Permalink | Leave a comment  »

From the NY Post:

This was not the "happy ending" William Halby was looking for.

The 77-year-old Brooklyn lawyer owes tens of thousands of dollars in back taxes for wrongly deducting more than $300,000 in prostitutes, porn, sex toys and erotic massages, a state tax judge ruled yesterday. The ruling came despite the meticulous efforts of Halby - a tax lawyer - to prove the deductions were reasonable medical expenses in his effort to fight depression and erectile dysfunction brought on by age.

"I was depressed," Halby, who's divorced, semi-retired and living alone in a Bay Ridge apartment, told The Post yesterday. "I live a solitary life. I have no social life. I needed that release."

Halby said he found his "sex surrogates" - preferably brunettes - through ads in The Village Voice and sometimes visited them several times a week. "Over the years, I've been with dozens of girls for full-body massage with . . . happy ending," he said.

All told, Halby spent about $322,000 to satisfy his desires, according to court papers.

In 2002 alone, Halby deducted $111,364 for "therapeutic sex" and massages "to relieve osteoarthritis and enhance erectile function through frequent orgasm."

He claimed another $2,173 on porn "to enhance sexual performance in lieu of taking Viagra."

In 2003, his $101,930 in deductions included $162 for "sexual performance aids" such as lubes, condoms and nipple clamps, the court papers said.

But the Department of Taxation and Finance roundly rejected the deductions, leaving the septuagenarian sex addict with a $24,271 state tax bill.

"It must be noted that portions of [Halby's] 'sex therapy' were, in fact, sex for a fee, in violation of penal law," Administrative Law Judge Brian Friedman wrote.

Halby, who faces similar action by the IRS, said he will appeal.

A former counsel for the Equitable Life Insurance Society of the United States, Halby represented himself through the proceedings. He meticulously recorded each liaison in a notebook titled "Tax Journal," including the cost and practitioners' first names.

When auditors challenged the expenses, he produced books and articles demonstrating the health benefits of sex, including a 2001 New York Post article about the use of sex workers in Danish nursing homes. A state auditor dryly rejected the arguments.

"Illegal treatments cannot be included in expenses," the auditor said. "In addition to being illegal in New York state, these expenses are not substantiated with receipts."

Halby is "of counsel" with the Larchmont law firm McMillan, Constabile, Maker & Perone.

Halby infrequently assists the firm with tax issues. A firm partner, Stewart McMillan, had not heard of Halby's tax troubles.

"He seems like a nice man," McMillan said. "He's thought of as a good tax lawyer."

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Gregg Easterbrook's great take on the government's bailout of AIG on ESPN.com's Tuesday Morning Quaterback:

Gimme! Gimme! Gimme! Last week, TMQ asked why no one was paying attention to the fact that the national debt ceiling was quietly raised by $800 billion during the summer. Well, toss that column: The White House just asked the national debt ceiling be raised another $700 billion, for the proposed financial-sector bailout. If that happens, in 2008 alone, $1.5 trillion will have been added to the national debt: every penny borrowed from your children and their children. Stated in today's dollars, in 1979 the entire national debt was $1.5 trillion. George W. Bush and Congress have in a single year added an amount equal to the entire national debt one generation ago. And the year's not over!

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

"Stocks are surging today, but U.S. government futures are down in heavy trading."

It took the United States 209 years, from the founding of the republic till 1998, to compile the first $5 trillion in national debt. In the decade since, $6 trillion in debt has been added. This means the United States has borrowed more money in the past decade than in all our previous history combined. Almost all the borrowing has been under the direction of George W. Bush -- at this point Bush makes Kenneth Lay seem like a paragon of fiscal caution. Democrats deserve ample blame, too. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leaders of the Senate and House, have never met a bailout they didn't like: Harry and Nancy just can't wait to spend your children's money. Six trillion dollars borrowed in a single decade and $1.5 trillion borrowed in 2008 alone. Charles Ponzi would be embarrassed.

If you borrowed, borrowed, borrowed, you could afford to live high for a while -- then there would be a reckoning. Hmmm … that sounds a little like what many Americans did with gimmick mortgages in 2005 and 2006. They were only imitating their political leadership! Why is it both parties in Washington think the United States can borrow, borrow, borrow without a reckoning ever coming? Bush, Reid and Pelosi seem poised to transfer hundreds of billions of dollars of borrowed public money to political insiders on Wall Street and in banking, whose bonuses will now be tax-subsidized. The capitalist maxim is, "She who reaps the gains also bears the losses." Now Washington wants those who reaped the gains to shift the losses to those who lived humbly. The young will pay and pay for these cynical ploys to insure the luxury of the powerful old. Why aren't the young outraged?

Hart Preston/Time Life Pictures/Getty Images

Charles Ponzi, relaxing in retirement as he stops at the mailbox to collect his 305 pension checks, can only envy modern Wall Street.

TMQ's pal Isabel Sawhill, among the leading public-policy economists of our day, says Washington does indeed need to intervene in the financial system -- the harm to the average person of letting credit markets freeze would be greater, she thinks, than the harm caused by more public debt. Fair enough. But it doesn't inspire confidence that on Sept. 12, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said the financial system had been fixed and "under no circumstances" would there be further bailouts; on Friday, Paulson said the system was collapsing and another $700 billion was needed. Suddenly Paulson is insisting the country has no choice other than immediately to hand over $700 billion to Wall Street fat cats, with barely any debate or even explanation of the plan. Why should anyone believe this guy, when just one week previously he said no further bailouts would occur? It seems clear Paulson had no idea what he was talking about then, while if the problem is really as bad as Paulson says now, his past delay in facing the problem has made the cost far higher. With such a poor track record, why is the treasury secretary suddenly viewed as a superbrilliant genius whose marching orders must be followed?

It is not public intervention that is objectionable. University of Chicago Nobel Prize winner Gary Becker, among the top conservative economists, just said, "I have reluctantly concluded that substantial intervention was justified." Rather it is size of the bailout, and the hurry-up-give-the-money-don't-stop-to-think aspect, that are troubling. Much of the $700 billion will flow to investment-community friends of Paulson, Bush and other administration figures. Average Americans who behaved irresponsibly by signing gimmick mortgages may get some taxpayer aid from the Paulson proposal, and maybe they should get none. But in the end, average Americans will still be liable for most of what they owe -- that is, will still be held responsible for their actions. Wealthy, politically connected insiders who run banks and companies such as American International Group will be exempt for responsibility for their actions, and will stuff taxpayer-subsidized millions into their pockets.

On Sunday, Paulson called the self-serving actions of top Wall Street figures "inexcusable" -- yet the plan is not only to excuse them, but to shower them with free money. Paulson said Wall Street pay levels were "excessive," but should be discussed later, after the bailout is done. Now is the moment of maximum leverage! Once they are holding the public's money and laughing about how easily they got it, financial executives will have no incentive to compromise on pay. Here's an idea: Any company that participates in the bailout agrees to limit its top-tier executives to the federal minimum wage. That is, after all, the amount Washington says is enough to live on. Meanwhile, of the two jokers who drove Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the ground, one was paid $19.8 million in 2007, the other $14 million; each will get nearly $5 million in taxpayer-funded "retirement" bennies.

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

That was the clock in 2007, now it needs another digit. (Note: Not a joke, now it needs another digit.)

Yet there's scant outrage. Maybe this is because in an era of fiscal irresponsibility by both parties, everybody wants a bailout. Wall Street, bankers, homeowners who lied on their mortgage applications, Detroit automakers, farmers -- gimme, gimme, gimme! Rather than asking whether the $700 billion giveaway is too large or being structured in a way that benefits the rich, numerous members of Congress are instead demanding more bailouts be appended: for seniors (see below), cities, states, more "stimulus" checks, you name it. Give money to whoever will fund my re-election! The money is being forcibly extracted from the pockets of our children and their children. Every dollar borrowed today by the irresponsible old of Washington will subtract two dollars from future economic growth, leaving our children and their children a legacy of stagnation.

The 1980 Chrysler bailout, which was nationally debated for months before happening, cost $3.2 billion, in present-value dollars, and was financed by revenue rather than by borrowing. Here is the borrowing that's happened in 2008 alone, with precious little public debate:

• $29 billion to bail out Bear Stearns.

• $40 billion in the first mortgage-holder bailout.

• $80 billion for an additional year of Iraq war operations. (Another $150-$200 billion in war costs such as future veterans' disability benefits were incurred but not funded.)

AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

We should give away $700 billion? I need to think about that. OK, I thought; give it away.

• Up to $85 billion to bail out AIG.

• $153 billion to households for "economic stimulus." 

• $200 billion, and possibly more, to bail out Fannie and Freddie.

• $290 billion in farm subsidies, despite agricultural prices and grains profits being at record highs.

• $700 billion general bailout of securities backed by bad debt. (The International Monetary Fund estimates this figure will rise to at least $1 trillion.)

That comes to $1.6 trillion, explaining the debt-ceiling rise, and does not include roughly $300 billion in essentially interest-free cash issued to banks by the Federal Reserve on an emergency basis, which may or may not be repaid, but which in any case make all existing money somewhat less valuable. Why is the debt aspect of the splurge barely being remarked on by the mainstream media and by politicians? Why are the young not furious? And about that $700 billion about to the shoveled to the Wall Street elite -- in 2007, George W. Bush vetoed an increase of $7 billion per year in health care spending for the poor, saying the country couldn't afford it.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

I always figured Labron for a top.  I guess I was wrong:

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

PGE Park August 6th - m4m - 28 (Pearl District)

Reply to: pers-790507440@craigslist.org
Date: 2008-08-09, 10:45PM PDT

You: Left field bleacher sitter in Ed Hardy tee, Diesel jeans, and Von Dutch hat, spittin mad game, with mad honeys. Obviously a supreme mack.


Me: Intrepid Portland Beavers center fielder. I saw how you reacted to that fly ball in the 5th inning. You appreciated the finesse, I appreciated you balling fly honeys. Game recognize game.


I'm new in town, just got called up from Ft. Wayne and need a serious wing man for downtown clubbin. NO HOMO. Lets see if we can turn a triple play, I can tell you got what it takes. I'm out of town this week to "Kick Tiger" ass down the coast but when I get back its on. I can tell you're not the average Portland hipster shooting up speedballs on their "fixed gear" under the Burnside Bridge and I'm not your average Triple A minor league baller so let's play ball. It's on.


~Chip

• Location: Pearl District
• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

Permalink | Leave a comment  »