HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » russ1943 » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Thu Oct 26, 2006, 03:53 PM
Number of posts: 591

Journal Archives

Give him what he stated he would do.

Pass legislation guaranteeing a pathway to citizenship or permanent legal status — for nearly 700,000 young immigrants brought to this country as children by their parents, tied to his (stupid) wall. Funding for the wall as he has frequently stated, to come from Mexico, no US funds.

Tax question

If there is a different group, forum more appropriate for this please advise.

Real estate, a condo is bought in 2000 by a not very healthy spinster. We’ll call her Gertie. Gerties mother has been giving Gertie financial help for years and Gertie decides to file a quit claim deed in 2001 to her mother in case she dies her mother will own the condo without dealing with probate. Years later her mother now well into her eighties and Gertie decides that Gerties sister is more likely to outlive her and removes her mother from the deed and adds her sister in 2008. Then about nine years later in 2017 Gertie dies. Gerties sister under her right of survivorship sells the condo for $120,000.
It has been explained that the tax burden now on the sister is the difference between the” basis” and the amount it was sold for.
Tax question for Gerties surviving sister; How does she determine the basis?
Our tax guy is sure sisters taxable gain is from original 2000 purchase price about $70,000.(basis) That would incur a tax on $50,000.
Sisters opinion is she was only added to the deed in 2008 at which time the value of the condo was estimated to be $100,000. (basis) Resulting in a tax liability on $20,000.

Well put!

Sometimes the words are put together to succinctly convey an important perspective. Thanks, world wide wally.

Tell your "Libertarian" friends that we were a "Libertarian" country until we determined
that without environmental regulation, this is what happens. Without banking regulations, the banks will rob you blind. Without food and drug regulations, they will poison you or sell you snake oil as a cure for anything. Without gun regulations we would have whackos killing 60 people and wounding 600 at a time, and..... Oh yeah. Sorry about that last one.

We can't sustain this level of madness from Trump.

Best single comment I've read.

We can't sustain this level of madness from Trump.
We can't sustain this level of madness from Trump.
We can't sustain this level of madness from Trump

K & R

Got a new desktop. Getting Office.

What's the difference in buying "Key Card" for $51.99 or buying "Download" for $59.00? Both are available from Amazon for a limited time. To clarify I'm talking about Microsoft Office Personal One year PC or MAC.


Check out GunFAIL @ DailyKos

Those of us interested in finding ways to at least diminish gun violence are well advised to be aware of the violence occurring on a daily basis. Statistics by necessity suffer a time lag by their very nature.
A few years back, on Jan 19, 2013 ………David Waldman wrote in a column titled “Today in GunFail News”; Before we even get started, what is this all about? Does it mean you can't or shouldn't have guns? No, not by itself. But what it does mean is that people who start out with the best of intentions sometimes get themselves mixed up in some serious trouble, and often people die because of it. These are the stories you should think about every time you handle a weapon, or are near someone else who's handling one………….Whether you're trained or not, experienced or not, or were raised around guns or not, where guns go, accidents follow. That's just statistics. You can do your best to prevent accidents, but everyone thinks they're a responsible gun owner, until something happens. Sometimes because you were kidding yourself. And sometimes although you think you did everything right. But the mistakes are very often of the kind that cannot be taken back.
On Sat Sep 26, 2015 he posted GunFAIL CXXXIX, (one hundred thirty nine?)! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/26/1421039/-Shoot-myself-once-shame-on-you-Shoot-myself-twice-shame-on-me-GunFAIL-CXXXIX From DailyKos.
I agree with the commentator who wrote; "these stories can really have an impact on people's understanding of an issue".

More guns in more places more often,

what can go wrong with that?

Permitless carry legislation has been introduced in the Michigan House of Representatives. Rep. Cindy Gamrat’s HB 4778 would keep the state’s registration system in place, but allow for broad exemptions. Law-abiding residents over the age of 21 would be able to carry concealed without the requirement of a permit. The current registration system would be maintained in order to allow for state-to-state reciprocity agreements. Rick Ector, owner of Rick’s Firearm Academy of Detroit, discusses Michigan’s bid to become the next state to support Constitutional Carry. Originally aired on Cam & Co 07/16/15. http://www.nranews.com/cam/video/cam-and-company-2015-rick-ector-permitless-carry-bill-introduced-in-michigan/list/recent-segments

The Gekas amendment.

This article (some below) in The TRACE helps explain a couple my personal problems with the gun enthusiasts positions. First I can’t count how many times I’ve cringed when reading gungeon dwellers claim that the NRA actually supported the “Brady Bill. The NRA fought tooth and nail against every facet of the intent of the bill and their support consisted of undermining it every step of the way. Second, although I didn’t know the Reps name the Gekas amendment is an appalling NRA piece of work effectively circumventing the goal of preventing prohibited persons from getting firearms, which is what the Brady bill intended!

While pushing back against the Brady bill with attack ads and campaign donations, the NRA was also fighting on a second front, promoting killer amendments through its allies in Congress. The political strategy behind the NRA’s killer amendments, Robert Spitzer writes in The Politics of Gun Control, “seemed to offer a meaningful reform yet posed no actual change in gun purchasing procedures for many years to come.” The bet was that the changes would never be achievable within the Congressionally prescribed timeline, and would take down the whole background check system when they proved infeasible. Gekas’s 1993 amendment proved to be the most important embodiment of this approach, because it shaped a bill that actually passed. It required that a computerized system — referred to then as InstaCheck — be installed within five years of Brady’s enactment. It also drastically reduced the five-day investigation period, calling for 24 hours instead. Since the NRA viewed the investigation period for Brady background checks as “arbitrarily selected,” they would expire — not when the technology was ready, but on a five-year timetable. Gekas’s NRA ties were not a secret. FactCheck.org would report in 2013 that an NRA spokesman was quoted in a press release saying that the group “worked closely with [Gekas] on the language and to round up support for it.” After further maneuvering in the Senate, the investigation period was raised to three days. In actuality, the NRA had triumphed. It managed to maintain political cover with supporters by fighting an unflinching war against the bill in the public arena while simultaneously watering it down from within. http://www.thetrace.org/2015/07/brady-bill-amendment-default-proceed-loophole-amendment-nra/

Last week, Jim Clyburn, a Democratic Congressman from South Carolina, filed legislation that would close the so-called “default proceed loophole,” which allows federally licensed firearms dealers to proceed with a sale if a background check — as in Roof’s case — takes more than three business days to complete. Connecticut Sens. Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal echoed the call, urging President Obama to take executive action to extend the window that federal examiners have for making a determination on a purchaser.

gun dealer exercised its lawful discretion and transferred the gun

A while ago January of 2013 I posted in another group, “How bout requiring purchasers pass background check. Not just require national background checks, but PASSING it!
I noted “It seems to me that many, probably most Americans are unaware that there are thousands of people every year who are ineligible to purchase or possess firearms who, pick up their firearms from licensed FFL’s after paying their money and walk out into society, thumbing their nose at the intent of the law!”

Now I read that the gun purchase by the gunman charged in the Charleston, South Carolina, church killings of nine people actually fit into the category.

FBI chief says accused shooter shouldn't have been able to buy gun. Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY 2:31 p.m. EDT July 10, 2015 During the mandatory background check prior to the attempted April 11 gun purchase, Roof's March arrest on felony drug charges was mistakenly attributed to the Lexington County, S.C., Sheriff's Department, not Columbia police. The Lexington County Sheriff's Department operates the jail where Roof had been detained. The Columbia police report included information that Roof admitted to drug possession, which would have triggered an immediate denial by the FBI NICS review process, according to bureau guidelines. ………… That information was never seen by the reviewer because the FBI's database did not include Columbia police contacts in its list of agency contacts for Lexington County purchase reviews. Because the FBI reviewer, described as veteran analyst who works on up to 20 purchases per day, was immediately unable to resolve the matter, the purchase was delayed for the maximum three business days before the gun was allowed to be transferred April 16 to Roof by a West Columbia, S.C., gun store………. The purchase continued to classified as "delayed'' with a decision pending. But firearms dealers are permitted to transfer weapons to buyers after the three-day period, if there is no denial. " By Thursday, April 16,'' Comey said, "the case was still listed as delayed-pending, so the gun dealer exercised its lawful discretion and transferred the gun to Dylann Roof.''

There were some other bureaucratic fuck ups and I don’t know whether or not the gun dealer ever received a denial, but the fact is we have a person who even the head of the FBI says shouldn’t have been able to buy a firearm.......... and yet the FFL legally took the money and the perp walked out the door with his assassination tool in his hand!

This Piece of Paper Fights Gun Crimes and Saves Lives

Permit-to-purchase systems are backed by strong data………….the PTP system the legislation seeks to create goes further than the standard background-check procedure in place in most parts of the country: Prospective gun purchasers have to apply for their permit in person at a local law enforcement office, have their fingerprints taken, and submit a photograph along with their paperwork…………..““The goal isn’t to slow down the process for law abiding citizens. It’s to make sure that only law abiding citizens can purchase a handgun.”…………….. One study found that states with PTP laws allowing police discretion tallied a 76 percent reduction in the likelihood of guns winding up in criminals’ hands relative to comparable states without such laws………….Even without a discretionary policy, the best available research shows that PTP requirements in general are associated with lower rates of firearm-related mortality and reduced suicide rates…………………The first study found that, after the repeal of a 2007 Missouri permit-to-purchase law, statewide murder rates spiked 14 percent — which amounts to “an additional 49 to 68 murders per year.” This effect was significant even after controlling for changes in policing, incarceration, burglaries, unemployment, poverty, and other state laws adopted during the study period that could affect violent crime. The study also found that the repeal of Missouri’s law significantly increased the diversion of crime guns that were purchased in Missouri and later recovered by police in neighboring states, suggesting that Missouri’s PTP system had been making surrounding states safer as well………..The second Johns Hopkins study, released in June of this year, examined a 1995 Connecticut permit-to-purchase law similar to the one outlined in Van Hollen’s legislation. The researchers compared homicide rates in Connecticut 10 years after the law’s passage of the law with the expected homicide rate in its absence. They discovered a 40 percent reduction in the state’s firearm-related homicide rate. Furthermore, the study found no substitution effect — that is, criminals in Connecticut did not switch to using other weapons to carry out homicide when they failed to obtain a firearm.
More at link;
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »