This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - mconnett
Anyone have any recommendations for laptop bags? I'd like to get something that's big enough to fit books as well, although I don't know how many books I'll need at any one moment (since I'll also be storing some in a locker, or so I hope).
My other consideration in picking a bag is that I'd like to bike to school on some/most days (a 3 mile ride).
Would it make more sense to get a 2-strap backpack (e.g. http://www.rockymountaintrail.com/detail.aspx?ID=10023, a 1 strap messenger bag (e.g. http://www.baileyworks.com/catalog/product.cfm?id=3), or some kind of dual-use pannier/messenger bag (e.g.http://www.arkel-od.com/panniers/briefcase/overview.asp?fl=0&site)
Any thoughts, suggestions?
« on: June 15, 2008, 07:31:37 PM »
I'm hoping to bike to school each day, but I'm wondering what panniers would be strong enough to securely carry law school books & a laptop. Do any bikers out there have any recommendations? If so, I'd love to hear.
I'm going to loan about 15-17K a year for law school (all in the form of Stafford), and will soon need to choose a lender. Does anyone have any suggestions for choosing between the various Stafford lenders (e.g. Access, Citibank, etc)? Are they all about the same, or are there real differences to consider?
I'm pretty sure (minus 1 long-shot with another school) that I'm going to Temple as well. I'm looking forward to it!
What do people think about housing options? I've heard Queen Village is a pretty nice place to live. Ideally, I'd like to be able to bike to school, but I wonder if it's safe biking through the north-end neighborhoods late at night?
Also, does anyone have any suggestions on the best time to visit the city to try and find a place? My ideal place would be a small 1 br/studio with wooden floors and nice natural light for less than $800 (if such a place exists:).
General board for soon-to-be 1Ls / Re: I have a really, really rare PS. Can anyone already accepted check it out?« on: April 28, 2008, 03:16:04 PM »
I'd be interested in reading it as well.
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy. IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence. And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why. Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact. So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy? Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared. And whatís so wrong with that? Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to). Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.
Wow... You'd think after the utterly horrible failure of trickle down economics, that such biblical statements of "fact" would somehow be tempered by now. After all, it's 2008, not 1981.
But I guess there is no limit to the self-delusion that plagues the economic theories developed by rich white men. Ah, it would be refreshing for a trickle-downer to speak directly and honestly for once (and leave the self-delusion behind). Get your placards and let your inner Friedman run free. Long live the aristocracy! Democracy is over-rated. And economic equality is for losers.
Ooops... typo corrected.
Ok, I admit I skimmed the thread, but in going through it again, I can't see anything which questions whether Charlie is actually correct that less capital gains = less revenue. Am I missing something.
As indicated in the link above, there is good reason to believe that Charlie was wrong.
Also, for a multi-millionaire so concerned about the middle class, it's curious why he seemed so uninterested in issues like the subprime mortgage crisis, trade, or union rights. Oh, I forgot, capital gains tax has a much greater bearing on the economic well-being of middle class Pennsylvanians...
The capital gains question made me so crazy I was literally jumping up and down in my room. The way Obama answered it made me cringe. I don't want a President who bases tax rates on "fairness," even when it means bringing in less revenue. Seriously? Isn't it better for all of us when there is more money in the coffers, so to speak?
The problem with your statement here is that you are assuming Charlie Gibson was correct. As a multimillionaire I can understand why Charlie would be upset about having his capital gains tax raised. However, the evidence supporting his claim that revenues increase when capital gains are cut is extremely poor. See, for example: http://www.cbpp.org/7-10-07tax.htm
What makes me really annoyed is when I see a millionaire like Charlie crying crocodile tears about the middle class being affected by a tax increase that would only effect people with over $250,000 in revenue.