David Letterman's Last Show Could Make Anyone's Top 10 List

David Letterman welcomed Bill Murray as his final regularly scheduled guest on Tuesday, but it’s clear the late night host saved the best for last.

Though CBS didn’t disclose exactly what would happen on Letterman’s final show, the network did promise plenty of “surprises,” and that promise got delivered. Letterman’s final appearance as host of “The Late Show” included some throwback clips and other moments that were instant classics:

There was a visit from the president …

Image: Giphy

And Letterman finally accepted that it’s not going to work out with NBC …

Image: Giphy

Even with the retro clips and surprising moments, something that may be lost on the audience is how well Letterman understood late night comedy. Ron Simon, a curator at the Paley Center for Media, told The Huffington Post that before the comedian made his late night debut on NBC, he brought his staff to the Center, then the Museum of Television & Radio, to study up on late night history.

“Dave came over with his writers, and they looked up, especially some of the early ’50s early ’60s talk show hosts like Steve Allen and Ernie Kovacs,” said Simon. “I think that was one of the special things about David Letterman is they were able to take a look at history but do their own unique, surreal spin on it.”

Simon called Letterman a pioneer of late night comedy, experimenting in a new time slot when NBC launched “Late Night” and then again breaking the mold and bringing a new, more mature late night show to CBS. Letterman had an “understanding of all the rules, and then he was able to break those rules,” he said.

Here’s to 33 years of breaking the rules!
Happy retirement, David Letterman!

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Mercedes takes luxury sky-high with its concept private jet interior

2015-05-21 3 mercedesWhile most of us fly economy, crammed into planes like a flying tin can, some people skip business class altogether and head straight for their own private jets. These luxury flyers never have to worry about getting stuck in the middle seat. With this concept design from Mercedes, the choice is between a sleek armchair and a cushy sofa. This … Continue reading

Ford goes backwards with 2016 F-150 tech (in a good way)

F150 ProTrailer Assist-50_MRCars that can parallel-park themselves aren’t new, but Ford’s F-150 is borrowing the principle for a common truck headache: safely reversing a trailer. Pro Trailer Backup Assist is joining the options list for the 2016 model year of the aluminum truck, aiming to help avoid moments of “hang on, which way do I turn the wheel?” confusion when trying to … Continue reading

Oppo R7 Officially Introduced

Oppo-R7

Oppo has officially introduced their latest 4G LTE-enabled Android 5.1 smartphone, the Oppo R7. Measuring 6.3mm thick and weighing 147 grams, this high-end smartphone has a 5.0-inch 1920 x 1080 Full HD AMOLED display with Corning Gorilla Glass 3, a 1.0GHz or 1.5GHz octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 615 processor, an Adreno 405 GPU, a 3GB RAM, a 16GB of expandable internal storage (up to 128GB) and dual SIM card slots (1x nano SIM, 1x micro SIM).

Not only that, the handset also sports an 8MP front-facing camera and a 13MP rear-facing camera with f/2.2 lens, LED flash and 1080p Full HD video recording. Powered by a 2320mAh battery, the R7 provides 4G LTE, WiFi 802.11 b/g/n, Bluetooth 4.0 and GPS for connectivity, and runs on Android 5.1 Lollipop OS with Color OS 2.1 on top.

The Oppo R7 will be available in China starting tomorrow for CNY 2,499 (about $400). [GSMArena]

Why Some of Us Pay More Estate Tax

The Federal government assesses an estate or death tax only on estates valued at more than $5.43 million. Married couples can avoid these taxes if their net worth is less than $10.86 million. In fact, only a fraction of a percent of all Americans who die in 2015 will owe any estate taxes, unless you’re from one of a handful of other states that assess an estate tax at the state level.

As a Minnesota resident myself, let’s take a look at a possible situation for MN residents who die this year. They will be assessed an estate tax by the state of Minnesota if the value of their estate exceeds $1.4 million (increasing to $2.0 million by 2018).

How much are you worth?

The value of your estate is calculated by adding up all your assets (house, cabin, 401k, IRA, investment accounts, etc.) and subtracting your liabilities — amounts that you owe others (mortgage, student loans, credit card debt, etc.). For example, if your assets equal $800,000 and you owe $200,000 in mortgages and other debt, your net worth might be $600,000.

At $600,000 you would owe $0 in Federal or state estate taxes.

Don’t forget life insurance.

When calculating their net worth, most people forget to include their life insurance. Generally, the proceeds you receive from the death benefit of life insurance also get included in the value of your estate. In the example above, if your assets minus liabilities add up to $600,000 and you have $1.0 million in life insurance, you have an estate that would be valued at $1.6 million upon death. Since this exceeds the current exemption amount of $1.4 million, $200,000 of your estate would be taxable at a rate of at least 9 percent.

Most pay no tax.

According to the MN Department of Revenue only about 2 percent of all Minnesota residents will owe any estate tax this year. However, I would take that statistic with a huge grain of salt. If you are the kind of person that reads financial planning blogs and/or works with a financial advisor, odds are pretty good you may subject to a future estate tax.

In the example above, a MN resident who dies with an estate valued at $1.6 million would owe about $18,000 in estate tax. With some basic estate planning, those taxes can usually be avoided – especially if you are married.

Coming up soon, I will tell you how you can avoid most of these unnecessary taxes. Until then, just ASK MIKE.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

U.S. Foreign Policy for an Evolving World

It’s been a rough several weeks for President Obama on the foreign policy front.

Last week, the president had high hopes that a two-day Camp David summit might yield substantial progress toward strengthening the security of the Middle East, but the six Persian Gulf leaders who attended left without arriving at any bold new agreements. The meetings got off to an inauspicious start when King Salman of Saudi Arabia backed out at the last minute, and most analysts agreed that the meetings highlighted a growing gap between the U.S. and its Arab allies.

Prior to the summit, the president also sought to rally support for what would be one of the world’s largest trade accords. Obama believes that the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, an ambitious trade deal with 11 other nations, would boost the U.S. economy and counter China’s growing influence in a vital part of the world, but at the moment he’s being thwarted by skeptical members of his own party.

Meanwhile, several Republican presidential hopefuls have already begun laying out their foreign policy plans, which are notable for their criticisms of Obama’s handling of world affairs. The debate on the U.S. role in the world will apparently be front and center in the 2016 presidential campaign.

For a moment, let’s give the president a break on his foreign policy struggles and take a sizeable step back as we survey what we’re dealing with around the globe.

Right now, the world’s a tangled mess. Crises have cascaded and converged upon us in nearly every part of the world. Instability abounds. Threats to our security come from non-state actors as well as from hostile nations. Indeed, the number of foreign policy challenges facing the U.S. and its allies is staggering. Many of these challenges are hugely complex, and they don’t ever seem to go away. If it’s any consolation to Obama, most of these same problems will land in the lap of his successor and probably several future presidential administrations.

Of course, scanning the global landscape reveals several positives. The U.S. doesn’t face an existential threat to its national security. Despite the many foreign policy challenges we face, we can essentially choose the role we play in the world and we deal from a position of strength. The fundamentals of what make our nation great are still in place. Militarily, technologically and economically speaking, we are far from perfect, but by and large we are strong. We remain the premier world leader, even if other nations might be narrowing the gap.

Nevertheless, much pessimism pervades our global engagement efforts. Across the political and media spectrum, there’s a sense that if we’re not doing too much, we’re doing too little. We’ve got an overreach and an under-reach problem. We’re losing our political will and capabilities to help out in the world. But we should really be focusing more of our energies at home.

Regardless of how you’d grade Obama’s foreign policy performance as president, you cannot discredit him for trying. And he’s not the first, nor will he be the last, president who finds many of the world’s problems intractable. Foreign policy is often about managing, not solving, and not making things worse.

That said, if we truly want to see some progress made toward solving some of these global challenges, our nation as a whole must reevaluate its approach to foreign policy.

This means putting aside the ideological blinders and carefully calculating what America’s vital interests are and answering several key questions: What are we attempting to achieve in the world? How much are we prepared to spend in resources and, more importantly, American lives to achieve our objectives? How long are we willing to be engaged in a particular challenge? Vagueness answering these questions only compounds our problems down the road.

Our biggest questions have often arisen over the use of military force, and, here, we have yet to strike the right balance between always using force and never using it.

We must be smart in our use of military power, recognizing what U.S. might can and cannot achieve. Personally, because of recent events, I have come to doubt our ability to change other nations. We need to be prudent and restrained, reject the role of gunslinger, but be willing to use force carefully and cautiously, and oppose bad actors who attack the way the world works.

Today, Americans largely reject putting troops on the ground, which has led us to rely mostly on Special Forces, drones, intelligence-gathering and training and supplying other forces to achieve our foreign objectives. Still, a sizeable contingent of critics would support the use of more U.S. military power. They see more U.S. military power in itself as an all-encompassing solution. If you’re going to fight at all, these “hawks” say, fight to win. They also seem to suggest that the U.S. intervene militarily in every hot spot of the world, including, among others, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Syria. Hence, the question that needs to be asked of the critics is this: What are your priorities and specifically, what military force are you prepared to use, and where, to achieve your objectives? If we’re going to get into all these areas, what’s the exit strategy for getting out? Vague assertions about more military strength, while popular, are not sufficient.

As we tackle these and other tough questions, we must also remain confident in and recommit ourselves to promoting our nation’s values. Those values include our strong support of peace, freedom and democracy, our generosity and willingness to share the benefits of our prosperity, and our technological prowess and innovation. At the same time, we must avoid actions such as torture and lengthy imprisonments that do not reflect our values and severely harm our image abroad and the willingness of nations to follow our lead. So, we need to set an example for other countries that would follow our model. That means our oft-dysfunctional political and economic system actually needs to work.

Other steps are necessary.

The forces of globalization will not be stopped, and we must do all we can to ensure the establishment of high quality trade agreements that ensure fair treatment for consumers, remove unnecessary trade barriers, expand our exports, reduce currency manipulation and protect jobs and the environment.

Finally, let’s not forget that the U.S. isn’t alone in tackling the world’s largest issues. We will need a lot of help, and diplomacy will be key. While we should always be leery of foreign entanglements, we need to consult and work collaboratively and cooperatively with countries that can help us solve these issues. At the same time, we have to be realistic and recognize that the world is a dynamic place.

We were the preeminent global power for most of the 20th century, and we will remain the world’s leading power for years to come, but our authority has evolved as other nations have grown in strength. We will have to learn to live and prosper in an evolving global environment.

At its core, the U.S. is an optimistic nation. Americans tend to believe we can solve any problem thrown at us. Self-confidence serves as vital component of the character of our nation, a nation that has a difficult time saying no when the need for help arises. But we simply cannot solve every problem. We have to be smart and strategic, while recognizing our limits.

Lee H. Hamilton is a Distinguished Scholar, Indiana University School of Global and International Studies; Professor of Practice, IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs; Chairman, Center on Congress at Indiana University. He served as U.S. Representative from Indiana’s 9th Congressional District from 1965-1999.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

How to Turn a Consulting Business into a $35M Tech Empire

If you’re interested in online businesses or running your own business in general, then you should be familiar with the importance of Search Engine Optimization (SEO). It’s a marketing strategy that you can use to rank higher on search engines such as Google, Bing, or Yahoo.

Since there are over 3.5 Billion searches happening per day on Google alone, this makes SEO one of the most effective and scalable strategies in online marketing.

Our lovely and humble guest, Rand Fishkin, has built a $36,000,000 (yes, that’s 6 zeros) annual business, that helps other companies with their SEO and other marketing strategies. With over 150 employees, Moz is now one of the top leaders in online marketing tools.

But you’ll be surprised to hear their humble beginnings. In fact, Rand is a self-claimed “accidental entrepreneur.”

After dropping out of college, Rand joined his mom, who was running a marketing agency at the time. Not the digital marketing agencies that you see today, but the ones where they created pamphlets and brochures — the old school way of promoting!

It took many years before they finally decided to introduce a software tool, which they originally built for themselves internally, where people can access by paying a monthly subscription.

Rand and I dig deeper into the humble beginnings of his journey, the difficult decisions he had to make when making several transitions in his business and how he made them, and Rand drops some amazing knowledge on marketing strategies that will take your business to the next level after listening.

Let’s go!

Never miss an Episode:

Subscribe on iTunes

Subscribe on Stitcher

This podcast is brought to you by Rype, the fastest way to learn how to speak a new language.
Rype personally matchmakes you with a handpicked, native speaking tutor to become conversation fluent faster.
Click this link and receive a free 30-minute Spanish lesson. Give it a go!

Highlights of the Episode

  • The origins of how Rand became an “accidental entrepreneur” described in detail
  • The steps Rand took in order to transition from by MacVx” href=”#”> trading time for money, to building a scaleable, multi-million dollar business
  • The pros and cons of raising money from outside investors, and what Rand recommends
  • How Moz used inbound marketing and blogging to build a massive following and initial loyal customers
  • How to use inbound marketing as a competitive advantage before, during, and after your launch your product or service
  • Why it’s okay not to know what you’re doing when starting a business or pursuing your dream
  • What Rand would do differently if he had to start Moz from day one
  • What is a “flywheel” marketing channel, and why it’s the essential foundation to grow your business
  • The 3 components Rand recommends when you’re deciding on a marketing strategy today
  • Rand’s challenge to #growers looking to make the leap towards their dream

Links Mentioned in the Episode

Rand’s Challenge to #Growers

“Become self-aware of your strengths, and what you love and hate doing.” 

Related Episodes You May Enjoy

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

'Survivor: Worlds Apart' Crowns A Winner

Season 30 of “Survivor” was a nail-biter until the very end, but finally, the show has crowned a new winner.

Spoiler Alert! Don’t continue reading unless you’ve seen the “Survivor: Worlds Apart” finale …

Mike Holloway outwitted, outplayed and outlasted the rest of the competitors and took home the $1 million check, and the title of Sole Survivor, on Wednesday night. The 38-year-old from Texas was a challenge juggernaut throughout the season, and won all three of the challenges featured in the finale. Although he wasn’t in the core alliance throughout the final few weeks of the competition, Holloway won over the jury after an intense round of questioning.

Carolyn Rivera was the runner-up, while Will Sims II took third place. Rodney Lavoie Jr. lost his chance at the million bucks after Holloway forced a tie between him and “Mama C” in tribal council (They had to face-off in a fire-building challenge). “Mama C,” clearly, won.

During the reunion show, Jeff Probst shared the cast of Season 31, “Survivor: Second Chance,” which features contestants selected by a public vote from a producer-picked pool of former players, all of whom have only played once before and not won. Contestants include Season 1’s Kelly Wiglesworth, as well as Ciera Eastin, Vytas Baskauskas, “Woo” Hwang, Stephen Fishbach, Terry Deitz, Kass McQuillen and Season 30’s Shirin Oskooi and Joe Anglim.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

D.C. Quadruple Homicide Suspect Identified

WASHINGTON (AP) — Police have identified a suspect in the mysterious slayings of a wealthy Washington family and their housekeeper inside their multimillion-dollar home.

Washington, D.C., police issued a news release late Wednesday saying they are looking for a man identified as 34-year-old Daron Dylon Wint in connection with last Thursday’s quadruple homicide. Police have issued an arrest warrant charging Wint with “murder one while armed.” Authorities offered no further details, and have previously released very little information about who might have killed the family or why. When firefighters responded to the house for a fire May 14, they found the slain bodies still inside. Authorities believe the fire was intentionally set.

Slain were 46-year-old Savvas Savopoulos; his 47-year-old wife, Amy; their son, Philip; and housekeeper Veralicia Figueroa.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

California To Order End To Pumping From San Joaquin River

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Regulators are ordering farmers with California’s oldest water rights to stop pumping from the San Joaquin River watershed for the first time in memory.

State water board engineer Kathy Mrowka told a public drought hearing that the curtailment orders will be sent to so-called senior rights holders on Friday.

The mandatory conservation orders for rights holders with century-old claims to rivers and streams will be the first anywhere in the state since the 1970s. They would be the first in memory to senior water-rights holders along the San Joaquin River.

California officials already have ordered conservation for cities and towns and some other farmers. Friday’s order is the start of expected across-the-board cuts for the state’s most senior rights holders.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.