text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
[218 U.S. 205, 206] Messrs. H. T. Newcomb, Edward Lauterbach, and Underwood & Smyser for Woodman et al.
Mr. Justice Lurton delivered the opinion of the court:
This case comes to this court upon a certificate under 6 of the act of 1891 [26 Stat. at L. 828, chap. 517, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 549], creating circuit courts of appeals. The action in the circuit court was one by the executor and legatees under the will of James F. Woodman, to recover an amount of money which had been paid, under protest, as a tax upon legacies under the will of the testator, by virtue of 29 and 30 of the act of June 13, 1898 [30 Stat. at L. 464, 465, chap. 448, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, pp. 2307, 2308], and amendments, known as the war revenue act.
The facts certified are: That Woodman died at Chicago, March 15, 1902, leaving a will, which was there duly probated on May 3, 1902, and that the Illinois Trust & Savings Bank qualified as executor. The clear value of legacies payable under the will to the defendants in error was $166,250. On January 17, 1905, and before the payment of these legacies, the collector claimed and collected, as the amount of duty and tax due and payable upon said legacies, under the act of Congress before mentioned, the sum of $2,812.49. After stating the facts, substantially as above, the certificate concludes as follows:
The form of this certificate has been criticized, but we think it sufficiently states both the question and the desire of that court for the instruction of this court that it may make a proper decision. It conforms in substance with the statute, and finds precedents in a number of instances in matter of form. Helwig v. United States, 188 U.S. 605 , 47 L. ed. 614, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427; United States v. Pridgeon, 153 U.S. 48 , 38 L. ed. 631, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 746; United States v. Ju Toy, 198 U.S. 253 , 49 L. ed. 1040, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 644.
It is also urged that the circuit court of appeals for the seventh circuit is precluded from requesting the instruction of this court, because it had in two cases theretofore decided the very question now certified. United States v. Marion Trust Co. 74 C. C. A. 439, 143 Fed. 301; United States v. Stephenson, not yet reported. In both cases the decision was adverse to the contention of the United States. The first was affirmed by this court without opinion, by an evenly divided court ( 203 U.S. 594 , 51 L. ed. 332, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 783); and, in the second, an application by the United States for a writ of certiorari was denied ( 212 U.S. 572 , 53 L. ed. 656, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 682). It is further contended that, if not concluded by its own decisions, it was bound to follow the judgments of this court in Eidman v. Tilghman, affirming the judgment of the circuit court of appeals of the second circuit, reported in 69 C. C. A. 139, 136 Fed. 141, the affirmance by this court being reported in 203 U.S. 580 , 51 L. ed. 326, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 779, and similar judgments of affirmance in McCoach v. Philadelphia Trust, S. D. & Ins. Co. 73 C. C. A. 610, 142 Fed. 120, and 205 U.S. 539 , 51 L. ed. 921, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 783, and United States v. Marion Trust Co. supra.
All of these cases were affirmances by an equally divided court of the judgments of the court below in favor of the legatees or distributees who had sued to recover taxes paid upon legacies or shares which had passed to the plaintiffs within one year after the death of the testator [218 U.S. 205, 212] or intestate, the several lower courts having ruled that the tax had not been saved, because it was not due and payable at the time of the repeal of the act under which the tax was claimed.
The circuit court of appeals was obviously not bound to follow its own prior decision. The rule of stare decisis, though one tending to consistency and uniformity of decision, is not inflexible. Whether it shall be followed or departed from is a question entirely within the discretion of the court, which is again called upon to consider a question once decided. The court below, in this instance, when called upon to reconsider its former construction of the inheritance tax act, found itself confronted by the fact that this court had been equally divided in opinion as to the proper interpretation of the act, and for that reason alone obliged to affirm the ruling of that and other courts against the legality of the tax which had been collected. If the decision of the court under review had been in favor of the legality of the tax, an affirmance must likewise have resulted from an equal division. That court also found that its own former view of the act had not been satisfactory to the circuit court of appeals for the eighth circuit, which court had decided contrariwise in Westhus v. Union Trust Co. 90 C. C. A. 441, 164 Fed. 795. In such circumstances the court below was not only free to regard the question as one open for determination, but one which might well be certified to this court, that the question of law which had never been authoritatively decided by this court might be so determined by an instruction as to how it should decide the matter when thus presented for reconsideration.
When this court, in the exercise of its appellate powers, is called upon to decide whether that which has been done in the lower court shall be reversed or affirmed, it is obvious that that which has been done must stand unless reversed by the affirmative action of a majority. It has [218 U.S. 205, 213] therefore been the invariable practice to affirm, without opinion, any judgment or decree which is not decided to be erroneous by a majority of the court sitting in the cause. The earliest precedent is that of Etting v. Bank of United States, 11 Wheat. 59, 78, 6 L. ed. 419, 423. Chief Justice Marshall said at the conclusion of the opinion:
In Durant v. Essex Co. 7 Wall. 107, 110, 19 L. ed. 154, 156, Mr. Justice Field, for this court, said, in respect of the effect of the affirmance by a divided court:
To the same effect are Westhus v. Union Trust Co. 94 C. C. A. 95, 168 Fed. 617; Hartman v. Greenhow, 102 U.S. 672, 676 , 26 S. L. ed. 271, 273. A different rule seems to have been sanctioned in the English courts. Catherwood v. Caslon, 13 Mees. & W. 261; Beamish v. Beamish, 9 H. L. Cas. 274.
Under the precedents of this court, and, as seems justified by reason as well as by authority, an affirmance by an equally divided court is, as between the parties, a conclusive determination and adjudication of the matter adjudged; but the principles of law involved not having been agreed upon by a majority of the court sitting [218 U.S. 205, 214] prevents the case from becoming an authority for the determination of other cases, either in this or in inferior courts. The affirmance by a divided court in the second case shows this, for if it was not so, the second equal division could not have happened, for the case would have been controlled by the first equal division.
We shall therefore proceed to determine the question of law presented by the certificate of the circuit court of appeals, feeling free to decide it as our judgments may dictate.
The statutes involved and requiring consideration are the 29th section of the act of June 13, 1898 (30 Stat. at L. 464, chap. 448, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 2307); the 30th section of the same act, as amended by 11 of the act of March 2, 1901 (31 Stat. at L. 948, chap. 806, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 2308), and 7, 8, and 11 of the act of April 12, 1902 (32 Stat. at L. 97 et seq., chap. 500, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1909, pp. 875, 876, 878). So much of the sections referred to as is material to the present question is set out in the margin. 1
1 Section 29 of the act of June 13, 1898, is as follows:
So much of 30 of the act of June 13, 1898, as amended by 11 of the act of March 2, 1901, as is material, reads:
Sections 7, 8, and 11 of the act of April 12, 1902, are as follows: [218 U.S. 205, 215] The 7th section of the act of April 12, 1902, which act we shall hereafter refer to as the repealing act, did not go into effect until July 1, 1902. That section explicitly repealed 29 of the act of June 13, 1898, which was the only section imposing a tax upon inheritances, and the only authority for the tax collected from the defendants in error. The claim of the United States was and is that, as the testator's death occurred prior to July 1, 1902, the tax demanded had been imposed as an obligation before the repeal of the taxing section, and that [218 U.S. 205, 216] the liability thus imposed was saved by the 8th section of the repealing act. For convenience that section is here again set out:
The question for solution must therefore turn upon the inquiry whether the tax in question had been imposed prior to the going into effect of the repealing act within the intent and effect of the saving clause just set out.
There are cases which go so far as to say that the unqualified repeal of a law as effectually destroys rights and liabilities dependent upon it, not past and concluded, as if the statute had never existed. It is, however, putting it strongly enough to say that an unqualified repeal operates to destroy inchoate rights, as a release of imperfect obligations, and as a remission of penalties and forfeitures dependent upon the destroyed statute. United States v. Reisinger, 128 U.S. 398 , 32 L. ed. 480, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 99; Curtis v. Leavitt, 15 N. Y. 9, 152, et seq.; Belvidere v. Warren R. Co. 34 N. J. L. 193; 1 Lewis's Sutherland, Stat. Constr. 282 et seq.
There has been a marked legislative trend in the direction of escaping from the serious consequence sometimes incident to this common- law rule of construction, indicated by general statutes saving liabilities, penalties, and forfeitures incurred under repealed statutes. Such a general statute was passed by Congress in 1817 (chap. 71, 16 Stat. at L. 431, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 6), the 4th section of which was carried into the revision of 1878, and is now in force as 13, Rev. Stat. (U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 6). That section reads as follows:
This provision has been upheld by this court as a rule of construction applicable, when not otherwise provided, as a general saving clause, to be read and construed as a part of all subsequent repealing statutes, in order to give effect to the will and intent of Congress. United States v. Reisinger, 128 U.S. 398 , 32 L. ed. 480, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 99; Great Northern R. Co. v. United States, 208 U.S. 452 , 52 L. ed. 567, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 313.
In the last case cited the court said of this section that--
This section is not alone applicable to penalties and forfeitures [218 U.S. 205, 218] under penal statutes. It extends as well to 'liabilities,' and a liability or obligation to pay a tax imposed under a repealed statute is not only within the letter, but the spirit and purpose, of the provision. Therefore we must take that general saving clause into consideration as a part of the legislation involved in the determination of whether a 'liability' had been incurred by the imposition of a tax prior to the act that destroyed the law under which it had been imposed.
The repealing act here involved includes a saving clause, and if it necessarily, or by clear implication, conflicts with the general rule declared in 13, the latest expression of the legislative will must prevail. In the case of Great Northern R. Co. v. United States, cited above, the question was whether the saving clause in the Hepburn act was so plainly in conflict with the rule of construction found in 13 as to limit the actions or liabilities saved to those enumerated therein; but the court held that, as the later clause applied to remedies and procedure, it was not, by implication, in conflict with the general provision of 13, which saved penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities. 208 U.S. 466 , 467.
The significance of 13 is therefore this: That if, prior to the repealing act, the defendants in error were under any liability or obligation to pay the tax or duty imposed by 29 of the act of June 13, 1898, that obligation or liability was not relieved by the mere repeal of that section, nor as a consequence of the saving clause in the repealing act, unless the special character of that clause, by plain implication, cuts down the scope and operation of the general rule in 13.
In the light of these principles of interpretation we come, then, to the question as to whether, at the date of the repeal of 29 of the act of June 13, 1898, the legacies to the defendants in error were subject to any tax or duty under the repealed section which constituted a 'liability' under [218 U.S. 205, 219] 13, or to a tax or duty 'imposed,' under the saving clause of the repealing act.
The only section which imposes any tax upon inheritances is the 29th. Any legacy or distributive share, or gift in anticipation of death, 'passing after the passage of the act,' is, by the express terms of that section, 'made subject to a duty or tax to be paid to the United States, as follows,' etc.
Section 30 of the same act deals only with the return, payment, and procedure for the collection of 'the tax or duty aforesaid,' referring to the tax imposed by 29.
Now, what is the property, right, or thing which is made subject to the tax? This has been most conclusively answered by Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41, 56 , 44 S. L. ed. 969, 975, where the section in question is construed as laying a tax upon the transmission, or the right to succeed to a legacy or distributive share or gift in contemplation of death, passing after the act.
For reasons and upon grounds not necessary to be restated, it has been also conclusively decided in Vanderbilt v. Eidman, 196 U.S. 480 , 49 L. ed. 563, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 331, that the tax or duty does not attach to legacies or distributive shares until the right of succession becomes an absolute right of immediate possession or enjoyment. It was therefore held in the case cited that a legacy upon conditions which might never happen was not subject to the tax or duty prior to the time, if ever, when the right of possession or enjoyment should become absolute.
To repeat, then: The subject of the tax or duty exacted by 29 is the right of succession which passes by death to a vested beneficial right of possession or enjoyment of a legacy or distributive share.
Upon the facts certified, the right of succession which passed by the death of the testator was an absolute right to the immediate possession and enjoyment,-a right neither [218 U.S. 205, 220] postponed until the falling in of a life estate, as in Mason v. Sargent, 104 U.S. 689 , 26 L. ed. 894, nor subject to contingencies, as in Vanderbilt v. Eidman, supra. No further event could make their title more certain nor their possession and enjoyment more secure. The law, then unrepealed and in full force, operated to fasten, at the moment this right of succession passed by death, a liability for the tax imposed upon the passing of every such inheritance or right of succession. The time for scheduling or listing was practically identical with the time for payment, and the listing or scheduling was required to be done by the executor charged with payment, but might be and was postponed for reasons of grace and of convenience. That is almost universal under any taxing system. The liability attaches at some time before the time for payment. But the liability for the payment of the tax exacted under 29 of the act of June 13, 1898, accrued or srose the moment the right of succession by death passed to the defendants in error, and the occurrence of no other fact or event was essential to the imposition of a liability for the statutory tax upon the interest thus acquired.
Much has been urged because the tax was not 'due and payable' when the repealing act took effect, and the contention is that because not 'due and payable,' no tax had been theretofore imposed within the intent of the saving clause. What we have already said answers this. But let us see the very unreasonable result which would ensure if we are required to say that by 'tax or duty imposed under 29' Congress meant a tax or duty due and payable when the repealing act should go into effect.
No one questions but that one effect of this saving clause would be to save any such tax as was 'due and payable' one year before July 1, 1902. This being so, it would be very unjust if the tax in the latter case is saved and the other remitted, inasmuch as the thing made subject to [218 U.S. 205, 221] the tax would, in each case, be the same; namely, the transmission of a beneficial right to the possession and enjoyment of a legacy or distributive share at the death of a testator or intestate. In the one case, the tax paid upon the right passing by death would be preserved. In the other, a tax upon a like inheritance would be remitted. The only difference would be that, in one case, the time for payment had arrived, while, in the other, it had not, though, in the latter case, the ultimate obligation to pay was equally as certain and fixed as in the first case.
Now, did Congress intend to make such an unjust distinction as would result from such an interpretation of the saving clause in question as shall make the time limit for payment the test as to whether one tax shall be preserved and the other remitted in a situation otherwise identical?
The saving clause does not, in terms, limit the right saved to a tax or duty which should be due and payable at the date of the repeal. It is, perhaps, an obvious suggestion that if that had been the purpose of Congress, it would have been easy to make that purpose clear.
But, in place of saying in so many words that 'all taxes or duties which should be due and payable prior to the taking effect of the act' should be subject to the provisions of 30, etc., the Congress said that 'all taxes or duties imposed by 29,' etc., prior to the taking effect of this act, should be subject to the provisions of 30. Now it is to be noticed that this 30, which is the remedial or procedure section, is not one of the sections repealed. The 29th section, which alone imposes any tax, is the one which is repealed. The plain purpose of the saving clause was to preserve some liability which had been imposed under 29, which would otherwise be lost. This it did by providing that all taxes 'imposed' prior to the going into effect of the act should, notwithstanding the repeal of the section which originated the tax, be preserved, and as to collection lien, etc., be [218 U.S. 205, 222] subject to the unrepealed 30. It must also be borne in mind that this time limit for payment to 'one year after the death of the testator' came into the 30th section only by the amendment of March 2, 1901. Up to the time of that amendment, the only provision as to time was that still found in the later parts of the same section, namely, that 'before payment and distribution to the legatees' the executor, administrator, or trustee 'shall pay to the collector . . . the amount of the duty or tax assessed upon such legacy or distributive share, and shall also make and render (to the collector) a schedule, list, or statement, in duplicate, of the amount of such legacy or distributive share, together with the amount of duty which has accrued, or shall accrue thereon, verified,' etc. The same original section also provided that, in case of neglect to so pay or deliver the statement required 'within the time hereinbefore provided,' certain penalties should be incurred, and that the collector should make out schedules, etc. This reference to the 'time hereinbefore provided' is in the original section, and must, therefore, refer to a time before 'payment and distribution' to the legatees and distributees.
It would seem to follow that the purpose and effect of the amendment making such tax 'due and payable in one year after the death of the testator' was to advance the time of payment so as to require payment within one year if there should be longer delay in paying legacies and distributive shares, leaving in full force the requirement that the tax should be paid before the payment of legacies and distributive shares, if such payment and distribution whould be made in less than one year. We have not passed over the fact that this time limit in terms applies only to the tax due under wills, and to the uncertainty as to the time for the apyment of the tax upon distributive shares. It, however, seems quite obvious that that time limit was intended to apply to shares in intestate estates, as well as [218 U.S. 205, 223] to legacies from testators, and that the omission may be supplied by necessary implication.
In has been suggested that the lien given by 30 only attaches when the tax is due and payable. The lien was in the section before the amendment, and, in view of its purpose, would attach with the obligation or liability for the tax. There is no reason which would justify the assumption that the lien only attached when the day of payment might arrive,-a date most indefinite before the insertion of the time limit by the amendment of 1902.
But it has been urged that any conclusion which saves a tax from the effect of a repealing act which was not actually due and payable is in conflict with Mason v. Sargent, supra. That case arose under the inheritance tax law of 1864. [13 Stat. at L. 223, chap. 173.] The plaintiff's testator died while the law was in force, it having been repealed October 1, 1870. The legacy to the plaintiff, which was in that case held to have been illegally taxed, was one payable after the death of the widow of the testator, which did not occur until 1872, and after the repeal of the law under which the tax was claimed. But that case is distinguishable from this in more than one particular. The legacy sought to be taxed did not vest in possession and enjoyment before the repeal of the act under which it was supposed to be taxable. If, therefore, no taxable succession occurred during the existence of the inheritance tax law of 1864, the right to the tax would fail under the very test which this court, in Vanderbilt v. Eidman, made the test of whether a tax had been imposed during the operation of the act of June 13, 1898, and the very test which is applied in the present case.
The precise question here involved, and upon which this case must turn, namely, whether a tax is not at once 'imposed,' by succeeding to an immediate right of possession and enjoyment, during the operation of the act of June 13, 1898, in such sense as to be within the [218 U.S. 205, 224] intent of the saving clause in the act which repealed that act, was not and could not have been involved in the case cited. The terms, both of the act of 1864, as amended in 1866 [14 Stat. at L. 98, chap. 184], and of the act which repealed that act, and of the saving clause in the repealing act, are, in some important aspects, to be differentiated from the acts here involved. It is enough, however, to say of that case that no taxable succession having occurred before the repeal of the act, there was nothing to save by the saving clause in the repealing act. In the present case it is equally as clear that if no taxable succession actually vested prior to the repeal of the taxing act, no tax would be saved. If, however, there did occur such an absolute right to the possession and enjoyment of the legacies to the present defendants in error as made it subject at once to the imposition of a tax under the law in operation when such succession occurred, a very different question must be decided from any decided in Mason v. Sargent.
The conclusion we reach is, that upon the passing by death of a vested right to the immediate possession or enjoyment of a legacy or distributive share, there was imposed the tax or duty exacted upon every such right of succession, which was saved by the saving clause of the repealing act.
The question certified must be answered in the negative.
Mr. Justice McKenna, dissenting:
I am unable to agree to the judgment of the court. I regret that time does not serve to give adequate expression to my views or to consider opposing ones. Some of the elements of dissent I can only hastily give. The question of the interpretation of a statute is, however, seldom in broad compass. The purpose is to get at the meaning of the words, and fortunately there are wellknown rules [218 U.S. 205, 225] to assist the process. The first of these is the motive of the law. Whatever construction advances that carries a presumption of truth.
There must be a strict or liberal construction, according to the purpose of the law; the former, if it imposes burdens; the latter, if it relieves from them. The contentions of the government, it seems to me, reverse this order. Their consequences seem to me to be: The law is a taxing one; is concededly of doubtful meaning; it must nevertheless be construed against the taxpayer. It was intended to relieve from burdens; its ambiguities must be resolved to retain them.
These contradictions between intention and result are intensified if we consider the general purpose of the law, proclaimed at the time of its enactment. It was intended as a repeal of war revenue taxation. In other words, to take from a time of peace burdens laid in time of war. A worthy purpose, I submit, and based on wisest considerations of governmental policy, and not to be defeated or impaired in any of its details by resolving the uncertainties of language against it.
There was emphatic and illustrative unanimity in the Committee of Ways and Means of the House of Representatives that reported and recommended the law. There was a difference of opinion in the committee as to the extent of the reduction which should be made, resulting from a difference in other views of its members, but there was no difference as to the necessity of a reduction of revenue.
The majority of the committee recommended a reduction of $73,000,000; the minority was of opinion it should be $123,000,000. In the reduction there was a special item of legacies. The figures need no comment. They display the purpose of Congress. Words, however, were added to emphasize it. 'Sound business judgment,' it was said, 'dictates a sweeping reduction of our revenues.' [218 U.S. 205, 226] The final word of recommendation of the measure was that 'every consideration of prudence commends' its 'wisdon.' This, then, was the purpose of the measure, sanctioned by the highest considerations of judgment and wisdom. Should it not prevail, certainly have dominance in the interpretation of the law passed to effect it? Even as to a live and continuing law, the rule of interpretation is that taxes must be expressed in clare and unambiguous language. If there be doubt, it is to be resolved against the government. Eidman v. Martinez, 184 U.S. 578 , 46 L. ed. 697, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 515. Such a rule of interpretation certainly should be applicable to a statute repealing taxation. To what an anomalous contrast does its disregard bring us? Shall a law passed to supply the wants of a deficient treasury have a more restrictive construction than one passed against the burden of a constantly increasing surplus? Indeed, this case presents even a stronger contrast. Under the rule of interpretation announced in Eidman v. Martinez, a law providing for the exigencies of war cannot prevail against the right of the taxpayer to resist taxation, the authority for which is equivocally expressed. But peace legislation, it seems, may claim a more determined power, though it have no necessities but the reduction of revenue; though it proclaims that purpose, and is urged to it by governmental policy. It may have a double sense and yet be unfaltering in its exactions, resisting presumptions of law and legal rules, but a war measure may not.
I cannot believe that Congress intended to leave uncertainty, or, if uncertainty should inadvertently result, that it was to be resolved to retain taxes, and not abolish them. And it had the means of certainty, and, I must assume, availed itself of them. Prior cases had given it examples of the interpretation of taxing law,-indeed, of the special kind of taxing laws which it was repealing; and we may be sure that it had those examples in mind in fixing the scope of its enactment. And this is in accordance [218 U.S. 205, 227] with a familiar rule of interpretation which this court has applied and necessarily will be called upon to apply again. That is, that when provisions which have received judicial interpretation are used in a statute, they are supposed to be used with the meaning that had been given to them. Under any other rule judicial decisions would make 'not light, but darkness visible.'
In Clapp v. Mason, 94 U.S. 589 , 24 L. ed. 212, a statute passed in 1864 [13 Stat. at L. 223, chap. 173] subjected to a tax legacies and successions. Under it a tax was assessed upon certain real estate deivised by Mason to his widow for her life, or until she should cease to occupy the same as a place of residence, and upon her death, or ceasing to occupy the same, to Clapp. The widow occupied the real estate until June 17, 1872. Mason, the testator, died December 4, 1867; the tax was assessed on the 15th of May, 1873. It was paid on the 31st, under protest, to avoid distraint or other forcible process to collect the same.
Under the statute of 1864 the tax would have been a proper one, but by a statute passed July 14, 1870 [16 Stat. at L. 261, chap. 255], the tax imposed by the former act was repealed. The repealing clause, however, continued the provisions of former acts, levying and collecting all taxes properly assessed or liable to be assessed, or accruing under their provisions. It provided also that 'any act done, right accrued, or penalty incurred under former acts,' should be saved.
The collector insisted that the tax upon succession in question had accrued before the repeal of the act of 1864; that is, upon the death of the testator. The devisees contended that it did not accrue until they came into possession of the land; and before that occurred, it was asserted, the statute assessing the tax had been repealed.
The court stated the question to be when the right to the tax accrued,- 'at the death of the testator, or at the death of the widow, when the plaintiff became entitled to the possession of the land?' In answer to the question, the [218 U.S. 205, 228] court conceded that the will of Mason conveyed an estate to William P. Mason and Charles H. Parker (those who took after the widow), and that, although they were not entitled to immediate possession, they had a vested estate. And it was conceded that not only vested estates, but those in expectancy, were within the statute. The admission, however, the court said, did not aid them in deciding the point before them, as the question of time still arose,-When was the vested estate taxable?
The question was answered by saying, after a consideration of the provisions of the statute, that it would be difficult to carry out its 'system in any other manner than by the provision that the succession should not be deemed taxable until such time as the successor should be entitled to its possession.' It was further said:
... * *
The questions were re-examined and decided same way in Mason v. Sargent, 104 U.S. 689 , 26 L. ed. 894. The latter case, however, exhibits more clearly the applicability of the principles discussed to the case at bar. Mason died December 4, 1867. He bequeathed by his will certain personal property to the plaintiffs in the action in trust for his widow, and upon her death one half to William P. Mason and one half to Eliza R. Cabot. The widow died in 1872. In April, 1873, the tax in question was assessed. It was paid under protest, and plaintiffs brought the action for the refunding of the tax, on the ground that the property [218 U.S. 205, 229] did not vest in possession of the legatees until the death of the testator's widow, which occurred after the repeal of the legacy succession tax act, and that the tax had not accrued so as to come within the saving clause of the act of repeal.
The act of 1864 (13 Stat. at L. 223, 285, chap. 173, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 2268) subjected legacies and distributive shares of personal property to a tax passing from a decedent, in the hands of an executor or administrator, varying in amount according to the degree of relationship of the beneficiary to the decedent. It further provided that the tax or duty should be payable whenever the party interested in the legacy or shares should become entitled to the possession and enjoyment thereof. The repealing act contained the saving clause which has been already set out.
The collector contended that the tax had accrued when the repealing act took effect, October 1, 1870. The opposing contention was that the tax did not become a claim in favor of the government until the legacy itself became payable, which was not until after the death of the widow, June 17, 1872. The latter contention was sustained, and the tax declared to have been illegally demanded.
It was decided that the legacy was the subject of the tax; that it was exempt during the life of the widow, and only became payable upon her death; that it did 'not become a subject of taxation until the right' accrued 'to reduce it to possession.' The provision of the law which required the trustee to give written notice to the assessor of his trust within therty days after he should take charge of it was declared 'not material to the argument,' and that the provision of the act of 1864, that the tax or duty thereby imposed should be a lien or charge upon the property bequeathed for twenty years, or until the same be paid within that period, determined nothing as to the time when the tax accrued.
Clapp v. Mason was cited as applicable, and the court [218 U.S. 205, 230] concluded as follows: 'No right to the payment of the tax had accrued at the date when the repealing act took effect; and, therefore, none to collect it can be deduced from its saving clauses.'
Clapp v. Mason and Mason v. Sargent were followed as determinative of when, under 7 of the act of April 12, 1902 [32 Stat. at L. 97, chap. 500, U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1909, p. 875] (the act now in question), the tax should be regarded as 'imposed' in Tilghman v. Eidman, by Circuit judge Lacombe at circuit, and also by the circuit court of appeals of the second circuit. 131 Fed. 652, 69 C. C. A. 139, 136 Fed. 141. The judgment was affirmed by this court by an equal division of its members. 203 U.S. 580 , 51 L. ed. 326, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 779.
A distinction is made between those cases and that at bar, and there is some distinction in the facts; but not such, in my opinion, as to take this case out of the principle announced in them. They were made to turn upon the fact that the tax or duty was upon the legacy or distributive shares. In this they were applied in Sturges v. United States, 117 U.S. 293 , 29 L. ed. 920, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 767, and aollowed in Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U.S. 41 , 44 L. ed. 969, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747, and Vanderbilt v. Eidman, 196 U.S. 480 , 49 L. ed. 563, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 331, in which the act of June 13, 1898, was interpreted. It is said in Knowlton v. Moore, 'that the provisions of the act of 1864 were in mind when' the act of June 13, 1898 [30 Stat. at L. 448, chap. 448, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 2286], was drafted. The cases of Clapp v. Mason and Mason v. Sargent were decided when that act was drafted. Is it not a fair inference that it and its repealing act were intended to have the same meaning and interpretation which had been given to its prototype and its repealing act?
Those cases were also made to turn on the fact that, as the tax was upon the legacy or distributive share, there could be no tax nor claim in favor of the government until such legacy or share was vested in the possession and enjoyment of the legatee or distributee. In this again they were followed in Vanderbilt v. Eidman. And it seems to me, therefore, that there is such resemblance of the provisions of the act of 1864 to those of the act of [218 U.S. 205, 231] June 13, 1898, as to make the cases interpreting the former decisive precedents of the meaning of the latter.
The time of payment is in both acts at a date subsequent to the death of the testator. In the act of 1898, one year after his death; in the act of 1864, when the legacy came into possession and enjoyment. This difference in time can make no difference with the principle that the tax does not accrue until it becomes due and payable. And, I submit, is not 'imposed' until then, does not become a claim in favor of the government until then, and, not being such, is not saved by 8 of the repealing act. The lien does not attach until then. By 30 of the act of 1898, the tax is due one year after the death of the testator, and is secured by a lien; but when the lien attaches is not stated. There is the same silence in the act of 1864. The omission was supplied by Mason v. Sargent, which declared that the lien presupposed the existence of the tax, and only attached when the tax accrued. This must also be the meaning of 30, and we have a further parallel between the acts, completing the application of the cited cases. Mark, too, the words of 8 of the repealing act, associating the tax and the lien, showing how closely the legislative mind followed the judicial decisions and gave its legislation, as I think, the certain meaning that the interpretation of the prior enactments afforded. Section 8 provides as follows: 'That all taxes or duties imposed by 29 . . . shall be subject as to lien, charge, collection, and otherwise to the provisions of 30. . . .'
An argument is made to show that a tax may be said to be imposed, though it be not due and payable. The argument is answered, I think, by what I have said. A tax is not imposed by a mere provision for it. Illustrations of this will readily come to mind besides those afforded by the cited cases. However, I will not attempt to further review the contentions of the government or the opposing [218 U.S. 205, 232] ones, nor consider from which the greater embarrassments, if any, will result. The force of the conflicting contentions, and of course they have force, establish the ambiguity of the statute and the different meanings that can be ascribed to it. In such situation the rule of interpretation which I have announced, and which I have shown is sanctioned by this court, should turn decision against the tax. I will not quote the circuit courts and the circuit courts of appeal, which ahve so thought and have pronounced against the government. They make a body of authority, persuasive in their numbers and rank. And this court has divided in opinion. I do not mention the fact as a circumstance which should preclude consideration of the question, but I bring it forward as an element of some power in the discussion. In may not have the 'true, fixed, and resting quality' of stare decisis, but it has nevertheless strong appeal and persuasion. It has persisted through quite a period of time and against many attempts to disturb it. It is certainly something more patent than inaction. It gave authority to the decision of the circuit court of appeals in Eidman v. Tilghman [69 C. C. A. 139, 136 Fed. 141], and that again determined other judgments and became a rule of decision for the settlement of estates.
I think the question certified should be answered in the affirmative.
I am authorized to say that the CHIEF JUSTICE and Mr. Justice Day concur in this dissent.
Was this helpful?
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)


text:
Lexmark fuser 56P2542 56P1333 for T630 and T632
Product Description
Fuser for use in Lexmark T630 and T632 series printers . This PrinterTechs compatible fuser is remanufactured by us, to our extremely high standards.
Exchange program
Purchasing a fuser on exchange is a simple way to save money and prevent electronic waste from ending up in a landfill. We send you a fuser and you send back your old fuser in the same box. Easy!
- By purchasing a fuser or maintenance kit on exchange you are agreeing to send back your used fuser (core) within 30 days of purchase.
- We will periodically email core return reminders at the email address given with the order. If the fuser core is not received within 30 days a core charge will be issued to your credit card.
- Send the fuser core back in the original packaging along with the included return authorization sheet. Return shipping charges will be your responsibility.
- International customers: Because of high shipping costs, we recommend you purchase fusers without a core exchange. If you do purchase fusers on exchange, understand your return responsibility will also include paying for any import fees, brokerage fees, or tariffs when sending your core back.
Additional Information
|For use in the following printers:
|Lexmark T630, Lexmark T630D, Lexmark T630DN, Lexmark T630DT, Lexmark T630DTN, Lexmark T630N, Lexmark T630NVE, Lexmark T630TN, Lexmark T630TNVE, Lexmark T630VE, Lexmark T632, Lexmark T632DN, Lexmark T632DTN, Lexmark T632DTNF, Lexmark T632N, Lexmark T632TN, Dell M5200n, Dell W5300n, IBM Infoprint 1332, IBM Infoprint 1352
|Alternate part numbers
Also used in these models

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Pat a Cake Baby is our outstanding WAHM business for today. Jamie started out sewing baby products that are useful and stylish. Her business has grown tremendously and she now has a few other moms that help her out. A wonderful feature on her website is a gift registry for new moms to pick what they want from her great collections.
|The minky wrap has two flaps that fold around the baby's arms and snap.
|You can see here how the front folds down to slide the baby in the wrap. The lining is so soft and luxurious, I can't tell you how wonderful it feels.
|Here is Gracie trying to sleep as her arms flail around.
|We gently brought her arms to rest at her side and snapped the flaps together. There are two widths to choose from and two snaps for each placement.
|Gracie quickly fell asleep in her wrap and was easily carried around and moved from one spot to another without waking her.
- Moving her after she falls asleep is much easier, because putting her on a new surface (like the cradle or swing) usually woke her up due to the temperature difference, but in the wrap, it doesn't affect her.
- It seems more like a baby sleeping bag because it doesn't keep her swaddled, which is good for her--she likes to use her hands. It does keep her from hitting herself in the face in her sleep.
- It keeps her warm which is AWESOME and a constant struggle in the winter.
- Unsnapping the wrap requires two hands but it could be because the snaps are newer.
- They are good quality snaps, which is great!
- It is a lint magnet, which is kind of a bummer for pet owners but not that big of a deal.
- It sheds, even after a wash, kinda like a fancy towel sheds. After a few washes it is great.
- She LOVES being put in it! She gets a big smile on her face and nuzzles right in!
- This is surely an everyday item with a baby that snoozes most of the day. You almost need two so you have one when the other is being washed!
- Definitely a must have for a new mom.
|Modern Designs for the Classic Baby
Drawing ends 2/22/13
a Rafflecopter giveaway


text:
Dry eye syndrome is the most common side effect of LASIK, especially in the weeks following the procedure. Here's what you need to know about LASIK-related dry eye syndrome and how it's treated.
Many people choose refractive surgery like LASIK to permanently correct their vision without the need for glasses or contacts. And although it's considered a safe and effective procedure, LASIK carries risks of complications and adverse effects, just like any other surgery.
One of the most common post-LASIK complications is dry eye syndrome, a condition characterized by chronic eye dryness. In fact, about 95% of patients report having symptoms of dry eye syndrome for up to a few days or even weeks after surgery. That number drops to about 60% a month after LASIK and by 6-12 months post-surgery, most patients have recovered. Few patients report having symptoms of dry eye syndrome a year after surgery and beyond.
Symptoms of Post-LASIK Dry Eye Syndrome
Patients may experience any number of the following dry eye symptoms following LASIK:
- Irritation
- Dryness
- Redness
- Feeling that something is stuck in the eye
- Eye fatigue
- Blurred vision
- Reduced visual acuity
- Why Can LASIK Cause Dry Eye Syndrome?
Why Can LASIK Cause Dry Eye Syndrome?
LASIK can disrupt the feedback system that alerts your brain about eye dryness.
During LASIK, the surgeon makes tiny incisions in the cornea that can damage corneal nerves, making the cornea less sensitive to stimuli and sensations. Because of this, the normal cornea nerve impulses that control tear production may not function fully, and signals that would ordinarily tell the brain to begin tear production may not be sent.
This results in underproduction of tears, and a dry ocular surface.
Who's at Risk of Developing Post-LASIK Dry Eyes?
You're more likely to develop dry eyes following LASIK if any of the following apply to you:
- Preexisting dry eye syndrome
- High myopia before the surgery
- Older age, especially a woman after menopause
- Have an autoimmune disease, for example Sjorgen's syndrome
- Take certain medications that dry out the eyes, like allergy medication, blood pressure regulators or antidepressants
- Live in a dry environment
- Cataracts
- Glaucoma
- Keratoconus
Your surgeon will evaluate your ocular condition before performing surgery, and take into account any risk factors for developing dry eye syndrome after the procedure.
How We Can Help
Whether you have dry eyes or not, annual eye exams are vital for maintaining healthy eyes and clear vision. If signs of dry eye syndrome are detected during the examination, we'll discuss the next steps to take for restoring healthy and refreshed eyes.
Many eye diseases can be quickly and easily diagnosed during a Comprehensive eye exam, Pediatric eye exam and Contact lens eye exam. If you were diagnosed with an eye disease, such as Cataracts, Astigmatism, Pink Eye or conjunctivitis Myopia or Nearsightedness , Glaucoma, Macular degeneration, Diabetic retinopathy, or Dry eye, you may be overwhelmed by the diagnosis and confused about what happens next. Will you need medications or surgery – now or in the future? Is LASIK eye and vision surgery an option for you ? Our Miami eye doctor is always ready to answer your questions about eye disease and Contact lenses.
Book an eye exam at Pro-Vision Care Center, Inc eye clinic near you in Miami, Florida to learn more about your candidacy for contact lenses and which type is right for you. Call 305 204 8964
Pro-Vision Care Center, Inc, your Miami eye doctor for eye exams and eye care
Alternatively, book an appointment online here CLICK FOR AN APPOINTMENT
My eyes are always burning and tired, what is causing this and what can I do about it?
These are often signs of dry eye syndrome, a very common condition that affects many people over time. Women are generally more prone to developing these symptoms and aging is often a cause as well. Dryness of our eyes is often due to a decrease in the oil production in our eyelid glands which causes the surface of the eye to become irritated. Certain medications and health issues can also contribute to dryness. There is no true cure for dryness but many treatments are available such as the use of artificial tears, nutritional supplements incorporating Omega 3, prescription medications such as Restasis, and eyelid hygiene. No single treatment works for every individual so we customize treatments for each person and their specific condition.'
Are there some every day activities that can cause Dry Eye?
Yes. Generally, those that suffer from allergies, or have systemic inflammatory diseases like arthritis and Sjogren's, or those who use the computer or digital devices often and even contact lens wearers tend to be more susceptible to dry eye symptoms.
Am I a good candidate for refractive surgery?
Patients who are at least 18 years of age, have healthy eyes that are free from retinal problems, corneal scars, and any eye diseases are generally suitable. Many patients who are nearsighted, farsighted or have astigmatism are potential candidates. We will also discuss your lifestyle needs to help you decide if LASIK is the best alternative for you. If you would like to schedule a free LASIK consultation, please contact our office.
What are some of the qualifications for being a good LASIK candidate?
Some of the qualifications include having healthy eyes, good general health, corneas that are not too thin, stable vision, a prescription that is not too high, realistic expectations, and being at least 18 years of age.


text:
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Puppy won't eat
I recently adopted a puppy from another state, he was driven 7 hours to get here. The first night I had him he was very energetic and ate his food, which is the same food that was given to him at the shelter. I got him saturday at 1 AM. Then Sunday, he wouldn't eat. He also has diarrhea and little energy. He still get excited, but all he wants to do it sleep. I have tried chicken and rice, beef and rice, all kinds of wet and dry foods, and he wants nothing to do with eating. He refuses treats too. I took him to the vet yesterday, he doesn't have parvo or worms. I'm extremely worried.
How worrisome...
How old is the puppy? What food did they send with him?
Your pup has been through A LOT. If he is not eating, that will definitely affect his energy level.
Where and how are you feeding? There might be a lot of stres around feeding now, making it hard for him to eat. Then the tummy gets upset, and it's a vicious cycle.
I had a similar problem when I adopted my girl. I just left food out for her, which she eventually ate on her terms. I found that when her tummy was upset, some chicken soup usually worked, so I always had the organic stuff on hand for or, or made some from scratch and froze some, so I always had some for her. For the diarrhea, I really like probiotics.
It can take a good couple of weeks for them to settle in, and it's hard to tell exactly what is wrong here, if it's nerves or fear or something else.
He's 9 weeks old, almost 10. They didn't send any food, but told me he was on Purina Puppy Chow. I have tried feeding with other dogs, away from other dogs, in a quiet room, and outside. I put a little pumpkin on his tongue, so his diarrhea is now gone. But, he still refuses to eat. He's drinking just fine and is still a little playful.
on the puppy chow. I wouldn't eat it either, I think you have a smart puppy! In all seriousness, I agree this is a stressful time for your pup, but it's important to get something into him at this young age. Try a bit of pedialite maybe just to get fluids into him. The pumpkin is good for his runs. I do think if you leave a bit of boiled chicken in broth out he may take it when it's quiet around him.
Now back to the puppy chow.... So full of corn, which dogs can't digest. You really should search out a grain free type of food that is appropriate to the size of your dog (will he be a giant dog, or a smaller breed?). If you decide to switch to a much healthier brand (it would be hard to pick a worse one in my opinion) mix it with the puppy chow for a good week. 75/25 puppy chow the first day or two, then 50/50 for a couple days,..... until it's entirely new food.
Good luck with your new puppy. If he doesn't start eating soon I'd be calling the vet and asking what to try next.
Hopefully he's eaten by now? It's 3 days since your post. Generally you should keep a puppy on the food he is used to when you first get him, a whole big bag at least or a couple of months. Many of the changes inflicted on puppy you can't control but you can at least keep his food the same and hopefully avoid the unpleasant reactions that sometimes accompany a food change. But you can't be sure if the food you were told to get is really what he was on. Plus, even if it is, he might have been on it only a very short time.
Are you letting him settle in? It's not a good idea to allow all your friends and neighbours in right away or to take him out to many places. You want to do those things, yes, for socialization, but he needs to settle and feel safe too. For a couple of days at least, to maybe a week, keep visits in and out to a minimum.
Did they actually test for parvo? Has he had any vaccines yet?
|diarrhea, puppy, rescue, sick
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode


text:
Giving shopping
a new experience
right from manufacturing our luminaires to the completion of their installation in our outlets. They also assisted us in keeping our energy consumption and maintenance costs lower"
- David Kumar Arumugam, Operations Manager, Harvey Norman Malaysia
Lighting is an important tool in retail marketing. Good retail store lighting can be used to target and attract new customers, build store image and subtly persuade the customers to purchase your merchandise. Harvey Norman believes that strategically placed retail store lighting will appeal to the customers and enhance the shopping experience.
Harvey Norman Malaysia teamed up with Philips Lighting to meet its lighting requirements. The Philips Lighting team conducted a lighting audit before and after installation to provide a clear insight into the possibilities and benefits that the new lighting system could offer.
LED downlights such as LuxSpace were used for the walkways of the store to help guide customers through the store. Other LED lighting solutions were also used for accent lighting in the other areas of the store. Additionally, the TV area used ToBeTouched DALI controls that enable customization to control, so that buyers can tone down the lighting to view the contrast of the TV screens in various lighting conditions.
Philips Lighting provided much more functionality than being simple sources of illumination. Using Philips modern light fixtures added drama, as well as improved the overall ambiance and look of the store.


text:
SANTIAGO, Chile — Authorities kept hundreds of thousands of people out of their beds early Wednesday after a magnitude-8.2 earthquake struck off Chile's northern coast. Five people were crushed to death or suffered fatal heart attacks, a remarkably low toll for such a powerful shift in the Earth's crust.
The shaking loosed landslides that blocked roads, knocked out power for thousands, damaged an airport and provoked fires that destroyed several businesses. About 300 inmates escaped from a women's prison in the city of Iquique. In Arica, another city close to the quake's offshore epicenter, hospitals treated minor injuries, and some homes made of adobe were destroyed, authorities said. Chilean Interior Minister Rodrigo Penailillo announced the five deaths.
Bachelet's government extended its tsunami warnings for northernmost Chile long after they were lifted elsewhere. Its mandatory evacuation orders remained in effect until nearly dawn for coastal areas north of Antofogasta, a decision backed by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii.
"We regard the coast line of Chile as still dangerous, so we're maintaining the warning," geophysicist Gerard Fryer told The Associated Press.
Bachelet, who just returned to the presidency three weeks ago, spoke well after midnight, five hours after the quake struck.
It was not lost on many Chileans that the last time she presided over a major quake, days before the end of her 2006-10 term, her emergency preparedness office prematurely waved off a tsunami danger. Most of the 500 dead from that magnitude-8.8 tremor survived the shaking, only to be caught in killer waves in a disaster that destroyed 220,000 homes and washed away large parts of many coastal communities.
"The country has done a good job of confronting the emergency. I call on everyone to stay calm and follow the authorities' instructions," Bachelet tweeted after Tuesday night's temblor.
When she finally addressed the nation, she said her interior minister would monitor the tsunami threat throughout the night and coordinate the emergency response. "Classes have been suspended, and we will be able to know the extent of the damage in the light of day," she added.
The tsunami warning center cancelled tsunami watches for areas other than northern Chile and southern Peru. The only U.S. impact might be higher waves Wednesday for Hawaii's swimmers and surfers, it said.
The U.S. Geological Survey initially reported the quake at 8.0, but later upgraded the magnitude of the quake that struck 61 miles (99 kilometers) northwest of Iquique. More than 20 significant aftershocks followed, including a 6.2 tremor. More aftershocks and even a larger quake could not be ruled out, said seismologist Mario Pardo at the University of Chile.
Psychiatrist Ricardo Yevenes said he was with a patient in Arica when the big one hit.
"It quickly began to move the entire office, things were falling," he told local television. "Almost the whole city is in darkness."
The quake was so strong that the shaking experienced in Bolivia's capital about 290 miles (470 kilometers) away was the equivalent of a 4.5-magnitude tremor, authorities there said.
Chile is one of the world's most earthquake-prone countries because just off the coast, the Nazca tectonic plate plunges beneath the South American plate, pushing the towering Andes cordillera to ever-higher altitudes.
The latest activity began with a strong magnitude-6.7 quake on March 16 that caused more than 100,000 people to briefly evacuate low-lying areas. Hundreds of smaller quakes followed in the weeks since, keeping people on edge as scientists said there was no way to tell if the unusual string of tremors was a harbinger of an impending disaster.
Talk to us
- You can tell us about news and ask us about our journalism by emailing email@example.com or by calling 425-339-3428.
- If you have an opinion you wish to share for publication, send a letter to the editor to email@example.com or by regular mail to The Daily Herald, Letters, P.O. Box 930, Everett, WA 98206.
- More contact information is here.


text:
There Is No Nobel Prize in Economics
It's Nobel Prize season again. News reports are coming out each day sharing the name of the illustrious winner of the various categories — Science, Literature, etc. But there's one of the prizes that's a little different. Well, that's putting it lightly… you see, the Nobel Prize in Economics is not a real Nobel. It wasn't created by Alfred Nobel. It's not even called a "Nobel Prize," no matter what the press reports say.
The five real Nobel Prizes—physics, chemistry, literature, peace, and medicine/physiology—were set up in the will left by the dynamite magnate when he died in 1895. The economics prize is a bit different. It was created by Sweden's Central Bank in 1969, nearly 75 years later. The award's real name is the "Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel." It was not established by Nobel, but supposedly in memory of Nobel. It's a ruse and a PR trick, and I mean that literally. And it was done completely against the wishes of the Nobel family.
Sweden's Central Bank quietly snuck it in with all the other Nobel Prizes to give free-market economics for the 1% credibility. One of the Federal Reserve banks explained it succinctly, "Few realize, especially outside of economists, that the prize in economics is not an "official" Nobel. . . . The award for economics came almost 70 years later—bootstrapped to the Nobel in 1968 as a bit of a marketing ploy to celebrate the Bank of Sweden's 300th anniversary." Yes, you read that right: "a marketing ploy."
"The Economics Prize has nestled itself in and is awarded as if it were a Nobel Prize. But it's a PR coup by economists to improve their reputation," Nobel's great great nephew Peter Nobel told AFP in 2005, adding that "It's most often awarded to stock market speculators .... There is nothing to indicate that [Alfred Nobel] would have wanted such a prize."
Members of the Nobel family are among the harshest, most persistent critics of the economics prize, and members of the family have repeatedly called for the prize to be abolished or renamed. In 2001, on the 100th anniversery of the Nobel Prizes, four family members published a letter in the Swedish paper Svenska Dagbladet, arguing that the economics prize degrades and cheapens the real Nobel Prizes. They aren't the only ones.
Scientists never had much respect for the new economic Nobel prize. In fact, a scientist who headed Nixon's Science Advisory Committee in 1969, was shocked to learn that economists were even allowed on stage to accept their award with the real Nobel laureates. He was incredulous: "You mean they sat on the platform with you?"
That hatred continues to simmer below the surface, and periodically breaks through and makes itself known. Most recently, in 2004, three prominent Swedish scientists and members of the Nobel committee published an open letter in a Swedish newspaper savaging the fraudulent "scientific" credentials of the Swedish Central Bank Prize in Economics. "The economics prize diminishes the value of the other Nobel prizes. If the prize is to be kept, it must be broadened in scope and be disassociated with Nobel," they wrote in the letter, arguing that achievements of most of the economists who win the prize are so abstract and disconnected from the real world as to utterly meaningless.
The question is: Why would a prize that draws so much hatred and negativity from the scientific community be added to the Nobel roster so late in the game? And why economics?
To answer that question we have to go back to Sweden in the 1960s.
Around the time the prize was created, Sweden's banking and business interests were busy trying to ram through various so-called "free-market" economic reforms. Their big objective at the time was to loosen political oversight and control over the country's central bank.
According to Philip Mirowski, a professor at the University of Notre Dame who specializes in the history of economics, the "Bank of Sweden was trying to become more independent of democratic accountability in the late 60s, and there was a big political dispute in Sweden as to whether the bank could have effective political independence. In order to support that position, the bank needed to claim that it had a kind of scientific credibility that was not grounded in political support."
Promoters of central bank independence couched their arguments in the obscure language of neoclassical economic theory of market efficiency. The problem was that few people in Sweden took their neoclassical babble very seriously, and saw their plan for central bank independence for what it was: an attempt to transfer control over economic matters from democratically elected government and place into the hands of big business interests, giving them a free hand in running Sweden's economy without pesky interference from labor unions, voters and elected officials.
And that's where the Swedish Central Bank Prize in Economic Sciences came in.
The details of how the deal went down are still very murky. What is known is that in 1969 Sweden's central bank used the pretense of its 300th anniversary to push through an independent prize in "economic science" in memory of Alfred Nobel, and closely link it with the original Nobel Prize awards. The name was a bit longer, the medals looked a little different and the award money did not come from Nobel, but in every other way it was hard to tell the two apart. To ensure the prize would be awarded to the right economists, the bank managed to install a rightwing Swedish economist named Assar Lindbeck, who had ties to University of Chicago, to oversee the awards committee and keep him there for more than three decades. (Lindbeck's famous free-market oneliner is: "In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city — except for bombing.")
For the first few years, the Swedish Central Bank Prize in Economics went to fairly mainstream and maybe even semi-respectable economists. But after establishing the award as credible and serious, the prizes took a hard turn to the right.
Over the next decade, the prize was awarded to the most fanatical supporters of theories that concentrated wealth among the top 1% of industrialized society of our time.
In 1974, five years after the prize was first created, it was awarded to Friedrich Hayek, one the leading "laissez-faire" -- enrich the rich -- economists of the 20th century and the godfather of neoclassical economics. Milton Friedman, who was at the University of Chicago with Hayek, was not far behind. He won the prize just two years later, in 1976.
Both Hayek and Friedman were huge supporters of the political independence of central banks. In fact, they built their careers on bashing government intervention in economic matters. Hayek developed a whole business cycle theory that blamed government and government-controlled banking systems for all economic ills. He also equated all government intervention will inevitably lead to totalitarianism. Friedman with a whole new subsection of neoclassical economics called "Monetarism" that had a scientific formula worked out, specifying exactly how much money central bankers needed to keep floating around in the economy to keep inflation low and unemployment high enough to keep big business happy. No democratic control over banking policies needed, just let the free-markets do its thing! The Swedish central bankers couldn't get better spokesmen for their cause.
But Hayek and Friedman's usefulness went way beyond Sweden.
At the time of the prizes, neoclassical economics were not fully accepted by the media and political establishment. But the Nobel Prize changed all that.
What started as a project to help the Bank of Sweden achieve political independence, ended up boosting the credibility of the most regressive strains of free-market economics, and paving the way for widespread acceptance of libertarian ideology.
Take Hayek: Before he won the award, it looked like Hayek was washed up. His career as an economist was essentially over. He was considered a quack and fraud by contemporary economists, he had spent the 50s and 60s in academic obscurity, preaching the gospel of free markets and economic darwinism while on the payroll of ultra-rightwing American billionaires. Hayek had powerful backers, but was out on the fringes of academic credibility.
But that all changed as soon as he won the prize in 1974. All of a sudden his ideas were being talked about. Hayek was a celebrity. He appeared as a star guest on NBC's Meet the Press, newspapers across the country printed his photographs and treated his economic mumblings about the need to have high unemployment in order to pay off past inflation sins as if they were divine revelations. His Road to Serfdom hit the best-seller list. Margret Thatcher was waving around his books in public, saying "this is what we believe." He was back on top like never before, and it was all because of the fake Nobel Prize created by Sweden's Central Bank.
Billionaire Charles Koch brought Hayek out for an extended victory tour of the United States, and had Hayek spend the summer as a resident scholar at his Institute for Humane Studies. Charles, a shrewd businessman, quickly put the old man to good use, tapping Hayek's mainstream cred to set up and underwrite Cato Institute in 1974 (it was called the Charles Koch Foundation until 1977), a libertarian thinktank based on Hayek's ideas. Even today, Cato Institute pays homage to the Swedish Central Bank Prize's role in the mainstreaming of Hayek's ideas and Hayek's influence on the outfit:
The first libertarian to receive the Nobel Prize was F.A. Hayek in 1974. In the years leading up to the prize announcement, Hayek had reached a professional and personal nadir. Unable to maintain an appointment in the United States, Hayek had returned to Austria to take up a position at the University of Salzburg, Austria. With the announcement of the prize in 1974, however, Hayek's work, and the fortune of Austrian economics, took a remarkable turn.
Hayek's influence on Cato is profound. Two of Cato's first books were by Hayek: A Tiger by the Tail: The Keynesian Legacy of Inflation & Unemployment and Monetary Policy: Government as Generator of the "Business Cycle." Perhaps more than any other intellectual in the twentieth century, Hayek has inspired Cato and its researchers to develop policies that ensure a free society. When Cato moved into its current location in 1992, its auditorium was named in Hayek's honor.
Friedman's Nobel Prize had a similar impact. After getting the prize in 1976, Friedman wrote a best-seller, got his own 10-part PBS series Free to Choose and became President Ronald Reagan's economic advisor, where he had a chance to put the society-crushing policies he developed in Chile under Pinochet.
Friedman would spend the rest of his time denying it, but he was deeply involved and invested in the Pinochet's totalitarian-corporate economic experiment. Chilean economist Orlando Letelier published an article inThe Nation in 1976 outing Milton Friedman as the "intellectual architect and unofficial adviser for the team of economists now running the Chilean economy" on behalf of foreign corporations. A month later Letelier was assassinated in D.C. by Chilean secret police using a car bomb.
Friedman's monetary theory was used by Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Paul Volcker to restrict the money supply, plunging American into a deep recession, doubling the unemployment rate and had the added bonus of getting Reagan elected President. . . . And Hayek and Friedman were just the beginning.
For instance, in 1997 two economists won an award for their derivative risk models that minimized risk, just before the derivatives would explode in the 2000s real estate bubble.
The award was shared by economists Robert Merton and Myron Scholes for their work in figuring out how to value derivatives so as to minimize risk. The two economists used their Nobel-worthy economic models to run "the world's biggest hedge fund," which was called Long Term Capital Management (LTCM). And the fund really lived up to its name. Nine months after winning the Swedish Central Bank Prize in Economics, LTCM went belly-up, racking up over $1 billion in losses over a period of just two days. It was of course bailed out by then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who considered LTCM "too big to fail."
Then there's Vernon Smith. In 2002, Vernon Smith, adored and funded by Libertarians like Charles Koch, won the "Nobel" — his patron looked at the money he spent funding Smith's academic career as a good investment, saying simply: "The Koch Foundation's gift was an excellent investment."
Smith's research basically entailed setting up theoretical "wind tunnels" to test how, for example, the privatizations of markets would respond in various conditions all in a way that has nothing to do with reality.It will take a brave act to bring this sham to the attention of the public.
One year, one of the prize winners will have to speak out, and explain this ruse to the public as he wins the award.


text:
Alton Brown's Sherried Sardine Toast
Recipe courtesy of Alton Brown
2 (3.75-ounce 2-layer) tins brisling sardines in olive oil
2 tablespoons finely chopped parsley leaves, divided
1 tablespoon sherry vinegar (or red wine vinegar)
1/4 teaspoon lemon zest, reserve the lemon and cut into 4 wedges
Freshly ground black pepper
4 (1/2-inch) thick slices crusty bread, such as sourdough, country loaf or rye
1 ripe Hass avocado
Coarse sea salt
Drain the oil from 1 tin of sardines into a small bowl and set aside. Drain the oil from the other tin into another small bowl and whisk in 1 tablespoon of parsley, vinegar, lemon zest, and black pepper, to taste. Add the sardines, stir to combine and set aside for up to 1 hour.
After 45 minutes, put a rack 3-inches from the broiler and heat the oven to the broiler setting on high. Brush each slice of bread on 1 side with the reserved oil. Put the bread, oil side up, onto a cooling rack set inside a half sheet pan and broil 2 to 3 minutes or until golden brown and crisp.
Halve the avocado and remove the pit. Smash the flesh in each half with a fork.
Spread the avocado evenly onto the toasted bread. Top evenly with the sardines. Pour any remaining dressing on top and garnish with the remaining parsley.
Season lightly with sea salt and serve with lemon wedges.


text:
North Face Jackets is a desirable and chest insulation is crucial, warm and comfortable in cold weather, wear-resistant shoulders and elbows increase, it use of recycled Polartec. Packed with 700 fill goose down, this high loft jacket delivers plush warmth in brutal conditions. This jacket arriving in fashionable style as well as good colour plan are incredibly breathable as well as waterproof North Face Denali Jackets that have an elevated microdot internal area.
* Sleek, performance-fitted jacket insulates against cool to cold weather and layers exceptionally well. Performance fit* Two hand pockets* Elastic-bound cuffs* Single-hand hem cinch-cord* Size Available: S,M,L,XL,XXL* Manufacturer Warranty: Lifetime* Recommend Use: Cold Weather* Gender: Men


text: The white middle-classes gathered in Parliament Square to protest against plans for a third runway at Heathrow airport - blighting, they say, thousands of homes in London's aviation hub's flight paths - especially to the west of the capital. Central to the demonstration were both London mayoral candidates: the Conservative Zac Goldsmith and Labour's Sadique Khan. The £17bn expansion at Heathrow would mean 250,000 more flights a year.Add to Cart Add to Lightbox Download


text:
Post 9/11 GI Bill
The Post-9/11 GI Bill provides financial support for education and housing to individuals with at least 90 days of aggregate service on or after September 11, 2001, or individuals discharged with a service-connected disability after 30 days. You must have received an honorable discharge to be eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
As of August 1, 2009, the Post-9/11 GI Bill is effective for training. Approved training under the Post-9/11 GI Bill includes graduate and undergraduate degrees, and vocational/technical training. All training programs must be offered by an institution of higher learning (IHL) and approved for GI Bill benefits. Additionally, tutorial assistance, and licensing and certification test reimbursement are approved under the Post- 9/11 GI Bill.
The Post-9/11 GI Bill will pay your tuition based upon the highest in-state tuition charged by a public educational institution in the state where the school is located. The amount of support that an individual may qualify for depends on where they live and what type of degree they are pursuing. For a summary of benefits visit Compare the Benefits.
This Post 9-11 GI Bill will pay eligible individuals:
Tuition & fees directly to the school not to exceed the maximum in-state tuition & fees at a public Institution of Higher Learning. See chart listing maximum in-state tuition rates
For more expensive tuition, a program exists which may help to reimburse the difference. This program is called the "Yellow Ribbon Program".
A monthly housing allowance based on the Basic Allowance for Housing for an E-5 with dependents at the location of the school.
For those attending foreign schools (schools without a main campus in the U.S.) the BAH rate is fixed at $1,333.00 for 2009.
An annual books & supplies stipend of $1,000 paid proportionately based on enrollment.
A one-time rural benefit payment for eligible individuals.
This benefit is payable only for training at an Institution of Higher Learning (IHL). If you are enrolled exclusively in online training you will not receive the housing allowance. If you are on active duty you will not receive the housing allowance or books & supplies stipend. This benefit provides up to 36 months of education benefits, generally benefits are payable for 15 years following your release from active duty.
The Post-9/11 GI Bill also offers some service members the opportunity to transfer their GI Bill to dependents.
Links to Military Branches:


text:
NumPy v1.12 Manual
Welcome! This is the documentation for NumPy 1.12.0, last updated Jan 16, 2017.
Parts of the documentation:
NumPy User Guide
NumPy Reference
F2Py Guide
NumPy Developer Guide
Indices and tables:
General Index
Search page
Complete Table of Contents
Meta information:
Large parts of this manual originate from Travis E. Oliphant's book "Guide to NumPy" (which generously entered Public Domain in August 2008). The reference documentation for many of the functions are written by numerous contributors and developers of NumPy, both prior to and during the NumPy Documentation Marathon.
The preferred way to update the documentation is by submitting a pull request on Github (see the Developer Guide. The NumPy Documentation Wiki can also still be used to submit documentation fixes. Please help us to further improve the NumPy documentation!


text:
Musicians and Instrument Makers Forum
- a new interactive forum dedicated to the craft.
You're invited to visit and join a brand new interactive forum dedicated to the needs of musicians and builders.
UPDATED! Speed Index:
Tobi, 2 bridge twinger guitar"Feedback" - Directory
Jason Lollar, Basic Pickup Winding NEW
The Vancouver Guitar Builders Cooperative
Bob Hembrook, Mesquite Basses and Guitars from Texas
Nickolay Andreev, Guitarmaking in Moscow
Tim Deacon , Carodyce Instrument from the UK
Michael Wentzell , South Carolina's "glamour boy guitarmaker"
Mark Carlson , a visit with Fender's R&D stress analyst
Billy Rhinehart , handcarved uniquely ornamented objets d'art
Rainsong Graphite Guitars, visit the factory of these graphite innovators
Jim RedgateLeading Edge, Jay Hargreaves
George Wilson
Richard Schneider
Robert Girdis
CD Order FAQsRecording Artist Index - 1999
Online CD Order form
Disco links
August - - Bill Hill "Honorable Intentions"Recording Artist Index - 1998
January - - Sunyata "Gypsy Sun, Gypsy Moon"Recording Artist Index - 1997
February - - Terry Garland "Trouble In Mind"
March - - Terry Garland "The One To Blame"
April - - Frank Schultz "A Day Like This"
May - - Puddle Duck "Fly"
July - - In Clover "Music for Silent Films"
August - - Headstone Circus "Live at Cary Street"
November - - Kimberly Burns "Wild Heart Of Mine"
January - - George M. Lowe "Don't Be a Fool!"
February - - Billy Ray Hatley" "Big City Blues"
March - - Armwood "Omega Man"
April - - Carl Volk "Estrada do Sol"
May - - Wolftown "Mother Lode"
June - - Marcos Vinicius "Dedicatoria"
July - - Progetto Avanti "Orchestral Illusions"
August - - Todd Wayne "Behind Closed Doors"
September - - John Bullard "Bach on the Banjo"
October - - Allan Neave "...the isle is full of noises..."
November - - Fat Daddy "Back Where I Started From"
December - - Guitars A Quattro "Four For Tango"
January - - The Ululating Mummies"Sacred Snack"
February - - Dirtball "Hillbilly Soul"
March - - Dog's New Clothes "Waiting for the Moon"
May - - May-Lily Lee "Actualities"
June - - Oscar Lopez "Dancing on the Moon Contigo"
July - - Kurt Rodarmer "The Goldberg Variations"
August - - Tim Donley "Cuttin' Loose"
September - - Eileen Edmonds "Eileen Edmonds"
October - - Patchwork "Something Off Our First Album"
November - - Bare Bones "Time Won't Wait"
December - - Big Top Blues Band "Mad Love"
September - - Terry Garland "Edge of the Valley"
October - - John Bullard "A Classical Banjo"
November - - Janet Martin "Just Wakin' Up"
December - - Zydeco Crazy "Shake Whatcha Got!"
New Visitors Please "Sign In" Here
"Dear Tony the Guitarmaker..." Collector E-Mail Form
"Dear Tony the Guitarmaker... Please send me more information (or include me on the Luthiers Around the World list).
Reference - Accent Marks If special accent marks are needed in listing your name and address, use this guide. NEW!
Discography Online Order FAQs
Online Catalog/ Ordering FAQs
Order / Quote E mail form
Online Order Center
CBI -- Custom Cable Quote
LM Engineering Product and Policy, Ordering Custom ATA Cases
Online CD Orders
Web Development Services
Vintage Instrument Appraisal Service
Insurance Services - Under Construction
Trading Post - Under Construction
Mailing Address - Snail Mail
Schools and Study ProgramsRESOURCES - UPDATED REGULARLY
"The Master Violinmaker" by Paul Fleisher
Fingerboard Worksheet Teaching aid
Chord Block Worksheet Teaching aid
Repair reading list
The Healdsburg Guitar Makers Festival 1996 see your cronies cavort
Healdsburg Guitar Festival 1997 some great looking custom instruments and their builders
Agustín Barrios Mangoré by Johnna Jeong
Tree Talk, Inc. Non-profit wood research and software development firm
Dr. Michael Kasha The father of the "new model" for the classical guitar
Repair Shop List of Repair Specialist
Guitar Player sites
FTP Sites and News Groups
Unique Instrument Sites Ethnic instruments, one of a kind
Sources of Supply
Clubs, Organizations and Societies
Johnna Jeong - An Introduction
Books, Periodicals, Publications... and other sources of information relative to Vintage Musical Instruments
Instrument Collectors Commercial Listings
Commercial Collections - Under Construction
Amplification - An indexSheet Music, Books, Tablature, Videos - Under ConstructionRack Mountable ProcessorsRane AP 13 Acoustic Instrument PreamplifierRane AP 13 -- Technical information
Rane RE 27 Realtime Equalizer
Rane RE 27 -- Technical information
Furman Model PL-Tuner Power Conditioner/Tuner
Rack Mountable Power Amplifiers - Under Construction
P. A. Systems - Under Construction
Combo Amps - Under Construction
Transducer Systems - An indexFishman Transducer systems -- An IntroductionFishman Pocket BlenderRMC Pickup Company under construction
Blender System
Fishman Portable Equalizer
Fishman Acoustic Matrix
Fishman Powerjack
Fishman Powerjack - update
Fishman Blender Series
Fishman Powerbridge
Fishman Powerbridge - update
Fishman Powerbridge - Schematics
Fishman AXIS and AXISm Preamps
Arch-top Guitar pickups
Prefix Onboard Preamp
Fishman Dual Parametric D. I.
Accessories -- An IndexStringsFamous Guitarmaker Brand Strings
Cipriani Bridge Systems
Cables - An indexC.B.I. Professional Wiring SystemsC.B.I. Connectors
C.B.I. Speaker Systems
C.B.I. Speaker Cables
C.B.I. Microphone Cables
Conquest Sound
Cases -- An IndexGuitar CasesSKB3rd Planet Gig BagsSKB - Pedal Board
Harptone Musical Instrument Cases
ATA CasesLM Engineering ATA CasesRack Mount Cases - Under ConstructionLM Engineering Surface Hardware Cases
LM Engineering, XL Series, 200 Series and more
LM Engineering - Ordering
More Cases - Under Construction
Tonewoods Resource List
Fretting Supplies and Accessories Resources
Inlay Materials, Tools and Supplies - Suppliers
Veneers and Mosaics Resource list - under construction
Plan Service - Resource List
Special Tools and Repair Accessories - Suppliers


text:
In its 114th year, Billboard remains the world's premier weekly music publication and a diverse digital, events, brand, content and data licensing platform. Billboard publishes the most trusted charts and offers unrivaled reporting about the latest music, video, gaming, media, digital and mobile entertainment issues and trends.
Common terms and phrases
according to Nielsen acts Akon Alacranes Musical Angeles arena artists audience Awards ballads band Banda Billboard Billboard 200 Billboard Hot 100 Cable Guy catalog chart-topper classical crossover comedian comedy concert debut digital music downloads Dreamgirls duranguense genre Grey's Anatomy Hawthorne Heights indie Internet iPod iTunes jazz Keith Urban Larry the Cable Latin Grammy Latin music Leila Cobo Lopez Love Media Mexican Music Summit million mobile Music Conference music sales MySpace Nielsen SoundScan norteno NOVEMBER Patsavas performances play players Producers promotion R&B/Hip-Hop radio Rascal Flatts record label regional Mexican music Release Date retail rock senior VP showcase singer sold songs songwriter Sony BMG soundtrack studio Taste of Chaos there's Tigres del Norte tour track TV MUSIC United Universal Music Universal Music Group Univision users venue week www.billboard.biz Zune


text:
Some days, it seems like you have to be an absolute genius to run an efficient and profitable practice. The question is, if you were not born that way, how can you achieve the status of genius?
I discovered the following list which was written by a management expert and I thought I would pass it along to help you in your search for perfection and happiness. Practice these qualities, one per day, and get your staff in on it too. Hope you enjoy this as much as I did!
24 qualities that geniuses have in common
- DRIVE. Geniuses have a strong desire to work hard and long. They're willing to give all they've got to a project. Develop your drive by focusing on your future success, and keep going.
- COURAGE. It takes courage to do things others consider impossible. Stop worrying what people will think if you are different.
- DEVOTION TO GOALS. Geniuses know what they want and go after it. Get control of your life and schedule. Have something specific to accomplish each day.
- KNOWLEDGE. Geniuses continually accumulate information. Never go to sleep at night without having learned at least one new thing that day. Read. And question people who know.
- HONESTY. Geniuses are frank, forthright and honest. Take responsibility for things that go wrong. Be willing to admit, "I goofed", and learn from your mistakes.
- OPTIMISM. Geniuses never doubt they will succeed. Deliberately focus your mind on something good coming up.
- ABILITY TO JUDGE. Try to understand the facts of a situation before you judge. Evaluate things on an open-minded, unprejudiced basis and be willing to change your mind.
- ENTHUSIASM. Geniuses are so excited about what they are doing, it encourages others to cooperate with them. Really believe that things will turn out well. Don't hold back.
- WILLINGNESS TO TAKE CHANCES. Overcome your fear of failure. You won't be afraid to take chances once you realize you can learn from your mistakes.
- DYNAMIC ENERGY. Don't sit on your butt waiting for something good to happen. Be determined to make it happen.
- ENTERPRISE. Geniuses are opportunity seekers. Be willing to take on jobs others won't touch. Never be afraid to try the unknown.
- PERSUASION. Geniuses know how to motivate people to help them get ahead. You'll find it easy to be persuasive if you believe in what you're doing.
- OUTGOINGNESS. I've found geniuses able to make friends easily and be easy on their friends. Be a "booster", not someone who puts others down. That attitude will win you many valuable friends.
- ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE. Geniuses are able to effectively get their ideas across to others. Take every opportunity to explain your ideas to others.
- PATIENCE. Be patient with others most of the time, but always be impatient with yourself. Expect far more of yourself than of others.
- PERCEPTION. Geniuses have their mental radar working full time. Think more of others' needs and wants than you do of your own.
- PERFECTIONISM. Geniuses cannot tolerate mediocrity, particularly in themselves. Never be easily satisfied with yourself. Always strive to do better.
- SENSE OF HUMOR. Be willing to laugh at your own expense. Don't take offense when the joke is on you.
- VERSATILITY. The more things you learn to accomplish, the more confidence you will develop. Don't shy away from new endeavors.
- ADAPTABILITY. Being flexible enables you to adapt to changing circumstances readily. Resist doing things the same old way. Be willing to consider new options.
- CURIOSITY. An inquisitive curious mind will help you seek out new information. Don't be afraid to admit you don't know it all. Always ask questions about things you don't understand.
- INDIVIDUALISM. Do things the way you think they should be done, without fearing somebody's disapproval.
- IDEALISM. Keep your feet on the ground – but have your head in the clouds. Strive to achieve great things, not just for yourself, but for the betterment of mankind.
- IMAGINATION. Geniuses know how to think in new combinations, see things from a different perspective, than anyone else. Unclutter your mental environment to develop this type of imagination. Give yourself time each day to daydream, to fantasize, to drift into a dreamy inner life the way you did as a child.
To become a genius practice manager
contact us at 416-466-6217
for a FREE Practice Assessment!
Creative Commons Attribution: Permission is granted to repost this article in its entirety with credit to The Art of Management Inc. and a clickable link back to this page.


text:
top of page
Now you can have nutrient-dense, plant-based whole food meals delivered right to your door (or the door of your office or hotel), anywhere in the United States.
After many years in the works, here it is. You asked for it, and now I'm delivering...
I'm pleased to say, for years people have told me they feel amazing when following the nutritional principles in the Thrive book series. Many have gotten off medication, lowered cholesterol, reduced body fat, improved sleep quality, cut sugar cravings, dramatically reduced risk of disease, enhanced mental clarity, and boosted athletic performance. That's what I like to hear.
But, the common complaint was: time. There simply isn't enough of it. Our modern lives don't include the hours required to prepare a variety of fresh, nutrient-dense, complete plant-based meals each day. And while the decline in how we feel when not eating this way is significant, most just mask it with sugar and coffee, further placing stress on the adrenal glands and perpetuating the problem. And others simply don't like spending time in the kitchen. I understand. I too live this way. Plus, there's travel, something Ive become well versed in over the last several years. So what's the solution? If only someone could do the grocery shopping, prepare nutrient-dense, plant-based meals - exactly as specified in Thrive - and deliver them. Welcome to THRIVE FOODS Direct. Whether youre a hard-core athlete, too busy to cook, or simply want to reap the benefits of complete plant-based nutrition, THRIVE FOODS Direct is your answer.
All dishes are prepared according to the nutritional principles in the Thrive book series: high net gain, alkaline-forming, plant-based, whole food. And always made entirely from fresh, certified organic ingredients. The menu changes frequently - variety is emphasized - for both enjoyment and optimally nutritional benefit.
As you know eating a plant-based diet is the best way to enhance health. And once the base of health has been built, all of lifes challenges are easier met. There simply is no better-tasting or easier way to get in the best shape of your life.
Hope you enjoy your enhanced state of living as much as I enjoy mine!
To your ambitions,
Brendan Brazier
bottom of page


text:
NASA's most powerful spacecraft orbiting Mars has captured amazing new images of the huge parachute used by the agency's Curiosity rover when it safely landed on the Red Planet last August.
A video of the NASA images of Curiosity's parachute shows it billowing in the Martian wind. The views were recorded by NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter currently circling the planet.
In all, the MRO spacecraft captured seven photos of Curiosity's huge parachute flapping on the surface of Mars. The images were taken between last Aug. 12 and Jan. 13 using the orbiter's powerful High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment camera, known as HiRISE.
"This sequence shows distinct changes in the parachute," NASA officials explained in an image description. "In the first four images, there are only subtle changes, perhaps explained by differences in viewing and illumination geometry." [See amazing Mars photos by Curiosity]
At some point between Sept. 8 and Nov. 5 (featured in MRO's fourth and fifth photos in the parachute sequence), the parachute underwent a major change in position, in which part of the parachute shifted inward. The move was accompanied by a change in the terrain around the parachute, possibly from dust being kicked up as the parachute moved.
Another movement occurred between Dec. 16 and Jan. 13, when the parachute shifted toward the southeast.
"This type of motion may kick off dust and keep parachutes on the surface bright, to help explain why the parachute from Viking 1 (landed in 1976) remains detectable," wrote planetary scientist Alfred McEwen, the principal investigator for MRO's HiRISE camera at the University of Arizona, in a statement.
NASA's Mars rover Curiosity landed on the Red Planet on Aug. 5. During its descent, the MRO spacecraft used its HiRISE camera to spot the rover descending under its parachute, just before dropping free to begin the risky "sky crane maneuver" that ultimately lowered it down to its Gale Crater landing site.
"Researchers have used HiRISE to study many types of changes on Mars," NASA officials said in a statement. "Its first image of Curiosity's parachute, not included in this series, caught the spacecraft suspended from the chute during descent through the Martian atmosphere."
Curiosity's main parachute was the largest parachute ever used for a Mars landing. When it was fully deployed, the parachute measured 51 feet (15.5 meters) across.
NASA's Curiosity rover is nearly eight months into a planned two-year primary mission to determine if Mars could have ever been habitable for microbial life Last month, NASA announced that Curiosity had succeeded in that objective after the rover analyzed a sample drilled out of a Martian rock.
The powerful Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter launched toward the Red Planet in 2005 and arrived in orbit around the planet in 2006.
Email Tariq Malik at firstname.lastname@example.com or follow him @tariqjmalikand Google+. Follow us @Spacedotcom, Facebookand Google+. Original article on SPACE.com.


text: Hyland's is a brand that carries a variety of homeopathic products and medicines to address various conditions or symptoms. They use high quality natural ingredients and have strict standards for preparation, ensuring you can feel comfortable giving the product to your family. Started by a pharmacist in 1903, the company believes in the body's ability to use its own natural defenses to heal and restore balance, which is the basis of homeopathic medicine. They have a children's health line and products for allergies and sinus concerns, cold and flu, sleep and stress relief, and more. Hyland's prides themselves on listening to their customers and continuously providing great products for every member of your family, from infants to seniors.


text:
happy monday! hope you had a nice holiday. i have a fun treat for you today…… a video tour of my new Craft Room! yep, you get to see how dorky i am in real life…..and davis's mad videoing skills…..lol
Warning: my voice sounds awful thanks to the cold i've been fighting all week. ugh.
you can find a photo tour of my craft room here.
i have some awesome new christmas crafts planned for this week, so swing by and check out the new tutorials i'll be posting!
disclosure: i received free products from The Original Scrapbox for my craft room. all opinions are 100% my own.
Latest posts by Linda (see all)
- Powder Room Makeover - Mar 25 2019
- Raspberry Sweet Rolls Recipe - Mar 12 2019
- Farmhouse Spring Wreath - Feb 19 2019