That's terrible! RIP!

16 hours ago, Grease Monkey said:

Top Gun done.  It was alright. Not what I expected. 

What did you expect?

I'm not being a smart ass, just curious what you did expect. I haven't seen it yet. I'm hoping to see some incredible flying footage, other than that I'm not sure what else will be in it. Probably some love story, lots of references to the first movie, etc. I'm looking forward to seeing it.

Happy Birthday!

23 hours ago, wopachop said:

Im a dummy and did engine work right before a smog.

 How the heck would somebody in LA ever pass smog?

They probably do it by not working on the car right before they try to get it smogged.

I made that mistake once. I drove it like normal for 2 weeks and it passed when I went back.

I have Square, which I've only used a couple of times and had no disputes, so that's not helpful. I know Costco offers a CC processing service, but I don't know how competitive their rates are or how they treat their vendors. Perhaps a Google search might turn up more useful info.

As far as I'm concerned, Biden shares some responsibility for this tragedy. Ever since he stole the election, this entire country has been filled with anxiety, dread and fear of what the future will bring. That's for good reason. Look at the economy, inflation, gas prices, the dictators doing as they please, knowing full well this senile old gas bag will do nothing meaningful to stop them.

Now you take a mentally ill kid, add in all of that anxiety and dread, it only takes another small straw to break the camel's back and send him off the deep end. He could have used any number of weapons, like a home made bomb, but he chose guns. It makes no difference what he used, his intent to harm children is what really matters.

I do have several questions though. They said he was unemployed, 18 yrs old. How did he manage to buy 2 AR-15s (allegedly valued at $5k with mags, ammo and optics) and a new truck, allegedly valued at $70k? Is it that easy to finance a truck with no job?

Why did law enforcement reportedly wait outside the school for 40 minutes while he was inside? Why was the armed school security officer not on campus at the time? I'm not saying I'm connecting a lot of dots, but generally speaking, not too many events end up being that coincidental.

How about smoking some ribs in the house 2 or 3 times. Would pecan or apple wood smell better?

Get 'er done!!

23 minutes ago, Surf and Dune said:

 Whatever man. I also own my own corporation which pays me a salary. If it makes sense to pay less to the Feds, but spend even more overall by adding an employee then rock on. I'd rather buy some tools/supplies, vehicle, etc for the company than send it to the State. Your mileage may vary. 

Your advice most definitely makes more sense for John, you and many others. This guy had offices in CA, TX and (FL, I think.) I was surprised he didn't pay himself more, but he really hated paying taxes. At any rate, he was happy to decrease his salary. He also wrote off his trucks, trailer and toys as advertising expenses. I'm sure that saved a lot more money, until he sold off the company to an international corp.  

I'm not arguing with you, just correcting your assumption that you know what he meant. You really have no idea since you never talked to him. That's very presumptuous, to put it politely.

1 hour ago, Surf and Dune said:

 No, your buddy wanted to save money, I doubt he cared which line item it came from. I'm not arguing that your advice wasn't wise, just saying his overall savings that you are stating are probably about $10,000 a year off which is substantial considering his overall income. 

Really?

Were you there? How do you know what he wanted? He was talking to me, and the words he used were "I want to reduce my federal taxes", not "I want to keep my payroll expenses down." He didn't care if the company spent more money, he just wanted to reduce his taxes.

Perhaps the way your company is structured, saving the company money is actually saving you money, which is great. That is not how it worked for him. The more people he hired, the larger his company grew and it's relative value went up. Right up until he sold it for tens of millions.

5 hours ago, Surf and Dune said:

 

 What about the other costs you need to include when you have an employee? Workmans comp? 

How Much Does an Employee Cost You?

By Barbara Weltman on August 22, 2019

Category: Industry Word

When you think about adding a new employee to your payroll, determine what the actual financial cost of doing so means to your business.

---

When you think about adding a new employee to your payroll, determine what the actual financial cost of doing so means to your business. This includes the dollars and cents over and above the basic wage or salary you agree to pay. There’s a rule of thumb that the cost is typically 1.25 to 1.4 times the salary, depending on certain variables. So, if you pay someone a salary of $35,000, your actual costs likely will range from $43,750 to $49,000. Some added employment costs are mandatory, while others are a little harder to pin down. Fortunately, there may be tax savings to offset some of the costs.

Mandatory added costs of an employee

Hiring an employee means considerable payroll tax costs, including:

• Employer share of FICA (7.65% on compensation up to the annual wage base, which is $132,900 in 2019, plus 1.45% on compensation over the annual wage base).
• Federal unemployment tax (FUTA) of $42 per employee. The FUTA tax rate is 6%, but most employers can take a FUTA credit of 5.4%, resulting in a mere 0.6%.
• State unemployment tax, which varies with your state and your claims experience (the more claims made by former employees for unemployment benefits, the higher your state unemployment tax rate will be).

You can learn more about these costs from the IRS and your state revenue department.

You also need to address insurance coverage for your employees. This includes:

• Workers’ compensation. Costs vary from state to state.
• Other insurance that may be needed for the work performed. For example, if you have a professional firm, you may want or be required to pay for professional liability coverage. Similarly, you may need to have a bond, a type of insurance, for an employee to protect a third party (your customer). For example, a bond may be needed for employees who clean homes so that homeowners’ valuables are protected from employees’ damage or theft.

That's all great info. For the HR dept.

My friend didn't ask how to reduce his company's expenses. That wasn't his goal. He wanted to reduce his personal federal tax bill. I think he also liked the idea of putting some SS money into her SSA account, since she hadn't been employed for the previous 10 yrs.

This isn't going to eliminate your tax bill, but it might help a little. A long time ago a friend of mine owned his own company and he paid himself $120k/yr. He had a GF who had been with him for 10 yrs so he filed as single and she had no income. I told him to hire her at his company and pay her $40k/yr. Then reduce his pay to $80k/yr. She didn't actually have to do any work, just get her on the payroll and reduce his income to $80k and make sure they file separately.

This dropped his federal tax bill from 24% of $120K =  $28,800 to 22% of $80k = $17,600. Her tax bill was 12% of $40k = $4,800. Together they paid $22,400, a savings of $6,400 or roughly 22%. Between the 2 of them they still made $120k/yr, but they got to keep $6400 more per yr.

I know you're married, so this wouldn't work for you, but if you have a kid or couple of kids who you could hire at work, it might help some. 

My ex-FIL was a master at writing off business expenses. He flew down to MX to meet with clients and chartered a Learjet for 3 days and took his best friend with him. Him and his best friend each got to fly the Learjet for about 15 minutes each. When they landed, he met with the client and the next day he took the client, his best friend and the pilot deep sea fishing for most of the day. They finished up the deal and he wrote off the entire trip as travel expenses. You could do the same with your Glamis trips, write the entire expense as advertising or marketing. 

On a slightly related note, I know a guy who made $6M/yr, but didn't want to pay for his son's college education. He hired a film crew to make a highlight reel of his kid playing football. They mailed out several hundred copies on DVD and his kid got a full scholarship at St Joseph's. He put a down payment on a 4 BR house near campus. He gave it to his kid, who rented the other 3 rooms out, which covered the mortgage. He gave his kid an Escalade, the 4 guys hung out and partied like a posse and when he graduated 4 yrs later, he sold the house and the profit from that was more than his entire tuition would have cost. He came back to San Diego, worked for his father at Met Life and put the house profits down on a house worth about $1.5M at the age of 23. That whole family knew how to work the system.

17 minutes ago, AZCG said:

 

This isn't a 'tax strategy' it's tax fraud...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2012/05/15/viral-tax-loophole-video-is-misleading-taxpayer-fraud-is-a-much-bigger-problem/?sh=4cef81902cda

BTW, this article is more than 10 years old.

Sorry, I should have used the sarcasm emoji on that one.

AFAIK, the IRS still hasn't stopped the additional child credit, so the fact that this was publicized about 10 yrs ago makes the IRS look even more incompetent. If that was even possible.

Hopefully others also saw that post and are as disgusted by the tax fraud as I am. Reason # 4,535,987 to close the border.

I think the best tax strategy is to tell the IRS you are an illegal alien and they will give you an ITIN. Then when you fill out your taxes, you get to claim up to 25 dependents who may or may not exist. You don't have to prove they exist because they live south of the border. They give you a deduction of $2,000 per dependent, so even if the alien paid no taxes, he automatically gets a $50,000 refund per yr per tax return.

Of course you can file multiple tax returns and have them all mailed to the same address, tons of people do it every yr. So far, the IRS puts no effort into trying to stop illegal aliens from getting taxpayer refunds, so it's a very safe strategy.

There's a 4 seat Raw motorsports with a built Northstar and Mendeola trans for sale on FB for $30k OBO. I don't know the seller, but that sounds like a good deal.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=5587495024617835&set=p.5587495024617835&type=3

7 hours ago, Cookie said:

Happy Birthday, I hope you are spending time in Buff

 

Jesus!

That's gotta be the WORST BD wish ever!

47 minutes ago, NOAZ longshot said:

Nothing to be jealous about.  Just 40 acres surrounded by 1280 acres of State Land, no neighbors and all the Snakes, Rabbit, Bobcat, Javalina, Mountain Lion, Deer and Elk you can eat.

 

Now you're just rubbing it in!! 

Now I'm MEGA jealous!   LOL

I've thought about getting a 5 acre lot, plopping down a prefab house on it and covering the entire roof wit solar panels and putting in a 40Kwh battery bank to power the house and workshop/barn. The only problem is finding someplace that has water available, or a well and a septic system.

Other days I think about moving to Thailand and getting massages every day in a luxurious $600/mo. apartment.

33 minutes ago, NOAZ longshot said:

No offense taken.  Solar is a constant learning curve.  I appreciate the insight.  We bought the house 2 years ago and the seller installed new batteries before we closed.  The house was build it 2010 and I was sure the old batteries were the original and they were dead.

We did add 1400w of panels facing West with an additional controller to keep the power going until Sunset.

These 6v batteries are in two strings of 4 wired in series to make a 24v system, then the two strings are wired in parallel.  the old batteries were very similar in size but had three strings of four 6v.  According to the Solar Company I consulted with after we moved in, adding a third string was not recommended per the battery manufacturer.  The thought was to increase the storage capacity knowing that it would take longer to fully charge.

I do like the idea of using bus bars.  I will have to look into that.   Correct me if I am wrong, but I would only have the Two "Strings" of four wired into the bus bar.  Each string would still be series with the ends connected to the bus?

I didn't notice it was a 24v battery bank. Yes, using bus bars, or just a common post connected to each string with equal length cables would work.

I'm really glad you're using 24v, much better than a 12v system for higher powered use like an entire house. What are you using for an inverter? If you haven't seen them yet, they have hybrid inverters now. The solar panels connect to this one unit, as well as the 24v battery bank, AC input and AC output. There's a big menu that you setup, pretty easy, to tell it which way the power flows. Solar to battery charging first, then if an AC load starts up, it puts out just enough to power it. If a 3,000 w load comes up, it puts as much solar as is available, then adds battery power if necessary. After the sun goes down, it automatically powers any AC loads from the battery. If you connect a generator, it charges the batteries first priority, if an AC load starts up, it passes the AC from the genny to the load. The beauty of it is, there is no switching between inputs and outputs. It all flows to or from the batteries to the AC loads seemlessly. As soon as the sun comes up, it automatically charges the batteries. It's a 60A MPPT solar controller, 80A AC battery charger and 3,000w inverter, all built into one unit. Instead of spending $3600 for a Victron inverter, or $2,000 for a Magnum inverter, these are only about $500-600 ea. I have 2 for each trailer, so they can provide 6,000w to the A/Cs and other AC loads in 240v split phase with an interface board. They have even larger ones that are 6500w per phase, but those are 48v inverters.

As for your solar panels, I'd recommend they all point to the south at the proper azimuth for your latitude. While the east facing panels catch more morning sun, the south panels also catch sun, almost as much, right at sunrise. By facing some to the east and west, they only catch optimal sun in the morning and afternoon. One large array pointing south would catch sun all day and optimal sun most of the day. Unless there's some reason like terrain that prevents a large array.

On 5/10/2022 at 10:33 PM, NOAZ longshot said:

PS.  we have thought about installing a small wind turbine to give some nigh time supplement.  Because we live on top of a mountain at just over 6000 feet we almost always have some wind.

 

Beautiful house and scenery! I'm very jealous!

I would strongly recommend against wind power, unless you select very carefully. A friend of mine bought a 400w wind turbine that was very highly rated and it produced almost nothing, like less than 50 watts. We checked everything out and the bottom line was, even with a very stiff breeze the alternator was a poor design that would never produce much power.

I also saw a video of a guy who mounted a larger one on his truck so he could drive it around at whatever speed he wanted to test output at different speeds. That one only produced about 200w at like 65 mph. He ended up designing his own carbon fiber blades which were much better and mounting them on a very complex pitch control mechanism and he managed to get over 400w, but it just wasn't worth the trouble and expense. I've also heard that the huge multi-megawatt wind turbines don't ever produce the claimed power output.

There is a horizontal one that uses a squirrel cage design that's designed to be mounted on  the ridge of the roof. They claim it works even at lower wind speeds due to acceleration of the wind going up the roof before hitting it. It's also capable of catching wind from either side of the roof and working at higher wind speeds than other designs. It's advertised to be much better, but it's probably really expensive, even by wind turbine standards.

2 hours ago, Bobalos said:

Until a solution to nuclear waste gets sorted out I can't see where that would be an option any company would be willing to look into. 

Imo, nuke is the way to go, but sheet.....  figure some sheet out already... 

LFTR reactors use radioactive waste as fuel. We can dig up all of that waste they buried right next to the Columbia River that is leaking into the river and actually make electricity from it, instead of contaminating the river. They are also not pressurized with steam, so they don't leak or explode. Current light water reactor designs are high pressure and can go super critical if not regulated properly or they lose cooling due to water loss or pump failure. LFTR reactors need to be fed, or they die down. If they lose power somehow, they just drain down into a lower chamber and turn into solid salt, since they cannot maintain the heat to remain liquid. So they would never melt down and explode like Chernobyl, Fukushima or 3 mile island.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_fluoride_thorium_reactor

43 minutes ago, Orange_R said:

You really need to put the encyclopedia down and have a beer lol, I'll buy  

I only picked it up because you clearly didn't understand what I was trying to share with you.

The bigger issue is the gov't has done nothing to try and expand this technology to more states. As many have stated, the politicians have used this issue to raise taxes, but the reality is they aren't investing anything into new nuclear reactor designs, expanded incentives for rooftop solar systems with battery backup, etc. Their goal is to tax us, not fix the problem.

33 minutes ago, Orange_R said:

I wasn't arguing, I was asking a question and making an observation. Is it biological material? Then it probably qualifies...  

You were talking about a completely different type of fuel. No relationship whatsoever.

Biodiesel is made through a chemical process called transesterification whereby the glycerin is separated from the fat or vegetable oil. The process leaves behind two products – methyl esters and glycerin. Methyl esters is the chemical name for biodiesel and glycerin is used in a variety of products, including soap.

The process Xyleco, Inc. invented uses mashed up twigs, sticks, bark - anything with CELLULOSE in it (even paper or cardboard) and blasts it with a powerful electron beam, then distills it much like crude oil to produce the desired products - gas, kerosene, jet fuel or diesel. There is no similarity between the two ingredients or the processes. Vegetable oil is not anything like cardboard or sticks.

If you think the term biomass makes it biodiesel, then fossil fuel based diesel would be biodiesel, since it comes from biomass buried tens of thousands of yrs ago. Not related at all.

3 hours ago, Orange_R said:

Have you burned the new bio diesel on your truck yet? I have and it completely effin SUCKS! I saw a 3.5mpg drop using that chit fuel.

Please read and don't get confused. It's not biodiesel. It's plant based diesel, just like oil is plant based biomass, cooked underground for 20,000 yrs. This process just shortens the time needed. I know what biodiesel is and this is NOT biodiesel. If it was biodiesel, I'd refer to it as biodiesel.

11 hours ago, NOAZ longshot said:

I guess "Challenge" is not the correct word.  It is a daily "process".  We have plenty of panels and batteries, but we cant just turn everything on without thought of where the electricity comes from. the way most people do.  We have panels facing East, South and West to gather every minute of daylight.  Most days we are fully charged by 9AM.  

We balance the open windows for cooling depending on the wind direction, then when it gets too hot for that, we turn on the A/C; we watch the battery levels to make sure you have enough for the overnight.  Use the daytime to charge small devices and lights for reading etc.   This time of year is much easier with the longer days and more power input to the batteries.  

Winter time with much shorter days we use more rechargeable batteries in table lamps instead of the switch on the wall.  But, thankfully there is no need for A/C.  It is a different lifestyle and one that my wife and I embrace.  We don't have brown outs or complete outages.  In the past two years we only had a low battery system cutoff once at about 4am, (we were just learning what we could do and how late we could stay up binge watching the latest series.)  We also have a standby generator now incase the battery levels drop to that point again.

Then there is the water level checks and occasional equalizing process.  We also found that cold batteries don't keep a charge as well as warm, so we insulated the solar barn.  Even without a heat source, the barn is now 5 to 10 degrees warmer than outside.   "Process" much better word.

 

PS.  we have thought about installing a small wind turbine to give some nigh time supplement.  Because we live on top of a mountain at just over 6000 feet we almost always have some wind.

 

Ah. I see what's going on. While that's quite a few 6v batteries, the total usable power is only half, which is 880Ah, or 10.5 Kwh. When you factor in the 20% power loss from lead acid batteries, you only have about 8 Kwh of power per night. The fact that you're fully charged by 9 am indicates you have plenty of solar, but the battery bank is too small.

I'm just trying to help here, so please don't take offense. I'm single and I've calculated my overnight loads with 2 fridges, 1 chest freezer and mini split A/C would be about 10 Kwh min. So I sized my LiFePo4 battery bank at 30 Kwh, and if only discharging the pack to 20%, thats 24 Kwh usable, a comfortable buffer. The less you discharge a battery daily, the longer it lasts. The same with both of my trailers - they have 20 Kwh battery banks and I don't expect to use over 50% of that with mini splits in the summer.

You could add inexpensive LiFePo4 batteries in a 2nd bank and use a dual battery charging device to keep both banks isolated, wire one bank to the inverter and the other bank to 12v loads. Once you get beyond a certain power level (under or over 10 Kwh, IMHO) it's best to use a 24v or 48v battery bank. I've setup both trailers with 24 V and the house bank is planned out as a 48 V system. As you approach 4 yrs on the 6v batteries, they'll be approaching the end of their useful life. That's why I suggested buying a few LFP batteries now, you can add more later when the lead acid batteries die. This spreads the cost out over time.  

I also noticed you're using high voltage cables from an EV. Those were designed to provide power up around 400 - 500v DC, not 12v like you're using them for. If you use an IR temp gun on the terminals under heavy loads, it will tell you if your battery cables are undersized. If you're drawing a heavy load, it's best to use 2/0 or possibly even 4/0 cable, and as short as possible to the inverter, which is probably your highest single load. If the battery terminals are getting a lot warmer than room temp, then you need thicker battery cables.

Are you using a BMS to measure exact state of charge? I'd recommend the Victron smartshunt for $130. They make 500A, 1,000A, etc. versions. Super accurate once it's setup properly for the battery type.

Another thing that 99% of people don't understand is current flow when charging and discharging batteries. This is more critical with LFP batteries, but it could help you get equal life out of all 8 batteries, which could make your battery bank last a lot longer.

A lot of pics of battery bank wiring looks exactly like yours. I've even seen $10,000 worth of Battle Born batteries wired like that. The better way is to wire all 4 sets of your batteries to a bus bar with equal length cables, then connect the main battery bank cables to the bus bars. The way it's wired now, the batteries on the left and right get charged/discharged first and the most, the 2 inside batteries get less usage and less power. In this video, the guy wired up 5 LFP batteries like yours and the BMSs on his showed the 1st battery was 100% charged, the 2nd battery was about 92%, the 3rd was about 84%, the 4th was 78% and the last battery was only 70%. So while one would think that all 5 batteries were fully charged after the charger shut off, there was a total of about 76% of one battery less than fully charged, or the entire bank was essentially charged to only 85%, quite a bit of power was not charged into the batteries because the first one indicated full, so the charger shut off. While he's using different batteries, the same principal still applies to yours to a lesser extent. Hope this info helps!

22 hours ago, NOAZ longshot said:

Who doesn't want to breathe clean air?  Right?  or  Left?    Before you read this let me be clear, I live off grid.  I make my own electricity 100% and it is a challenge... daily.

The Climate Change Alarmists want everyone to think that the world will end in 12 years if we don't do away with fossil fuels right now.  If you deny their claims you are a Climate Change Denier or a Terrorist worse than the Taliban.

 

So let's play a game.  Ask the Greenies these three questions:

 

Question #1

Is the US 100% ready to throw the switch and power everything with clean electricity?  I mean right now today....anyone?  Of course not.  There is no infrastructure to support everyone driving electric vehicles; not enough electricity to start with.  No electric Semi trucks to move good to market, no electric airplane or trains to move people, etc.   We are just not ready to start today or tomorrow; it will take years to get the technology even close to where we can consider 100% green energy on a large scale.  The alarmists have to at least acknowledge this simple fact.

Question #2

How long will it take to get green ready?   Who knows...but, we are heading in the right direction...maybe not fast enough for the "12 year" crowd, but there are still some huge barriers to overcome that we have no answers for.  Such as; currently, it would take solar panels to completely cover Texas, Arizona, California and Nevada to produce enough electricity to power the US grid.  But that only works if the Sun is shinning...no clouds, rain and no night.  There is simply no way to store enough solar power to light up Las Vegas, let alone the rest of the country.  Electric vehicles take too long to charge; unless you only commute back and forth to work, electric vehicles do not make good road trip vehicles.  These and many other technological barriers still stand in our way.  So let's be extremely optimistic and say 5 years.  "In 5 years we will have overcome all the barriers to green energy"

Question #3

If it will take 5 years and that is a huge "IF".  Wouldn't it be better for the planet if the country with the highest clean air emission standards be producing the worlds fossil fuel energy for the next 5 years?  If you agree that 5 years is the goal then why have China, India or Russia produce the fossil fuel energy for those 5 years.  Those countries have none or almost no clean air standards.  The fact is that since the 1974 Clean Air Act, the United States has been the world leader in reducing harmful emissions.  Let me put it this way, Harvard University concluded that even if the US went carbon neutral tomorrow, we would reduce greenhouse gasses by less than 2% globally.  The US is not the problem, we are the clean Fossil Fuel solution until the technology is renewable ready.

So face the facts Greenies, In order to get to 100% renewable energy sooner and cleaner, "Right" now, the United States needs to be the world leader in Fossil Fuel production while we work to make renewable energy a viable alternative.

My Two Cents, thanks for reading.

 

The part I focused on was your sentence about making electricity is a daily challenge. I'm wondering why. Do you need more panels, more batteries or both?

As for the rest of your post, I agree with your stance about the climate alarmists. I do want clean air, like you said, we all do.

We currently have the technology to achieve all of our goals as soon as they can get implemented. We can install huge battery banks to store solar energy during the day and time shift it to overnight and balance peak loads nearly instantly. LFTR nuclear reactors are ultra safe - they don't go super critical like current light water reactors. They consume nuclear waste as fuel, are not pressurized and will shut down if not actively kept running by an operator. We also have mini and micro reactor plans, like the mini one Elon Musk designed that fits in 2 semi trailers and can be setup by 4 men in 2 days. The micro reactor can fit in a shed and power a few blocks of houses, again, a safer design than current reactors.

There's a company already turning green waste into gas, diesel, jet fuel and kerosene that burns cleaner than "fossil fuels" and can be used with no mods to current cars, trucks and planes. We just need the gov't to help fund more processing plants in cities across the country. This will also drastically cut down on landfill loads.

The other part the climate alarmists don't take into account is that the earth is a self balancing system. As CO2 levels rise, the forests automatically go "greener", they grow more trees, more leaves with no outside intervention. A lot of the climate change that we're seeing now is massive releases of methane from melting permafrost in northern Canada and Siberia. Methane is 20x worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas, the release from the permafrost is a self perpetuating cycle started once we hit current temps.

If a large portion of the world was off the grid like you, we would make a huge dent in the need for electricity from the grid. Large cities and factories would still need grid power, but those are highly concentrated power users, not suburban or rural residential consumers. With enough solar panels and battery banks, people could charge their own EVs at home overnight.

Elon Musk once calculated that a solar farm 100 mi by 100 mi would be enough to power the entire US. To reduce distribution issues, I prefer rooftop solar or smaller solar farms near the suburbs.