hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

Unauthorized use of a plant doesn't invalidate it's patent

RSS story archive

RE: election - delete if not interested

Interesting idea.  Companies can already write off research and 
development, but it must be capitalized and thus written off over a long 
period of time.  The rules are VERY complex, and the expenses of 
unsuccessful research is written off as an expense which is a tough problem 
for many companies under today's tax structure and capital markets.

Incidentally, I don't know the actual data of Houston's pollution problem 
that is so often a "fact" in this campaign, but I can attest to changes 
over the twenty years that I have visited that city for work.  In 1978 the 
Clear Lake area was subjected to a sulfur odor that could make you sick, 
and the flares from the plants in Texas City and Pasadena were enough to 
light the sky at night.  Today, that area is very pleasant (except for heat 
and humidity - but not even the government could correct that one), and the 
flares only light up in an emergency.  Communities and industry work 
together closely, and the area is a very desirable place to live.

From my own reference, I have seen industry solve one problem, only to have 
the government people change the rules.  That is a quick way to throw away 
millions of dollars on a useless project.  Remember cyclamates, the 
artificial sweetener that was going to kill us?  Well, an industry was 
killed by the time the government retracted their condemnation and said 
they were not harmful.

I'm afraid that I have just seen too many cases of dictated rules come out 
of Washington that were much more harmful than helpful, especially from 
EPA.  The main reason that I have preferred Bush to Gore, is the fear of 
what he would do in conjunction with Carol Browner to the industry of this 
country, without the need for true science.

You wrote:

I realize that this may sound like a commie conspiracy to you--but how 
keeping the taxes as high as they are and giving a TAX CREDIT for cleaning 
their own do-do?  That way, instead of using the money from "tax relief" to 
buy other companies, they can make better neighbors and save some bucks, 

Nah--it would never get through a Republican Congress.

To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the

 © 1995-2015 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index