Dear Cyndy,

Thank you for your letter. When it arrived in my e-mail box,
we were still in Belmont. Yesterday we drove to Virginia. Now
we're here. I've unpacked the car, and assembled the electronic
equipment. I've attached the scanner, the printer, the fax
machine that I brought from Massachusetts. All the equipment
seems to be functioning, at least for the time being.

We drove down in a new dark red Dodge minivan. Our old '97 van
with 158000 miles has started to leak rain when there is a
down pour. This is the car which Klemens had been using when
Margaret and I took the less old (2005 van, 80000 miles) to
Virginia. Last month I reached the conclusion that I couldn't
drive to Virginia again, leaving Klemens without a functioning
automobile, until I had bought another car. And that's what I
did. I found it anything but an edifying experience. A car
such as I would have wanted, simple, accessible and easy to
repair without gadgets or gimmicks is not being built by any
manufacturer. Instead I had to settle for a car that will be
next to impossible to repair, has gadgets such as "power
windows" which I can do without, has, instead of keys that
can be duplicated for $1.50, electronic pods to unlock the
doors and start the engine.  Replacing one of these pods
costs $200. One must take the car to the dealer who must
"program" not only the pod newly acquired but also the other
"pods" and the car itself. I felt helpless, as if I was being
manipulated, which indeed I was. But I had no choice. The
best I could do was to try to understand the engineering,
but the "service manual" which I tried to purchase, I was
told was not yet available. As part of the bargain I had to
pay for a "black box" such as is installed in airplanes from
which, in the event of an accident the police could ascertain
how fast I was driving, when and in what direction I turned
the wheels, when I applied the brakes, all of which makes me
ask if George Orwell wasn't an innocent optimist. The most I
will say for the car is that, at this juncture, it's still
running.

I haven't done anything about the surface gutters that we
discussed. When we arrived this morning, the basement was
dry, presumably because there's been little rain and the
ground water has subsided. Ultimately (if I live) I'll have
to confront the problem, and I'll report to you, but as of
this evening it's low on my list of priorities.

Continued on the following day:

You asked about my work on the estate tax which I hope I've
completed for the time being. I'll try now to turn attention
to my novel and other projects. My conclusion: the laws are
irrational and contradictory. Their application is a matter
of consensus in the taxation of small estates. In the case 
of large estates, where contested sums may comprise millions
of dollars, and there's plenty of money to hire lawyers, the
application of the estate tax laws is usually a matter of
bargaining, where the result is a compromise between the demands
of the IRS and the offers of the estate's executor. It's been
shown statistically that when no agreement can be reached,
and the decision is referred to the Tax Court, the taxes
subsequently assessed by the Court are often close to the
arithmetic mean of the demands of the adversaries.

Because estates are as unique as the individuals who create them,
generalizations are almost meaningless. Moreover, there is an
unbridgeable chasm - namely death - between the testator who
plans the estate and the executor who is responsible for filing
the estate tax return. I have some notion of how I would settle
my own estate, - but the formalities of "Last Will and Testament"
notwithstanding, it's unrealistic for me to presume to instruct
my executor how to resolve the ambiguities, and untangle the
contradictions of applicable estate tax law.

With that discouraging insight, I send my best wishes both to
you and to Ned.

Jochen