I listen to 99.9 BJ Shae in the morning and the Men's room is a great show.
96.5 , 102.5, 97.3 but not so much since Dori passed away, 107.7, 98.1, 94.1 and 103.7 from time to time depending on what song is playing.

>are they charging you for the benefit of paid leave now?

I couldn't find anything that said when payments started, so I looked at my paystub and, yes, at least I'm being charged now. A quick look at the math shows me getting hit for 0.58% of my check, so for a $1000 check, I'd get charged $5.80.

>If I exhaust those, my private short term leave insurance kicks in which is much, much cheaper than the tax they are imposing for this benefit.

While I was digging for the payment info, I came across info on Voluntary Plans. Quick version is that an employer has to provide something equivalent to PFML. If they want to opt out of the government plan, they have to submit their own equivalent plan and have that approved. If it doesn't do the same job as PFML, it, at least should, be denied. At the end of the day, this comes down to having your employer look in to it. Now, as per my grandmother raping comment, I don't trust a business to lift one finger that it doesn't have to, regardless of how much it would save their workers. But I've been wrong before. Maybe ask your payroll, HR department, or union shop steward if there are any plans to opt out of the plan. If they won't... well look at it like this. It's not terribly expensive, and you're covered a bit more if absolutely everything goes down the toilet.

They aren't branches, I can tell you that. Our carport is full of rounds we pull from DNR sites. My brother in law has always heated his home with a wood stove from DNR wood. DNR permits, yes you are taking the wood that is left, not cutting it down.

As far as public lands to cut your own, actual trees, follow the other suggestion for potential on federal lands.

I am not sure, but I don't believe you can actually cut trees down on public land.

My programmed stations are as follows: 90.3 Kexp 95.7 oldies 98.1 king fm (classical, when the kids need to sleep or I need to just relax) 99.9 (2-6pm weekdays is the men’s room, best show on radio in my option) 102.5 kzok (classic rock/overlap with 99.9). Morning show with Danny b and Sara is decent 103.7 (old school hip hop) 710 am (Seattle sports if your into it)

Hope that’s helpful. I drive a ton and have pretty much settled on these as my go to. Lifelong seattlite. They all have their place throughout the day

From what i can understand you can’t cut trees yourself, you can only collect branches which aren’t really sustainable if you heat your home with wood

Yes, in the national forest. It will depend on the area and time of year. Check out the website of the forest closest to you for more information.

This is the link with all the info you need.

https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/product-sales-and-leasing/firewood

can confirm KEXP hands down is the best FM station left. KISW sucks donkey balls Krazee OK is ok, the End it seems like every time i change over to that station Kate Bush is runnin up that hill

I don’t have any capital gains, and I think it’s bullshit that they’re taxed at a lower rate than earned income.

I have.. it's programmed on my radio.

If you don't agree with the constitution, we will be in a loop. But at least we can agree the Supreme Court's interpretation is twisted and against the meaning of the constitution.

Have you tried 107.7

> You think removing protections about so-called wealthy people by redefining the Constitution's meaning is okay because people can afford it. This class warfare has been used before and it will be used again.

> The constitution should apply to everyone, not just some people.

We’re in a logical loop here.

I’m sure the wealthy really appreciate your concern for them and their rational best interests.

Too bad they don’t feel the same way about you and your rational best interests.

You think removing protections about so-called wealthy people by redefining the Constitution's meaning is okay because people can afford it. This class warfare has been used before and it will be used again.

The constitution should apply to everyone, not just some people.

> You're okay with removing constitutional protections against some people because of their class status.

> Think about that.

I’m pretty sure the wealthy can afford to fight their own fight.

Shift that mental energy to issues that have a higher probability of affecting you and your family instead.

There’s lots of them, take your pick based on probability of occurrence and impact on your rational best interest.

In the meantime the wealthy will be okay sorting this issue out in their own.

Or… carry their water for them for free because what impacts their rational best interests might, maybe, someday impact yours.

It’s too bad the wealthy don’t have the same concern for you, honestly.

Thank you.. I will check it out on my drive home after work.

You're okay with removing constitutional protections against some people because of their class status.

Think about that.

Frequency: 90.3 MHz FM

> Why should that matter? It's against the constitution and the state Supreme Court ruled against it in a twisted manner to make it fit.

> And now they know they can just redefine property as excise taxes.

We’re in a logical loop here.

I don’t share your fear of this possible future.

In the meantime I’m okay with letting the wealthy fight their own fight—they clearly have the resources to do so and they don’t need me to carry their water for them for free.

> > And your realize the law was 25,000 until people complained and they added a zero to it to make it 250,000. When you don't notice, it will be 25,000 again.

That element of the comment has been addressed elsewhere in the comments a few times already.

>I think it’s highly improbable that I—or the vast majority of the state—will ever be effected by this.

Why should that matter? It's against the constitution and the state Supreme Court ruled against it in a twisted manner to make it fit an agenda. You think it's okay to be unconstitutional against some people? Those people aren't people?

And you realize the law was 25,000 until people complained and they added a zero to it to make it 250,000? When you don't notice, it will be 25,000 again. You now know their intent if you didn't know it before.

And now they know they can just redefine property as excise taxes and the state Supreme Court won't care.

Do you happen to know the number?

great picture

> They finally got to tax something with the most twisted logic ever. You think they're not coming after you, next?

I think it’s highly improbable that I—or the vast majority of the state—will ever be effected by this.

The vast majority of people do not make a significant portion of their income from capital gains. Thx most common types of capital gains that more regular people have exposure to are excluded from this ruling already.

So no… I have very little worry about my risk of paying this tax in the future.

If I have the good fortune to need to worry about it I’m sure my account and lawyer will help me come up with legal work arounds. Whatever I’m not clever enough to hide, shift, or exclude—I’ll pay taxes on.

Awesome picture

>Due to a quirk of Washington's constitution

It's not a quirk. It's an intentional part of the constitution.