bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:02:38 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:06:53 -0400, wrote:


I asked if your 401K had a money market fund. By putting your money in same, you
could have prevented the losses you took.

gee. where was your crystal ball in 2006?

I sold a lot of stock in 2006, you should have asked me.
I sold off my home builder stock in 2004. I am actually swimming in
that money (my pool)

gee. too bad most m iddle class americans will have to work 'til
they're 70

Not if they applied themselves, worked hard, and saved money.

bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:35:19 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:10:34 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:02:38 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:06:53 -0400, wrote:


I asked if your 401K had a money market fund. By putting your money in same, you
could have prevented the losses you took.

gee. where was your crystal ball in 2006?

I sold a lot of stock in 2006, you should have asked me.
I sold off my home builder stock in 2004. I am actually swimming in
that money (my pool)

gee. too bad most m iddle class americans will have to work 'til
they're 70


Only the dumb ones. I retired when I was 49 but I did have a little
hobby job for a few years after that.

so 100M americans are dumb

you right whiners think your little fairy tales have an impact on the
middle class.

wrong


Your problem is you don't read well and come up with these crazy
knee-jerk responses. You have blinders on and, apparently, they have
been on your whole life.

Canuck57 wrote:
On 21/07/2010 8:51 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:36:22 -0600,
wrote:

On 21/07/2010 7:53 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:35:19 -0400, wrote:



Only the dumb ones. I retired when I was 49 but I did have a little
hobby job for a few years after that.

so 100M americans are dumb

you right whiners think your little fairy tales have an impact on the
middle class.

wrong

Nope, many of them become lillionaires! And before they are 50...
Only
the portion that is not thinking correctly end up losers and without
raises.

why not check the GINI coefficient? the US has the least social
mobility of 10 western democracies, except for the UK

Because many have lost the American way, trading it in for envy, greed
and entitlement -- which do not work.

Plus, your born much better off than 80% of the world to start with.
In in Afganistan, less than a 50% chance you can read when you are
20. The room to grow their is high. Bum to Saddam or Obama, sorry,
Osama in a lifetime is real and fewer people to compete with.

more facts to blow your bull**** away.

and those without raises? that's the ENTIRE MIDDLE CLASS

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...the-day-6.html


I actually don't entirely disagree with you in that being middle class
is now tougher than ever before. But I disagree with the reason.

Big fat corruptive government is the cause. Track total government
revnue against wages...you will see government outsrips income. And
you can't keep having government grow like a cancer.

At some point, DC will go bankrupt. And Obama will have the dubious
honor of kicking DC past the tipping point.

DC will tip over? Like Guam?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9R-cQ_A_6w

bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:28:20 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:



wrote in message
...

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:22:20 -0600,
wrote:

no, i lost because i was middle class. you seem to forget that there
are 100M in the same shape i'm in

but, then, you're right wing. the problems of the middle class dont
interest you at all. not a bit


Where the hell you get 100,000,000? Another factoid pulled out of your ass!
a 1/3 of the people in the us are not middle class workers. There were only
120,000,000 employed in 2008. Most people, middle class included had less
than $50k in savings and retirement funds when they retired. And that was
before the crash. Most did not lose much in the crash, as they had spent
all the money they made already.

the question is, what does this have to do with anything? the issue is
the situation of the middle class. that includes joblessness, decrease
in wealth (including 401K's, home assets, etc) and the fact we havent
had a raise in 30 years while the richest 1% have had a 500% increase
in income


A few years ago, we discussed the cost of

boats on this group. At least one person sid they did not care what the
boat cost, but what the payment per month were. They ignored the fact the
boat loan was for 15 years for a $9,000 boat. That attitude was and is
rampant in both the lower and middle class.

more proof that the right hates the middle class. nothing changed for
the middle class in terms of attiitudes. what DID change is the
financial sector's rapacious GREED in inventing new financial
instruments and using these to transfer MASSIVE amounts of wealth FROM
the middle class TO the rich by bush's tax cuts, lack of sharing
increases in productivity, etc

there's a reason the GINI coefficient, which measures income
inequality, is the WORST For the US vs other democracies. there's a
reason the middle class hasnt had a raise in 30 years....and that
reason is GREED on the part of wall street and others who control the
economy

you have NOTHING but emotion. no data. no facts. you have right wing
mythology, fables and fairy tales you use to comfort yourself about
why the rich are blessed of god while the middle class deserves
poverty

Admit it, you made bad choices,

and are economically ignorant. We lost jobs because people decided a living
wage was required, and that living wage was enough to be upper middle class
in the last 60 years.

PERFECT EXAMPLE of what i'm talking about...you insist that the US,
which has the POOREST GINI coefficient has a greedy middle class when
it's the RICH who are greedy.

you're very right wing. you're a PERFECT example of how ARROGANT the
right wing is.

No raise in 10 years, says you suck at your job

more right wing bull****

NOBODY in the middle class has had a raise; NOBODY

dooes the ENTIRE middle class suck at their jobs?

WHY is this ONLY in the US? is it ONLY the US middle class that sucks?

you are SO filled with bizarre right wing bull**** it's laughable!

.. 100% Democrat and Republican and Independent Congress peoples

fault. Not Wall Street, not the big banks.

really? CDO's went from 1 trillion in 1997 to SIXTY TWO TRILLION in
2007

the financial sector accounted for 40% of GDP in 2007. what value did
this bring to the US economy?

NOTHING! NOTHING at all. it was GREED. the numbers dont lie. but the
right wing DOES. they want to blame the middle class even though the
US middle class just takes it year after year after year.

They were going along because

the government was giving them huge profits.

WTF?? how does 'the government' give them big profits? they simply
wiped out all regulation, and stole everything not nailed down

and you blame the middle class!

Wall streets and the big banks

were greedy so they insured the loans and sold them for even more profit.
That was criminal, but all started because government gave away the house.

EXACTLY!! right wing BULL**** said 'smaller govt and less regulation
will give the free market a chance to work'

and THAT destroyed the US economy. the middle class was NOT at fault


Are you beginning to realize that certain posters here would have jumped
to your side if anything you were typing had a shred of truth? Does it
surprise you that you are the Lone Ranger in this moronic debate?

bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:42:56 -0400, wrote:


wrote in message
...

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:28:20 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:



NOBODY in the middle class has had a raise; NOBODY

dooes the ENTIRE middle class suck at their jobs?

WHY is this ONLY in the US? is it ONLY the US middle class that sucks?


Wall streets and the big banks

were greedy so they insured the loans and sold them for even more profit.
That was criminal, but all started because government gave away the house.

EXACTLY!! right wing BULL**** said 'smaller govt and less regulation
will give the free market a chance to work'

and THAT destroyed the US economy. the middle class was NOT at fault


Man you'd better slow down. All this ranting will take its toll on your
health.

gee. imagine what i'm gonna be like when i still have to work at 70 to
support wall street.


BTW.....many of your "middle class" Americans have had increases over the
past ten years. They are called merit increases.

more incredibly stupid bull****.

INFLATION ADJUSTED wages have not risen in 30 years

are you naturally stupid or do you practice?


Wow! You finally caught on about the "adjusted for inflation" part of
the graph you posted a dozen times.

bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:10:02 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:



wrote in message
...

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:03:21 -0600,
wrote:


you be sure and let me know

Sensationizing are we? Advertising how big of a loser you are?

yeah. me and 100M other americans.

And yet

you vote Obama who blows Trillions on corruption....LMAO

notice he hates the middle class THEN blames the black president for
what the white rich boy president caused?

you're probably the only canadian who flies a klan flag on his front
porch

Capitol gains is partly so people will invest for the long term.

which is bull****. it costs about 50 cents for every dollar we give to
the rich in captial gains

check out the chart about half way down the page here

http://www.tnr.com/blogs/jonathan-chait

giving the rich more money COSTS the economy money.


Who is giving the rich money? Obama wants to give the losers *our* money.

bpuharic wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:39:34 -0400, wrote:


wrote in message
...

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:41:31 -0400, wrote:


neither will 100,000,000 other middle class americans.


Now I'm off to the Hard Rock casino to enhance my lifestyle.

yeah. tell us again about all those raises we got.


I never claimed that a majority received raises. It's you that claim all
over this news group that EVERY member of the class have not received
increases.

fine. you go show me where the data is showing the middle class has
gotten a raise.

i've shown you data that they didnt. AND that the rich got a 500%
increase in 30 years

where's your data?


Your graph supported it. What was the level of inflation for the past
30 years? Do you have any idea?

D.Duck wrote:

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:30:16 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

it's greed. there's a reason the financial sector accounted for 40% of
GDP in 2007 while the US did NOT become more competitive in world
markets. the financial sector added NOTHING to US assets

Where do you think the money for your retirement will be coming from?

The whole basis for everyone's pension, 401k and IRA is that Wall
Street sector you seem to hate. Retirees are by definition not adding
anything to the economy, they are living off of it.

Well, that's not really true. They're spending their money in many
ways that contribute. If they just hoarded their money, the economy
would be much worse off.

The same is true of everyone on Social Security. You better hope Wall
Street stays 40% of the economy if you want your 401k to be worth
anything when you start sucking off the public tit.

Unfortunately, 401Ks and IRAs (except Roths) aren't really great for
retirement instruments. People forget about the tax consequences of
withdrawing money. Tax rates are at historic lows. They will rise,
and one needs to factor that in when planning for retirement.



Well put. That's why I've been slowly removing money from my
traditional IRA for the past ten years to minimize the tax
implications as much as I can.
Yup. Obama's off-the-chart spending will certainly increase taxes. He
can't keep printing money forever.

"Larry" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 06:30:16 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

it's greed. there's a reason the financial sector accounted for 40% of
GDP in 2007 while the US did NOT become more competitive in world
markets. the financial sector added NOTHING to US assets

Where do you think the money for your retirement will be coming from?

The whole basis for everyone's pension, 401k and IRA is that Wall
Street sector you seem to hate. Retirees are by definition not adding
anything to the economy, they are living off of it.

Well, that's not really true. They're spending their money in many ways
that contribute. If they just hoarded their money, the economy would be
much worse off.

The same is true of everyone on Social Security. You better hope Wall
Street stays 40% of the economy if you want your 401k to be worth
anything when you start sucking off the public tit.

Unfortunately, 401Ks and IRAs (except Roths) aren't really great for
retirement instruments. People forget about the tax consequences of
withdrawing money. Tax rates are at historic lows. They will rise, and
one needs to factor that in when planning for retirement.



Well put. That's why I've been slowly removing money from my
traditional IRA for the past ten years to minimize the tax implications
as much as I can.
Yup. Obama's off-the-chart spending will certainly increase taxes. He
can't keep printing money forever.

You're truly stupid. The fact is that Bush lowered taxes for no damn good
reason, and they were already at historic lows. This isn't sustainable. Even
a moron like you should know that. Keep blaming Obama for all your troubles,
but they're definitely self-made.

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:17:04 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:29:34 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

The reason the average is down is because millions of people had their
high paid jobs shipped offshore due to policies and laws written when
that guy from Arkansas was in office. (NAFTA/GATT).

ROFLMAO!!! i'm old enough to remember that.

NAFTA was negotiated by GEORGE BUSH. it was laid out in great detail
by GEORGE BUSH. clinton signed it because it's destructive to a
nation's reputation to go back on a treaty that's about to be signed.

christ. dont you guys know ANYTHING??

Yup blame it on Bush, the standard democrat answer for 2 decades

IOW you dont like the facts...

uh OK