Max Sawicky wrote,
>If you want to use a variable standard, that
>hardly simplifies things.
You're tying Gordion knots, Max. There are indexes for all kinds of things
unemployment, consumer prices etc. They're not "simple" either, nor are they
uncontroversial. Just wait and see: if the BLS put out an overtime index of
the sort I'm talking about, Doug Henwood would cite it as gospel ;-). Then
we'll have to go through the whole rigamarole of the limited perspective
provided by the data, etc. etc. etc.
>Accounting without calculation. Give me some
>time to get my arms around that one.
Take as much time as you need, Max. But also please read what I wrote. I
didn't say anything about "accounting without calculation" -- I was talking
about the non-necessity of basing a rule of thumb on the precise calculation
of an ultimately incalculable amount. Just more Gordion knots.
How much is the annual depreciation on computer equipment? According to my
tax return it's (ho, ho, ho) 30%. So my three year old 486 is still worth
$1400. I could buy a new one with better specs for $1000. But the amount I
will enter on my return will be a "precise calculation" based on the
purchase price minus previously claimed allowable depreciation. The 30% is
way off; it still does the job.
To say that there's an element of arbitrariness in the calculation is not to
say that the calculation is arbitrary.
Regards,
Tom Walker
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Know Ware Communications
Vancouver, B.C., CANADA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(604) 688-8296
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
