Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.

For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.

Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!

E-mail us here.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on April 18, 2005 3:16 AM. The previous post in this blog was Don't tell me.... The next post in this blog is On this day. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.



Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
Willamette Week
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Monday, April 18, 2005


This year's tax deadline provoked a flurry of commentary about the impact of consumer technology on the tax system. A noteworthy thread came from some taxpayers who (like myself) pay (and dislike) the alternative minimum tax (AMT) as part of their federal income tax. One of them complained that the AMT was TurboTax's fault.

TurboTax is one of the popular personal computer programs that help taxpayers with the awful chore of filling out their forms. It is a godsend, and once a taxpayer uses it, the likelihood of going back to a pencil and paper on the kitchen table slips to nil. The program does all the math for you, it updates everything as you add new data about your income and expenses, and it remembers you from year to year. That last feature is particularly neat. Not only do you not have to re-key your address, dependents' names and i.d. numbers, and favorite charities every year, but you can also hold up your tax results from the last five years side by side to see how you're doing.

So how is TurboTax responsible for the perpetuation of the AMT?

Well, according to the critics, taxpayers who use this program (or a similar program, or who use professional return preparers who essentially charge you to run the same programs) may not even know that they're paying the AMT. And they don't suffer from the complexity of the AMT (which would be a real headache to figure by hand) because the program does all the thinking for them. Thus, there is far less likely to be a groundswell of outrage over the AMT than there would be if the taxpayers had to compute it manually.

They're certainly right about the outrage factor. Without TurboTax or something similar, most taxpayers wouldn't even realize they owe the AMT. They'd send in their tax returns, and get a rude surprise several weeks or months later, when they got a bill from the IRS for hundreds or even thousands of dollars. That would send them storming over to the phone to call their representatives in Congress, all right. In contrast, with TurboTax flagging the issue in a timely way (as it did for me), there's still indignation, but without the elements of shock and awe, and without the hassle factor accompanying manual calculations.

In that sense, the AMT really is being helped along by TurboTax. The complexification of the tax system lumbers on, and it's unlikely to get fixed, because, folks, Congress knows we either have TurboTax or are going to H. & R. Block. Congress knows that as long as the people at Intuit who are writing the TurboTax program can figure out the tax laws, Congress doesn't have to write a tax code that anyone else can fully understand.

This phenomenon is not entirely new. For example, a couple of decades back, the tax laws got much more complicated when Congress discovered the sheer beauty of cheap, handheld financial calculators, such as the classic Hewlett-Packard 12C. Once the tax staffers on Capitol Hill saw how easy it was to figure out compound interest, many important tax calculations suddenly required that such calculations be made. As one tax pro put it to me over the water cooler back in my practicing lawyer days, "The 12C created the O.I.D. rules."

And it's no news that the computer is affecting the way the world works, is it? Let's face it, in the end, Bill Gates killed the music industry. For most consumers, the purchase of music at a retail store appears to have become a quaint relic of a bygone era, due entirely to the power of the home computer. In that sense, it's Gates as much as Intuit who's responsible for the persistence of the AMT.

A few years back, a bright student and I were conversing about this very topic when she made an intriguing suggestion. Instead of Congress writing tax laws in a legal form of English that mere-mortal accountants and attorneys can understand, and then having Intuit put it into computer code, why not have Congress simply pass the computer code itself? In other words, rather than say, "Your tax is your income minus these deductions, multiplied by these tables -- now go buy a private computer program to try to get it right," Congress could simply say, "Your tax is what this computer language says you owe after plugging in the income and expense information that it calls for."

I laughed when she said that. But then again, I laughed years ago at the Charlie Chaplin commercials that promised a computer in every house some day.

In any event, there are plenty of reasons not to like the AMT. It takes away deductions for things like supporting dependent children, and paying income taxes to the state and local governments. If Congress really believes that those expenses decrease one's ability to pay, and therefore shouldn't go into the federal tax base, it ought to be sincere enough not to "sneak-tax" them through the back door of the AMT.

With TurboTax in the picture, the upcoming AMT battles will have to be fought out on those terms. "It's easy to overlook" and "I couldn't figure it out" are not going to be valid arguments.

Comments (18)

I capped off my tax day by visiting my local post office at five minutes to five. Then an hour later, on the way to rescue my wife and daughter (bringing her home from college for the weekend) from their inadvertent out of gas adventure near Wilsonville, I got popped for supposedly speeding.

What a perfect end to three days of tax hell.

Top that.

[Comment originally left on a Saturday, 4/16/05, post that consisted only of the photo shown here, under the title "The morning after." --JB]

That whole blog wouldn't have been necessary if the US would get rid of income tax in favor of the Fair Tax Act now being proposed in Washington. There wouldn't BE a tax day. Sure it's a radical idea, but one whose time has surely come. Or do you enjoy poring over the current tax code's 55,000 pages! Do you enjoy cowering in fear of an audit? By paying your taxes as you buy stuff, no more audit needed!
Check it out, and if you find a down side, let me know!

If it's a retail sales tax, it taxes poor and rich at the same rate on purchases of many types of necessary consumer goods. That's not as fair as an income tax.

Hi Jack,
I'm heading to the Tax Court Judicial Conference in a few days, and one of the topics to be covered in great detail will be Michael Graetz' proposal for changing the tax code. Any comments on that proposal?

It's here though I suspect you've seen it already

Gee, Jack...a tax that taxes poor and rich at the same rate isn't fair? You mean that it doesn't stick the rich with more than their fair share.

A tax that hits everyone at the same rate is fair; all else is socialist redistribution. You socialists seem to like that just fine, as long as you perceive that "someone else" is paying for it.

A downside to the proposed "Fair Tax Act"?

Well, it's more complicated than most state sales tax systems. Typically a state will exempt certain items (necessities) from the tax in an effort to reduce the burden on the lowest-income citizens. The proposed system, however, as far as I can tell would not exempt any items from the tax and would instead refund families an amount equal to the sales tax rate times the monthly poverty level. So poor folks are still out-of-pocket for the sales tax (initially at a whopping 23%) and must wait to be reimbursed. I'm not opposed to the amount of exemption under that system, just the mechanism (take the money first then give it back).

Plus, that 23% rate sounds awfully steep. Of course, that's a smaller percentage than the amount taken out of my paycheck for federal tax + FICA combined, so once you get over the "sticker shock" it's actually a substantially better deal, at least for me. But then I wonder, if I'm putting less money into the system, one of two things must be happening. Either someone else has to put in more to make up the difference, or the system will get less money overall.

I'm all for someone else making up the difference, there are a number of "fairness" issues with our current income tax system even among taxpayers at the same income level let alone between income groups. But the advantage to me in a 23% rate is that it's lower than my combined rate now. The higher the combined current rate is for someone, the greater the advantage in switching to the sales tax. Which tells me, the folks above me on the income scale are getting an even better deal, and the folks below me are getting a worse deal. Of course, there are lots of people at my level that are paying less than 23% combined now, so I wouldn't mind if they started paying their share too.

Or, we end up with lower federal revenues, which may in fact be the ultimate goal here. "Starve the Beast" of funding so that the government is forced to collapse those elements of the bureaucracy that are not absolutely critical to survival.

I happen to agree that a flat tax is inherently more fair than any other. I question whether the income tax can simply be swapped straight across for a sales tax to achieve that goal. I'd rather see a flat income tax rate with a reasonably generous exemption and no special deductions. Take the same percentage of everybody's income over $X, regardless of the source of that income (wages, interest, cap gains, etc.) That, to me, sounds fair.

And it'll never happen. Ah well...

I disagree with you on what is fair. I also disagree that this makes me a socialist.

The progressive rate structure assumes (rightly so, I believe) that those with greater incomes gain a disproportionate amount of benefits from the State. Ad valorem taxes on property being the most obvious example of this priniciple in application. Gosh, I guess socialists have been in power since Roman times.

Note that Graetz does suggest a basically flat rate on income in his proposal. 1st 100K exempt; remainder taxed at flat 25%; exemption begins phase out for incomes over $100K (reduced by $20 for each $100 over 100K). It will be interesting to see whether Treasury does anything with this proposal.


Taxing people who earn more at a higher rate is not fair by any measure, and expecting more "contributions" (always at the point of a gun) from those who work hard and create more wealth is a fundamental tenet of socialist states. So, it is not fair, and you probably are a Socialist. But hey, in P-town, that's a badge of pride, right?

Wealthy people get wealthy because they work hard, not because they get benefits from the state.

Rome was not an exemplar of sound fiscal and tax policy. Among other things, they started to overtax the various peoples in their empire, adulterate their currency (does all this sound familiar?)and we all know their empire did not last. Where are they now? (Actually, that reminds me of a funny line from the Sopranos...)

Wealthy people get wealthy because they work hard, not because they get benefits from the state.

Bwaaaahahahahahahaaaa! Go easy on the Kool Aid!

Jack, I'll leave the Kool-Aid to you and your merry band of socialist whiners. "Whaaah! The rich have everything."

The only rich people I know who really don't work very hard are tax professors and other academicians. Give a few lectures, write a few papers...what a life! And they make a lot of money...and most of them work for the state! So may be the rich really do get benefits from the least in the halls of academia. In the real world, though, those of us who have worked for it.

Good grief.

And to suggest that anyone who advocates graduated tax rates is a socialist might be the stupidest thing I have ever read on this site. Is Bill Gates' daddy a socialist? Because Bill Gates' daddy is active in tax policy studies for the state of Washington, and he says not only that the wealthy should pay more, but that, by doing so, they forward the same grand system that also (surpassing "their hard work") made their great wealth possible.

"Socialist whiners?" How old are you? But this is where I came in .... good grief.

Bart: I've already blogged a little about "Big Mike's" plan, here.

"The only rich people I know who really don't work very hard are tax professors and other academicians."

Thus the reality show, "Shoveling Coal With Paris Hilton."


"The progressive rate structure assumes (rightly so, I believe) that those with greater incomes gain a disproportionate amount of benefits from the State."

Can you elaborate on what benefits the rich get per tax dollar more than lower incomes? I disagree since higher income types use:
1) Less welfare (I hope this is obvious)
2) Less public medical services (usually have private insurance and better health)
3) Less police (since most crime victims are lower incomes, I know, I am not mentioning white collar crime)
4) Less school (higher usage of private schools)

In a perfect world, maybe progressive taxes work, but rich people have better tax accts and take advantage of every loophole to lower their rate anyways.

I know it is hoping against hope, but tax simplification or flat tax is probably the fairest real world way to levy taxes.

Flat tax rates and whining about socialism are red herrings. The complexity does not come from the progressive rate structures, but rather:

(1) What is income and when is it counted as such?

(2) What is allowable as a deduction and when?

(3) What anti-abuse rules control (2)?

(4) Who qualifies for tax credits and what are their ramifications?

(5) What are allowable as adjustments to income (and when)?

Once you've nailed down the answers to these questions, a progressive rate structure does not add much more complexity, save rare instances where rate structures can be taken advantage of, e.g. a closely held C corp. (That is, rare for most taxpayers.)

If you look at a progressive income tax as an excise tax on a person's opportunity set, you don't worry about the redistributive effects so much. However, it could lead you to favor certain consumption taxes, (not sales taxes).

top earners and wealth accumulators should not be denigrated for their status. It's not wrong to be rich, but while viewing progressive tax as punishment is tempting, it's not an accurate frame IMO. Why is it fair? Because well-paved roads bring down the cost of transport. Because educated workers bring down the cost of labor. Because adequate police and fire services (and on a national scale, the military) protect your high-value property. Because that cheap Bonneville power is running your factory.

I'm sure we can come up with more examples. The point is, a prosperous business environment is not free of cost. If none of these things mattered, Intel would be moving to Baghdad.

And I don't think one has to back ashamedly away from the merits of redistribution. A wider commerce is a healthier commerce, and one that provides better opportunity for profit by business in the long run. Gates needs to have people with enough money to buy Windows CrapP.

Poor benefit more from police power because they are more likely to be victimized by crime? Are you nuts? When I call police to report suspicious vehicle in my neighborhood, there was a squad car there in 10 minutes. My call prevented a burglary. But by your logic, my neighbors and I didn't benefit from the cops because nobody got ripped off.

LOLIRL! You all are FUNNY!

Yes, taxes are a drag. Yes, attempting to learn the tax cod so you can do it yourself is akin to picking up a copy of Gray's Anatomy to teach yourself surgical dissection. Taxes suck and without them this country would go to hell in no time flat. If you think things are bad now, imagine how they would be in twenty years without any source of income to maintain roads, sanitation, etc.

To get back to the original point of whether or not it is fair everyone the same regardless of income is, to me, unfair – however, I see the logic.

A person who makes $1.5 million taxable income and a person who makes $2,500 each get taxed, say, 35%. Of course, the person making $2,500 will pay considerably less than those making seven figure incomes but the true issue becomes who can afford it? It places an unfair burden on those unable to make larger incomes.

As far as an income tax, I’m all for it. Moreso, I would readily exchange an income tax for a sales tax. I strongly believe that a sales tax would help Portland in the long run. Even more than an income tax. The issue is, as far as I’ve seen it for the past few years, is that Portland has one outstanding issue that will constantly stand in the path of progress concerning taxation: A large portion of the population are N.I.M.B.Y.s (Not In My Back Yard). They want everything fixed but aren’t willing to lift a finger (or dollar) to get it fixed. Then they complain and point fingers at the government spewing things like “You need to manage your money better” or “Stop spending our taxes on !”

Get a grip, people. A so-called equal tax would cause more harm than good. All in all, I have to agree with Jack and Torridjoe on this one.


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Lange, Pinot Gris 2015
Kiona, Lemberger 2014
Willamette Valley, Pinot Gris 2015
Aix, Rosé de Provence 2016
MarchigĂĽe, Cabernet 2013
Inazío Irruzola, Getariako Txakolina Rosé 2015
Maso Canali, Pinot Grigio 2015
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Kirkland, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2016
Cantele, Salice Salentino Reserva 2013
Whispering Angel, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2013
Avissi, Prosecco
Cleto Charli, Lambrusco di Sorbara Secco, Vecchia Modena
Pique Poul, Rosé 2016
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Rosé 2016
Stoller, Pinot Noir Rosé 2016
Chehalem, Inox Chardonnay 2015
The Four Graces, Pinot Gris 2015
GascĂłn, Colosal Red 2013
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
L'Ecole No. 41, Merlot 2013
Della Terra, Anonymus
Willamette Valley, Dijon Clone Chardonnay 2013
Wraith, Cabernet, Eidolon Estate 2012
Januik, Red 2015
Tomassi, Valpolicella, Rafaél, 2014
Sharecropper's Pinot Noir 2013
Helix, Pomatia Red Blend 2013
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2013
Locations, Spanish Red Wine
Locations, Argentinian Red Wine
La Antigua Clásico, Rioja 2011
Shatter, Grenache, Maury 2012
Argyle, Vintage Brut 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16 Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2014
Benton Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
Primarius, Pinot Gris 2015
Januik, Merlot 2013
Napa Cellars, Cabernet 2013
J. Bookwalter, Protagonist 2012
LAN, Rioja Edicion Limitada 2011
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2009
Denada Cellars, Cabernet, Maipo Valley 2014
MarchigĂĽe, Cabernet, Colchagua Valley 2013
Oberon, Cabernet 2014
Hedges, Red Mountain 2012
Balboa, Rose of Grenache 2015
Ontañón, Rioja Reserva 2015
Three Horse Ranch, Pinot Gris 2014
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
Nelms Road, Merlot 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris 2014
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2012
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2013
Villa Maria, Sauvignon Blanc 2015
G3, Cabernet 2013
Chateau Smith, Cabernet, Washington State 2014
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16
Willamette Valley, Rose of Pinot Noir, Whole Clusters 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Ca' del Baio Barbaresco Valgrande 2012
Goodfellow, Reserve Pinot Gris, Clover 2014
Lugana, San Benedetto 2014
Wente, Cabernet, Charles Wetmore 2011
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2015
Adelsheim, Pinot Gris 2015
Trader Joe's, Pinot Gris, Willamette Valley 2015
La Vite Lucente, Toscana Red 2013
St. Francis, Cabernet, Sonoma 2013
Kendall-Jackson, Pinot Noir, California 2013
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2013
Erath, Pinot Noir, Estate Selection 2012
Abbot's Table, Columbia Valley 2014
Intrinsic, Cabernet 2014
Oyster Bay, Pinot Noir 2010
Occhipinti, SP68 Bianco 2014
Layer Cake, Shiraz 2013
Desert Wind, Ruah 2011
WillaKenzie, Pinot Gris 2014
Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2013
Des Amis, Rose 2014
Dunham, Trautina 2012
RoxyAnn, Claret 2012
Del Ri, Claret 2012
Stoppa, Emilia, Red 2004
Primarius, Pinot Noir 2013
Domaines Bunan, Bandol Rose 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Deer Creek, Pinot Gris 2015
Beaulieu, Rutherford Cabernet 2013
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
King Estate, Pinot Gris, Backbone 2014
Oberon, Napa Cabernet 2013
Apaltagua, Envero Carmenere Gran Reserva 2013
Chateau des Arnauds, Cuvee des Capucins 2012
Nine Hats, Red 2013
Benziger, Cabernet, Sonoma 2012
Roxy Ann, Claret 2012
Januik, Merlot 2012
Conundrum, White 2013
St. Francis, Sonoma Cabernet 2012

The Occasional Book

Marc Maron - Waiting for the Punch
Phil Stanford - Rose City Vice
Kenneth R. Feinberg - What is Life Worth?
Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
Peter Carey - True History of the Kelly Gang
Suzanne Collins - The Hunger Games
Amy Stewart - Girl Waits With Gun
Philip Roth - The Plot Against America
Norm Macdonald - Based on a True Story
Christopher Buckley - Boomsday
Ryan Holiday - The Obstacle is the Way
Ruth Sepetys - Between Shades of Gray
Richard Adams - Watership Down
Claire Vaye Watkins - Gold Fame Citrus
Markus Zusak - I am the Messenger
Anthony Doerr - All the Light We Cannot See
James Joyce - Dubliners
Cheryl Strayed - Torch
William Golding - Lord of the Flies
Saul Bellow - Mister Sammler's Planet
Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria DermoČ—t - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 5
At this date last year: 3
Total run in 2017: 113
In 2016: 155
In 2015: 271
In 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269

Clicky Web Analytics