BrentAllen
-
Content Count
2358 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Store
Posts posted by BrentAllen
-
-
This has been discussed before, even under a different title. I remember discussing Eagle Scouts that barely meet the requirements, and some of the people lamenting the problems here were very quick to point out that if the Scout meets the requirements, he gets the award.
I have found that setting a high bar solves most of these problems. We have a challenging program, and we attract a lot of Scouts. Knots? There are 10 knots a Scout needs to learn (Troop program here, not BSA advancement). First, learn to tie them on demand. Second phase, be able to tie them behind your back. Third phase, with a blindfold on, the Scout is handed a rope with a knot tied; he has to figure out what knot it is, untie it and re-tie it. This is just one example - you can ramp up your program on any of the skills.
If you read "Rocks in My Backpack" you will read about the long-term SM and the annual 100 question/skills test that each Scout in their Troop had to pass each year. Not for rank advancement, but to be a member of the Troop and be able to go on camping trips. Passing grade was 75%; if a Scout didn't pass, he took it again and had to make 80%. I'm modernizing it, and we are going to start it in January. I think the real benefit will be seeing areas where lots of Scouts miss questions or can't do the skills - those will be areas we need to work on.
We push High Adventure, and use it to promote the program. Want to go to Philmont? The Scout must have at least 30 miles of backpacking experience with the Troop one year before the Trek to be eligible. He'll most likely add another 50 miles of experience in the year leading up to the Trek, through shake-down and prep backpacking trips. Priority for HA is based on age, rank and experience (nights camping, related MBs, etc.)
We push NYLT and Summer Camp. Our Scouts don't go to either HA or Summer Camp - they go to both. We've had Scouts go to NYLT, HA and Summer Camp all in one summer. Our oldest Scouts are 15 years old, and most of them have been to NYLT, attended 5 Summer Camps, and 3 High Adventure bases. They are all finally getting to go to Philmont next summer. We are already discussing what they want to do in 2013, their last opportunity for HA as Boy Scouts.
At our COH last week, we announced a new award - The Centennial Camper - for 100 nights camping. Two Scouts have hit that number, and a handful are right behind them. They are recognized at the COH and their name goes on a special plaque. Same for Scouts who reach 100 miles hiking/backpacking. We will put together another for 200 miles, as some of these Scouts will reach that in another year or so.
My first two years as SM, I took the check-off sheet from the First Year Summer Camp program and gave credit to the Scouts without reviewing or re-checking. After awhile, that mistake showed up in our program - the boys couldn't do the skills. So, I changed things and told the next group of new parents why I was making the change. One mom complained, and wanted to know why I was making things harder for her sons (twins). I explained what had happened, but she just wouldn't buy into it. They are no longer with the Troop, or in Scouts. I'd rather lose a few than lower the bar and lose a lot. At 48 Scouts, we aren't hurting for members.
The highest honor a Scout can earn in our Troop is not Eagle. It will be an award given to the Scouts who are active until their 18th birthday, regardless of whether they earned Eagle or not.
Finally, something I tell all our parents: If we have a service project coming up, and your son says he doesn't want to participate because he already has hours for his next rank, this isn't the right Troop for him. If he doesn't want to go on a camping trip just because we have been there before, this isn't the right Troop for him. Every outing is an adventure and an opportunity to learn and/or teach.
-
boomer,
I'm talking about using dry ice at summer camp, the original topic here. The comment about Northern Tier and MOHAB was in reference to having meals for a week that didn't require refrigeration. Dry ice is actuall pretty heavy, and kind of expensive. I don't think I'd ever use it (or a cooler) on a backpacking trip.
-
Basement,
We've done that - at Northern Tier and MOHAB. No real challenge to it, if you like a limited menu. Why do that, when there are real skill lessons (using dry ice, for one) to be learned in keeping food cold for a week in the July heat of Georgia? It opens up so many other recipe opportunities and cooking lessons.
-
Nice article. But picking up your food at the commissary?
How about each patrol planning their own meals for the week, and then buying the groceries, staying within budget, of course. How about learning to keep your food cold for a week in the heat of July, and how to use dry ice? How about some lessons about making sure you ration your food, so it lasts all week? Lots of rank advancement skills can be taught and learned when you do this.
-
Beavah,
You are so dramatic! Need I remind you - again - that more DEMOCRATS voted against raising the debt ceiling than did Republicans? Also, I don't remember you getting so upset when Obama was in favor of default back when he was a Senator.
-
I like to go with freezer bag recipes for dinner (found at trailcooking.com). Breakfast is usually oatmeal and fruit/or fruit bar. I buy the Starkist Lunch To-Go Chunk Light kits for lunch. You can get them at Walmart for around $1.40. I'll also go with a Mountainhouse supper every now and then. We just boil water for our meals.
Supplement with trailmix and dehydrated fruit.
-
Wait, you said those were all subsidies - you know, my interest deduction, and the EIC. Your words - they are all subsidies. So I said let's get rid of all subsidies and you said, "Yah, sure!" It didn't take long for you to start backpeddling.
As for Britain, they are looking at their moral decline as the result of decades of liberal policies. I wonder if this is what B-P saw when he decided to start Scouting.
Watch that video. "She is on benefits, does not live with the boy's father and has 10 other children, the court heard."
Have more kids, get a bigger check, and a bigger council house! (paid by the taxpayers)
Or this story:
Modelling in her underwear at 12 and pregnant at 15... and schoolgirl's proud mother can't wait for a new council house
'It was a shock at first but now I'm really excited,' Soya, who is 16-weeks pregnant, told The Sun.
'I'm the first of my friends to have a baby - but I don't think I've grown up too fast.'
And her unemployed mother, Janis, 48, is delighted at the prospect that the new addition will mean a larger council home for the family including her other children Coco, Ritzy, Tarot and Jake.
She hopes that the council will upgrade them from a three-bedroom house to a five-bedroom home.
She said: 'I'm sure she'll make a wonderful mum and will teach her children discipline like I have.'
Yep, subsidies do encourage certain behavior. We are doing the same thing hear in the USA. How many kids are born out of wedlock? 41%! How many young single moms raising their kids? They don't have marketable skills or education to get a decent job, so they go on welfare. We are seeing an entire generation growing that will be counting on our tax dollars for their food, housing, clothing - everything. How will we ever get our budget under control with these types of costs continuing to multiply?
-
OK, so no more Section 8 housing, no more WIC, AFDC - just do away with welfare offices. Do away with public housing. Do away with Food Stamps, free school lunch. My taxes will be much lower without all that than they are now, even with my mortgage interest deduction. That's an interesting scenario you propose.
-
Beavah,
I'll be glad to give up my subsidies, if everyone else will, as well. Keep Social Security and Medicare, if you want, but sure, let's do away with all the others. What do you say? Deal?
-
Beavah,
I just called a local apartment complex for their rates. A two-bedroom runs $1,150/month. If the average Dunwoody homeowner pays $4,500 in property taxes and deducts the average $12,000 mortgage interest deduction, he will get a tax benefit of around $4,800 (30% bracket), which equals $400/month. Adding the $400 to the $1,150 rent payment for a total mortgage payment of $1,550 means you can buy a pretty good sized house vs. renting a two-bedroom apartment. The homeowner builds wealth and will have his living expenses drastically reduced upon retirement. The renter will have $400 to invest initially, but that will decrease as his rent goes up. He will continue to pay high rent until he takes the big dirt nap, or he has to move in with his in-laws. Even if he earns 6% on his stocks, the owner's house will probably be worth much more than the portfolio in 30 years.
You see them both as subsidies, but I see the interest deduction as letting me keep money I earned. The EIC is taking money other people earned and giving it to someone who didn't - a big difference. BTW, the government is encouraging single parenthood - why can't it also encourage marriage?
-
perdidochas,
I sort of agree, about the Simpson-Bowles plan. Isn't this new deficit commission just a repeat?
packsaddle,
I don't see why this is so hard to fatham. Homeowners have an average net worth of $200,000 while renters average $5,000. Which group is going to have their hand out to the government throughout their retirement years? As a conservative, I want to encourage people to build wealth so they can take care of themselves and not have to rely on the government. Encouraging home ownership also encourages marriage and two-parent families, all of which are good for our country. Where would you rather live, in a stabile neighborhood where the families know each other, or in a transient neighborhood where people come and go every 6 months? Which neighborhood will typically have the best schools? Who do you want living next door - an owner who will be more inclined to take care of his property (and help keep your property value up) or to a renter who doesn't really care about the house, since he has no ownership in it?
Beavah,
You see it as special interest, I see it as the government not taking as much of MY money. Government needs to be smaller, and not need as much of my money. I guess in your book, a tax cut is a subsidy, as well? I wonder what you call the Earned Income Tax Credit?
-
Think losing the mortgage interest deduction would be no big deal? We bust seven myths to show why the cost is bigger than you think.
Myth #1: The mortgage deduction is just for rich people The mortgage interest deduction helps mostly middle- and lower-income families.
65% of families who use it earn less than $100,000 per year.
91% earn less than $200,000 per year (thats where most economists draw the line between rich and middle-class).
Only 9% earn more than $200,000 per year.
This myth may have arisen because of a related fact: If you buy a house, youre much more likely to accumulate wealth by the end of your life. Home owners have an average net worth of $200,000, while the average renters net worth is $5,000, according to the Federal Reserve's Survey of Consumer Finances.
Myth #2: I'm not affected by the mortgage deduction because I don't own a home If the mortgage interest deduction goes away, home values would fall by 15%, the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS estimates. When home values fall, tax revenues follow suit, giving your local government two choices:
Raise property taxes. Not only will home owners pay more in taxes, renters wont escape unscathed either as landlords raise rents to cover their costs.
Cut services that everyonerenters and ownersenjoys.
Myth #3: Switching to a 12% mortgage interest credit would be a wash for most One proposal floating around Congress is to replace the mortgage interest deduction with a 12% nonrefundable mortgage interest tax credit. (Deductions reduce your taxable income; credits reduce your tax liability.) This plan would increase taxes for many home owners.
Example: If you paid $10,000 in mortgage interest, and youre in the 25% bracket, youd pay $1,300 in extra taxes.
The $10,000 deduction you have now saves you $2,500 on your taxes (25% x 10,000).
The 12% credit would save you only $1,200 (12% x 10,000) on your taxes.
In this scenario, if the mortgage interest deduction is changed to a 12% credit, youd lose $1,300 (the current $2,500 savings minus the $1,200 youll save under the 12% plan).
Myth #4: Not that many people take the mortgage interest deduction - There are 75 million American home owners, and 38.5 million of them take the mortgage interest deduction. The average mortgage interest tax deduction is $12,200, and a typical benefit for home owners is $3,050 a year.
The mortgage deduction is a key benefit to first-time home owners and trade-up buyers because you pay the most mortgage interest when you first take out a mortgage. (You wont pay equal amounts of principal and interest until year 13 or later, depending on your interest rate.)
People with large families also get a lot of bang from mortgage interest deductibilitythey buy relatively big houses for their big families.
Myth #5: Getting rid of the deduction won't affect me or my housing market It will mean lower property values for all American home owners, including the one-third who own their homes outright and the 12 million who take the standard deduction.
Even if you dont have a mortgage, getting rid of the MID will affect how much home you can afford to buyand how much a buyer will pay for your home.
Myth #6: People will still buy my house without the mortgage interest deduction Yes, people will still value home ownership, but it will be harder for them to buy your house. The mortgage interest deduction makes it cheaper to buy a home because it saves real money at tax time.
If you bought a home last year with a $200,000, 30-year, 5% fixed-rate mortgage and youre in a 25% tax bracket, youd save about $2,500 from the mortgage interest deduction alone in the first year you own your home. Thats money you can use to pay down other debts, save for your childrens college education, or put away to buy a move-up house.
Myth #7: Solving the U.S. budget problems requires everyone to sacrifice Home owners already pay 80% to 90% of the federal income tax collected. If mortgage interest deductibility disappears, you and your fellow home owners could foot 95% of federal income tax.
If youre at the beginning of your mortgage, losing the mortgage deduction will cost you a bundle:
$26,685a 15% drop in value for the median home valued at $177,900.
A proportionally smaller gain in overall home equity over your lifetime, because your home now starts from a lower value.
http://www.trulia.com/blog/andrew_kalinowski/2011/03/7_mortgage_interest_deduction_myths
-
Packsaddle,
My uncle in Odessa, TX told me they had rain the other day. Check out the article and picture:
Prayers Answered: Texas Finally Gets Some Rain
http://www.urbanchristiannews.com/ucn/2011/08/prayers-answered-texas-finally-gets-some-rain.html
caption: Xavier Swain, 11, holds his hands in the air during a downpour Thursday in Odessa, Texas. The official rain total from the National Weather Service at nearby Midland International Airport reported .36 inches of rain, the most since September 25, 2010. (Albert Cesare / The Odessa American via AP)
Looks to me like the prayers were answered.
-
Basement,
The mortgage interest deduction costs around $100 billion a year. Our deficits are running over $1 trillion. Eliminating the deduction won't " fix the problem....." The unintended consequences would probably cost more than you would gain.
-
Pack,
You are correct - you can't deduct your mortgage payment. You can only deduct interest. Of course, on a new mortgage, those first payments are almost entirely interest.
I've seen other estimates that homes would lose 15% of value if the interest deduction was removed. Whatever the number, I don't think that would be the worst cost to society. Stability, building wealth, etc. would be the worst casualties. Do we really want to become a nation of landlord barrons and renters?
If the deduction were to be removed, maybe I could sell my house to my neighbor and rent it from him, and he does the same with me. As landlords, we get to deduct interest, repair costs, and even factor in depreciation if I incorporate. If we just rented to each other at actual out of pocket cost, it would be less than a mortgage, and the government would get less revenue.
-
Beavah,
If you consider the mortagage deduction a subsidy, then you will have to do the same for every landlord or apartment owner that expenses interest. Homeowners are just cutting out the middleman.
We bought a house in a great elementary school district, which I'm sure has had a big influence on home prices and stability. Test scores are in the 96 - 100%. People will pay to get their kids into our local school. We also have an incredibly powerful Dunwoody Homeowners Assoc. which has kept the county (and now city) zoning board in check. I'll let you determine whether buying a home when considering those criteria is luck or intelligence.
Packsaddle,
Removing the interest deduction would have the same effect as raising interest rates. If I couldn't deduct my mortgage payment, my real purchasing dollar would be worth around 30% less, depending on my tax bracket. Assuming the huge majority of home buyers have a mortgage and deduct interest, sellers across the board would have to adjust prices on the new reality - most home buyers can't afford as much as they could when they had the deduction.
When we bought our house, we had friends who were paying more in rent for a tiny one-bedroom apartment than we were paying on our mortgage for a 4-bedroom house. Owning a home was much less expensive than renting - if you had the down payment.
-
A 2007 article claiming 7% returns on stocks is your best argument?? That article is ridiculous. It does not even address the main reasons for buying a house - long-term building of wealth, and paid-for housing upon retirement (with a much lower cost of housing during retirement years). The argument that "If you had $300,000..." completely misses the point. How many first-time home buyers are sitting around with $300K in the bank? Most have a hard time coming up with the downpayment, and can barely afford rent. Buying a house allows a young couple to build wealth over time, while giving them a place to live and raise a family. I'm not real interested in what a single 34-year old New Yorker has to say about raising a family.
Yep, keep on renting, and see how that rent feels when your income drops at retirement. Me, I'll keep my house that has averaged an increase in value of over $12,000 per year since I bought it in 1994 - even counting this recession. It will be completely paid off when I retire at age 60. I won't be another burden on the government (and taxpayers), asking them to pay my rent because I can't afford it. I'll have an asset worth 6 or 7 figures that I can pass on to my kids, or downsize and use the extra equity to supplement my income during the "golden years."
-
Sure, get rid of the mortage deduction. I'm sure that everyone's already depressed house prices will only drop another 25 - 30%, and the housing construction industry will get completely wiped out. Such a small sacrifice, right?
-
BadenP,
I didn't mention a thing about Perry, or even about taking sides. I just mentioned that Packsaddle had done the very thing he was advising against. Your prejudices are showing.
BTW, God is in charge of everything.
-
Packsaddle wrote, "This Eagle is opposed to Perry. I join Beavah on this topic. Keep the Eagle rank out of politics."
Uh, ...didn't you just bring Eagle into politics with that statement?
-
I guess if the goal is to not look like a Scout, they have succeeded. If a bunch of them was to walk down an airport concourse, you couldn't even tell they were a Scout group.
-
Buffalo,
I suggest reading this:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/boy_scout_gear_list_philmont.html
Also, we used Oware 10 x 10 Pyramid tents at MOHAB - they weighed about 26 ounces and would hold 4 Scouts.
http://www.owareusa.com/tents.html
I think Scouts can get them for around $189. We are looking at taking them to Philmont next year (my first trip, as well).
They don't have bottoms in them, but that wasn't a problem. We had individual grown clothes provided. We didn't get any rain while out there, so I can't give any reports from first-hand experience. The boys were happy with them, and said they would be glad to use them at Philmont. There were a lot more bears at MOHAB than there will be at Philmont.
I used my Mountainsmith Ghost pack (2 1/4 lbs) at MOHAB, and it worked fine. My full load was 27 lbs, including food and water for a 6 day trip.
Finally, did you see the August issue of Backpacker magazine? The first big article was about backpacking the Bob Marshall Wilderness, which is where we were at MOHAB. There is also an article on lightening your load, titled "Ultralight Comfort, 12 Easy ways to shed weight and camp in style." After Philmont, you need to take a serious look at MOHAB - it is the real deal! They are moving in a direction to be an ultralight backpacking destination. They have the location to be a world-class High Adventure program! The scenery and moutains were fantastic! The backpacking was very challenging, with lots of elevation change. We saw more bears on our trek than we saw people (3 bears, 2 people). The views from the peaks almost looked like the Himalayas - miles of snow-covered peaks in all directions. This was the third year for MOHAB - they had one Crew the first year, two the second, and seven this year. We were the first Crew from east of the Mississippi. I think this program is going to take off like wildfire, once word starts spreading. I have several SMs wanting to meet with me to discuss it and look at our maps. It is a great program for boys who have been to Philmont, and want something more challenging with a lot more wilderness.
When are you going to be at Philmont? We are going to be there June 12 - 24.
Brent
-
Jason is a good guy - hate to see him go, but wish him well.
We just lost several very good employees - see below, from our council web site:
Congratulations are in order for several Atlanta Area Council staff members. Director of Field Services Jason Pierce has been selected as Scout Executive for the Del-Mar-Va Council in Wilmington, Delaware. Jason, who has been with the Council for 18 years, will report to his new post on September 1. Jay Stoecker, Director of Annual Campaigns, has been promoted to serve as the Director of Development for the Daniel Webster Council in Manchester, New Hampshire. Jay has been a valued member of the Atlanta Area Council team since 1999. Jason Eiermann, Activities Director, will serve as a Field Director for the Black Warrior Council in Tuscaloosa. Jason began his career in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and joined the Atlanta Area Council in 2004. These three will be dearly missed, but we wish them all the best in their new positions!
-
Beavah,
You do realize that more Democrats voted against raising the debt ceiling than did Republicans? So, who was more willing to default??
I don't know why you try so hard to be a conservative, when you clearly aren't.
Dumbed down? Why the rush?
in Working with Kids
Posted
Sorry, double post.(This message has been edited by BrentAllen)