|
12/24 |
2013/6/4-7/31 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:54686 Activity:nil |
6/4 June 4th, never forget. \_ I don't want to remember, but I'll always remember. \_ clarify please? \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_Massacre |
2013/3/22-5/18 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:54635 Activity:nil |
3/21 Suppose your parents move all of their asset to the child, can they qualify for SSI (additional income)? Will the transfer of asset trigger some sort of audit, questioning, and such? Has anyone done this? \_ You are headed for prison. \_ i doubt it, i know people who live in million dollar mansions (in their child's name of course) and getting SSI and Universal Lifeline and such. just do it, the government owes you. \_ If you gift more than $11k, you have to file a statement with the IRS. SSI is not based on your assets though, so the real answer is no. IRS. |
12/24 |
2013/1/15-2/19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:54580 Activity:nil |
1/15 http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/explainer/2012/01/are_smart_people_ugly_the_explainer_s_2011_question_of_the_year_.html This explains why CSUAers are so smart. \_ I am guessing either you did not read the article or else you never met a CSUAer. |
2012/6/1-7/20 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:54406 Activity:nil |
6/1 http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/05/what-matters-economic-mobility/2089/# |
2010/7/12-8/11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53882 Activity:low |
7/12 "Debt commission leaders paint gloomy picture" http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_governors_debt_commission "... everything needs to be considered . including curtailing popular tax breaks, such as the home mortgage deduction, ..." Housing market is going to crash again? \_ Doubt it, not with NSFW marketing tactics like this: http://modelmayhm-6.vo.llnwd.net/d1/photos/080824/00/48b0dd6ea15cc.jpg \_ Probably not, but don't expect it to go up for a long time. Medicare benefits are going to have to be cut, it will be amusing to see which party decides to break the bad news to seniors. \_ Everything is going to have to be cut. Let's start with the DoD. I bet they can get by on half of what they spend now. My sister-in-law is in the Air Force Reserve and works in a civilian (federal) job at an Air Force Base and the waste is appalling. One example is that when she goes on training for the military she gets paid for that AS WELL AS drawing her regular full-time salary. So she volunteers for reserve duty all the time because it doubles her pay. That practice could easily be ended and would save taxpayers a lot of money. \_ From Business Insider: "In the United States, the average federal worker now earns 60% MORE than the average worker in the private sector." Also, did you hear about the city manager of Bell who just resigned over his $800K annual salary? He's going to be drawing $650K/year retirement from CalPERS. \_ Sure, the average federal worker also has more education than the average worker and works in a higher skill job. What is the apples to apples comparison on salaries? \_"One thing we do know about public sector employees in general, if you try to guess what they should be paid ... on average they are overpaid," said John Matsusaka, a political economist and USC professor in law, business and politics. \_ If Federal workers have more education and better skills then why are they working for the government? It is because the government pays better and is viewed as more secure. The talented people need to go to work in private industry to add to the tax base and not for the government where they are a drain. My anecodotal dealings with federal and state employees have not been good. Sure, my bank is bad but the teller is making peanuts compared to a government clerk and truthfully doing a better job than the clerks in the windows of most government offices. My sister-in-law (mentioned above) is a good worker with a graduate degree and some of her coworkers don't like her because she makes them look bad. Certain items that were supposed to be done same-day were queued up for four days when she first started She worked off the queue and got one of those "You're working too hard and raising expectations" speeches from her coworker. Does that surprise anyone who has had to deal with the IRS, State Department (passports), Social Security etc.? BTW, she is working for the Feds because it was the best salary she was offered anywhere *BY FAR*, allowed her to be paid double for her military duty (and not get in trouble for going off all of the time which many employers do not like), and had the best benefit package, too. She just got a big fat raise, too, (> 10%) for getting the department all caught up (i.e., doing the job they should have been doing all along). I am happy for her, but as a taxpayer I am appalled. \_ People at the NSA, CIA, FBI and Joint Chiefs are highly educated, skilled, and gov employees. \_ And yet they still lag behind their peers in private industry. I know this because my girlfriend's dad was in the DIA for many years and her mom worked for NIH. Both of them are educated, but like a lot of people in government it was more about a paper education than a real one. The government views a BA from Florida State with a Master's from James Madison's night school in Public Policy about the same as a BS from Stanford and a Master's from MIT in Economics. Example: the current CIO of the FDA has a Master's Degree in Public Administration from LSU and did undergrad at South Carolina. This is pretty typical. Not that there aren't people in government with degrees from Harvard, but the typical upper level government employee went to some directional state school somewhere and then grad school at a place like Santa Clara or Alcorn State or whatever. Joint Chiefs consists of 6 people, so I don't think they skew the mean upward. BTW, if you read the bios of the Joint Chiefs you will find them surprisingly undereducated in a conventional manner. (I am sure they have extensive military training.) My girlfriend's stepdad was career military with a PhD in history from Yale. That was the exception rather than the rule. He served as an advisor to the Joint Chiefs and had connections to a lot of the inner circle in DC. He said it is as much who you know as what you know, which is why it is called politics - and politics drives choices for high level government jobs (many of which are appointments) and also jobs for government contractors to some extent (often worried more about head count than actually fulfilling the terms of the contract). I collaborate with a lot of government employees and the military, too, and let's just say I am not impressed by most of them compared to our private industry and academic partners. \_ you know anecdotes may be interesting but you cant really aggregate them into some theory/general pattern. i'm sure i can match you anecdote for anecdote ... i know princeton english majors who worked at investment banks and didnt know how to do anything except dress well and schmooze. maybe thy could calculate a simple NPV but for anything complicated they would keep calling my friend when he was home with the flu [friend = berkeley EE/Business undergrad]. talking about "the govt" and "the private sector" is ridiculous. walmart, google, the federal reserve, the port of oakland, NIH, dmv, el burrito restaurant, nsa ... covers a lot of different ground. it might be worth asking a question like "does the nsa get second rate number theory/algebra people compared to mit/princeton/berkeley" or us army corps of engineers" vs "bechtel" in civil engineering chops. \_ Better to ask: Why are government agencies from the TSA to the DMV to the IRS to the SEC to UC so incompetent and difficult to do business with? Private business is not always competent and pleasant to deal with, but it's clear who gets more work done -- and cheaper. Government is full of clerks earning $50K/year to shuffle paper who answer to nobody. \_ I never have any problem dealing with government agencies, perhaps you are just a difficult person. \_ Government jobs are more likely to be in an office and require computer skills that the office and require computer skills than the average job. Are you really this clueless? \_ My wife just switched jobs from HUD to Citi and almost doubled her salary. -one anecdote \_ Did she work just as hard then as she does now? \_ Yes, she is like that. She was a rock star at HUD and just average at Citi though. She left because it takes five years to get a promotion at HUD and the pay is less. \_ Cutting the home mortgage deduction might lead to an armed revolution. You have a better chance of me accepting an income tax increase than destroying the value of my home. Like Prop 13, the mortgage deduction is sacred. \_ Frankly, the mortage deducation is stupid, it's basically just an indirect bank subsidy. But, yeah, I admit it would be hard to eliminate now. What about a slow ratcheting down over 40 years? Just rachet down the amount you can deduct a little each year. That way the current owners can pay off their mortgage before it affects them, and the new buyers just have to work it into their math before buying. -R homeowner \_ But opponents of the politicians suggesting it could scream about ending the deduction without mentioning the fine points. It's the impact on politics, not actual homeowners, that makes things like the mortgage deduction and Social Security ("the political third rail") difficult to withdraw. \_ People don't really take up their guns for things like home interest deductions. But they would go to the ballot box and throw all the bums out. |
2010/3/29-4/14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53764 Activity:low |
3/29 I'm curious what you think of the health care reform bill. I voted for Obama and I really hate it. It doesn't really address the problem, which is health care _costs_. This bill seems like a shell game. \_ I agree it doesn't address the root cause, but it's a start. The good news is that we have our third major entitlement (SS, Medicare, ObamaCare) signed into law, and that's not going away anytime soon. Of course, this is exactly what most Republicans feared. \_ How is Obamacare any different from Medicare? We already had that entitlement. The government isn't going to pick up the tab for those currently uninsured or those who can barely afford insurance. I find the bill completely unnecessary and toothless. \_ Any real solution would have been blocked by the "Blue Dog" democrats, and there are two real solutions: 1) properly regulate the insurance industry, which is pretty much impossible since the insurance industry regulates Congress or 2) extend Medicare to all, which would kill off most of the health insurance industry. The hope is that we can slowly creep towards solotion #2. \_ What about (further) regulating pharmaceutical companies and tort reform? Big pharma and expensive malpractice insurance are killing us. \_ Tort reform would at best be a drop in the bucket. \_ Are you kidding? Do you know what, say, a ob/gyn pays in malpractice insurance? And he passes that cost on to you and your HMO. \_ http://preview.tinyurl.com/mnt7zo "That puts litigation costs and malpractice insurance at 1 to 1.5 percent of total medical costs. That’s a rounding error. Liability isn’t even the tail on the cost dog. It’s the hair on the end of the tail." \_ I don't believe this guy and even he admits that defensive medicine costs could drive the cost up to 5-10% of costs. 5% of a trillion dollars (or whatever we spend) is a _lot_ of money to piss away! \_ I trust him way more than I believe you. In any case, shaving off a few percentage points of the total cost would be nice, but it is the growth rate that is going to kill us and legal costs as a percentage of overall medical costs are not increasing. \_ So, as a percentage of medical costs, what is increasing the most and what is increasing the fastest? \_ "We are still going to have adjustments that have to be made to further reduce costs." --POTUS \_ So what exactly are the merits of this bill? I don't see a point. All it does is shift more of the outrageous costs of health care onto young working people who probably can't afford big increases at this time. \_ Actually this bill calls for pretty big cuts in the growth of Medicare, so it is going to shift some of what is currently being spent on oldsters on younger uninsured. No political act can do anything about our changing demographics though. \_ We can let people pay for their own (and their parents' own) health care and demographics be damned. Demographics are only an issue b/c of these politics. \_ Yes, we could just let all the oldsters eat catfood and die due to lack of basic medical care. But we decided a long time ago that we didn't want to be a society like that. Especially now that we have taken a bunch of people's tax dollars and put it in the Trust Fund, we have a committment to follow through Trust Fund, we have a commitment to follow through on providing Social Security funding, which we can definitely do. We don't not have a comittment to definitely do. We don't not have a commitment to definitely do. We do not have a commitment to provide open ended heroic medical care to people in their last years of life though. We also cannot afford it either. This is going to be a tough political battle to fight though, since there are so many Baby Boomers and they think they are entitled to it all. \_ I can let my parents eat catfood and die due to lack of basic care and you can choose to do otherwise. I agree, though, that the Boomers have certain expectations that we cannot meet. My mom-in-law has had three mostly-unnecessary surgeries (there were other treatments available and she never sought any other medical opinions) at taxpayer expense and it infuriates me given that her generation is the one that had a lot of opportunity. Her retirement income is, after tax, not much less than my after tax income. I realize not everyone that age is so fortunate to have such a great retirement, but give me a break. She wastes money on all kinds of shit, including at the casino. I should not pay for her surgeries while she gets excited about how it only cost her a $30 co-pay. it only cost her a $30 co-pay. BTW, a common statement by Boomers is "I paid into the system my whole life and I _deserve_ to take out of it." Yeah, well, I paid in my whole life and I will probably be able to take less out because of greedy Boomers who are taking out more than they put in. |
2010/3/2-12 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53735 Activity:nil |
3/1 My sister works for the county and pays into CalPERS instead of Social Security. This year she got a second (private sector) job which paid more than her government job and paid into Social Security. Does she have to contribute to both retirement plans? That seems like a waste. I STFW and cannot find the answer. \_ You don't pay into CalPERS if you don't have a public sector job. In fact, I don't think you *can*. Most likely, she can either roll her CalPERS over to an IRA or leave it as is. In 2007, I considered rolling over my old CalPERS investments to an IRA, but decided the guaranteed 6% was a good thing (additional diversification). I'm not sure how my 401k/IRA's have done since 2007, but last year I was glad that I had some of my retirement in a relatively stable investment. \_ Maybe I am not making myself clear. She has a public sector job (works for the county). Through that job she contributes to CalPERS and does not pay Social Security. Last year she got a second job in the private sector. (She's a nurse.) She made more at that job than at her 'regular' job and she paid a lot of money into Social Security. She wants to know if she can get that Social Security money back, since she doesn't need SS as she has CalPERS. It's not an insignificant amount of money: about $7K. \_ No, she can't. \_ Sheesh. One is a Ponzi scheme and one is a Wall Street confidence game. They are totally different. Try Wikipedia before bothering us. |
2009/12/29-2010/1/19 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53608 Activity:nil |
12/26 http://www.dailynews.com/ci_14086516 I'm all for keeping compliance as it is the law, but why are some people against background check? Why would it be racist, esp. if you do the check to every single employee? |
2009/11/10-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53516 Activity:low |
11/9 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-20-most-unemployed-cities-2009-11#15-san-francisco-california-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-20-most-unemployed-cities-2009-11#7-san-jose-california-14 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-20-most-unemployed-cities-2009-11#5-los-angeles-california-16 Most unemployed cities in America \_ The actual city of San Francisco has quite a bit lower unemployment rate, he must be using the metropolitan area (and the one that includes Oakland, not the one that includes San Mateo) \_ How about San Jose, is that including Gilroy? \_ are you a moron? San Jose - Sunnyvale - Santa Clara |
2009/10/28-11/3 [Finance, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53477 Activity:low |
10/27 SAT score and family income: http://www.businessinsider.com/sat-scores-and-family-income-2009-10 \_ Is there any 3D charts showing three variables (income, race, SAT score)? I wonder whether race or income is a bigger factor. Of course race and income are not completely independent, but I'm wondering about different income and same race vs. same income and different face. \_ I'm sure race is a big factor. However, no one is stupid to publish it and be called a racist, like that guy in Bell Curve. It would be the Satanic Verses equivalent to your career these days. \_ I think race is a complete non-factor. You don't really believe some races are smarter than others do you? |
2009/9/14-21 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53361 Activity:nil |
9/14 Does anyone have the controversial book Bell Curve? I know it has the political incorrect [and perhaps flawed] data that shows certain race have higher IQ than other race and I'm wondering how smart Russians are relative to white Americans and East Orientals. I can't seem to Google for this information. The only thing I got is the following: http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/bellcurve.shtml#part3 \_ from the URL(book): "East Asians typically earn higher IQ scores than white Americans, especially in the verbal intelligence areas." I beg to differ. Almost all of my East Asian TAs I had at Cal had very very low communication skills." \_ "White Americans" are not a race. Most are a mixture of all sorts of ethnicities. For instance, many more people have Jewish blood in them that you would think. The populace is pretty far from its English origins. \_ Bell Curve said that intellegence is in this order: 1) Jews 2) Orientals 3) White Europeans 4) Mongrel races (Mexicans, Arabs, etc) 5) Mud people (Negroids, Australoids) Not sure where Russians fit in here, probably 3, but maybe 4. \_ How about the Persians since they're not Arabs? \_ Based on what I read on publications with a bunch of east European and Russian-sounding last names, Russians and Jews tie. \_ When did Adolf get a Soda account? \_ Here is my personal un-proven belief: - Intelligence is correlated with individual's genetics. - Ingelligence is not correlated with race's genetics. - In general, culture is correlated with race. Within the US, this is still true among first-generation immigrants, but to a lesser extent among later generations. - How hard-working you are is correlated with culture. - Income is correlated with intelligence. - Net worth is NOT correlated with intelligence. - One's "achievement" or social status is correlated (among other things) more with net worth than with income. - Chance of immigration to the US is correlated with achievements. Of course, all the above only apply to averages over large populations. Indiviaual cases vary. |
2009/7/22-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53184 Activity:nil |
7/22 Freepers plotting overthrow of the US government http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2295624/posts \_ so they make Hillary president?! Makes no sense |
2009/5/23-6/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:53038 Activity:low |
5/23 Public opinion is basically pathological http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/05/everything-is-unpopular.php \_ Yeah, voters are stupid. \_ I'm disheartened that the most popular program to cut is the space program. I think most people assume it gets a lot more money than it does. As this article says, its budget is tiny relative to the size of the federal government. I think if people realized what DoD spent they would realize it has to be #1 on the list. Either that, Social Security, or Medicare. Choose. My dad (who gets Social Security) said that if he were a person under 40 he'd lobby hard to reduce it given that we pay in and may never see that money again. I think most people would find defense most palatable. see that money againm but I think most people would find defense see that money again but I think most people would find defense cuts more palatable. (Pie chart of government spending: link:tinyurl.com/oanezb \_ They want stuff and don't want to pay for it. Nothing new to see here. This is, however, why welfare programs are broken. |
2009/3/30-4/3 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:52769 Activity:kinda low |
3/30 The fascist bargain goes something like this. The state says to the industrialist, "You may stay in business and own your factories. In the spirit of cooperation and unity, we will even guarantee you profits and a lack of serious competition. In exchange, we expect you to agree with--and help implement--our political agenda." The moral and economic content of the agenda depends on the nature of the regime. The left looked at German business's support for the Nazi war machine and leaped to the conclusion that business always supports war. They did the same with American business after World War I, arguing that because arms manufacturers benefited from the war, the armaments industry was therefore responsible for it. It's fine to say that incestuous relationships between corporations and governments are fascistic. The problem comes when you claim that such arrangements are inherently right-wing. If the collusion of big business and government is right-wing, then FDR was a rightwinger. If corporatism and propagandistic militarism are fascist, then Woodrow Wilson was a fascist and so were the New Dealers. If you understand the right-wing or conservative position to be that of those who argue for free markets, competition, property rights, and the other political values inscribed in the original intent of the American founding fathers, then big business in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and New Deal America was not right-wing; it was left-wing, and it was fascistic. What's more, it still is. \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism You aren't Humpty Dumpty you know. \_ You really can't see the difference between companies asking for handouts and governments forcing companies (at gunpoint) to hand over control? \_ So all those conservatives who argue for more jails, more government intrusion into people's bedrooms, harsher drug laws, etc are all actually liberal left-wingers? \_ The words "liberal" and "conservative" have multiple meanings. Media like to talk about it as if there are only two basic political "sides", which ignores libertarian vs. authoritarian and ignores the basic orthogonality of economic vs. social policy. Left and Right are two sides of the same "powerful central government" coin. I think the problem is that loose confederacies can't compete militarily with powerful empires. \_ dude, what is wrong with you? if GM doesn't like it, it can always leave and let the market take its course. It would be my personal preference anyway. \_ Honest question here: Is this move better for GM or just punitive? \- speculating from a generic perspective, i think these cases of "we need to retain the insiders because they are the only ones who can clean up" are bogus in the cases such as AIG and probably in this case as well. i think the familiarity is more than offset by people's inability to recognize/admit their mistakes, they have incentive to cover up mistakes etc. what would we have to give rick wagoner beyond his $28m pension for this not to be punitive? paging ken lewis ... April will be the cruelest month ... BofA annual meeting in a month and CalPERS is is going after them. |
2008/11/22-12/1 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity, Finance/Investment] UID:52079 Activity:moderate |
11/22 Pension gap divides public and private workers: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-02-20-pensions-cover_x.htm At what point do we Just Say No? Making more money *after* retiring seems like an issue. I say this as someone with family who retired from the military who makes more now than when active. Ridiculous. \_ Come back when you stay at your crappy public sector job for 20+ \_ have you ever served? \_ Public sector do not get stock options, generally do not get bonuses, they do not get 401k matching, they do not have ESPP options [there are obscure exceptions], they dont have crazy expense accounts, they get most of their income on W-2, so their tax loopholes are limited [compared to say 1099 people]. Sure there are lame public sector employees and there is fraud and corruption, but it's silly to focus as a class on military or say CALPERS pensions. Take a look at something like the finance industry which actively conspires with its elites by structuring compensation [moving income to cap gains], paying for what is clearly private income as corporate expense [car leases, club memberships, subsidized loans], helping individual incorporate etc. [yes, i know there are some exception to the above]. You might looking at how LLNL is doing under public vs private management (when Bechtel took over, people were basically kicked out of CALPERS) ... $280M in cost overrruns and the lab continues to deteriorate. Note also: the quality of "public employee/govt worker" is quie different at a UCB, the National Labs, or the SEC vs say the Port of Oakland. \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Schedule Can you honestly say that these employees are overpaid? I am a mid-level manager in a Fortune 500 company and I make more than the Undersecretary of the Navy. This is nuts. Low level employees, like bus drivers and mechanics, are probably overpaid in the civil service sector though. We need stronger unions in the private sector, obviously. \_ I think people are missing the point here, which is that we are paying certain people more to *not* work than to work. That makes absolutely no sense. So for 20 years of good work \- are you against paid sick leave? how about employer subsidized health care? how about employeer subsidized health care? how about dependent coverage ... i mean that's paying for people who dont even work for you. the person missing the point is you, and the point is "net present value" (of benefits) in this case [although really there are a few other points ... risk and return, at will employment vs public sector terms, and to some extent "the sanctity of contract". \_ "net present value" is too effing high. Only in your socialist utopia does someone make more money at retirement than when working. \- do you understand the difference between when money is "made" and when it is "paid"? the issue is *length of service* i.e. the amount of time over which you are earning the money, not the age/time you are collecting it. there is nothing magically different between your pension being 99% of your income and 101%. there is a big difference between whether you earned it after 20 yrs or 40 yrs or whether you are gettign paid at age 55 or 65. these people get 20-30-40 years of paychecks at, or for more than, the wage they retired at?! That's a sure way to bankruptcy. I am in private sector and I make more, but at age 65 I will get jack shit and that's the way most of industry is. Why should Uncle Sam do any different? \_ Because those people took lower-paying jobs partly because of the retirement benefits and job security. A simple choice of how to run your business, if you're one of the people who thinks government should run like a business (it shouldn't). -tom \_ The jobs are not really that much lower-paying. You might have a point if they were all working for 50% of market rates, but the reality is that government workers are paid pretty well. We've already been over that. \_ we've "been over that", you mean, back when you made ridiculous assertions that were flatly contradicted by the data you were presenting? -tom \_ You mean when I showed you that tree trimmers for LA County were making $70K or something like that? That workers in SF were routinely making over $100K? That crazy sysadmin pulled down something like $120K? The DWP workers pull down big bucks? Please rely on the actual data and not your faulty memory and perceptions. Here's a good start: the link I just posted, which no one bothered to read. \_ Data points with no context are meaningless. The link you just posted is a USA Today story with an editorial slant and similarly context-free numbers. -tom \_ How about the UC article some other kind person dug up? You are always rationalizing. Get your head out of the sand and WAKE UP! \_ The UC article doesn't say anything about compensation relative to the private industry. And I agree that people shouldn't be able to retire and come back to work full time at the same salary; in fact, it's against UC policy to do so, and the article says they're going to crack down on the very small number of cases where it has happened. -tom \_ Those ES level government workers I gave you the wiki link to are making 50% or less what they would make for similary responsible jobs in the private sector. \_ 20 years is an extreme exaggeration, except for the military you don't retire after 20 years and even there you only make 50% of your active duty salary. You don't make your case stronger by exaggeration, you just make yourself look misinformed. \_ Actual data: If I were to retire from UC at age 50, with 24 years of service (I started working here at age 26), I would get less than 30% of my final salary. -tom \_ Actual data: read the article \_ Your confirmation bias is showing. -tom \_ I'm the one who is biased? Check out how your UC colleagues are doing. \_ Did you read the article I posted? \_ Yes, and it said nothing about retiring at 20 years. You just made that part up. \_ How long do you think a police chief worked who retired at age 46? Certainly not 30 years. WTF should someone 46 years old be retired and making $125K/year for the rest of his life to sit on his ass at taxpayer expense? He might make more money not working than he did when he worked over the course of his life. We can't afford those excesses for civil servants. He can collect when he's 65 like everyone else. Getting full salary at that time would be more than generous. I'd support him getting HALF his salary at age 65. To get a raise when retiring at age 46 is beyond the pale. He should still be contributing to society in some way at that young age and not sitting on his ass cashing checks from the public. \_ Once again, you're using one anecdote from an article with an editorial slant and with no context, and suggesting that the issue is meaningful and widespread. It's not. Aren't you suspicious when the article says it will "boost his retirement benefit to *as much as* $125,000 a year"? Why the qualifier? [Here's why--they're not telling you the whole story.] You'll believe what you want to believe, go ahead, but you really are demonstrating complete cluelessness here. -tom \_ http://fireflystudio.com/acton/circle/index.html "Bill Fenniman retired in January 2007 after 27 years in law enforcement, the last 17 as Chief of Police in the City of Dover NH." 35% more than your claim of 20 years, it turns out. And it turns out that he is contributing. I hope to retire at 50 on my 401k and savings, who are you to tell me I can't? I will probably contribute to society in some way afterward, but that is my business, isn't it? \_ 401k and savings is your money. Do as you wish with it. Not the same as getting free checks for life starting at age 46. \_ A worker's pension belongs to that worker just as much as his 401k does. -tom \_ Of course. And how many employers are contributing enough money to their 401k plans such that you are guaranteed to maintain your full-time salary after you retire? Not many. The government is paying A LOT more than market for this. I've been in the workforce 13 years and there's barely 1 year worth of my current salary in my 401k and that counts my money plus my employer's very generous 8.5% contribution. (Most 401ks match a lot less than this.) I read that the average employee has about $100K in his 401k. This dude is getting that each year guaranteed forever starting at age 46. As a taxpayer, I feel ripped off. BTW, EBRI says that the average 401k balance of someone in their 60s with 30 years of tenure is $190,593. link:tinyurl.com/2a8a35 \_ If you don't understand why you can't compare 401k balances directly with pensions, it's not worth wasting any more time on you. -tom \_ You can't compare directly, but you can compare. \_ So you took the gamble of a private sector job with higher pay and lower benefits, it hasn't worked out that well for you, and now you are upset that others who took the safer route are doing better? What a piece of work you are! What is the value of 15k + 7k employer is the value of 15k + 7k employer match invested yearly for 27 years at a 10% (average stock market) gain? Here, I will make it really easy for your: $2.8M. I bet you want to privatize social security, too. Am I right? \_ Most people "take the gamble" of a private sector job with roughly THE SAME pay as the government and end up worse for it. Another way of stating this is that the average person in the private sector is receiving less compensation than the average person in the public sector. You cannot count the $15K, because that's my own money and you should be aware that $7K is hardly the average. So your $2.8M number is bogus. Yes, I do want to privatize SS, but that's neither here nor there. \_ you keep asserting that public sector employees are compensated more, but asserting it over and over doesn't make it true. -tom \_ You are full of it. I showed you the BLS stats that proved that private and public sector pay, including benefits was similar, but you ignored it. \_ Stop stomping my edits. As I was saying, I showed you the BLS data that public and private sector workers are paid similary including benefits and you ignored it. \_ http://tinyurl.com/5klnuo CA says it pays lower than other public sector employees and yet even its salaries are comparable (and sometimes even lead) the private sector. Salaries, not total compensation. \_ ...when you compare the state maximum to the private sector median. \_ Did you read why the State did that? \_ yes. the justification is ridiculous. -tom \_ That is not how I read Table 4. All above average private sector paying jobs\ pay lower than market rate when working for The State (and most below average paying jobs are higher, why might that be do you think?) Managerial jobs are particularly low paying. \_ Sure, and how many Americans are CFOs and MDs? \_ And programmers and accountants, and engineers and nurses and ... \_ Why don't they just work for the government then, if they pay is the same and the benefits higher? \_ Most people, like MOTD, are laboring under the impression that those jobs pay less. \_ you think that "most people" are incapable of reading job postings which list job descriptions and salary ranges? -tom \_ Contract law only applies to private sector employees? |
2008/10/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51539 Activity:nil |
10/15 What. The. Hell. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93R8IE00&show_article=1 |
2008/10/2-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51349 Activity:moderate |
10/2 What is it like to date a Republican? \_ Dated a TAIWANESE Republican. Great sex, but some side effects. Always thinks she's right. Very stubborn. She's never wrong, and you're always wrong. Materialistic. Always talks about money. Complains about job all the time. Wants more money. Plays stocks a lot. Talks about stocks all the time. Great sex. Always talks about herself. High maintenance. Talks too much. Talks about stocks and $$$. Complains about work. More righteous than anyone else. Wants more tax cuts. Does not care about anyone else except herself. Fuck mass transit and homeless and social programs, the government should spend more money on ME ME ME. Wants more tax cuts. Does not care about war as long as it doesn't affect her tax rates. Votes Republican all the time because it's GOOD FOR TAIWAN, so nothing else matters! And low tax, oh my! Republicans are GOOD. Who cares about faggots and minorities, lower tax is good for me! Me me me. $$$. See, she's totally self absorbed & selfish & annoying. My advice is that to be happy with someone like this, you too should be a Republican and use her until she's no longer of value to you. \_ Great sex. Annoying arguments. Overruse of cloying personal care products by your SO. \_ Annoying sex. Great arguments. Crappy food. \_ Why crappy food? I thought southerners ate better and took better care of themselves. SOUTHERN BELLES, MAN. \_ Have you ever been to the south? \_ I've never been to the south. In fact, like many people here, I've never left Northern California. people here, I've never been outside of N Cal. The only real reference I have is Sweet Alabama. Please tell me about the South. -pp \_ Well the Republican I dated wasn't from the South, but classic Southern food isn't exactly known for being healthy. \_ There's usually an inverse correlation between something that tastes good and something that is healthy. \_ Spoken like someone who knows nothing about food. \_ The key word is: usually. \_ You beat me to it. \_ I have. Women there (men, too) from the upper classes \_ I heard Southern pussies are bigger. Whether that's environmental or genetic is still debatable. http://csua.com/?entry=34794 \_ Southern men are just more well-endowed. are more put together. They dress up more often and wear makeup everywhere they go. This is in stark contrast to people in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic who are boring and plain-looking. I am not sure where to classify Texans, but there are lots of hotties in Texas, Florida, and Georgia. \_ And generally chubby, you forgot that part. MOTD boob guy would like it there. \_ And you forgot that dim like them chunky. Dim \_ I was visting family, sorry. \_ And you forgot that dim like 'em chunky. Dim likes 'em Texan size. Dim like JACKIE JOHNSON. Dim like LA and suburban homes. Bigger IS better. |
2008/9/22-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51255 Activity:nil |
9/22 If you would like to call your senator or representative about the $700B bailout (the one where Congress would give Hank Paulson sole discretion on what to spend it on), but are not sure what to say: http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=62163 (I left messages over the weekend with Mike Honda, Boxer, and Feinstein. I also said that bank transparency needs to happen SIMULTANEOUSLY with any money disbursement. How in the hell do you have any negotiating power when you give the money first and negotiate later on reform measures?) \_ Look how well it worked in Iraq! \_ also see: -op http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20080922006376/en |
2008/9/21-23 [Computer/SW/Security, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51253 Activity:nil |
9/21 Obama's Social Security Whopper http://www.newsweek.com/id/160179 \_ if you say so |
2008/9/21-23 [Politics/Domestic, Reference/Tax, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51252 Activity:nil |
9/21 700 fucking billion? Really? With no fucking oversight at all? What the fucking hell? And people think the Democrats are tax and spend? \- Wall Street Welfare Kings in Pink Cadillacs having out of wedlock children with their mistresses in Mayfair! |
2008/9/19-23 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51235 Activity:nil |
9/18 it would have been pretty awesome if Grover Norquist and his demonic minions had managed to privatize Social Security and had let everyone invest their SSI funds in the open market. \_ Why is that? |
2008/9/16-19 [Computer/SW/Security, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51192 Activity:nil |
9/16 <DEAD>retirementplans.vanguard.com/VGApp/pe/pubnews/SocialSecurityAndWorking.jsf?SelectedSegment=LivinginRetirement<DEAD> Why Social Security fucks everyone up. Earn too much? Get nothing! \_ Your reading comprehension is poor. You don't get nothing, you just get reduced benefits. That Vanguard page doesn't mention that your later benefits are actually increased because of working later. \_ You are right, we should let Morgan Stanley run Social Security, they will do a good job of protecting our retirement money. |
2008/9/6-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51078 Activity:nil |
9/6 http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/Courseyvalue.html \_ Screw polar bears. |
2008/8/23-29 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50947 Activity:nil |
8/23 Social Security is fine, will be for the forseeable future. Thank God we didn't let Wall Street get its hand on it: http://preview.tinyurl.com/43p3pz \_ Of course, this fails to mention that David Walker was Comptroller General of the United States and head of the GAO. Or that he resigned to get the message out. \_ What form is this trust fund stored in, and what will be the effecft of drawing it down? --jwm |
2008/7/25-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50688 Activity:nil |
7/25 Are these the kind of Conservatives that liberals should be paying attention to? I think I am going to buy the book. -liberal http://preview.tinyurl.com/64v8oy \_ I dunno, it looks pretty wishy washy to me. |
2008/7/18-23 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50628 Activity:low |
7/18 Best caption evar! http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92592545 \_ the "Enlarge" link is pretty good, too. \_ Totally appropriate. However I'm a liberal and I'm suppose to feel sorry for these guys and I'm suppose to want to get our government to mandate exercise for those who are obese. On the other hand, I don't feel sorry for them. What is wrong with me? -liberal \_ Being fat cows may largely be genetic, but spending $350/mo they spend on food and electricity? $350/mo on food and electricity? \_ Huh? Where do you get $350? \_ No, wanting the government to mandate exercise if fascist, not liberal--unless the two terms are the same. \_ Are you one of those Compassionate Conservatives I keep hearing about? \_ Food in general is obviously not out of reach enough |
2008/7/16-23 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity, Finance/Investment] UID:50587 Activity:nil |
7/15 My mom's fixed annuity is maturing and we're wondering what we should be doing with it. She's 70 and we gotta put the money where it is safe (no stock market, no 401k). What are some good choices to make now, considering that the US economy is failing and the banking industry is fubar? \_ I would buy another fixed annuity with enough of it so that annuity + SS = bare bones enough to live off of, put half the rest into a CA Muni ladder (or bond fund, if you have less than $1/4M to do this right) and buy an index fund with the rest. She is still too young to get 100% out of the market. What is wrong with an annuity? \_ I thought if you have over $3000 then you're not eligible for SS? Or is that something else? \_ I think this is related to SSI (Supplemental Security Income) for low income, not the Retirement SS. SSI allows a higher paycheck from the government. \_ No, even Warren Buffett gets SS. It is for everyone who has contributed for at least five years. Maybe you are thinking of the bankruptcy code. I think you are allowed to keep a car worth $3000 in a bankruptcy. \_ Ok so I tried to Google for Social Security but it seems complex, is there a SS for Dummies web site? Thanks! \_ http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761561113_2/Social_Security.html Courtesy of Bill Gates |
2008/6/25-7/14 [Reference/RealEstate, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50373 Activity:nil |
6/25 Home owning Baby Boomers generally screwed http://csua.org/u/lsr \_ This describes my parents to a T. We are all screwed, actually, but the Boomers are screwed more. |
2008/6/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50182 Activity:moderate |
6/6 Did you guys get a load of Obama's victory speech? This guy really does think he's the messiah. "I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment - this was the time - when we came together to remake this great nation..." Good thing he's facing it with profound humility, what the heck would he be saying if he wasn't? \_ Dittohead Desperation Level: Orange \_ Unlike poster below, your value-add is zero. \_ But identical to poster above. \_ http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/transcripts/121300/bush.html Everyone says things like this when they win. Did you just start following politics this year? Together, guided by a spirit of common sense, common courtesy and common goals, we can unite and inspire the American citizens. Together, we will work to make all our public schools excellent, teaching every student of every background and every accent, so that no child is left behind. Together we will save Social Security and renew its promise of a secure retirement for generations to come. Together we will strengthen Medicare and offer prescription drug coverage to all of our seniors. Together we will give Americans the broad, fair and fiscally responsible tax relief they deserve. Together we'll have a bipartisan foreign policy true to our values and true to our friends, and we will have a military equal to every challenge and superior to every adversary. Together we will address some of society's deepest problems one person at a time, by encouraging and empowering the good hearts and good works of the American people. This is the essence of compassionate conservatism and it will be a foundation of my administration. \_ And thus we see how the R's have become the D's of a few years ago. \_ ...what language is this, and what does it mean in English? |
2008/6/4-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:50149 Activity:low |
6/4 In Venezuela, ratting on neighbor is the law http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-flavenez0603sbjun03,0,4071658.story \_ Hugo Chavez: proving at every turn that scumbaggery knows no ideological boundaries. \_ Yeah, he's totally breaking new ground as far as communist strongmen go... \_ Funny. Actually, he made several improvements to the country and he continues to do so; he's also not breaking any ground on the Civil Liberties front. \_ Name those improvements. He's a thug like all other thugs. I hope you don't tell us how he made the trains run on time. \_ He nationalized a corrupt oil industry and funneled at least some of the money to improving conditions for the poorest Venezuelans. \_ Wow, so a corrupt politician cum dictator took property away from corrupt businesses and tossed some breadcrumbs to the peasants. Yay! He's my friend now! \_ I dunno how corrupt the foreign investment of infrastructure part of the Venezuelan oil industry was that he nationalized. It looks like he has embarked on a poorly planned program of massive socialism to placate the masses and buy their votes to keep himself in power, without thinking of the further economic consequences. and I'm a bleeding heart American liberal. \_ From Wikipedia: "By the end of the first three years of his presidency, Chavez had initiated a land transfer program and had introduced several reforms aimed at improving the social welfare of the population. These reforms entailed the lowering of infant mortality rates; the implementation of a free, government-funded health care system; and free education up to the university level. By December of 2001, inflation fell to 12.3% the lowest since 1986,[38] while economic growth was steady at four percent.[39] Chavez's administration also reported an increase in primary school enrollment by one million students.[39]" And that's about it for the good. You're right: he is a thug. That his thuggery happened to also involve some social improvements doesn't change that. On the plus side, he didn't suspend the constitution after the ppl voted down his Chavez-for-life proposal. On the minus side, hell, just about everything else. |
2008/5/19-23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:49999 Activity:nil |
5/19 What a dumb ass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1wSZBTAXRs \- meritocracy in action! also: \- meritocracy in acton! also: http://tinyurl.com/6xt6cj \_ What does Acton have to do with this? |
12/24 |