to tell the new hires at the company from which I
retired that if they put every cent they could into the CAP they could
retire at age 50 as millionaires. I did the math and they could do it
easily. The problem is and has been that most of us "want it now". I
did, but fortunately I got smart soon enough to survive. I had a good
paying job. I had new cars regularly and built a nice spacious home in
the country. A wife and two kids came along and we lived comfortably
but lived more for "now" rather than the future. I got single in 1980
and became a single parent as well. Fortunately one was about ready
to graduate from high school and the other was going into college.
Unfortunately my life savings at that time was $47 give or take a few
cents. (I'll always remember that figure) That was about the time I
started getting smarter.

In the 26 years since then, I met Joyce, got married, got out of debt,
went back to college, earned a bachelors degree, started graduate
school, got a good job and retired just under 7 years later. I could
have gone back to work the day after retirement making more than I had
before. I had a chance to do some very lucrative consulting but I
retired so I didn't have to work those hours or spend all that time
traveling on business. I was ready to go "play".

No, I'm not wealthy, but I can do most of the things I want "in
moderation" So what if I don't have a big expensive house and drive an
older car? I don't have to just sit and watch the grass grow either.

Had I had the sense to start stashing a bit away early on instead of
spending it, I could have retired at age 50 without ever having to
worry about money again. I'd have had even more if I'd driven every
car till the wheels fell off. <:-)) OTOH my first wife would have
gotten a bundle out of me instead of having the Judge refuse to let
them even discuss my retirement. (He declared it "off limits")<:-))

So I take the opposite stance. There should be no reason a person
shouldn't be able to retire at 50 to 55. If they can afford to retire
at that age they will not be a burden to society or themselves. OTOH
it does take work, and a willingness to accept change. It also
requires the person to go where the work is and to always be learning
so if the one profession fizzles they have another to fall back on.

Now I realize that not every one is going to choose a job or
profession to which they are suited the first time or maybe even the
second, but if they have ambition and a few smarts the majority
should be able to do quite well. Certainly there are those who are
going to be unable to do well for a variety of reasons and there will
be those who will be a burden to society from day one and not due to
any fault of their own.

A few facts of life:
If you live for now there may not be much of a tomorrow.
Education is one of the best investments you can make.
There is no such thing as a classless society.
Society becomes stratified due to many reasons beyond the typical
money, background, religious beliefs, and power. (I really don't care
if it does or not. I'm me)
The individual is not bound to any particular class for life with only
a few exceptions.
Only the working class can pay taxes. No matter how it's spread out
The money will *always* end up coming basically from us in the middle
class no matter who pays directly to the government..
What is the old saying? Success is 99% perspiration on only 1%
inspiration. (or something to that effect).

If I could do it then most any one should be able to do it, is
probably more true here than any where else as I'm notably short on
ambition and never did have much.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Jay Honeck]

> Why not? They work. The plans are growing.

Your plan is not the norm. I'm glad it's "working" for you, but the
fact is that if your company is paying you to "retire" at age 52 (or
whatever you said), there is going to be a competitor out there that
ISN'T.

That savings will be the death of your company, because it's just
plain stupid to pay young men to sit around and do nothing.
Companies that are smart enough NOT to pay young men to NOT work will
win, in an open market.

> Michigan has been unable to wean itself from the auto industry and
> with the inertia of that industry and its employees, it's probably
> going to get far worse before it gets better.

That's for sure. I lived through (on a much smaller scale) the
economic devastation that occurs when an auto maker goes belly up,
back when American Motors Corporation died. The economy of Kenosha,
Wisconsin was ruined for a decade or more.

They've now recovered fully, with nearly full employment -- but there
are still a lot of bitter old men there, wondering what happened to
their cushy lives...

It never even dawns on them that the answer is in the mirror.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



OTOH we do have the
> *possibility* of agriculture and alternative energy sources/fuels, but
> only time will tell. If they think Michigan and the auto industry are
> in bad shape now, wait until gas goes above $3.50 a gallon and stays
> there. I doubt it's all that far off and increasing oil production
> capacity is one of the worst things they can do.
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:55:03 -0600, "Dan Luke"
> wrote:

>
>"Jay Masino" wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
>>> contemplating "retirement" in 2007.
>>
>> That's weird, I'm only 44 and not a day goes by where I don't
>> contemplate retirement. I'm pretty sure I won't work past 59 1/2 (401K
>> withdraw age)
>
>That's what I said when I was 44.
>
>As things turned out, I could have retired comfortably at 55. Now, I've just
>turned 60 and am planning to cash out in two years...but that's what I said
>two years ago.
>
>Retirement can be scary when you actually face it.

It wasn't at all for me. One day I made up my mind it was time to
retire, walked into my bosses office, and gave notice.

Now to put that in perspective, I had a job I enjoyed, a good boss,
good working conditions, good people to work for and good people
working for me. IOW the job was fun and I made good money.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 02:30:17 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
> wrote:

>
>"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> As things turned out, I could have retired comfortably at 55. Now, I've just
>> turned 60 and am planning to cash out in two years...but that's what I said
>> two years ago.
>>
>> Retirement can be scary when you actually face it.
>
> And expensive when you actually look at everything that is involved,
>particularly medical insurance. I am now 6 years past my retirement date, and
>still working the same job. I am now working for 19% of my pay, for benefits,
>(that is the main thing) and for a small increment (2.2% per year) on my future
>retirement pay.

In the pre retirement meetings they used to tell us that our expenses
would go down after retirement which always ended up with me raising
my hand. After about the third time the exasperated speaker said,
"Roger, not every one in here flys airplanes". <:-)) But it's true if
you want to travel as well.

My insurance followed me including life insurance or it did until I
turned 65. I still have good medical, but my life insurance is now to
the point where I'm no longer worth more dead than alive.

Retirement gains where I worked were 2.2% per year UNTIL you reached
enough points (age plus years of service) to retire. Then it was only
about 0.6% as I recall.

I was able to put up to 15% of my salary into the CAP and with company
matching I think that was also 19%. However I could move it between
accounts, or have a portion of it directly in the stock market.
>
> I suppose it would pay me to go ahead and collect my pension and look for
>another job with benefits ... but I HAVE a job.
>
You could go do something for fun. That way you get paid for having
fun, have benefits AND have the retirement on top of that. IF you work
it out right you can retire with a substantial raise. If you need the
money and can't do it without a raise what advantage would there be to
retiring?

>Vaughn
>
>
>
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:43:40 -0500, Bob Noel
> wrote:

>In article om>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
>> contemplating "retirement" in 2007. I have no plans to *ever*
>> retire, but -- assuming that eventually health reasons will prevail --
>> I certainly don't want to become a burden on society until I am
>> physically forced to be.
>
>I'm looking forward to retirement... but in my case I'll be depending
>on my retirement account.
>
>There's lots of things I'd like to do, especially when compared to
>working in a (*@#&$(* cubicle.

I had offices at two different sites. It old them the day they put me
in a cubicle I was gone. However I retired before it ever happened.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On 22 Feb 2007 13:40:01 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>On Feb 22, 3:10 pm, "Montblack" <Y4_NOT!...
> wrote:
>> ("Denny" wrote)
>>
>> > He has a really nice F model Aztec he is trying to sell me - his Part 135
>> > machine... Ahhh temptation, get thee behind me!
>>
>
>>
>> So, got a name picked out for the Aztec, yet? <g>
>> Mont-out-of-the-blackness
>
>Ahhh jeez Monty.... You are about as helpful as an alcoholic-on-the-
>wagon who has drinking buddys who tell him "just one won't hurt"....
>
>>
>> What's the difference in:
>>
>> Fuel burn
>> Speed
>> Useful load
>> Speed
>> Avionics/radios
>> Speed
>> Comfort
>> Insurance
>> Etc.
>>
>
>in order:
>If ya gotta ask ya can't afford it, pilgrim...

Well an IO 540 burns what? times two.

>Lots faster than Fat Albert the Apache - 165 knots typical
>Whatever you can get the doors closed on (which is why they are used
>as lobster haulers)

It is big and that one doesn't smell like fish.
it's also a very docile twin. Probably not much different than Fat
Albert except for the load and speed...and fuel burn. Much more
forgiving than a Twin Comanche. OTOH the Twin is as fast as mine with
two engines and doesn't use more fuel than I do on one.
BTW I did see a guy land one (Aztec) on the nose gear and roll the
tire over.
>Like sitting in your easy chair at home, and you will not rub
>shoulders...

Roomy but noisy.

>Well, it's a twin - but not near as bad is if I were ASEL wanting my
>first twin...
>It's loaded, Radar and a GNS430, alcohol props, etc...

Geezeee...were I a couple of years younger...I keep saying that more
often lately.

>Gets you respect on the ramp at strange airports... Good paint..
>Average interior...

Yah, but who looks past the panel.
I've wanted to get my multi rating...Buy it...learn to fly it...get
the rating...sell it for a profit? Uses how much gas in today's
market<:-))

Nah, he probably wants more than I'd go. They sold that P-Baron for a
small fortune compared to what it was worth.

>
>denny
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On 19 Feb 2007 05:17:40 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>Well, Fat Albert still sits on jacks at Steve's shop... Not much
>happening... The vaunted new engine hoses have yet to arrive despite
>being paid for in advance...

The Deb gets its in April.
I really need to replace the KNS80 and one of the Coms.
KNS80 is some times flaky and the com is difficult to read. A new
window would fix the com...but I could probably purchase a used one
for the cost of a new window.

It's set so much this winter I have some doubts about the compression.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Roger[_4_]]

On 27 Feb 2007 21:23:45 -0800, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>> Why not? They work. The plans are growing.
>
>Your plan is not the norm. I'm glad it's "working" for you, but the
>fact is that if your company is paying you to "retire" at age 52 (or
>whatever you said), there is going to be a competitor out there that
>ISN'T.
>
>That savings will be the death of your company, because it's just

That's the point. The company isn't paying me anything. They paid that
as part of my wages. That percent went to an investment company
similar to the CAP from the day I received my first pay check.
Considering what went into the retirement account I'd guess the
interest is more than what I'm getting and I do get a fairly nice
check. OTOH it sure aint what I received while working.

I could have gone to the local head hunters and had it all set up to
come back in to my old office the next day with a considerable raise.
They can contract out like that, give the other company a commission,
and me a raise as they don't have to pay benefits. A good portion of
those benefits went to that investment company for my retirement.
OR rephrased, they pay the employment agency a premium and my wages. I
get a considerable raise and they still save money.
Also in today's dollars the new hires don't get as much in the way of
benefits as the earlier employees, but it's still a good place to work
and they pay a good wage to professionals.

>plain stupid to pay young men to sit around and do nothing.
>Companies that are smart enough NOT to pay young men to NOT work will
>win, in an open market.

They can't even claim what I receive for retirement as an expense as
that was done when I received my original paychecks.
So it doesn't cost the company any more for retirement if I retire at
50, 55, 60 or 65.

>
>> Michigan has been unable to wean itself from the auto industry and
>> with the inertia of that industry and its employees, it's probably
>> going to get far worse before it gets better.

I was glad I worked most of my life in the chemical industry. Prior to
that I had a taste of the auto industry for a couple of years. (didn't
like it)

>
>That's for sure. I lived through (on a much smaller scale) the
>economic devastation that occurs when an auto maker goes belly up,
>back when American Motors Corporation died. The economy of Kenosha,
>Wisconsin was ruined for a decade or more.
>
>They've now recovered fully, with nearly full employment -- but there
>are still a lot of bitter old men there, wondering what happened to
>their cushy lives...
>
>It never even dawns on them that the answer is in the mirror.

Yup. The cost of that new car is mostly wages.
I don't know if it's that way now or not, but at one time line workers
were reportedly making as much as engineers. (even when laid off)

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Denny]

>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)www.rogerhalstead.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Umm, my emailer just happened to notice this post Roger - as I had
quit following the thread...
Go ahead and send them if your emailer will allow a big file... I have
a 3 meg line for downloads...

On the Aztruck, I have a 150 hours, or so, in them so I understand the
critters... I'm not interested in having one... Fat Albert does what I
need in a family hauler...

And to put an end to this thread, the annual is over, the fat boy is
back home, snoozing in his hanger....

denny

[Jay Honeck]

> >There's lots of things I'd like to do, especially when compared to
> >working in a (*@#&$(* cubicle.

There are worse fates. During my last venture in the world of working
for others, our owners believed in the "open office" setting, to
provide "synergy" in the workplace. Thus, all of our desks were in
a big room, with nothing but file cabinets demarking our territory.

What this meant, in practice, was that very litle work was
accomplished. Everyone would walk past, cup of coffee in hand, on the
way to <fill in the blank>, and -- being nice people -- would simply
HAVE to say "How's it goin', Jay?"

You can't ignore your co-workers, so the ensuing conversations --
times 200 people -- meant that we had a very lively social life in the
newspaper, and not a lot of productivity.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RST Engineering]

In the engineering world, that setup is called a "bullpen".

Lots of bull going on.

Jim


> There are worse fates. During my last venture in the world of working
> for others, our owners believed in the "open office" setting, to
> provide "synergy" in the workplace. Thus, all of our desks were in
> a big room, with nothing but file cabinets demarking our territory.
>

[[email protected]]

Yup, annual interruptus!

Mid-time Continental IO-520 factory reman...
We have 6 jugs to replace for leaking exhaust valves.
The valves also have ridges (or lips), so they don't
seat properly... and the valve guides are worn.
We'll be down for a second week.

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocations!"
--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 247 Young Eagles!

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> Anyway, the point is that no 55 year-old person should be
> contemplating "retirement" in 2007.

What's this fascination with working? I cannot wait to retire. Some
people cannot envision ever not working. If that's you great, have a
good time, but you are a small minority. The vast majority of my
retirement will be my money. As soon as I determine enough money is
there I will be very difficult to find. I may occasionally work but it
will be on my own terms doing something I like. Most of the time I will
be having fun. I see a sailboat in my future, flying, golf a condo in
the Bahamas. I cannot imagine ****ing away my life working past about
55. I'd really like to be gone by 50.

[Jay Honeck]

> I cannot imagine ****ing away my life working past about
> 55. I'd really like to be gone by 50.

I used to feel that way, when I had a job I hated.

Now, I can't imagine not working. Playing innkeeper is just too much
fun!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Roger[_4_]]

On 28 Feb 2007 04:43:10 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)www.rogerhalstead.com- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Umm, my emailer just happened to notice this post Roger - as I had
>quit following the thread...
>Go ahead and send them if your emailer will allow a big file... I have
>a 3 meg line for downloads...
>
>On the Aztruck, I have a 150 hours, or so, in them so I understand the
>critters... I'm not interested in having one... Fat Albert does what I
>need in a family hauler...
>
>And to put an end to this thread, the annual is over, the fat boy is
>back home, snoozing in his hanger....


Now all I gotta do is remember to get them off the other computer.
Hopefully I'll remember before my next annual.<:-))


>
>denny
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Steve Foley]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> Now, I can't imagine not working. Playing innkeeper is just too much
> fun!

This song always makes me think of you:

Charge 'em for the lice, extra for the mice
Two percent for looking in the mirror twice
Here a little slice, there a little cut
Three percent for sleeping with the window shut
When it comes to fixing prices
There are a lot of tricks he knows
How it all increases, all them bits and pieces
Jesus! It's amazing how it grows!

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>I cannot imagine ****ing away my life working past about
>>55. I'd really like to be gone by 50.
>
>
> I used to feel that way, when I had a job I hated.
>
> Now, I can't imagine not working. Playing innkeeper is just too much
> fun!
>
> :-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
Jay,

You don't have a job, you have a business. That's a big difference.
What you do pays off directly to you. You work hard, you do well (or
better). If you choose to go flying you can pay someone else to cover
the front desk. At some point you may choose to go flying more and pay
someone else more or choose to work more and pay someone else less. For
the rest of us we work, we get paid, we work some more. If we exceed
the expectations of our performance plans we get an atta boy.

Margy

[Jay Honeck]

> You don't have a job, you have a business. That's a big difference.
> What you do pays off directly to you. You work hard, you do well (or
> better). If you choose to go flying you can pay someone else to cover
> the front desk. At some point you may choose to go flying more and pay
> someone else more or choose to work more and pay someone else less. For
> the rest of us we work, we get paid, we work some more. If we exceed
> the expectations of our performance plans we get an atta boy.

This is quite true. But I also lose everything if the government
decides to fund another new hotel. (They've built two in the last two
years...)

If you want the freedom of business ownership, you have to be willing
to risk everything. Everyone is against you, from the big-box chains
to the state and local gummint 'crats. There are few allies in
business; the best you can usually hope for is neutrality.

Bottom line: If you want the safety of the corporate world, you have
to be willing to eat **** every day. You will never starve, but it
sure tastes bad sometimes.

In my world, even the **** can stop.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> This is quite true. But I also lose everything if the government
> decides to fund another new hotel. (They've built two in the last two
> years...)
>

I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in
line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em.

[Jay Honeck]

>> (They've built two in the last two
> > years...)

> I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need to get in
> line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't beat 'em join 'em.

I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to
look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> (They've built two in the last two
>>> years...)
>
>> I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need
>> to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't
>> beat 'em join 'em.
>
> I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to
> look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare.

I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The people of
the city as represented by the council or whoever is making the decision to
build these hotels and lease them to private organizations. They are doing
it because they are going to get something in return. Increased tourism,
larger tax base, whatever.

Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a
new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake. Would
that be welfare?

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>> (They've built two in the last two
>>>> years...)
>>
>>> I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need
>>> to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't
>>> beat 'em join 'em.
>>
>> I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to
>> look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare.
>
> I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The people of
> the city as represented by the council or whoever is making the decision
> to build these hotels and lease them to private organizations. They are
> doing it because they are going to get something in return. Increased
> tourism, larger tax base, whatever.
>
> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and create a
> new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the new lake.
> Would that be welfare?

How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare?

Have Americans become such whores?

[RST Engineering]

Jeez, Jay, if I had your face, I'd shave my ass and walk backwards.

{;-)

On a more serious note, some of the part time faculty at the college feel
the same way about applying for unemployment over the summer break. The
other side of that coin says that if the college paid the premiums for
unemployment insurance directly to the faculty, or offered the faculty a
full year contract, or loaded up the schedule so that everybody could teach
in the summer, then there wouldn't be the need for those $$ to fill a three
month gap of no income. Hell, after 30 years at this gig I've got a $25K
credit in my "account" with the State of Californicate that I'll never see.
When I quit, it gets dumped into the general fund, lost and gone forever.

"Welfare" is collecting money for doing nothing. Working your ass off in a
structure that has been funded with public money for public purposes is not.
Forget thee not that part of your sweat in that structure is going back into
the public treasury, along with all the tax money that it generates. You
might have scruples about part of your labor going into the public treasury,
but don't call it welfare.


Jim



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> I have to shave this face every morning

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>>> (They've built two in the last two
>>>>> years...)
>>>
>>>> I fully understand you being ****ed about this but you really need
>>>> to get in line and let them build you an new hotel. If you can't
>>>> beat 'em join 'em.
>>>
>>> I have to shave this face every morning, and I wouldn't be able to
>>> look my kids in the eye if I accepted welfare.
>>
>> I know what you mean but I really don't see this as welfare. The
>> people of the city as represented by the council or whoever is
>> making the decision to build these hotels and lease them to private
>> organizations. They are doing it because they are going to get
>> something in return. Increased tourism, larger tax base, whatever.
>>
>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the
>> new lake. Would that be welfare?
>
> How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare?
>
> Have Americans become such whores?


You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways. If a government
entity decides that having more people stay in hotels in their location will
be of benefit then there are only so many things they can do to get more
people to open and run hotels.

Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote tourism, help
create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and if one city or state
is doing it the others have to do it to compete.

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around the
>>> new lake. Would that be welfare?
>>
>> How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare?
>>
>> Have Americans become such whores?
>
>
> You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways.

Yes.

> If a government entity decides that having more people stay in hotels in
> their location will be of benefit then there are only so many things they
> can do to get more people to open and run hotels.

That's one form.

>
> Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote tourism,
> help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and if one city or
> state is doing it the others have to do it to compete.

So, your answer to my second question is "yes"?

[Jay Honeck]

> Jeez, Jay, if I had your face, I'd shave my ass and walk backwards.
>
> {;-)

You forgot the part about learning to walk on my hands...

;-)

> On a more serious note, some of the part time faculty at the college feel
> the same way about applying for unemployment over the summer break. The
> other side of that coin says that if the college paid the premiums for
> unemployment insurance directly to the faculty, or offered the faculty a
> full year contract, or loaded up the schedule so that everybody could teach
> in the summer, then there wouldn't be the need for those $$ to fill a three
> month gap of no income. Hell, after 30 years at this gig I've got a $25K
> credit in my "account" with the State of Californicate that I'll never see.
> When I quit, it gets dumped into the general fund, lost and gone forever.

One point: You have no "account", and there are far more people
sucking from the teat than are carressing it.

Another point: Your employer has no choice but to pay into it -- they
cannot, by law, give it to you instead. But you know that.

/rant mode on/

In Iowa, unemployment compensation is a blending of two easily-
corrupted groups -- the bureacrats who run the system, and the
recipients of the money. Because of the way "Unemployment" is set
up, these two groups -- which, in the interest of "checks and
balances", should have as semi-adversarial role -- instead work
together hand-in-glove to fleece the system.

Bureacrats love new benefit recipients -- it keeps them busy, and
diverts our elected officials' attention elsewhere when they're
looking for places to cut the budget. More unemployment paid out
justifies their existence, and provides an incentive to build their
department -- two very compelling reasons for them to approve
benefits.

Recipients, of course, are more than happy to take the benefits.
While I might admit, on a good day, that many recipients of
"unemployment" are in need of the money, there are a signficant number
of dastardly and nefarious scumbags who will always try to scam the
system. Those people, combined with the bureaucrats, make for a
system that is full of fluff and waste.

Hapless employers are forced to pay into this corrupt system, and have
virtually no input or control over where the money is spent. In our
10 years in business in Iowa, we have had precisely one (1) employee
claim unemployment compensation. The claim was completely bogus, I
was able to document it six ways to China, but, in the end, it didn't
matter -- the guy (then living in a beach house in Florida) was able
to get paid for six months of sitting on his butt.

Now you might say "Good for him" -- except that because of this, my
overall unemployment insurance rate (or "Workforce Development" rate,
as the State of Iowa sickeningly coins it) went up 400%, and has
stayed at that higher rate for five years.

That extra money -- and we're talking many thousands of dollars -- was
money that could have been used for any number of productive things,
from remodeling the hotel, to giving my night manager a raise.
Instead, it was sucked into the never-satisfied maw of Gummint, never
to be seen again.

Don't talk to me about EVER accepting government welfare money. The
waste and fraud in our government, from Federal to State to Local,
sickens me, and I would rather accept money from organized crime.

/rant mode off/
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RST Engineering]

>
> One point: You have no "account",

Yes I do, Jay, and for the times during the year when my teaching contract
has run out and I have absolutely no assurance that it will be renegotiated
for the coming semester (like during summer and winter breaks) I have an
account with a known number of dollars in it that is printed on the
unemployment forms that I get every semester. Right now it stands somewere
in the vicinity of $25 grand. That account is debited for every dollar I
draw from it, and when it goes to zero so does my unemployment check.


and there are far more people
> sucking from the teat than are carressing it.

That would be caressing, but let's not suck the tits from nits. I don't get
your point.


>
> Another point: Your employer has no choice but to pay into it -- they
> cannot, by law, give it to you instead. But you know that.

SUUURRRRE THEY CAN. You have heard of the initiative and referendum
process, yes? Or is Iowa not yet on board with these 19th century
innovations for power to the people?

>
> /rant mode on/
>
> In Iowa, unemployment compensation is a blending of two easily-
> corrupted groups

/rant^2 mode on/

Ya know, Jay, you seem to have this "poor helpless little me" syndrome that
just drives me buggy. The people on your city council, on your state
legislature, and on your state senate put their clothes on one piece at a
time, just like you and I. You think they were BORN to the office? A lot
of them are poor dirt farmers that had the intestinal fortitude (with a
capital G) to stand up and say, "to hell with this system." And then do
something about it.

You keep saying how much money is required to run for office. I agree; it
is one of the warts on our political system. However, if somebody runs, and
if their message rings true with enough of the local factions, the money
will flow. It is amazing ... just like sticking a pipe into a wall and
turning on the spigot and watching the water flow. But you have to resonate
with the people and organizations.

But ya gotta do it. And you need to dedicate the time to do it. Or let
Mary run. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

>
> Hapless employers are forced to pay into this corrupt system, and have
> virtually no input or control over where the money is spent. In our
> 10 years in business in Iowa, we have had precisely one (1) employee
> claim unemployment compensation. The claim was completely bogus, I
> was able to document it six ways to China, but, in the end, it didn't
> matter -- the guy (then living in a beach house in Florida) was able
> to get paid for six months of sitting on his butt.

And did you appeal it, as is your right (at least in Californicate) or did
you let that ****ant little "administrative law judge" at the first hearing
be the deciding judge? Those idiots are not really skilled in UI law; they
are picked from a group of attorneys who hope someday to land the plush job
of "real" judge.

>
> Don't talk to me about EVER accepting government welfare money. The
> waste and fraud in our government, from Federal to State to Local,
> sickens me, and I would rather accept money from organized crime.

I'll talk to Bugsy, and if he okays the vigorish arrangement you can have as
much as you want. Just watch out for your kneecaps {;-)

/rant^2 mode off/

Jim


>
> /rant mode off/
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>>>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around
>>>> the new lake. Would that be welfare?
>>>
>>> How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare?
>>>
>>> Have Americans become such whores?
>>
>>
>> You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways.
>
> Yes.
>
>> If a government entity decides that having more people stay in
>> hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so
>> many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels.
>
> That's one form.
>
>>
>> Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote
>> tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and
>> if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to compete.
>
> So, your answer to my second question is "yes"?

No it isn't. Welfare, at least in my mind, pay people or companies to do
nothing or pays them more for something than it is worth.

If a city spends $1,000,000 today in the hope of earning $10,000,000 in
taxes and other income over the next 10 years that's not welfare that's
investment.

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>>>>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around
>>>>> the new lake. Would that be welfare?
>>>>
>>>> How is that any different from any other form of corporate welfare?
>>>>
>>>> Have Americans become such whores?
>>>
>>>
>>> You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways.
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> If a government entity decides that having more people stay in
>>> hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so
>>> many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels.
>>
>> That's one form.
>>
>>>
>>> Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote
>>> tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and
>>> if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to compete.
>>
>> So, your answer to my second question is "yes"?
>
> No it isn't. Welfare, at least in my mind, pay people or companies to do
> nothing or pays them more for something than it is worth.
>
> If a city spends $1,000,000 today in the hope of earning $10,000,000 in
> taxes and other income over the next 10 years that's not welfare that's
> investment.

That's the typical political bull**** definition of investment. Think: RISK.
Also, think: proper function of government.

No small wonder the welfare state is out of control: it's adherents are on
both sides of the aisle, and both are so adept at making BS excuses that
should make an adolescent cringe. Thank you, public
education/indoctrination.

I expect that all your comments about Chicago's Daley have just crashed.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>>>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>>>>>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around
>>>>>> the new lake. Would that be welfare?
>>>>>
>>>>> How is that any different from any other form of corporate
>>>>> welfare? Have Americans become such whores?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> If a government entity decides that having more people stay in
>>>> hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so
>>>> many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels.
>>>
>>> That's one form.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote
>>>> tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and
>>>> if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to
>>>> compete.
>>>
>>> So, your answer to my second question is "yes"?
>>
>> No it isn't. Welfare, at least in my mind, pay people or companies
>> to do nothing or pays them more for something than it is worth.
>>
>> If a city spends $1,000,000 today in the hope of earning $10,000,000
>> in taxes and other income over the next 10 years that's not welfare
>> that's investment.
>
> That's the typical political bull**** definition of investment.
> Think: RISK. Also, think: proper function of government.
>
> No small wonder the welfare state is out of control: it's adherents
> are on both sides of the aisle, and both are so adept at making BS
> excuses that should make an adolescent cringe. Thank you, public
> education/indoctrination.
>
> I expect that all your comments about Chicago's Daley have just
> crashed.


Matt, chill down it's Friday for God's sake. As I said you can argue that
promoting tourism, helping create jobs, ect, isn't the job of government.
But as I also said in the real world that is exactly what they are doing and
if a competing communittee fails to do it that communittee is going to loose
out.

I'm going to give you an example. Our city of 20some thousand has Murphy Oil
Corp based here. They just donanted $50,000,000 to pay for the college
education of every student that graduates from the El Dorado Public School
system for the next 18 to 20 years. (Hurray for me I just saved enough to by
a plane with.)

The sourrounding communities don't have a Murphy Oil that can do that for
them. Several are scrambling right now figure out a way to compete. The idea
of a sales tax to create a similar but publicly supported program. Should
public monies be spent for this type of program? It's not up to me to tell
the next town over how to spend thier money.

BTW.... Daley's act was criminal by just about any way you want to define
it.

[Jay Honeck]

> Yes I do, Jay, and for the times during the year when my teaching contract
> has run out and I have absolutely no assurance that it will be renegotiated
> for the coming semester (like during summer and winter breaks) I have an
> account with a known number of dollars in it that is printed on the
> unemployment forms that I get every semester. Right now it stands somewere
> in the vicinity of $25 grand. That account is debited for every dollar I
> draw from it, and when it goes to zero so does my unemployment check.

That's a fascinating system that does not exist in either of the
states I've owned businesses in. I like it -- although, of course,
it's all smoke and mirrors, no different than our "Social Security"
system that is neither "social", "secure", or much of a "system".

> SUUURRRRE THEY CAN. You have heard of the initiative and referendum
> process, yes? Or is Iowa not yet on board with these 19th century
> innovations for power to the people?

Bwahahahahahahahahahhaha!

A pro-business referendum? Here? Get real. The last election of a
pro-business candidate in Johnson County occurred before I was born --
and I'm gonna be 49 this year, with luck.

> You keep saying how much money is required to run for office. I agree; it
> is one of the warts on our political system.

Actually, I've never commented on the cost of running for office. You
must have me confused with some other crazy innkeeper... ;-)

> However, if somebody runs, and
> if their message rings true with enough of the local factions, the money
> will flow.

And there you have it. The politicians have done such a wonderful job
of bribing us with our own money that there is NO WAY anyone would
vote to limit taxes in support of "Workforce Development". Hell, even
the NAME of the department has been changed (from "Unemployment") to
make it politically unlikely to cut. After all, who could POSSIBLY
cut anything called "workforce development"?

> But ya gotta do it. And you need to dedicate the time to do it. Or let
> Mary run. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.

Now there is an idea. Hell, she wastes a good 49 hours every week
sleeping -- I'll get her on it right away...

> And did you appeal it, as is your right (at least in Californicate) or did
> you let that ****ant little "administrative law judge" at the first hearing
> be the deciding judge? Those idiots are not really skilled in UI law; they
> are picked from a group of attorneys who hope someday to land the plush job
> of "real" judge.

I appealed it as high as it could go. It made no difference. I had
every fact in my favor, people willing to testify against the guy --
and it did not matter.

> I'll talk to Bugsy, and if he okays the vigorish arrangement you can have as
> much as you want. Just watch out for your kneecaps {;-)

Hey, Jim -- speaking of organized crime -- let's talk about the
incredibly successful new casino hotel that recently opened just two
freeway exits south of us. Let's talk about the incredible demand for
gambling that this hotel is tapping into, to the tune of millions of
dollars per MONTH.

Let's talk about the jail cell I will occupy if I respond to my
customer's demand by following suit and installing slot machines in my
meeting room...

Try explaining THAT to your kids. I can't.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RST Engineering]

>
>> SUUURRRRE THEY CAN. You have heard of the initiative and referendum
>> process, yes? Or is Iowa not yet on board with these 19th century
>> innovations for power to the people?
>
> Bwahahahahahahahahahhaha!
>
> A pro-business referendum? Here? Get real. The last election of a
> pro-business candidate in Johnson County occurred before I was born --
> and I'm gonna be 49 this year, with luck.

Then it is about time for you to hit. A "green" (environmentally sensitive)
candidate in this mining and forestry county had NEVER been elected since
1850 until I resonated with the voters in '86 and again in '90. You just
need to make your case over and over and over again.

>
>> You keep saying how much money is required to run for office. I agree;
>> it
>> is one of the warts on our political system.
>
> Actually, I've never commented on the cost of running for office. You
> must have me confused with some other crazy innkeeper... ;-)
>
>> However, if somebody runs, and
>> if their message rings true with enough of the local factions, the money
>> will flow.
>
> And there you have it. The politicians have done such a wonderful job
> of bribing us with our own money that there is NO WAY anyone would
> vote to limit taxes in support of "Workforce Development". Hell, even
> the NAME of the department has been changed (from "Unemployment") to
> make it politically unlikely to cut. After all, who could POSSIBLY
> cut anything called "workforce development"?

No, there YOU have it. You run on a "tax cut" platform carefully disguised
as a real tax cut platform and when you get into office, you TELL the
bureaucrats that "our workforce development benefit" is now a "miserable
whore's public tit benefit". That's one of the benefits of runnng and
winning. Trust me.

>
>> But ya gotta do it. And you need to dedicate the time to do it. Or let
>> Mary run. I'd vote for her in a heartbeat.
>
> Now there is an idea. Hell, she wastes a good 49 hours every week
> sleeping -- I'll get her on it right away...

You are letting that beautiful little lady sleep that many hours...man, I
gotta have a talk with you in July... no WONDER you've only got two kids
.... {;-)


>
> Hey, Jim -- speaking of organized crime -- let's talk about the
> incredibly successful new casino hotel that recently opened just two
> freeway exits south of us. Let's talk about the incredible demand for
> gambling that this hotel is tapping into, to the tune of millions of
> dollars per MONTH.
>
> Let's talk about the jail cell I will occupy if I respond to my
> customer's demand by following suit and installing slot machines in my
> meeting room...

My tribe's name for me is Singing Pipe. Wanna cut a deal with me for making
your hotel a reservation? Or is that making a reservation at your hotel
{;-)

Jim

[Jay Honeck]

> > Let's talk about the jail cell I will occupy if I respond to my
> > customer's demand by following suit and installing slot machines in my
> > meeting room...
>
> My tribe's name for me is Singing Pipe. Wanna cut a deal with me for making
> your hotel a reservation? Or is that making a reservation at your hotel {;-)

These aren't Indian casinos. The state(s) justified allowing
organized gambling casinos by stating that the money would go toward
education. Who could oppose fleecing the stupid amongst us, when it
meant that their money would go for "the children"?

They also limited casinos to river boats. Who could argue against
bringing back cool old paddle-wheel boats, straight out of a Mark
Twain novel?

Last month, local citizens authorized a new 1% local sales tax to --
you guessed it! -- "support the schools". All that gambling money --
and we're talking BILLIONS -- apparently isn't enough to build the
schools we need in Iowa.

And now, after a few years of allowing only river boats, they have
changed the law to state that casinos must be built "on water". Thus,
our new casino hotel is built in the middle of Iowa, far from any
navigable rivers -- on top of giant bags of water. Incredible!

And, in the final coup de grace, there is now a bill before the state
legislature to remove the "on water" requirement. Our new governor
Culver -- firmly in the pocket of organized crime -- is expected to
sign it into law.

We now have 19 casinos in Iowa -- a state with fewer people than the
Chicago metropolitan area.

It is to weep.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...

>
> BTW.... Daley's act was criminal by just about any way you want to define
> it.

He was promoting tourism and other ventures, thus making Chicago
competitive.

(As long as one's own ox isn't gored).

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>>>>> Let's say the Corp of Engineers were to build a dam somewhere and
>>>>>>> create a new lake and went looking for hotels to be built around
>>>>>>> the new lake. Would that be welfare?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How is that any different from any other form of corporate
>>>>>> welfare? Have Americans become such whores?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can define corporate welfare in a lot of different ways.
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>>> If a government entity decides that having more people stay in
>>>>> hotels in their location will be of benefit then there are only so
>>>>> many things they can do to get more people to open and run hotels.
>>>>
>>>> That's one form.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now you can argue that it isn't the governments job to promote
>>>>> tourism, help create jobs, ect... but in the real world they do and
>>>>> if one city or state is doing it the others have to do it to
>>>>> compete.
>>>>
>>>> So, your answer to my second question is "yes"?
>>>
>>> No it isn't. Welfare, at least in my mind, pay people or companies
>>> to do nothing or pays them more for something than it is worth.
>>>
>>> If a city spends $1,000,000 today in the hope of earning $10,000,000
>>> in taxes and other income over the next 10 years that's not welfare
>>> that's investment.
>>
>> That's the typical political bull**** definition of investment.
>> Think: RISK. Also, think: proper function of government.
>>
>> No small wonder the welfare state is out of control: it's adherents
>> are on both sides of the aisle, and both are so adept at making BS
>> excuses that should make an adolescent cringe. Thank you, public
>> education/indoctrination.
>>
>> I expect that all your comments about Chicago's Daley have just
>> crashed.
>
>
> Matt, chill down it's Friday for God's sake. As I said you can argue that
> promoting tourism, helping create jobs, ect, isn't the job of government.
> But as I also said in the real world that is exactly what they are doing
> and if a competing communittee fails to do it that communittee is going to
> loose out.

That's a fabricated world. So, again, your answer to my second question?
(Recall the basis of tax monies).

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> That's a fabricated world. So, again, your answer to my second
> question? (Recall the basis of tax monies).

Sure it is a fabricated world but it is the world we live in.

And I understand that you don't feel it is the proper roll of government.
But government is supposed to derive its' power from the people. If the
people not only wants but expects the government to do this type thing that
doesn't make them whores. It makes them consumers of a service.

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>
>> That's a fabricated world. So, again, your answer to my second
>> question? (Recall the basis of tax monies).
>
> Sure it is a fabricated world but it is the world we live in.
>
> And I understand that you don't feel it is the proper roll of government.
> But government is supposed to derive its' power from the people. If the
> people not only wants but expects the government to do this type thing
> that doesn't make them whores. It makes them consumers of a service.

Recall the arguments that if the will of the people was to reinstate
slavery...

Like I said, people can make excuses for _anything_. That seems to be
America's strongest function of late.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>>>
>>> That's a fabricated world. So, again, your answer to my second
>>> question? (Recall the basis of tax monies).
>>
>> Sure it is a fabricated world but it is the world we live in.
>>
>> And I understand that you don't feel it is the proper roll of
>> government. But government is supposed to derive its' power from the
>> people. If the people not only wants but expects the government to
>> do this type thing that doesn't make them whores. It makes them
>> consumers of a service.
>
> Recall the arguments that if the will of the people was to reinstate
> slavery...
>
> Like I said, people can make excuses for _anything_. That seems to be
> America's strongest function of late.

So then I can assume that you only drive on toll roads, send your children
to private schools, fly from a private airport, never use ATC, and any of
the thousands of "public services?"

[Denny]

> So then I can assume that you only drive on toll roads, send your children
> to private schools, fly from a private airport, never use ATC, and any of
> the thousands of "public services?"- Hide quoted text -


As far as I'm concerned the US Government does not subsidize general
aviation nearly enough - magnitudes too little...
Even if subsidized each year with just a fraction of what is spent in
ONE DAY on public boat launches, harbors, coast lines, rivers, bays,
lakes, dredging for commercial shipping, national park roads,
wilderness roads, hiking trails, federal highways, federal support for
state highways, trucking, railroads, research, and on, and on, would
have every single GA airport in this country looking like Donald
Trumps personal showplace...
Just a fraction of ONE DAYS expenditures would astound you with what
we could do to subsidize GA airports... And that still leaves 364 and
a fraction days to continue to blow on the others...

And, if we had just ONE whole day of transportation spending
specifically allocated to GA per annum - whooo baby, leather designer
couches in the lounges, eye candy at every front desk, ramp boys 24/7,
cheap hangar space, cheap fuel, spotless concrete ramps and runways,
approach and runway lighting systems like a Los Vegas show, WAAS at
every single airport, high school pilot-ed just like drivers-ed... man
oh man, the gravy, the gravy <droooool>

denny - don't ever wake me up, I wanna die happy...

[Ray Andraka]

Margy Natalie wrote:

>
> You don't have a job, you have a business. That's a big difference.
> What you do pays off directly to you. You work hard, you do well (or
> better). If you choose to go flying you can pay someone else to cover
> the front desk. At some point you may choose to go flying more and pay
> someone else more or choose to work more and pay someone else less. For
> the rest of us we work, we get paid, we work some more. If we exceed
> the expectations of our performance plans we get an atta boy.
>
> Margy

Yes, that is true he's got a business, not a "job". If you feel like it
you too can start a business too doing something you enjoy to hopefully
make a living, and if you are one of the lucky ones come out at least
breaking even compared to "working for the man". There's nothing
stopping you from starting your own business (other than perhaps
government regulations on many industries) so that you too can reap the
rewards that go with a SUCCESSFUL business. The fact that you have the
freedom to do so is one of the major things that make America great.

On the other hand, starting and running a business isn't for every one.
Small business owners in general start out with the deck stacked
against them. Every tier of the government wants their cut, and in many
cases the government can fund a competing business and effectively pull
the rug out from under you, all while taxing you into oblivion.
Meanwhle, you need to keep pulling in paying customers in order to be
able to cut yourself a paycheck at the end of the month. Not enough
business to pay all the bills, or a delinquent customer that doesn't pay
a bill on time: you eat the cost instead of dinner. Most of us running
small businesses have at one time or another had cash flow issues that
had us eating macaroni and cheese from time to time. Yes, there are
rewards to running a business, but there are also substantial risks that
go with it.

[Matt Barrow]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
...
>
> So then I can assume that you only drive on toll roads, send your children
> to private schools, fly from a private airport, never use ATC, and any of
> the thousands of "public services?"

I do because that's all there is, not because I stole from my neighbor via
the ballot box. Given a choice, I'd revert to the proper function of
government and privatize EVERYTHING except courts, police and military.

Oh, and yes, I did send all my three kids to private schools - K thru HS.
IOW, I paid for mine and my neighbors (f*$&%*ing whores) kids educations.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Performance Homes, LLC.
Black Forest, CO