Politics Domestic SocialSecurity - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:SocialSecurity:
Results 151 - 181 of 181   < 1 2 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2022/08/07 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

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
2022/08/07 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular

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"
        "... 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:
        \_ 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
                 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
                       \_ 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
        \_ 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
           \_ 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
        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:
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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
        \_ 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
        \_ 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
              \- 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:
        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.
        \_ 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
                    \_ 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
                   \_ 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
                            \_ 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.
                            \_ 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.
                                      \_ 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.
                                         \_ 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
                                             \_ 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
                                                   \_ ...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
                                                      \_ 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.
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.
                          \_ 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:
        (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
2008/9/21-23 [Computer/SW/Security, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:51253 Activity:nil
9/21    Obama's Social Security Whopper
        \_ 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
        \- 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
        \_ 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:
        \_ 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
        \_ 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!
        \_ 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
        \_ 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
        \_ 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
              \_ ...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
        \_ 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
                    \_ 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
                       \_ 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.
        \- meritocracy in action! also:
        \- meritocracy in acton! also:
           \_ What does Acton have to do with this?
2022/08/07 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Results 151 - 181 of 181   < 1 2 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:SocialSecurity: