text:
STALIN'S MOUSTACHE
Roland Boer's Blog: Marxism, Philosophy and Socialism in Power
Selected Publications: 2010-2020 (with downloads)
Socialism in Power
Tag: emperor has no clothes
The Emperor has no clothes: The myth of United States military might
15 January, 2019 15 January, 2019 ~ stalinsmoustache	~ 12 Comments
'The emperor has no clothes' – this is the assessment of more and more parts of the world concerning the United States.
It is most notable on the Korean Peninsula, where the two parts have been actively working towards reunification and leaving the USA out of the loop. But one can find it throughout eastern, central and western Asia, as they work out their own regional problems. Russia, Eastern Europe, Africa, Latin America, even the Pacific increasingly have the same sense. This leaves a very small number of countries – perhaps 12 or at most 15 – who would count themselves as 'Western'; they seem to hold onto the myth of the invincibility of the United States.
Until quite recently, the United States has relied heavily on maintaining this myth. The threat of economic largesse or the cold shoulder – most bluntly manifested through sanctions – has cowed one country after another in the past. But no longer: the more the United States arbitrarily imposes sanctions on all and sundry, the more ineffective they become. Global reserves and transactions in US dollars, which are the hard edge of sanctions, continue to decline (only 39 percent in 2018). And once you do not use US dollars, you can sidestep the sanctions (as is the case with the DPRK).
We may add to this the following facts: the United States internally is tearing itself apart, as it rapidly destroys all of the post-Civil War agreements and thereby the unstable truce of the internal Cold War; it is falling further and further behind in technological know-how, so much so that it is technologically backward; it has been largely de-industrialised since 1989 and its infrastructure is crumbling; its political model – a peculiar version of bourgeois democracy – is not merely a shambles, but a laughing stock of the rest of the world.
Here I would like to focus on another dimension. Many who would agree to some extent with this assessment will still say, 'But the United States has the best military force in the world, which can defeat anyone'. While pondering this, I began to think back, trying to find a war that the United States has actually won.
Syria: it failed in its effort to topple the government.
Islamic State: this was defeated largely by the Russians, who know how to finish a job.
Afghanistan: ongoing failure.
Iraq (Gulf War): clearly a failure, at immense cost.
Libya: disaster, leaving a country in chaos.
Grenada and Panama (invasions in 1983 and 1989): perhaps these may seem like 'successes' over tiny countries, much like its earlier efforts in Latin America, but the result was a significant turn to the Left in Latin America and increasing rejection of US interference.
Cambodia: defeated.
Vietnam: a major loss.
Laos: lost again.
Cuba (Bay of Pigs): clear loss.
Korea: all they could manage was an armistice.
Second World War: while the Soviet Red Army clearly defeated Hitler's Germany (with the western front a sideshow), one may argue that the United States 'won' the Pacific War against Japan. But they struggled mightily to do so, and – as historians point out – the Japanese began to sue for peace only when the victorious Red Army began to move east. The nuclear bombing of Japan was a rushed job to make it look like the United States was on top. What the United States did do – since its war losses were relatively minor – was make the most of the situation and impose its economic model on a Western Europe bled dry by the war. The United States did so by relying on the long post-war economic depression in Europe to assert economic control.
First World War: reluctant to enter into what they saw as a European problem, they arrived late and sustained few losses.
United States Civil War: at last, we can find a major conflict, but is this a loss or a win?
American War of Independence: they did indeed win this one, but it is some time ago now.
In fact, we need to go back to the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to find wars that were won – such as the 'Indian' wars of extermination, internal rebellions, those with immediate neighbours (for example, Mexico, Canada and Latin America, as part of expansion and local domination), or occasional raids in the Pacific, to find actual examples of 'victories'. Hardly glorious.
One may suggest that the United States has managed somewhat better when it has used someone else to do the dirty work. A good example here is the funding and arming of the Taliban in Afghanistan in order to resist the Soviet Union's invasion of the 1980s (an effort to quell a restless border country). This example could be multiplied, but it came at immense cost, manifested above all in the successful attack on the World Trade Centre in New York in 2001. If anything was a symbol of US military weakness, this was it.
The question remains: why has the United States consistently lost wars for more than a century? One answer is the simple fact that United States ground troops are of inferior quality. As Stalin already observed in relation to the Atomic Bomb: weaponry is one thing, but the key is the quality of the ground troops. Thus, the United States loves firing missiles, dropping bombs and (more recently) using drones on all and sundry – Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and so on – but when it sends in ground troops they fail again and again. Of course, the use of weaponry ensures that the military industry keeps humming along (as also the sale of such weaponry), but it is never able to win wars.
To be added here is the avoidance of getting too deeply involved in major conflicts – the two 'world wars' of the twentieth century being the best examples. In these cases, it has preferred to let others take the brunt and then step in afterwards to impose its will.
In light of all this, why do some people still play up United States military might? This is partly an old line, which follows a well-worn narrative. It is also relatively comfortable: under United States hegemony, the world is a bad place, but it provides a level of known comfort. And one can always feel a little better by harping on about the emperor's evils. More significantly, it is a myth upon which the United States has relied for more than 70 years. The propaganda machine has been hard at work advancing this myth: Hollywood movies; museum displays for children of United States military hardware; pure spin dressed up as 'history' concerning its 'pivotal role' in the Second World War; a compliant 'Western' media; and so on.
The reality is somewhat different. As Wallerstein already put it some time ago: imperial hegemony works only when no one challenges it. As soon as someone does, one dare leads to another. A little later (2003), he observed that the United States is 'a lone superpower that lacks true power, a world leader nobody follows and few respect, and a nation drifting dangerously'. These days, this is even more the case. In fact, it is no longer a 'super' power, but merely a power.
Perhaps it is time we realised – as the majority of the world has already realised – that the emperor really has no clothes.
Roland Boer is a Marxist philosopher who researches on the many dimensions of the construction of socialism, in China and elsewhere.
Communist Party of Australia
Critical Theory of Religion
KCNA (Korean Central News Agency)
Marxist Internet Archive
Materializmi Dialektik
People's Daily
Prole Center
Pyongyang Times
The Spectre Still Haunts
Voyages on the Left
İştirakî
Washing Brains: How to Understand Chinese Marxist Research
China's Socialist Market Economy (final article completed)
State of disaster: Australia's bushfires, a pariah state and the catastrophe of neoliberalism
On retirement and other matters
Light from the east: red star over Christmas
Model workers: Common people doing their jobs with devotion
What is the world's second most popular destination for international students?
Chinese speed: Get ready for Chinese naval superiority
Interpreting phase one of the China-United States trade deal
A frightful hobgoblin …
Stalin's Opposition to Anti-Semitism
Book outline: Socialism with Chinese Characteristics
Stalin's tobacco preferences
An Effort to Understand the DPRK (North Korea) in Light of the Marxist Tradition
Losurdo on Stalin: A Review
China's Socialist Market Economy (final article completed)
Was the Russian Revolution a success? Part 1
another world is possible Australia China communism communist party DPRK economics Engels Lenin Mao Zedong Marx marxism philosophy socialism socialism in power socialist democracy socialist governance socialist human rights socialist market economy Stalin Stalin Prize Uncategorized Xi Jinping


text:
Martí d'Opava, Martinus Oppaviensis, Martin von Troppau o Martinus Polonus fou un cronista dominic del .

Es creu que va néixer a la ciutat d'Opava, a Silèsia (actualment a la República Txeca) i que morí al juny del 1278 a Bolonya durant un viatge de tornada a Roma. Està enterrat a la Basílica de Sant Domènec de Bolonya, prop de la tomba de Sant Domènec de Guzman. Estudià a Praga al monestir dominica de Sant Climent i sobretot desenvolupà les seves activitats a Polònia.

La seva obra Chronicon pontificum et imperatorum (Crònica dels papes i dels emperadors) és especialment reconeguda per la composició de les pàgines. Cada doble pàgina abasta un període de cinquanta anys, amb cinquanta línies per pàgina. Les pàgines de l'esquerra recullen la història del papat, amb una línia per any, i les pàgines de la dreta narren la història dels emperadors de manera que les dues narracions són estrictament paral·leles. Aquesta composició gràfica molt innovadora basat en no fou apreciada pels copistes contemporanis: molts recolliren el text sense respectar la distribució, amb el resultat d'unes cronologies més aviat caòtiques.

La crònica fou molt influent, se'n coneixen uns quatre-cents còpies manuscrites, i es reflecteix a bastament en molts cronistes posteriors, amb diverses traduccions a llengües vernacles. La biblioteca del Monestir d'El Escorial conserva una traducció al català del , eixida de la col·lecció del comte-duc d'Olivares.

Referències

Bibliografia

Frares dominics polonesos
Historiadors de l'Església
Escriptors polonesos
Persones d'Opava
Morts a Bolonya
Historiadors polonesos
Religiosos txecs
Escriptors moravians
Escriptors dominics

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Rating: Polimer News 5 out of 5 based on 4 votes. 4 user reviews.
The company has evolved as a 24 hours Tamil News satellite TV channel. Polimer is the second largest MSO in TN catering to millions of TV viewing homes across 10 districts of TN.
Founded by Mr. P.V. Kalyana Sundaram, the company currently runs 8 basic cable TV channels in various parts of TN and Polimer TV, a fully integrated Tamil GEC reaching out to millions of Tamil viewers across the world.
The channel has state of the art production facility in Chennai. Besides a library of more than 350 movies on an exclusive basis, the channel also beams 8 hours of original content every day.
The channel has extended its vision to various genres including Reality. In short, Polimer is aiming to become a strong and competitive channel in the GEC space of Tamil Television scenario.


text:
<?php

$styles = array('default');
$styles_css = array();

if ($path = $this['path']->path('theme:styles')) {
    foreach (glob("$path/*") as $dir) {

        $styles[] = $style = basename($dir);

        if (!file_exists($dir.'/style.less')) {
            $styles_css[] = $style;
        }
    }
}

?>
<p class="uk-form-controls-condensed">
    <select name="<?php echo $name ?>" data-selected="<?php echo $value ?>" data-style-css="<?php echo htmlspecialchars(json_encode($styles_css)) ?>" data-style-selector>
        <?php
            foreach ($styles as $style) {
                printf('<option value="%s">%s</option>', $style, $style);
            }
        ?>
    </select>
</p>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


In 2018, we mark 38 years since we were established as the first member society of the General Society of Mayflower Descendants outside of the United States. The Canadian Society of Mayflower Descendants received its charter from the General Society on September 13, 1980. Of the CSMD's charter members in 1980, five continue as active Society members: Sharon Cadieux of Kingston ON; Lynn Pierce-Hanlon and Vance Pierce of Holland Landing ON; Abbie Thompson of Victoria BC; and Leon Warmski of Oakville ON.


text:
Chris Brown Announces New Single 'Iffy'
January 1, 2022 adminLeave a Comment on Chris Brown Announces New Single 'Iffy'
Breezy season is approaching.
On the first day of the new year, Chris Brown has announced the first single from his long-awaited 10th solo album Breezy. "Iffy" drops Friday, Jan. 14, along with the video, for which he shared a cinematic trailer.
"BREEZY SEASON COMING! 2022 🎥 NEW ERA UNLOCKED," Chris told his followers.
He also revealed that Breezy will feature 16 tracks, like his 2005 self-titled debut.
"THIS GONNA BE MY 10th album," he wrote. "The amount of songs on this one will be the same amount of songs as my first album. KEEP IT CLASSIC… Chris Brown to BREEZY!"
Breezy, the follow-up to 2019's Indigo, was announced back in July 2020. In May 2020, he and Young Thug released their collaborative mixtape Slime & B, which produced the hit single "Go Crazy."
2022 is shaping up to be a big year for Breezy, who is reportedly expecting a baby with model Diamond Brown. This would the third child for the singer, who also has 2-year-old son, Aeko, and 7-year-old daughter, Royalty.
New Trailer Offers Sneak Peek At Ricky Gervais In Final Season Of 'After Life'
Celebrating Betty White's Legacy | 5 Great Roles Aside From The Golden Girls
Stream Young Thug's New Album 'Punk'
Louis Tomlinson confirms One Direction reunion: 'It's inevitable'
Travis Scott Golfs in CA with Michael Jordan, First Outing Since Astroworld

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
When Fort Lauderdale beach gets dirty, the 'mayor of the beach' makes the grime go away, and the smiles turn up
Intracoastal boat crash in Highland Beach results in injuries
Affectionate request doesn't sway first appearance court judge
By By Linda Trischitta
Felicia Underwood (Broward Sheriff's Office, courtesy)
FORT LAUDERDALE — Felicia Underwood faced a $76,000 bond when she made her first court appearance before Judge John "Jay" Hurley Monday during a particularly interesting docket of cases.
Underwood, 38, was charged by Fort Lauderdale Police with distributing/delivering cannabis and trafficking in more than 10 and less than 200 grams of MDMA, a drug that is also called phenethylamines in a state statute.
Underwood told the judge she did not know what phenethylamines are. She also told Hurley she has two jobs and asked for a reduction in the bond amount, for which she would be responsible for 10 percent.
Hurley ordered a reduced bond of $10,000, but Underwood, who told the judge she had no money and that her mother was not working right now, was hoping she'd get to pay even less to get of jail before her trial.
"You can't make it a little lower, hon?" Underwood seems to say on the Sun Sentinel live stream video.
Hurley appears shocked for a moment.
Latest Crime News
Lauderhill police arrest man for cruiser set on fire in synagogue parking lot
Family of teen killed in dirt-bike crash plan to sue, saying Boynton officer, city must be held accountable in child's death
'I'm so sorry, man. I fell asleep': Driver charged in death of Weston mom who was riding her bicycle
"Did she just refer to the court as 'honey'?" Hurley asked, while the voice of a woman in the courtroom who was off camera can also be heard asking, "Did she just say honey?"
Said Hurley, "Oh well, hon or honey, it's all part of the same...Ma'am, I'm going to leave your bond where it is today, alright?"
While preparing to call more arrestees before him, Hurley said, "Oh boy, it's a Monday, isn't it?"
Late in the day, Underwood was still in a Broward County jail.
Justice System
Police arrest man after cruiser set on fire in Florida synagogue parking lot
Family of teen killed in dirt-bike crash say Florida cop, city must be held accountable


text:
<bill session="110" type="hr" number="741" updated="2009-01-09T09:24:17-05:00">
	<status><vote date="1192551600" datetime="2007-10-16T13:20:00-04:00" where="h" result="pass" how="roll" roll="965"/></status>

	<introduced date="1192420800" datetime="2007-10-15"/>
	<titles>
		<title type="official" as="introduced">Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 734) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq.</title>
	</titles>
	<sponsor id="412239"/>
	<cosponsors>

	</cosponsors>
	<actions>
		<action date="1192489800" datetime="2007-10-15T20:10:00-04:00"><text>The House Committee on Rules reported an original measure, H. Rept. 110-382, by Mr. Welch (VT).</text></action>
		<action date="1192489800" datetime="2007-10-15T20:10:00-04:00"><text>The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the resolution.</text></action>
		<calendar date="1192489800" datetime="2007-10-15T20:10:00-04:00" ><text>Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 134.</text></calendar>
		<action date="1192541400" datetime="2007-10-16T10:30:00-04:00"><text>Considered as privileged matter.</text><reference label="consideration" ref="CR H11555-11563"/></action>
		<action date="1192541400" datetime="2007-10-16T10:30:00-04:00"><text>DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 741.</text></action>
		<action date="1192545060" datetime="2007-10-16T11:31:00-04:00"><text>POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 741, the Chair put the question on ordering the previous question and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Welch demanded the Yeas and Nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of ordering the previous question until later in the legislative day.</text></action>
		<action date="1192592700" datetime="2007-10-16T12:45:00-04:00"><text>Considered as unfinished business.</text><reference label="consideration" ref="CR H11573-11574"/></action>
		<action date="1192551000" datetime="2007-10-16T13:10:00-04:00"><text>On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 223 - 196 (Roll no. 964).</text><reference label="consideration" ref="CR H11562-11563, H11573-11574"/></action>
		<vote date="1192551600" how="roll" roll="965" datetime="2007-10-16T13:20:00-04:00" where="h" type="vote" result="pass" ><text>On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 195 (Roll no. 965).</text><reference label="text" ref="CR H11555"/></vote>
	</actions>
	<committees>

	</committees>
	<relatedbills>

	</relatedbills>
	<subjects>

	</subjects>
	<amendments>

	</amendments>
	<summary>
	10/16/2007--Passed House without amendment. Sets forth the rule for consideration of H.Res. 734 (expressing the sense of the House regarding the withholding of information relating to corruption in Iraq).<br/>
	</summary>
</bill>


MANILA, Philippines - The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) announced the details and application schedule of the Special Professional Licensure Examination (SPLE) formerly known as SPLBE for countries in the Middle East for the year 2018. As posted, the August 2018 SPLE will be conducted on August 24-26, 2018 in testing locations at the following countries.
PRC announced that the commission will administer licensure examinations of the following programs on the abovementioned date and locations.
PRC said that interested applicants shall apply online via SPLE Online Licensure Exam and Registration System.
Upon completion of online application, the applicant shall submit the photocopies of basic and specific requirements together with printed and signed application form at Philippine Overseas Labor Offices (POLO) on or before May 25, 2018 (deadline). POLO will then submit the pre-qualified applicants to PRC on or before June 8, 2018. The list of conditionally approved applicants will be posted at PRC official website which shall then be forwarded to the seven (7) testing locations.
Printed and signed online application form.
Original copies of the documents mentioned above shall be presented by the examinee and will be validated by PRC SPLE team on respective venue of assignment.
Aside from the basic requirements posted above, these specific documents required by each regulatory boards shall be secured by the applicant, courtesy of the Professional Regulation Commission.
PRCboard.com is among the trusted websites when it comes to providing timely and reliable information on any government-related examinations. Further updates about August 2018 SPLE board exam results and related news and announcements can be retrieved at this website or at our social media pages via Facebook and Twitter.
Hi. Possible din po ba magkaroon ng PRC licensure exam for medtech sa mga hindi pa po nagtake ng exam before sa PH? Thank you.
any update on this quiry? 2019 registration?
Hi any update for 2019 licensure schedule?
Any update for SPLE 2019?


Dissolution of Marriage due to conversion to Islam.
Dissolution by Mutual Consent (Both husband and wife agreed for divorce).
Grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage (Adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion of a party to a marriage for at least 2 years OR parties to the marriage lived apart for at least 2 years continuously).
Under Section 51 of the LRA, it is mentioned that the non-convert spouse can apply for divorce after 3 months of conversion of the converted spouse. This is because under the same Act, the converted spouse cannot apply for such divorce as the LRA does not apply to a Muslim. Hence, the marriage is not dissolved until the non-convert filed for a divorce petition in the High Court of Malaya.
Under Section 52 of the LRA, both husband and wife can mutually agree to dissolve their marriage or divorce after 2 years. The Court will grant such an order if it is satisfied that both parties freely consented and that proper provision or maintenance is made to the wife for support and care and custody of the children.
Q. How long does it take to be divorced in Malaysia?
A. For a joint petition (both husband and wife agreed to divorce), the divorce process will be less than 6 months typically. However, for a single petition (or contested divorce where one party of the marriage filed for divorce only), then the process will be much more lengthy and also costly. In average, the process can take up to 12 months or more.
Q. How much does it cost to hire a divorce lawyer in Malaysia?
A. You can now get your FREE Legal Quotation instantly in less than 2 working hours and we are committed to provide reasonable and affordable legal service to all.
Q. Is it true that my spouse can claim half of my assets after divorce automatically?
A. No it is not true. However, this will depends on the Court to assess how much the spouse contributed to the matrimonial assets (monetary and non-monetary contribution will be assessed).
Q. Can I claim for maintenance and also the maintenance of my children after divorce?
A. Yes. You can claim for your maintenance and also the maintenance of your children (if any) from your spouse after divorce. However, the amount shall be up to the decision of the Court to decide depending on the means of living during the marriage, the assets owned and earning capacity of your spouse etc.
Q. Can I apply to have my children to be under my custody, care and control after divorce?
A. Yes. Under the law in Malaysia, the Court is more favored to grant custody, care and control to the mother if the child is or below the age of 7. However, this can be disputed if the husband can prove that the mother is not fit to be granted such order. Most importantly, the welfare and best interest of the children is the Court's ultimate consideration.
Q. Can I still visit my children after divorce if the Court granted my spouse the custody, care and control?
A. Yes. You can have reasonable access of visitation if both parties agreed to it. However, if your spouse objected to it, then the Court shall decide based on the facts and circumstances.
Q. My husband/wife is not in Malaysia anymore. Can I still file for a divorce petition in Mlaaysia?
Q. Can I file for a divorce in Malaysia if I am legally married in other country?
Get Free Legal Quotation from us now and get free advise from our lawyer about divorce in Malaysia.


text:
Q: editing and saving an excel file in R In an imported excel file, for example iris- If I want to change the name of a Species, from setosa to "newname", how would I do it? and then save it as a new excel file, or a new csv file to be used subsequently. I use this code but it does not recognize the new file iris1.xlsx.
All it does it- is prints newname, but fails to save the modification into a new file.
iris %>%
mutate (Species = case_when(Species=="setosa" ~ "newname")) %>%
write.xlsx(iris, "iris1.xlsx")

A: As mentioned by akrun, you have to replace "iris" (which is the original df) with "." (which is the modified df) in the chaining process.
Code is below with a more complete solution and a base R alternative :
## Packages
library(dplyr)
library(openxlsx)

## Tidyverse
iris %>%
  mutate (Species = case_when(Species=="setosa" ~ "newname",
                              TRUE ~ as.character(.$Species))) %>%
  write.xlsx(.,"iris1.xlsx")

## Base R
iris$Species <- as.character(iris$Species)
iris$Species[iris$Species == "setosa"] <- "newname"
write.xlsx(iris,"iris1.xlsx")

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
configuration DSC_WinsServerAddress_Config_Configured {

    Import-DscResource -ModuleName NetworkingDsc

    node localhost {
        WinsServerAddress Integration_Test {
            InterfaceAlias = $Node.InterfaceAlias
            Address        = $Node.Address
        }
    }
}


0:05Skip to 0 minutes and 5 secondsNICK PATTERSON: At this stage, you're probably thinking either yes, I'm a great communicator or actually, there are areas I could improve. If you're already at the point of having communication mastered, that's great. But always remember, you can never stop building your skills, and it's rare that anyone's communication is perfect all the time. Another point to keep in mind is that it's one thing to be a good communicator, but it's another thing to showcase your expertise to employers. For example, did you know that despite the value that employees place on employability skills, like communication, data from LinkedIn reveals that employability skills are routinely under-reported in user profiles.
0:45Skip to 0 minutes and 45 secondsThis might be because we're uncomfortable about climbing skills without formal credentials or because we underestimate the relative importance of the skills we do have. Next week, you'll have the chance to benchmark your communication skills against international frameworks and criteria. You'll also have the opportunity to consider examples that demonstrate your communication capabilities and will be guided through ways that you can evidence these to employers. There are lots of other practical activities and topical discussions planned too. Starting with how the world of work is changing and what this means for you. So please join me in week two as we continue to explore the relationship between communication and employability and find out what steps you can take to showcase your communication skills.
When it comes to employability, it's not enough to simply 'be' a good communicator; you also need to be able to demonstrate and evidence this to employers. In this video, Nick Patterson talks about what's on for next week and how to prepare.
Next week we'll be looking at ways to benchmark your communication skills, and gather evidence to demonstrate these, which includes writing your own capability statement.
We'll explain how you can use this evidence to apply for a Deakin Professional Practice credential, a new way to recognise the skills and knowledge you've developed through learning, work and experience. We'll also tell you how you can get a discount on the cost of the Communication credential. If you'd like to find out more about how credentials work, drop us a line.
Ask your manager or co-workers for feedback about your communication style, what you're good at and the specific skills that you could improve on.
Try recording a presentation you have coming up at work and then listen to it and note how you could improve.
Make some notes about a work conversation that went well – or perhaps not so well – and analyse why this was the case.
Change your communication technique depending on whom you are speaking to and see what results this achieves.
Watch the video from Nick to find out more about what's on for next week.
In the comments, discuss what you're going to try and do before next week and what you're most looking forward to.


text:
Home / Library / Calcium / Calcium: The Most Abundant Mineral By Kevin Connolly, Ph.D
Calcium: The Most Abundant Mineral
By Kevin Connolly, Ph.D
Calcium (Ca), an essential metallic element in human nutrition, fulfils a wide variety of biological roles. You are probably quite familiar with its celebrated structural role as a primary mineral component of bones and teeth, but did you know calcium also directly participates in a myriad of metabolic reactions, including those that control energy production, muscle contraction, heartbeat, blood coagulation, and the functions of the immune, nervous, and endocrine systems? The human body derives its entire pool of calcium from the diet, and not surprisingly, has evolved an intricate system for the absorption, distribution, storage, and maintenance of relevant calcium levels. So is it necessary to take a calcium supplement to support all these functions? For most people, absolutely!
Sources and Forms of Calcium
~Food~
We can consume calcium as naturally-occurring components of dietary foodstuffs (dairy products, dark green vegetables, and to a lesser extent meats, fish, and legumes). Sadly, the average American adult is estimated to intake between 500 to 800 mg of calcium per day, with men having higher average intakes than women. This average intake is significantly less than the established Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) of 1,000 mg/day for adults aged 19 to 50, and 1,200 mg/day for those over 50. The disparity is likely attributed to the evolving (or devolving) Western diet (in which many high-calcium foods like broccoli, mustard greens, and sardines have fallen out of favor) and our avoidance or intolerance of dairy products as we age. Compounding factors such as poor vitamin D status and carbonated soft-drink consumption have been shown to further decrease the amount of usable calcium in the body. Studies have shown that poor calcium status, especially early in life, can have lasting, irreversible, detrimental effects as we age.
~Supplements~
Increasingly, supplementation has been required. Currently, an estimated 25% of U.S. women take a calcium supplement. These supplements are available in a variety of different forms, usually as calcium salts (gluconate, citrate, carbonate, phosphate, among others). There has been considerable debate as to the merits of each (particularly in bioavailability), but it is important to note that nearly all have been demonstrated to serve as good calcium sources under most conditions, and any differences between them are usually modest. This is due to the complex, highly regulated system that the human uses to absorb and utilize calcium.
Calcium is absorbed in the small intestine (and possibly the large intestine) both actively (by a transport system) and passively (by diffusion). The combination of active and passive absorption allows the digestive system to rapidly respond to the body's calcium requirements; ensuring calcium is efficiently absorbed when dietary intake is low, but preventing over-absorption (and undue stress on the renal system) when dietary calcium levels are high. Calcium absorption is limited to approximately 1/4 to 1/3 of ingested calcium, assuming dietary calcium levels are also adequate. These values are also altered during different points in human development, increasing significantly during periods of rapid growth (during infancy, puberty, pregnancy) and declining later in life (after menopause, intestinal calcium absorption decreases by about 0.2% annually)
In general, calcium is absorbed in its free (elemental) form. This means it must be released (dissociated) from its bound salt or protein in order to be absorbed. In healthy individuals with sufficient calcium intake, the rates of dissociation of different calcium salts are similar; hence, differences in bioavailability of different forms of calcium are modest under these circumstances.
Calcium in bones and other Systems
The skeleton is the reservoir for calcium, where it performs a structural role in the bone composite, but can also be released into the blood for use in other body systems. Bone calcium is in the form of hydroxyapatite (scientifically known as Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2,) a calcium phosphate mineral. If more calcium is released from bone than is replaced (which may occur if dietary calcium levels are insufficient, or as a consequence of imbalanced hormone levels following menopause), a net loss of bone calcium can occur, which can decrease the bone's density and increase the risk of fracture.
Mineral in Your body
Calcium is of obvious importance in human health, but one must also consider its interdependency with other nutrients when choosing to improve calcium status. Calcium intake at a level relevant to one's age group is important, but equally as important is ensuring proper amounts of vitamin D (though diet, supplementation, or sunlight exposure) to mobilize the dietary calcium from the intestines to the systems where it is needed. Calcium, although required, is not sufficient for the growth of bone or the maintenance of bone mineral density. This is consistent with our knowledge of the complex chemistry of bone formation, and has been demonstrated in controlled clinical settings. The incorporation of calcium into bones depends on some controllable dietary and lifestyle factors, particularly sufficient trace minerals (like iron, silicon, boron, copper), vitamins (notably vitamin K), as well as factors which build a strong bone matrix (such as physical activity).
Bone-Up, from Jarrow, combines microcrystalline hydroxyapatite (MCHA), from free-range Australian calves, with essential vitamins and minerals for optimal calcium absorption and increased bone density and hardness. Vitamin K2, as MK-7 (a more bioavailable form of vitamin K) and 1000 IU of vitamin D3 help support the deposition of calcium into the bones as well as assist in building the organic bone matrix. Minerals such as magnesium, zinc, manganese, and boron are essential for optimal bone health. Also added is the nutrient potassium citrate, for optimal osteo support.
C-1000 with Bioflavonoids
Vitamin Code Liquid Multivitamin - Orange-Mango
30 Fluid Ounces
Tri-Salts
Ostivone Ipriflavone 200 mg
90 Veg Capsules
Bone-Up


text:
Tag Archives: Tim Duncan
How Did the Warriors Beat the Spurs?
I don't think anyone was expecting the utter devastation the Warriors wrought upon the Spurs. I don't think anyone was expecting Stephen Curry to explode for thirty-seven points in only twenty-eight minutes. I don't think anyone was expecting San Antonio's point differential to go down a full point. I don't think anyone was expecting any of this.
The important question is: How did this happen?
The answer, simply, is that rather than running their usual motion offense, the Spurs decided to try their hands at running a bakery. The problem is that the only pastries they knew how to cook were turnovers (mostly apple ones). All (bad) jokes aside, the Spurs continually hemorrhaged possessions last night, giving the ball to the Warriors in a variety of ways.
Naturally, the multitudinous turnovers were a problem for San Antonio, but the fact that it's bad to turn the ball over isn't enough to explain the blowout. After all, it's not like Golden State took particularly good care of the ball; it had twenty-one turnovers to San Antonio's twenty-six (which is eighth-most out of 1348 team games played so far this season!).
In fact, just turning the ball over alone doesn't matter all that much. Take a look at a graph:
In this scatter plot, the x-axis is turnovers per game while the y-axis is winning percentage. As you can tell from the relatively even scatter of the graph, there's only a very weak negative correlation (the r is -.36) between turnovers and winning percentage.
If turnovers don't inherently affect winning, then why did they hurt the Spurs so significantly against the Warriors?
When a team turns the ball over, that often leads directly to a fast break, a facet of the game in which the Warriors excel. In fact, Golden State leads the league in fast break points with 20.7 per game, an impressive 2.76 standard deviations above the mean. To illustrate that number, take a look at a scatter plot of NBA teams and how many fast break points they have per game:
Look how far the Warriors (the star in the upper right corner) are away from everyone else. In fact, they gap between them and sixth place is larger than the gap between sixth place and thirtieth!
Golden State is so aberrant in this regard, that, as shown by the following box plot, it qualifies as an outlier:
As we can tell, Golden State's offense relies a lot on fast breaks, and we've already covered how turnovers often lead to fast breaks. Now let's take a look at San Antonio's defense.
The Spurs allow 11.2 fast break points per game, ranking sixth in that category. As seems to be customary between these teams, two strengths are in direct conflict.
In this case, the Warriors' strength won out. They scored nineteen fast break points, about two points under their average, but roughly eight points more than the Spurs' average.
Now, one important aspect of a fast-break is the "fast" part. The Warriors rank first in the NBA in pace, while the Spurs are the eighth slowest team in the league. Since Golden State was able to take control of the pace of the game, San Antonio was out of its element. It didn't help matters that the Spurs' average age is 30.5, the oldest in the league by over a year. In fact, that's likely a significant part of why they play so slowly.
Anyways, to sum it up, the main reason the Warriors were able to dismantle the Spurs on Monday night was because they were able to take control of the pace of the game through forcing turnovers. Those turnovers allowed them to score plenty of fast break points, erasing one of San Antonio's biggest strengths.
Here's a bonus question: Did this game provide a blueprint for how to beat the Spurs?
I'll put it simply: Do many teams have a guy who can do things in transition like this?
Yeah, I didn't think so.
And aside from the otherworldly talents of Curry, the Warriors, as we've discussed, have a lot more going for them that other teams simply don't have.
But even the Warriors haven't figured out the formula to beating the Spurs. San Antonio had nearly double its usual turnovers and Tim Duncan was sitting out. There were plenty of other factors that contributed to the blowout that are unlikely to recur all at once.
Although this clearly is not a death knell for the Spurs, it could be a chink in their formerly unbroken armor, and perhaps particularly skilled teams will now be able to exploit it.
This entry was posted in NBA and tagged basketball, Curry, Duncan, Golden State, Golden State Warriors, NBA, San Antonio, San Antonio Spurs, Spurs, Steph Curry, Stephen Curry, Tim Duncan, Warriors on January 28, 2016 by Sushi Kaplan.
Warriors vs. Spurs: Who's Better?
Tonight, the Spurs and Warriors will meet for the first time this season, in Oracle Arena. Not only are these teams the two best in the NBA this season, they're also two of the best in NBA history. In fact, here's a list of every single team that has ever posted a point differential above plus-12 like the Spurs and Warriors have so far this season:
So yeah, that's ridiculous. Even better, the three other teams on that list all went on to win the championship. The problem is that the Spurs and Warriors can't both win the championship. In fact, as both teams play in the Western Conference, only one team can even make it to the Finals. Accordingly, the Western Conference Finals (assuming both the Spurs and Warriors make it) will be the de facto NBA Finals, as the winner of that series will go on to the real NBA Finals to demolish whichever flawed team emerges from the East.
Tonight's game is truly a clash of titans, one that is quite possibly the greatest regular season matchup in the history of the NBA.
In honor of tonight's game, it's time to figure out which team is better and should be considered the favorite to take home the Larry O'Brien Trophy in June.
The Warriors lead the NBA significantly in points per game. They score 114.7 points per game, 6.2 more than the second place Thunder. The gap between the Warriors and the Thunder is the same as the gap between the Thunder and the ninth place Pelicans. To illustrate this point, here's a graph of the points per game totals among NBA teams:
That star in the upper right hand corner is the Warriors. Look at how far they are away from everyone else. In fact, they're 3.27 standard deviations above the mean, meaning that, assuming a normal distribution, one would expect an offense to score as many points per game as them .05% of the time. That's about once every sixty-seven seasons. Wow.
However, that point total is skewed somewhat by Golden State's pace. They play at the second fastest pace in the league, averaging 101.75 possessions per game, behind only Sacramento. Meanwhile, the Spurs play far slower, at the sixth slowest pace in the league, averaging 95.91 possessions per game. That's a difference of nearly six possessions per game, allowing the Warriors to average more points than the Spurs.
If, instead of points per game, we use points per hundred possessions, the gap between the Warriors and the rest of the league shrinks significantly:
Here, the Warriors still lead the pack at 112.7 points per hundred possessions, but the Thunder (second at 109.2) and the Spurs (third at 108.8) follow close behind them.
Although Golden State's offense is clearly the best in the game, the San Antonio's isn't all that far behind.
Edge: Warriors
The Spurs, similarly to the Warriors on offense, lead the NBA in points allowed per game by a significant margin, allowing a stingy 89.8 points per game. In fact, San Antonio's defense (the star in the lower left corner) is nearly as far away from the rest of the league as Golden State's offense:
Golden State, on the other hand, ranks a mere eighteenth in points allowed per game, giving up 102.6 points per contest.
However, in addition to offensive numbers being skewed by pace, defensive numbers are skewed too. After all, it's a lot easier to give up fewer points when you don't have to face as many shot attempts.
To combat this, like we did with offense, let's use points per hundred possessions:
This change actually doesn't affect the Spurs at all; in fact, it might even increase the gap between them and the rest of the league. However, the Warriors vault from eighteenth all the way up to third, a sizable jump.
Similarly to offense, while San Antonio's defense is clearly the best in the NBA, Golden State's isn't too far behind.
Edge: Spurs
Golden State leads the NBA in assist percentage, as 68.5% of its field goals are assisted. San Antonio isn't far behind, sitting in sixth place with an assist percentage of 61.7%. In addition, the Warriors are the proud owners of six of the eleven games this season in which a team accumulated thirty-five or more assists.
There are plenty of stats that I can use to show how great the Warriors' chemistry is, but they can't compete with the Spurs. No one can. A couple of years ago, San Antonio had this video made about them:
Sure, plenty of other teams pass, but have any of them had videos like this one made about them? I actually looked; there are none.
If you want something more recent, here are the Spurs earlier this season, destroying the Timberwolves:
I mean, just look at how disconsolate the Timberwolves are after the Spurs finally decided to score:
That's what the Spurs' passing can do to a team.
Last of all, and best of all, who can forget the famous Spursgasm from a couple of years ago?
Good lord.
Big Edge: Spurs
This might be the tightest category yet. Steve Kerr took over a Warriors team and, with largely the same roster, turned a 51-31 sixth seed into a 67-15 juggernaut. This season, with Kerr sidelined, Luke Walton has led the Warriors to a 39-4 start.
The Spurs have Gregg Popovich, the best coach in the league hands-down, and one of the best coaches of all-time.
No matter how good Kerr and Walton have been while helming Golden State, no one can equal Pop, but at least they've been able to come close.
Slight Edge: Spurs
Star Power
You'd think that this category would be an easy Warriors victory, but it's a lot closer than you'd think. Each team has a superduperstar, Stephen Curry for the Warriors and Kawhi Leonard for the Spurs. Each team has a superstar, Draymond Green for the Warriors and LaMarcus Aldridge for the Spurs. The intrigue comes in the various supporting players.
San Antonio has so many good, solid players, from Tony Parker to Manu Ginobili to Tim Duncan to Boris Diaw to Danny Green. Even players buried a little deeper on the bench are still capable, like David West and Patty Mills.
On the other hand, Golden State has a far top-heavier rotation. Andrew Bogut is a solid center, Shaun Livingston is a good back-up point guard, and Harrison Barnes and Andre Iguodala are very good small forwards. Deeper on the bench are players such as Festus Ezeli, Leandro Barbosa, and Marreese Speights, three players who are all decent, if unspectacular.
In the end, the Spurs' superior depth doesn't matter as the Warriors have a third star in Klay Thompson, giving Golden State the advantage in the final category.
No matter which team is better, the Warriors should be expected to win tonight due to their immense home court advantage, but, in the end, by the tiniest of margins, the Spurs are the superior team.
Final Edge: Spurs
This entry was posted in NBA and tagged Aldridge, Curry, Draymond Green, Duncan, Golden State, Green, Kawhi Leonard, Klay Thompson, LaMarcus Aldridge, Leonard, point differential, San Antonio, San Antonio Spurs, Spurs, Spursgasm, Steph Curry, Stephen Curry, Thompson, Tim Duncan, Warriors, Zach Lowe on January 26, 2016 by Sushi Kaplan.
Looking Backwards and Forwards with the Finals
Wow. What a series. Not exactly exciting, per se, but it was amazing nonetheless. Just watching the well-oiled machine from San Antonio dominate in every way possible was stupendous to watch. Series like this one show that when Duncan, Parker, Manu, and Pop all finally retire, the Spurs will keep on rolling on as they always do.
So, if you recall, before the Finals (well actually it was during them, but whatever), I wrote a piece talking about what was at stake for each important player in these Finals (if you didn't, check it out at https://sushionsports.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/what-these-finals-mean/). Well, now that the Finals are over, let's take a look back and a look forward for what these Finals have meant. Let's start with the Finals MVP.
Kawhi Leonard:
The Finals MVP, obviously, had a very good series. The question is whether or not this series shows that he can become the next Spurs superstar, following in the steps of George Gervin, David Robinson, and Tim Duncan.
He's a good player, sure, but he's not an elite scorer. He's a very good defender, hassling LeBron all series, but does that make him fit to lead the Spurs into the future?
The accepted requirement for a superstar is to be an elite scorer and the crunch time guy for his team. Leonard doesn't exactly fit those requirements. He's not an elite scorer (although he's capable of scoring more than twenty points a game) and he doesn't have the ball in his hands at the ends of close games. However, I don't think it matters all that much.
The Spurs ecosystem is such that all five players on the floor are supposed to pass up good shots for better ones and that anyone can score at any given moment, so the individual scoring numbers for Spurs are generally suppressed. Leonard doesn't need to score 25 points a night for San Antonio to be considered a superstar, because that's not what's needed of him by his team. Along those same lines, as I said earlier, because the Spurs always look for the best shot no matter what, even in crunch time, Leonard can't get every crunch time play run for him. Leonard can't be a superstar by those traditional requirements because, again, that's not what San Antonio asks him to do.
All Leonard needs to be able to do to be considered a superstar by the standards of the Spurs is to take over when it counts, like Tim Duncan. Duncan always knew (and knows) when, to win the game on any given night, that he needed to, let's say, score twenty points and grab ten rebounds. This was an important quality of Duncan's, as it allowed him to really turn it on in big games and to lead his team to victory.
As shown by these Finals, it's pretty clear that Leonard knows how to take over in important games and that he has the capability to lead the Spurs into the future and to assume Duncan's mantle as the face of the franchise.
Tim Duncan:
Duncan, already the best power forward ever, is now pushed up even higher up the list of the greatest players. By my estimate, he's pushed past Bird (only won three titles, had a loaded team, didn't last as long as he could have due to injuries) and Magic (was the second banana to Kareem for much of his career) and is even with Bill Russell for the third best player ever, behind Kareem and MJ. In fact, I think Duncan is better than Russell because while Russell won eleven titles in thirteen years to Duncan's five, Russell played in a much weaker era with better teammates than Duncan.
There are a few notable similarities between Duncan and Russell: Duncan is a great teammate and is very unselfish. Russell was like that too. Duncan always shows up for big games. Again, just like Russell. Duncan even shares the same reticence and privacy that Russell had half a century ago.
Almost as important, Duncan now clearly asserts his dominance as the best post-Jordan superstar. The runners-up, in order, are LeBron, Kobe, Wade, and Shaq.
Shaq won four titles and was dominant whenever he wanted, but about a third of his career was while MJ was still around, so he's technically not a true post-Jordan superstar. Also, he failed to become what he could have been had he tried and worked harder, so he was unable to get the maximum amount of points that he could have earned.
Wade won a title by himself, and won two titles and two runner-ups in the Finals in a subservient role to LeBron. As he only played at a high level for a few years before breaking down due to injuries, it's tough to give him full credit.
Kobe won five titles but three were in a secondary role to Shaq's. His teams also haven't had success when he was the only star on his team and his team has won 45 or fewer games multiple times, so he loses points there.
If LeBron had won this year, he'd top this list, but even so, because of his runner-up finish this year, he still moves past Kobe to spot number two. He could have been even better and more dominant, but he never really stopped messing around and started really working on his game until after the 2011 Finals loss to Dallas. He's accrued as many honors as you can get as an individual player and has had three runner-ups in the Finals and two championships, all as an alpha dog, so it's impossible to put him lower than second on this list.
Duncan now has five championships, along with a resume so long that the Spanish-speaking announcers during the World Cup wouldn't be able to say the whole list in just one breath. Those accolades are what make him the best post-Jordan player.
Another way that Duncan broke new ground is in adaptability. At the start of his career, Duncan and the Spurs relied on post-ups and slowing the game down. After the rule changes midway through the decade, they changed course to become a player and team that are essentially 3-and-D, along with great ball movement and selflessness. This transformation was impressive and it just adds to the legend of Tim Duncan. Whenever he decides to retire, the league will sorely miss him.
The Spurs Way (and International Players):
Speaking of adaptability and selflessness, the Spurs Way has proven its' use throughout the series and the entire season. We've already discussed the stylistic and strategic changes that the Spurs have made, but let's talk about a few other components of the Spurs Way.
Only high character guys. They haven't had a bad character guy since Stephen Jackson, way back in 2003. Since then, they haven't risked any locker room cancers and instead have focused only on players that can contribute to a healthy locker room.
Passing and unselfishness. All you need to know about the Spurs' offense is that when announcers say that so-and-so made the "extra pass", members of the Spurs just hear "the right pass".
International players. An astounding NINE of San Antonio's players are not from the United States (compared to zero on Miami). There must be something about international players that the Spurs have discovered that makes them inherently… better, I suppose, (although I was thinking about "different, but in a good way") that the Spurs now use to their advantage. Something that I find to be, perhaps, indicative of the gap between international and American-born players, is what happened in Game 1 of the Finals, the infamous Cramps Game. American players like LeBron were felled and couldn't function properly, while players like Tony Parker and Tim Duncan were used to the brutal conditions. Parker said that it "felt like [I was in] Europe… We never have AC in Europe, so it didn't bother me at all" while Duncan said that he hadn't played in conditions like this since he "left the Islands" where he was born. Be it that international players are tougher, more skilled, or anything else, they, and the Spurs Way, brought the title back to San Antonio, a pretty powerful endorsement of them.
The Spurs Into the Future:
The Spurs are in good shape for the future. Of the San Antonio Big Three, Parker remains in his late prime, while Duncan and Ginobili, while clearly past their prime, remain good players and will be able to play for as long as they want. They have the future leader of the franchise, Leonard (as we talked about earlier), and a number of good players alongside him. They have around ten million dollars in cap space this summer and they can manufacture good players out of thin air. As long as R.C. Buford, Gregg Popovich, and Tim Duncan all help run the team in some capacity, the Spurs will be in good shape.
LeBron James:
How can you blame LeBron? Here's a chart that showed the Heat's EWA, or Estimated Wins Added by Heat players during the Finals (courtesy of ESPN Stats and Information:
ESPN Stats & Information
LeBron had nearly two, Bosh had about a half, and the rest of the Heat dragged LeBron down. The chart pretty much says that LeBron was dominant and incredible, Bosh was decent, and that the rest of the Heat were garbage, pulling LeBron down with them.
No matter how good LeBron might be, he can't win one on five against the Spurs. LeBron was guarded by Kawhi Leonard, (who defended LeBron perfectly) but since the Spurs didn't have to pay much attention to anyone on the floor other than Bosh, they could help onto LeBron to make it much harder for him to score. And, because there weren't any scoring threats on the floor other than him, (apart from Bosh) he couldn't rack up assists and get his teammates easy points when the Spurs helped off of them to guard him instead.
This wasn't 2011 against the Mavericks all over again. In that series, LeBron forgot that he was LeBron and that he is unstoppable when he decides to be, and did nothing for minutes at a time, losing him a title and a lot of respect from the world. In these Finals, LeBron did everything that he possibly could. This time, LeBron didn't lose the Finals; the Heat did.
And that's really what these Finals should be about: Miami didn't lose the Finals as much as San Antonio won them. Miami didn't choke away a victory as much as San Antonio went out and got it. San Antonio outclassed Miami in every way, and rather than blaming LeBron for the shortcomings of his teammates or talking about how Miami sucks, we should all be applauding the Spurs for the marvelous tutorial on how to play the sport of basketball. That's the story that people should take away from these Finals. It's possible that we will never see the level of offense that the Spurs exhibited during this series ever again, so why squander it by blaming LeBron for something that isn't is fault? Honestly, I think that we should all just take a moment and appreciate the rarity and history of what we were lucky enough to see.
The 2015 Heat:
Outside of three early termination options (from Bosh, LeBron and Wade) and a player option (from Udonis Haslem) (the difference between EWOs and POs is that the former is ending the deal a year early while the latter extends the deal an additional year), Miami only has just over four million dollars on their cap for 2014-2015 (from Birdman, Norris Cole, and Justin Hamilton). This gives them the freedom to improve. However, it may not be easy as that. Just to bring back their three stars, unless they take a massive pay cut, will be somewhere around 50-60 million dollars combined. Wade alone, when he picks up his player option, will be around a 20 million dollar cap hit. It's almost impossible to be able to perform enough cap gymnastics to get around that.
Remember, this is a team that got solidly beat in the Finals. Just keeping their players (who are, keep in mind, all getting older) won't be enough. They need to add a number of supporting pieces, but they don't have the cap space to do it. Next year, even if they bring back LeBron and Bosh, they'll be an older and shallower team, even weaker than they were this year. The Heat are in bad shape for the immediate future (or at least as bad as you can be when you just were the runner-up in the Finals) and it's going to be interesting how they manage to deal with their bleak outlook for 2015 and beyond.
The Decision 2.0.:
How does this series affect LeBron's decision? As we mentioned earlier, this series, it was LeBron (with some Bosh) against the Spurs. His teammates (again, excluding Bosh) were useless. Miami's options to upgrade the team are almost nonexistent. Wade will accept his player options for the next two years because it's a lot more money than he would get on the open market. Why would LeBron want to stay in Miami when he has to carry the team by himself, accept less money, and only be a championship contender because the Eastern Conference is complete garbage?
I've been advocating all along for LeBron to go to the Clippers (you can check out a few of my prior articles for the reasons why). An interesting direction that LeBron leaving Miami for the Clips might push the league towards is a league of superstars, rather than a league with individual teams. Instead of cheering for the Heat or the Thunder, fans will cheer for LeBron or KD, independent of the team they play for.
The NBA would never allow that to happen because it would push way too much power to the players, which could lead to an intriguing scenario: the players leaving the NBA and forming their own league, to officially take control of the basketball league away from the NBA. Here's an article about that very concept from about two years ago, during the lockout: http://grantland.com/features/we-need-renegade-basketball-league/. It's co-written by my favorite writer, Bill Simmons, and it's certainly worth a read.
The ideas that the article proposes are fascinating and it wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to see this possibly happening. If the players took over and made it a players' league, the NBA couldn't do anything to stop them, the players would make more money with fewer restrictions, and we'd all get to finally stop seeing stars force their way to one team or another, because a star would own and run his own team. There's no downside for anyone other than the owners of NBA teams, and if it ends up happening, that'd be one of the coolest things in the history of sports.
Speaking of cool things in sports, go turn on your TV and watch the World Cup. It's been great so far and it's worthwhile to watch. An article recapping the first slate of games for each team should be up, at the latest, within 24 hours, so if you haven't watched the World Cup so far but want to get into it, you should check that out along with the last article I posted, previewing the World Cup.
Also, if you enjoyed this article, share the link to it on social media and with your friends and family, coworkers and acquaintances, and anyone else who you think might like it. Every page view, like, and share helps. Thanks in advance and thanks for reading!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged 2014 NBA Finals, basketball, Heat, LeBron, LeBron James, Miami, Miami Heat, NBA, NBA Finals, San Antonio, San Antonio Spurs, Spurs, Tim Duncan on June 18, 2014 by Sushi Kaplan.
What These Finals Really Mean
So I was going to write a Finals preview column, but fate, school, and Finals (and no, not the good basketball kind, the horrendous school variety. Ugh) intervened, and I didn't have a chance to write it. This is my replacement column.
Now, for the record, my Finals prediction before the beginning of the series was Heat in 6. Here's why I have them winning in 6:
The reason why I have the series ending in 6 is that the Heat don't have home-court-advantage so they'll have to win a game on the road. The odds are that the Heat, should they manage to win a game on the road against San Antonio, it'll be in one of the first three, rather than the last one.
The reasons why I have the Heat winning the series are as follows:
LeBron James.
Have I mentioned LeBron James yet? I'm not sure. Just for my peace of mind:
Honestly, that's the only reason to take the Heat. They're don't have home court, the Spurs are far deeper, the Heat are older. The Heat are not as good as last year while the Spurs are far better, and, if you'll recall, the Heat only barely managed to win. The Heat can't count on a Ray Allen 3 to bail them out again, nor do they have home-court so they can play a potential elimination game at home.
Still, all is not lost for the Heat. As you may have seen above, they still have LeBron James. Historically, the best player in the series almost always will win that series, unless the talent disparity is too much. As the Spurs are slightly better, while the Heat have LeBron, it's close to a toss-up, but for me, when in doubt, I always go with the best player in the league. Still it should be a close matchup.
Of course, when the best player in the league isn't on the floor, it doesn't matter much if you have him. On Thursday night, LeBron sat for most of the fourth quarter as an 86-79 lead with nine minutes left deteriorated once he sat, culminating in a 110-95 San Antonio victory. He even came back in with about four minutes left, behind by two, made a shot, then limped off the court, never to return to the game.
This was caused by the arena's air conditioning malfunctioning so the players were playing in 90 degree weather, lending new meaning to the chant "Beat the Heat".
LeBron has had trouble with cramps in past playoff games; maybe he should try and fix his problem and attempt to find a solution, rather than hoping that it doesn't show up in a big Finals game. Unlike most idiots on social media, all burying LeBron for "deserting his team". All complete bullcrap.
LeBron is in horrible company in having to come out of a Finals game because of cramps. Michael Jordan would never do something like that because… Wait a second… My editors (I don't have an editor, I'm my own editor, but I wanted to say that because one, it sounds cool, and two, it makes it sound better) are telling me something… Oh! MJ also came out of a Finals game because he had cramps? Yeah, but still. My point from before is still relevant because, you know, only the best player ever did it.
You know maybe they're actually onto something here: someone who led his team in all relevant statistical categories (i.e. points, rebounds, assists, etc.) while carrying the team on his back the whole year and who led his team during that game in points, was tied for second in assists, and was second in rebounds, despite playing merely 33 minutes because his whole left side started seizing up, isn't a good teammate because when the whole left half of his body is immobile, obviously, he should be out there, limping along, playing like garbage (wow that was a really long sentence). But it doesn't matter if he did that because, of course, if he did, the Twitter-verse would tell him that he should have taken himself out so that he wouldn't harm the team by playing badly. It's a lose-lose situation for LeBron.
In fact, it's commendable that LeBron took himself out. He could have tried to be the hero and sucked. Rather, he recognized his limits and decided that a lesser, but healthier teammate would be better than a hobbled version of him. Again, how is that a bad thing?
Anyways, so after Game 1, my pick isn't changing. It's still Heat in 6. I expected that the Heat would lose twice in the first three games in San Antonio, so this loss isn't devastating for my pick. Of course, I really, really want to change my pick to San Antonio in 7 but that would lose me whatever respect you had for me in the first place, so I'll have to refrain.
So, after a preamble of over 900 words, onto the actual article! This article is, I suppose, a Finals preview, but it's not in the usual format and it's not about the usual stuff, so I'm not counting it. This column is about what this Finals means to everyone important who's involved in it and how it affects the legacies of those people.
All that's at stake for LeBron James is his third title, a three-peat, the inside track to the title of most dominant team of the decade, a few spots up the all-time list, and much more. Only MJ (twice), Bill Russell (multiple times), and Shaqobe (once) have ever managed to get a three-peat. That's the best player ever, a top-five player, and the best pairing ever, between two top-twenty players. Not too shabby a list.
In addition, although he's already accomplished this, it's worth mentioning here, the four-peat of getting to the Finals. The last team to get to the Finals four straight years was the 1984-87 Celtics. Before that, it was the 50s and 60s Celtics. That's another prestigious list.
Also, should he win this title, LeBron will move up the list, definitely to the top 10, or possibly even higher. My rankings of all-time players is MJ, Kareem, Russell, Magic, Bird, Duncan (although he'll move up a couple of spots if he wins the title, although we'll get to him later), Kobe, and then some order of Oscar, The Logo, and Wilt. Does LeBron move past those three to get to the Kobe-Duncan tier if he wins the title? I think so, especially as Wilt, West, and Oscar only won a combined four titles.
Another important thing that I'd like to talk about, something that I've talked about briefly in the past, is how winning this championship will affect LeBron's potential free agency. No important player on, let alone the undisputed leader of a championship winning team, has ever walked away after winning it all. Ever. From that we can assume that he won't leave Miami if they win this series, especially as they'll have a chance for a four-peat, something that only Russell ever did (and he did it in a much weaker era). The question is whether or not LeBron will win more titles if he stays in Miami or if he goes to, let's say, the Clippers. If he stays in Miami then he has a potential four-peat, but after that, with Wade's deal clogging up the cap, he'll have to carry the team by himself every night. Alternatively, if he loses, he can go to the Clippers and have a great supporting cast, not have to play his best game every night, live in Los Angeles, and win five straight titles as a superstar, if not more, before becoming a supporting player and winning a few more after that.
If he wins this year, I hope, rather than resigning a long contract with Miami that he just accepts his player option for next year, before going into free agency in 2015. If he wins the title with Miami next year too… Well, I suppose we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
The main risk for LeBron is that he becomes a historical nomad, like Roger Clemens. Clemens is a superstar, but Boston hates him, Toronto has no love for him, New York regarded him as a mercenary, and he only spent three years in Houston. If LeBron leaves Miami, then that's the risk he runs. Is it worth it to sacrifice fan loyalty for more rings? Who knows, but it's an important conundrum for LeBron, and one that he'll have to figure out.
With the three-peat, all-time list, and everything else that we talked about, there's certainly a lot at stake for King James these Finals.
Tim Duncan probably has the most at stake other than LeBron. He and Kobe are locked in a duel for the title of the most successful post-Jordan superstar (I'll talk more about Kobe later, but first, Duncan). He won four titles, he's won more than 50 games every year of his career (except for the shortened season in 1999 in which he went 37-13, although that's a 61 win pace), and he's done it all without once bottoming out and getting a good draft pick, he's consistent, he knows where to pick his spots (as in, he knows when he needs to score 20 and get 15 rebounds for his team to win), he's loyal, and he's lasted for more than 15 years, all of them above average.
In my opinion, a fifth title pushes him past Larry Bird and probably Magic as well (as Magic had a far better supporting cast and didn't truly become the alpha dog of the team until 1986 or 1987), to become the fourth best player ever. A fifth ring also pushes him into a tie with Kobe for the third most rings ever from an alpha dog, behind Kareem and MJ (with six) and Russell (with eleven). The alpha dog distinction is important as a number of supporting players lucked into rings by playing alongside great players, like Robert Horry (with seven rings), Dennis Rodman (with five rings), and any player from the 50s and 60s Celtics.
Another interesting subplot with Duncan is that it seems as though he'll retire if he wins. While it'll be sad to see him go, after years as an elite player, leaving at the pinnacle of his profession is a pretty nice way to go. I like that Duncan will leave after this year if he wins because it shows how smart of a player he is: he won't demean himself by holding on too long, like, for instance, MJ with the Wizards.
Another storyline to watch is how last years brutal Finals loss affected the Spurs. Most teams wouldn't be able to come back from that but the Spurs just kept on rolling, destroying teams efficiently, as always. A historical parallel is the late eighties Pistons. The Pistons lost brutally in both 1987 and 1988. In 1987 they lost in the Eastern Conference Finals to the Celtics after Bird's famous steal. The next year, in 1988, they made it to the Finals, against the Lakers, and were up in Game 6, about to close the Lakers out to win their first title, when Isiah sprained his ankle but still managed to notch a 25 point third quarter. Then, they lost in excrutiating fashion, losing by one point, 103-102, before losing the Game 7, 108-105. Still, after two seasons with bad breaks, they persevered and won the next two titles.
Yes, I suppose the comparison isn't perfect; the Spurs have already won a title, but the message is the same: only truly great teams bounce back from those kinds of losses. Duncan, having done so, has already exorcised the demons of last year's Finals, has already proven that he and his team are great. But to bounce back and avenge last year's loss by winning another championship against the team that stole one away from him last year? That's a damn good end to a damn good career.
Dwyane Wade:
Wade is content as no matter what happens, he'll still have one more ring than LeBron, on the strength of his 2006 ring against Dallas. Still, another ring never hurts historically. The main thing that a ring would accomplish would be tying him with Duncan and pushing him to one ring behind Kobe. Still, that's not as big of a deal as you might think for a couple of reasons.
One, competing with Kobe and Duncan doesn't matter as much as competing with LeBron, Melo, and Bosh (and Darko) as they're from a different period. Duncan and Kobe were drafted in 1997 and 1996, respectively, while the foursome (quick tangent, what's the equivalent to trio for a group of four? Is it a foursome? Like, trio is to a group of three as ________ is to a group of four. Any suggestions?) of LeBron, Melo, Bosh, and Wade were all drafted in 2003.
Second, in 2006, he carried the Heat to the title, so there's no argument there. In 2011, he was a big part of the runner-up Miami team. In 2012, when the Heat won the title, he was still an important component of the team, although he was no longer the alpha dog as LeBron had finally decided to assert his dominance. While in 2013, in the second consecutive title winning season, he was a good supporting player, but by no means an elite and integral player, especially as he was playing hurt for much of the playoffs. This year, he sat out for chunks of the regular season, only playing 54 games. In the playoffs, he had something of a rejuvenation, although he didn't come anywhere near to his previous heights.
The question, of course, is how much the titles count in the grand scheme of things. Yes, he won titles, but not as the best player. How valuable that is determined to be will ultimately decide his legacy.
Ray Allen:
Allen is already a first ballot Hall-of-Famer. He already owns the most clutch, important, and challenging shot in the history of the NBA. He's already the best three point shooter of all time. He doesn't need another title like some of the others on this list, but his accomplishments keep on piling on and he keeps on moving up the ranks. Another record he'll likely have by the end of the Finals is most 3s in the Finals. He has 49 to Robert Horry's 56. Of course, this is Allen's 3rd Finals while Horry had seven to accrue his total, making Allen's total amount of 3s far more impressive.
Ray Allen will be remembered as one of the first great three point shooters (along with Larry Bird and Reggie Miller) and one of the clutchest (is that a word? If not, it is now) players ever, the owner of the clutchest shot ever,as well as the winner of two rings (and counting). There's nothing more for him to prove, but winning another ring would be yet another accomplishment by a great player.
Gregg Popovich:
He's already in the conversation, but another title would strengthen his case for the title of Best Coach Ever. He's fighting with Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson. Auerbach famously coached with just seven plays while Jackson functioned as more of a peacemaker and harmonious Zen Master than as a coach, but neither of them had the same tactical aptitude as Popovich has. In fact, I personally think that Pop is already the best coach and here's why:
The titles conversation is largely irrelevant. Auerbach won 16 titles throughout his career, but only nine as a coach, of the 50s and 60s Celtics. While, right now, it's more than twice as many as Pop has, but they came in a weaker era with a quarter of the teams that there are today, meaning that Auerbach's numbers are inflated. Additionally, Auerbach's Celtics had a number of Hall of Famers while Popovich's Spurs have had only David Robinson (only at the tail end of his prime and when he was washed up) who's already a Hall of Famer. Obviously, Duncan is a shoo-in, but there's no guarantee that Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili will end up making it in. Pop's degree of difficulty is and was much greater than Auerbach's ever was.
The same goes for Phil Jackson for his first six titles with the MJ-Pippen Bulls. The league was over-expanded and there weren't enough good players to go around, not to mention the fact that he had the best player ever. For three more titles, Jackson had Shaq and Kobe, two of the three best players in the league at the time, another reason why he had it easier than Popovich.
Popovich has already won four titles and had 16 years straight of sustained success, all while never having a high draft pick since Duncan. He competed in a tougher league than Jackson, and a larger league than Auerbach. He won with far inferior players than either Jackson or Auerbach. That's why I think Gregg Popovich is the best coach ever. Although some may disagree, another title will make it even clearer. That's what's at stake for Popovich these Finals.
Kobe Bryant:
As was briefly mentioned in the Duncan section, Kobe and Duncan are locked in a battle for the title of best post-Jordan superstar. Kobe is only in the conversation on the strength of his five titles. The problem with him is that he had a sub-500 season in his prime, along with 37 and 40 loss seasons in the two years immediately following it, not to mention another 37 loss season in 2012-13 when he had a ton of help. Also, the case could be easily made that his three titles during his three-peat from 2000 to 2002 don't count as much as they were largely won on the back of Shaq while Kobe acted as an elite second banana.
If Duncan wins his fifth title, then Kobe loses whatever case he may have had as a better player as one of Kobe's two big things that he was better than Duncan in (the other being points, in which Duncan is ranked 19th to Kobe's 4th and is 7000 points behind Kobe) will be gone.
Despite his rivalry with LeBron, Kobe will be cheering for the Heat to prevent Duncan from surpassing him. In all, it's a lose-lose for Kobe, and his legacy has never looked less secure since 2007, after three straight subpar seasons, before Pau Gasol came to Los Angeles in a one-sided deal that brought Kobe a few more elite seasons, a runner-up, and two titles.
I hope you enjoyed the article (and yes, I know, the cover picture is from last year's Finals, but I thought it looked cool so just roll with it, okay?) and if you did, spread it around, share it with your friends and family, and anyone else who might like it. Thanks for reading and let's hope for an amazing Game 2 tonight!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged basketball, cramping, Finals, Heat, LeBron James, legacies, Miami Heat, NBA, San Antonio Spurs, Spurs, The Finals, The NBA Finals, Tim Duncan on June 9, 2014 by Sushi Kaplan.


Setting equitable and "market" level compensation for founders and early employees of startups is one of the most important elements of a new venture. It is not only central to attract and retain the best human capital for the startup, but is critical to align incentives between investors and management. This note provides a framework to think about compensation in startup ventures and is intended for entrepreneurs thinking about starting a venture, as well as for employees looking to join a young high-potential startup.
Nanda, Ramana, Robert White, and Stephanie Puzio. "Equity Compensation in Startup Ventures." Harvard Business School Background Note 815-074, March 2015.


Music. Music has the power to make us smile, laugh, cry, and more. The beat, the melody, the vocals, the lyrics - it all makes us FEEL something. Everyone has different tastes in music, but everyone receives the same benefits that music gives.
My favorite part of being a motivator is being able to share what music has done for me, physically and mentally. I want everyone to feel the way that I feel when I hit the beat of a song.


or call 707.257.2350 | $50/Class or $160/Four. Gift Certificates Available.
Learn the subtle nuances of painting mountains.
Dry brushing is a wonderful technique for painting texture such as fur or wood.
Past Classes: Take a look at what we've created this year! And in 2018 and 2017!
We tried something I am doing more of in class these days. We did not draw or trace any images. We just jumped on the page and picked a bunny image I provided and started painting standing up. Most of the students do not have drawing class experience so it is challenging to just jump on a blank piece of paper and start painting....they did a great job and really rose to the task. We welcome Brenda to the class and she did a wonderful first image.
I did something new in class this time. We have done classes where I ask students to start a piece then pass it to the next person. This is a great way to let go because you are not as invested in the outcome since everyone works on the piece. To do this same concept this week there was a twist. Instead of passing the piece around the students move to the next place using the paints brushes etc of the next artist. I did this because we painted a still life using the artist's personal vase and the arrangement they made from flowers I provided. In comparing the pass-around to the piece each person did as their second painting it is so interesting to see the knowledge they gained from seeing what other artists painted from their still life. Only one artist chose another vase to paint in the second half of the class.
It helps if you RSVP so I save a place for you in class. (the room accomodates 30 people so I like to know we have enough room).
Class starts promptly here at the gallery at 10:30am each Sunday morning and goes to about 2pm.
Class tickets of 4 are $160 or $50 for one class and gifts certificates are available.


Question No.1: If firm has undisclosed foreign assets, can the partner file declaration in respect of such asset?
Answer: The declaration can be made by the firm which shall be signed by the person specified in sub-section (2) of section 62 of the Act. The partner cannot make a declaration in his name. However, the partner may file a declaration in respect of an undisclosed asset held by him.
Question No.2: Where a company has undisclosed foreign assets, can it file a declaration under Chapter VI of the Act? If yes, then whether immunity would be granted to Directors of the company?
Question No.3 Whether immunity in respect of declaration made under the scheme is provided in respect of Acts other than those mentioned in section 67 of the Act?
Answer: Section 67 provides immunity from prosecution under the five Acts viz. the Income-tax Act, Wealth-tax Act, FEMA, Companies Act and the Customs Act. It does not provide immunity from prosecution under any other Act. For example- if the undisclosed asset has been acquired out of the proceeds of sale of protected animals the person will not be eligible for immunity under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
Question No.4: Whether the person making the declaration will be provided immunity from the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002?
Answer: The offence under the PMLA arises while laundering money generated from the process or activity connected with the offences specified in the schedule to the PMLA. Therefore, the primary requirement under PMLA is commission of a scheduled offence. With the enactment of the Act, the offence of wilful attempt to evade tax under section 51 of the Act has become a scheduled offence under PMLA. However, where a declaration of an asset has been duly made under section 59 of the Act the provisions of section 51 will not be applicable in respect of that asset. Therefore, PMLA will not be applicable in respect of the scheduled offence of wilful attempt to evade tax under section 51 of the Act in respect of assets for which declaration is made under section 59 of the Act.
Question No.5: Where an undisclosed foreign asset is declared under Chapter VI of the Act and tax and penalty is paid on its fair market value then will the declarant be liable for capital gains on sale of such asset in the future? If yes, then how will the capital gains in such case be computed?
Answer: Yes, the declarant will be liable for capital gains under the Income-tax Act on sale of such asset in future. As per the current provisions of the Income-tax Act, the capital gains is computed by deducting cost of acquisition from the sale price. However, since the asset will be taxed at its fair market value the cost of acquisition for the purpose of Capital Gains shall be the said fair market value and the period of holding shall start from the date of declaration of such asset under Chapter VI of the Act.
Question No.6: Where a notice under section 142/ 143(2)/ 148/ 153A/ 153C of the Income-tax Act has been issued to a person for an assessment year will he be ineligible from voluntary declaration under section 59 of the Act?
Answer: The person will only be ineligible from declaration of those foreign assets which have been acquired during the year for which a notice under section 142/ 143(2)/ 148/ 153A/ 153C is issued and the proceeding is pending before the Assessing Officer. He is free to declare other foreign assets which have been acquired during other years for which no notice under above referred sections have been issued.
Question No.7: As per section 71(d)(i), declaration cannot be made where an undisclosed asset has been acquired during any previous year relevant to an assessment year for which a notice under section 142, 143(2), 148,153A or 153C of the Income-tax Act has been issued. If the notice has been issued but not served on the declarant then how will he come to know whether the notice has been issued?
Answer: The declarant will not be eligible for declaration under Chapter VI of the Act where an undisclosed asset has been acquired during any previous year relevant to any assessment year where a notice under section 142, 143(2), 148, 153A or 153C of the Income-tax Act has been issued and served on the declarant on or before 30th day of June, 2015. The declarant is required to file a declaration regarding receipt of any such notice in Form 6.
Question No. 8: Where an undisclosed foreign asset has been acquired partly during a previous year relevant to the assessment year which is pending for assessment and partly during other years not pending for assessment then whether such asset is eligible for declaration under Chapter VI of the Act?
Answer: In the case where proceedings are pending before an Assessing Officer in pursuance of a notice under section 142, 143(2), 148, 153A or 153C of the Income-tax Act served on or before 30-06-2015, the declarant may declare the undisclosed asset under Chapter VI of the Act. However, while computing the amount of declaration the investment made in the asset during the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which such notice is issued needs to be deductedfrom the fair market value of the asset for which the person shall provide a computation alongwith the declaration. Further, such investment which is deducted from the fair market value shall be assessable in the assessment of the relevant assessment year pending under the Income-tax Act and the person shall inform the Assessing Officer the investment made during the relevant year in such asset.
Also to clarify, where a notice under section 142, 143(2), 148, 153A or 153C of the Income-tax Act is issued on or after 30-06-2015, the declarant shall be eligible to declare full value of asset even if such asset (or part of such asset) is acquired in the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which such notice is issued.
Question No.9: Can a declaration be made of undisclosed foreign assets which have been assessed to tax and the case is pending before an Appellate Authority?
Answer: As per section 65 of the Act, the declarant is not entitled to re-open any assessment or reassessment made under the Income-tax Act. Therefore, he is not entitled to avail the tax compliance in respect of those assets. However, he can voluntarily declare other undisclosed foreign assets which have been acquired or made from income not disclosed and consequently not assessed under the Income-tax Act.
Question No.10: Can a person against whom a search/ survey operation has been initiated file voluntary declaration under Chapter VI of the Act?
Answer: (a) The person is not eligible to make a declaration under Chapter VI if a search has been initiated and the time for issuance of notice under section 153A has not expired, even if such notice for the relevant assessment year has not been issued. In this case, however, the person is eligible to file a declaration in respect of an undisclosed foreign asset acquired in any previous year in relation to an assessment year which is prior to assessment years relevant for the purpose of notice under section 153A.(b) In case of survey operation the person is barred from making a declaration under Chapter VI in respect of an undisclosed asset acquired in the previous year in which the survey was conducted. The person is, however, eligible to make a declaration in respect of an undisclosed asset acquired in any other previous year.
Question No. 11: Where a search/ survey operation was conducted and the assessment has been completed but the undisclosed foreign asset was not taxed, then whether such asset can be declared under Chapter VI of the Act?
Answer: Yes, such undisclosed asset can be declared under Chapter VI of the Act.
Question No.12: Whether a person is barred from voluntary declaration under Chapter VI of the Act if any information has been received by the Government under DTAA?
Answer: As per section 71(d)(iii), the person cannot make a declaration of an undisclosed foreign asset where the Central Government has received an information in respect of such asset under the DTAA. The person is entitled for voluntary declaration in respect of other undisclosed foreign assets for which no information has been received.
Question No.13: How would the person know that the Government has received information of an undisclosed foreign asset held by him which will make the declaration ineligible?
Question No.14: What are the consequences if no declaration under Chapter VI of the Act is made in respect of undisclosed foreign assets acquired prior to the commencement of the Act?
Answer: As per section 72(c), where any asset has been acquired prior to the commencement of the Act and no declaration under Chapter VI of the Act is made then such asset shall be deemed to have been acquired in the year in which it comes to the notice of the Assessing Officer and the provisions of the Act shall apply accordinglyIndia is expected to start receiving information through Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) route under FATCA from USA later in the year 2015. Further, under the multilateral agreement India will start receiving information from other countries under AEOI route from 2017 onwards. As at 18th March 2015, 58 jurisdictions (including India) have committed to share information under AEOI by 2017 and 36 jurisdictions have committed to share by 2018, including jurisdictions which have beneficial tax regime. The multilateral agreement is expected to cover all the countries in the near future. The information under the AEOI will include information of controlling persons (beneficial owners) of the asset. The possibility of discovery of an undisclosed asset may arise at any time in the future; say for example, information of an immovable property can be unearthed if any utility bills/property tax or even gardener's/ caretaker's salary has been paid through an existing or closed bank account. Therefore, if any information of an undisclosed foreign asset acquired earlier, say in the year 1975, for $ 100,000 comes to the notice of an Assessing Officer later, say in the year 2020, when its value becomes, say, $ 5 Million, the liability under the Act amounting to 120 percent of the fair market value of the asset on the valuation date may arise in the year 2020, besides prosecution and other consequences. In this case if the valuation date is in the year 2020 the amount of tax and penalty under the Act will be $ 6 Million.
Question No.15 If a declaration of undisclosed foreign asset is made under Chapter VI of the Act and the same was found ineligible due to the reason that Government had prior information under DTAA then will the person be liable for consequences under the Act?
Question No.16: In respect of the undisclosed foreign assets referred to in answer to question No. 15 above, where the proceedings under the Income-tax Act are initiated, can the options of settlement commission etc. under the Income-tax Act be availed in respect of such assets?
Answer: All the provisions of the Income-tax Act shall be applicable in respect of those assets.
Question No.17: A person has some undisclosed foreign assets. If he declares those assets in the Income-tax Return for assessment year 2015-16 or say 2014-15 (in belated return) then should he need to declare those assets in the voluntary tax compliance under Chapter VI of the Act?
Answer: As per the Act, the undisclosed foreign asset means an asset which is unaccounted/ the source of investment in such asset is not fully explainable. Since an asset reported in Schedule FA does not form part of computation of total income in the Income-tax Return and consequently does not get taxed, mere reporting of a foreign asset in Schedule FA of the Return does not mean that the source of investment in the asset has been explained. The foreign asset is liable to be taxed under the Act (whether reported in the return or not) if the source of investment in such asset is unexplained. Therefore, declaration should be made under Chapter VI of the Act in respect of all those foreign assets which are unaccounted/ the source of investment in such asset is not fully explainable.
Question No.18: A person holds certain foreign assets which are fully explained and acquired out of tax paid income. However, he has not reported these assets in Schedule FA of the Income-tax Return in the past. Should he declare such assets under Chapter VI of the Act?
VI of the Act. However, if these assets are not reported in Schedule FA of the Income-tax Return for assessment year 2016-17 (relating to previous year 2015-16) or any subsequent assessment year by a person, being a resident (other than not ordinarily resident), then he shall be liable for penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs under section 43 of the Act. The penalty is, however, not applicable in respect of an asset being one or more foreign bank accounts having an aggregate balance not exceeding an amount equivalent to Rs. 5 lakhs at any time during the previous year.