Quoted without comment.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Quoted without comment.
Just-in-time inventory is a disaster waiting to happen. See my 26 February 2010 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2010/02/lean-manufacturings-dangers.html.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Well SEC? Will you now go after PWC for its wonderful AIG audit? Well PCAOB?
I expected this after the DOJ folded.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Friday, June 25, 2010
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
"Wayne ... Swan said miners are effectively 'arguing that a government cannot change its pricing arrangements. It is the equivalent of the steel mills saying to the companies that they can't put up the price of iron ore. It has to stay the same for 40 years. That is nonsense. ... Swan rejected media reports that a visit to China later this week is intended to reassure Chinese steel makers that the proposed tax won't lead to higher commodities prices", Rachel Pannett at the WSJ, June 2010, link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704875604575280444005329232.html.
"Swiss mining company Xstrata PLC on Thursday said it would stop development of two major projects in Australia, saying neither will be viable under the government's proposed resources tax. ... In its announcement Thursday, Xstrata said it will stop development of its A$6 biillion Wandoan thermal coal project and its A$600 million Ernest Henry underground copper project. The move follows Xstrata's decision in early May to also suspend a A$30 million three-year copper exploration program. ... Prime Minister Kevin Rudd cast doubts on Xstrata's move, saying it was strange that the company should stop spending on Wandoan when the legislation covering the new tax won't be drafted for 12 months and it won't come into effect for two years. ... The tax targets profits, not production. ... 'The resoruce super-profits tax has created significant uncertainty for the future of mining insvetment into Australia and would impair the value of previosuly approved projects and exploration to the point that continued investment can no longer be justified,' Xstrata Chief Executive Mick Davis said", my emphasis, Ray Brindal at the WSJ, 4 June 2010, link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575283461667881540.html.
"'The Australian people own those resources, and they deserve a fairer share of those resources,' said Kevin Rudd, prime minister, in a television interview", William MacNamara at the FT, 4 June 2010.
"'The impact of the tax eliminates the net present value of the Wandoan coal project almost entirely and substantially reduces the value of the Ernest Henry underground shaft project,' Mr. Davis said", Peter Smith at the FT, 4 June 2010.
Will Australia return 40% of a company's deficiency if an investment yields less than 6%? We note Australia wants to change taxes on existing investments. Does Australia's government believe mining ventures, 95% of which fail to find an economic orebody, are government bonds? Or are Australian government bonds as risky as mining ventures? Of course the investments wouldn't have been made. When Rio did its IRR calculations ten years ago, it assumed existing tax rates. If Rio had assumed a higher tax rate, its projected after-tax cash flows would have been smaller. What's not to understand? A substantial amount of ore in Australia will become "extra-marginal" if this tax goes through. In addition, the hurdle rate for all investments in Australia will increase as a result of "tax uncertainty". But "the ore belongs to the people". It did until Australia leased the land. See my 28 March 2008 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2008/03/stripper-well-economics.html. This proposed tax reminds me of 1980's "Windfall Profits Tax" which failed to produce the revenues Jimmy Carter & Co. projected, link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windfall_profits_tax.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Hearing my ass. How about a conviction? Texas' BPP got slammed recently for similar actions, my 8 November 2009 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/11/lifting-immunity.html.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Will the involved states let you pay taxes late in sympathy?
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Financial Armageddon? Did anyone ask Michael Panzner about this?
Take the Bar and Beat Me, my 22 December 2007 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2007/12/us-injustice-system-at-work.html, describes Him.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Go China. Better platinum than dollars.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
"You might think that being a Supreme Court justice would be the top of the line job for someone in the legal profession. But, many Supreme Court decisions suggest that too many justices are not satisfied with their role, and seek more sweeping powers as supreme policy-makers, grand second-guessers or philosopher-kings. ... The role of an appellate court is not to simply second-guess the decision of the trial judge and jury, much less usurp the responsibility of legislatures to make social policy. But the pretense of applying the Constitution gives appellate judges the power to do both. ... If justices can pick and choose which legal principles and practices they will follow, from the many widely varying principles and practices in countries around the world, then they can find a basis for doing just about anything they feel like doing. ... Once appellate judges are free to base their rulings on what people do in India, Egypt or Germany, Americans are no longer a self-governing people", Thomas Sowell at Frontpage Magazine, 24 May 2010, link: http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/24/judicial-power-grabs/
"Ever wonder why most of your credit-card mail comes from South Dakota? The answer is a 1978 Supreme Court decision called Marquette National Bank on Minneapolis v. First of Omaha Service Corp. ... The Court ruled that it referred to the location of the bank. ... What happened next was predicatble enough: Citibank offered to move to South Dakota, bringing much-needed jobs and tax revenue, if the state would let it write new credit-card regulation. ... If the Supreme Court had interpreted one word differently, credit-card regulation in this country would be entirely different. ... Bruce Ackerman, a legal scholar at Yale ... [said] 'For sure ... the status of undocumented aliens is going to me mcuh more salient in Americna law. We're going to have 10 [million] or 15 million people or more who'll find themselves in a position increasingly like black people in 1954. That will be a terribly serious issue, and the court will have to decide how to respond.' ... 'What happens when promised benefits are cut back dramatically?' he asked. 'Will the court protect the weak, or not?'," my emphasis, Ezra Klein at Newsweek, 24 May 2010, link: http://www.newsweek.com//id/238075. This reminds me of my meeting Al Sharpton in 1966 or 1967, my 5 March 2009 post: http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/03/eric-holder-deceiver.html.
"I first began working on strategic arm control with the Russians in 1970, an effort that led to the first Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement with Moscow two years later. ... The same answer holds true for the new START agreement: The US is far better off with this treaty than without it. It strengthens the security of the US and out allies and promotes strategic stability between the world's two major nuclear powers. ... First, it limits significantly US and Russian strategic nuclear aresenals and establishes an extensive verification regime to ensure that Russia is complying with its treaty obligations. ... Second, the treaty preserves the US nuclear aresenal as a vital pillar of our nation's and our allies security posture. ... Third, abd related, the treaty is buttressed by credible modernization plans and long-term funding for the US nuclear weapons stockpile and the infrastructure that supports it. ... Fourth, the treaty will not constrain the US from developing and deploying defenses against ballistic missioles, as we have made clear to the Russian government. ... The new START treaty has the unanimous support of America's military leadership", my emphasis, Robert Gates at the WSJ, 13 May 2010: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703339304575240164048611360.html.Can anyone play this game? You may as well look at goat entrails as attempt to ascertain China's "intent". Only capabilities count!
Friday, June 11, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Henry Ford said "History is bunk". Amen. RK is a UT philosphy professor.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
As police budgets get strained, the drug war will implode. Be patient.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
"One of the many fashionable notions that have caught on among some of the intelligentsia is that old people have 'a duty to die,' rather than become a burden to others. ... Already the government-run medical system in Britain is restricting what medications or treatments it will authorize for the elderly. Moreover, it seems almost certain that similar attempts to contain runaway costs will lead to similar policies when American medical care is taken over by the government. ... If a government-run medical system is going to save any serious amount of money, it is almost certain to do so by sacrificing the elderly", my emphasis, Thomas Sowell at Townhall, 11 May 2010: http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/05/11/a_duty_to_die.
Let's repeal the 13th Amendment with respect to doctors. Problem solved. Didn't we get an Obamacare cost estimate for the next ten years? Aren't you comfortable with it? Didn't the CBO say it would be $849 billion? Various goverments will break many promises over the next ten years. Got bonds? Sell! As I've written before, "Kill the old white women"! That's how Medicare costs will will be reduced. I wonder if a Big 87654 firm would opine on the CBO's estimate?