Try Streamlight's web site. I have a couple of theirs which use AAA's, one even has a flexible neck.

http://www.flashlights.com/

Mine is tack sharp with both the D500 and D750. I've had mine for around 7 month, and I could ask for a better distance lens. It also delivers great results with my Tokina 1.4x T/C.

15.

Wife texted me this morning while I'm on the way to work. "Windows are frozen. Won't open."
I texted - "Gently pour some water on it, then tap lightly with a hammer."
Wife returns text in ten minutes - "Computer is really messed up now."

For my laptop, and my desktop which is used exclusively for editing, I subscribe to iDrive, and I've been a happy customer for the past three years. I've been fortunate that I haven't had a loss of data, though, but I have easily recovered files as test runs.

I also use two separate 2tb Seagate external drives, one on the laptop, and the other on the desktop, and all photo files are kept on the desktop and I use its Windows backup program to go to the external drive. I also load every image to the external drive on my laptop before editing. It's a bit of extra work, but about as safe as I can see.

This is the dilemma with which economists deal regularly. It's also the same problem with governments everywhere, even with the most libertarian.

Nothing happens in the world without some type of reaction to the action. Newton's Third law applies to economics, also.

I've read a couple of books by Matt Ridley, a distinguished British scientist and author. In his book "The Evolution of Everything: How Ideas Emerge", he goes into great detail about how man's evolution has taken place, and how ideas emerge to the mainstream. I'm in the middle of "The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves". In it he explains how economic activity started, from the onset of civilization, with the hunter-gatherers, to modern economic cooperation. These are not "breeze through" books. They're scholarly works which take a bit of thinking, along with reading them. One of the things I've taken away, is that everything emerges from the bottom, up; not the top, down. It's why governments have little, to any business in economics theory and development.

That's usually the point with import taxes. However, the revenue shouldn't go to the government, except the cost of administering that particular import tax. Putting any revenue of the sort just causes the government to choose "winners and losers" to the loss of the market.

As to luxury sales taxes, why tax import luxuries? All you do with those taxes is to create animosity among countries. They will retaliate, taxing U.S. luxury goods exported to them. You end up with another trade war.

In a perfect world, your thesis may have some validity. However, in the real world, involving real people, your "sustainability" models just don't work.

First, people have neither the time, nor the inclination, to do reams of research on each and every product which they consume. And the folks who espouse this, don't have the expertise, either.

Capitalism is effective because of the division of labor, folks becoming more specialized in their labor. Failure to specialize means the end of technological advance, ergo, the end of scientific advancement. Technology always precedes science.

Alternative energy sources, bio- and solar, are not sustainable. In solar, there has to be some manner of energy storage for the periods which there is no sunlight. That's battery, and it means that the energy has to be converted from DC to AC for transmission and usage. Bio fuels are hugely inefficient. The cost of production is double the cost to produce the crop. And fuels like ethanol are corrosive, even to stainless steel. Corn is a food, and the reduction in available land to produce food, causes a huge financial hardship on the poor, who have to pay more just to subsist.

The most economical means of energy production is through oil, coal, and nuclear. Oil reserves are huge, and even at current estimates of usage, will last for over 100 years. Coal is the original renewable energy source. It was created 350 million years ago through photosynthesis, and in its most economical usage, provides cheap energy to millions. In fact, its usage to the most poor of countries, would enable them to raise the standard of living and improve their economic lives. Nuclear is the most economical, and with the exception of the stupidity of the Soviet Union, has been safe beyond any other energy source. (Three Mile Island's problem was the result of human error, ignoring the reactor's warnings)

The costs of materials, whether steel, plastics, textiles, are inelastic in economic terms. Their costs as commodities on the world markets are governed there. If you want to sell iron ore or oil, you can't sell for less than the market price very long. Labor costs are also inelastic in any particular country because of unions, labor laws, etc. Labor laws in France do not translate to labor laws in South Africa. In the total cost of goods sold, indirect costs are widely variable depending on where the goods are produced; for the same reasons as labor.

Economic development must be evolutionary, as is life itself. An economic group can't skip from Step B, to Step E, and not pay a dear price. Developing countries must build infrastructure, and at times the most simplistic of means. Road, sanitary facilities, food markets, and other parts just can't be skipped.

Individually, there's precious little we can do to affect world trade. It's unlikely that any government will make major changes in trade policy, lest we end up with similar problems after Smoot-Hawley was signed into law in 1930. That created international trade wars contributing to the Great Depression. The greatest protection is insistence on free and fair trade, but it takes a great deal of courage and political calculation to pull of one of those coups.

I remember complaints about Japanese dominance of the camera markets in the 1970's; yet, there were no American camera makers left to built 35mm SLR cameras. Japan, and a few European manufacturers were the only game in town. That won't change, unless and until, labor rates equalize globally. I'll never live to see it, and I doubt that two generations younger will, either.

Right, not at all partisan.

The problem lies with the structure of the world economy, and the problems with how countries, regardless their political leanings, handle things like currency. We see how countries go to great lengths to protect their own economies from the predatory practices of other countries. Whether it's currency manipulation, protective tariffs, industrial espionage, theft of intellectual property, etc., governments will do what's necessary to insure the survival of that particular country.

We place great stock in patent and intellectual property (copyright, etc.), and little thought is given to how those protections affect others. Just one example is the invention of the light bulb with a sturdy filament. Thomas Edison is generally given credit for this invention, but the idea he used was in play in at least six different countries besides the U.S. The same goes for the telephone. Alexander Bell was among four inventors who had the same idea. As a result of those patents, other countries were forced to pay royalties to build telephones and light bulbs, costing the citizens of those countries untold millions of dollars in extra-high prices. And when countries like China, steal or otherwise ignore patents and intellectual property, we end up with political problems.

The above just illustrates the intricacies and complexity of even the most simple of inventions.

The Labor Force Participation rate is at rates not seen since the early-mid 1970's. It remains below 63%, and no economy can grow successfully with so few people participating in the economy. The LFP is the most accurate measurement of employment there is. The state-reported unemployment numbers are rife with political "adjustments"; failure to report on time, so-called "seasonal adjustments", all contribute to skewing statistical data.

The Labor Department statistics don't tell the true unemployment number. They ignore anyone who's not actively looking for a job. Those folks are de facto unemployed. Actual unemployment is probably over 15%, with some estimates as high as 20%.

While Obama likes to brag about the length of the recovery, it's a mile long, but only half an inch deep. GNP needs to grow at, or above 4%; and there have been too many months of less than 1%, even 0% reported even after 2012.

PS - The Labor Department purposely skewed unemployment numbers during the Great Depression to keep peace. Estimates of real unemployment during the period 1931-1942 ranged up to 40%, even higher in some states.

That, sir, is the result of a capitalistic economy. If people can afford the homes, new cars, garages, updated kitchens, golf clubs, etc., why do you even care? It's their money, earned honestly and disposed of on what the individual wants or needs. It's none of my, nor anyone else's business. Every new golf club keeps another golf club maker's employee in a job. Every home, remodel, etc., keeps a carpenter, electrician, tiler, tool maker, etc., employed. That's the very basis of capitalism. Money doesn't sit under mattresses, floorboards, or cans in one's backyard. It's put to work, generating jobs, new capital, etc.

If another photographer owns ten Nikon D750's, why do we even mention it? Good for him/her, that they can afford them, or the lenses and accessories that go along with the cameras.

Capitalism depends on the diverse investment of capital and resources to grow economies. How those economies grow should be the business of the consumer, and not any government, since governments do not contribute to economies; they only take away.

Don't think for one minute that China's ascendance is based solely on "western corporate greed". China is no paragon of economic virtue. China has only allowed capitalism because their Communist economic system was falling under its own weight. While the Beijing government is hard line, the smaller, local party bosses had to allow capitalism to invade, else the local citizens would have starved to death. China also doesn't give a rat's behind about emissions, and is the largest consumer of bituminous coal. The recent development of the Yangtze River and its tributaries wasn't an ecological blue print, either.

China uses capitalistic economics to prop up its Communist philosophy. China has also manipulated the value of the Yuan, in order to maintain competitiveness in the global market. China only begrudgingly recognizes some intellectual property, something not inherent in its philosophy. (China is not the only Asian country which does this.)

Labor is not a flexible cost. It's inelastic, and will move to its lowest cost, wherever that may be. Until and unless true free trade becomes a reality, the discussion is merely academic. Countries will always act in their own interests.

You do know that when the wife says, "Go ahead and buy one", that it's a dare and not permission.

Amen! I moved to the area more than 30 years ago, and in that time, I've seen nothing but decay, especially outside the downtown and New Center areas. Although the urban decay predates Coleman Young, his attitude about the 'burbs hit home with a lot of suburbanites. The politicos looted the city coffers with bad investments, outright theft, and pure incompetence; and a lot of that still exists. I avoid the east side like the plague, and I've never entered the city unarmed. Kwame Kilpatrick was just the latest in a string of con men.

The Heidelberg Project should have been torn down the first time an old refrigerator was left there and called "art". Maybe it's been burned out for good.

The renewed areas are still virtual enclaves, required by a still high crime rate.

By most politicos, news folks, etc., Detroit is now undergoing a true Renaissance. Literally hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent in selected areas for sports arenas, stadia, restaurants, shopping, and revitalized housing. All well and good.

However, not more than two miles away from all the spending, are neighborhoods which still look like the proverbial war zones. Literally blocks of abandoned, falling down houses, overgrown lots, streets with bad pavement. On one lot is a long-dead tree, which still stands, despite decay and termite ravaging. It has some unique bark still remaining. Here are photos of the tree, and a close up of some of the bark. Original colors are so dreary, the images are better served in black and white (converted in Photoshop)

http://i661.photobucket.com/albums/uu331/pendennis1947/Dead%20Tree%20Scotten%20Street%20Detroit_zpsvxo2ddb1.jpg

http://i661.photobucket.com/albums/uu331/pendennis1947/Tree%20Bark%20Dead%20Tree%20Scotten%20Street%20Detroit%20-%20BW_zpst7lftaxm.jpg