Free Republic

“KONDRACKE: ............. Well, I don’t know what—actually, his plan is the fair tax, which would raise sales taxes. Now that doesn’t seem to be a very popular idea.

HUME: But it would eliminate the income tax completely.

KONDRACKE: Who would that benefit, though?

HUME: You need a constitutional amendment to do that.

KONDRACKE: It helps rich people.”

I am impressed with Kondracke’s in-depth analysis of the Fair Tax. He got into it almost up to his ankles. He has obviously spent a huge amount of time studying the proposal in order to come up with such a perceptive analysis.
I would suggest that review the Fair Tax, but I don’t believe that he has the analytical capacity of a turnip.

Perhaps we should all send a penny to Congress to pay for their airline tickets.

I considered that prior to making the observation, but (1) any competent terrorist already knows it and (2) the MSM’s attempt to create panic through ignorance or intentional misinformation disgusts me (thirdly, the MSM disgusts me anyway).

I considered that prior to making the observation, but (1) any competent terrorist already knows it and (2) the MSM’s attempt to create panic through ignorance or intentional misinformation discusts me (thirdly, the MSM discusts me anyway).

These guys are a re-incarnation of the “Gang that couldn’t shoot straight”. The concept of an explosion of jet fuel is viable only with a powerful enough trigger. A tactical nuke might do it, but then the fuel would become irrelevant.

Although I respect Senator Thompson and would vote for him over anyone else on the national scene, I fear that he would be too little, too late. Fully 60% of the republicans must be considered to be RINO’s who would side with more government given the choice and would NEVER stand up for the conservative positions that he holds. They would only support him long enough to maintain their precious positions in Washington. After that they would join the media and the democrat party to make every attempt to make him look like a fool.

It is my opinion that the national leadership (elected and unelected, democrat and republican) has sold out to special interests and socalists and we have passed the point of no return.

I can only fear for our children and grandchildren.

In his original blog, Mr. Zumbo denounced the entire class of firearms and their owners with 11 specific statements. I cannot be convinced that those statements did not reflect his strongly held opinions.
His first "apology" was in the form of excuses, while his second continues to exhibit his failure to understand the 2nd Amendment or even acknowledge it's existence.

In this blog, he has expanded the divide between hunters and shooters, when he could have taken the opportunity to suggest that the "black rifles" might have some value as a varmit rifle. Instead he took the occasion to condem them.

I am willing to let Mr. Zumbo do what he deems necessary to mend the rift that he has opened, but it will take a very long time and much effort on his part before I will be able accept an apology from him.

Yes they were referring to the length of the fastener actually retained in the concrete.

"I thought and thought and can't se how the length of the bolt has anything to do with something hanging from the ceiling except for how close to the ceiling do want the hanging panel."

The concern has to do with the method used to attach the bolts to the concrete. If you were to thread a bolt into steel, then the maximum strength would be attained by making the thread length approximately 1.5 times the nominal diameter of the bolt. If you had a 1/2" diameter bolt then the maximum strength would be realized with a 3/4" long threaded hole.

In this case, the material that was being threaded into was much weaker than steel and in order to attain the strength required to hold the panels in place, the area of engagement would need to be much greater.

Not knowing what the design parameters or requirements were, I can only speak in generalities. If the strength of the base material were to be 10% of the strength of steel, then the length of engagement to attain the strenght of a steel base would be 10 times that required in steel. In other words, if peanut butter had 1/100 of the strength of steel, then you would have to put our 1/2" bolt into 75" of peanut butter in order to match the strength of a tapped hole in steel.

In this case, they were only trying to insure that the mounting strength of the bolt that was epoxyed into concrete was adequate (with an appropriate safety margin) to hold the panels in place assuming that the bolts were properly installed.

Whereas a 1/2" bolt installed in steel could fail with a load of perhaps 18,000 pounds. The same bolt epoxyed into concrete could fail at 1,200 pounds although the mode of failure would not be the same. In the first case, the bolt itself should be the weakest component whereas in the second, the interface between the bolt and the concrete would be the point of failure. Again I am simplifying, but the more epoxy that you have in contact with the bolt, the stronger the joint will be. Thus the deeper the bolt is imbedded into the concrete, the stronger the joint wil be.

With the technology used in this application however (an epoxy joint), it is impractical to get much more than 10% of the strength of a steel to steel joint. Moreover if the installation is improperly made, the theoretical strength goes out the window.

This example uses SWAGed numbers (Scientific Wild Assed Guess) and I make no claim as to their accuracy other than to say they are close enough for illustration.

Perhaps I was not complete enough in my answer. The 1.5X rule was what we used in the die business when installing a Socket Head Cap Screw (170 ksi) into a tapped hole in mild steel (60 ksi). This however is irrelevant to the discussion at hand where a 100 ksi fastener is being held in 4 ksi concrete with a 6 ksi epoxy.

"From what I heard, the workers faild to clean out the holes after they were drilled, so the epoxy bonded to the dust."

Not an unreasonable observation, but even with a clean hole, how do you assure a 100% bond in an overhead hole?

I'm only happy that it was not my product in that application.

The failure was undoubtedly NOT in the bolt, rather in the epoxy attachment to the concrete. The 1.5X rule is valid for a threaded fastener into similar materials (steel into steel), but in this application, it does not apply.

This system has been used for years to anchor heavy equipment to FLOORS where there is relatively little tensile load on the joint and where you are assured that the epoxy is well contained while it sets up.
This would probably be the worst application for this type of a fastener in that a full bond could not be assured particularly given the field installation methods.
I cannot say what the design specification was in this application, but I would not feel comfortable with less than a 5X margin of safety (but then my supervisors have always deemed me to be conservative). Should one of them fail, the adjacent fasteners must take up the load. But given your description of the panel, it is more likely that several of the fasteners failed simultaneously over a period of time. I.e., a poorly designed application for a marginally installed product.

#11. Remove all firearms from the hands of the public and prosecute anyone who would deign to defend themselves or their property from assault in order to insure a peaceful society.

How is the 20% VAT assessed on the full value imports when the only value added are distribution and perhaps packaging costs?

Would this not merely been seen as a tariff by the exporting country and thus be subject to retaliation in kind?

Excellent point!!! The leveling of the playing field vs imports is one of the strongest arguments for the NRST.

Please explain why we need several more layers of taxation and the accompanying expense when a straight sales tax accomplishes the same objective at lower cost.

Three reasons to avoid the VAT:

1. It effectively hides the true tax rate from those who pay it (the consumers).
2. It adds multiple layers of personnel for compliance and bureaucracy for which we receive absolutely nothing.
3. "Everyone else is doing it."

The beauty of the VAT is the same feature as the present income tax system. It is hidden from the average consumer so that he has no idea as to how much the government is taking from him. Anyone supporting either of these systems is pro-government.

Only the consumer pays taxes and the more that the government can hide from him the better deal he thinks he is getting.