On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:35:17 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:40:10 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/25/13 1:20 PM, wrote:

The smaller operations are usually SPs and they don't have much in the
way of benefits. I am sure it is the same way up there. I know when I
put on an addition in the mid 70s (Clinton Md), the concrete/masonry
contractor was a family business and the guy who ran my gutters was a
one man show. I did the rest myself. My nieces hubby worked for Ryan
Homes a while and he did not get any benefits but the operating
engineers covered him.


Basically, we are devolving into a pensionless, healthcareless society
of day workers. A 401k is not a defined benefit pension plan.

I think the demographics of the baby boomers is threatening all of the
pension plans, including SS.

"Threatening" isn't the right word. I suppose the solution is to just
cut us all off? I still haven't seen one ****ing honest proposal from
the right to fix whatever problems there are.


I am still wondering what happens to the equities market when the
boomers cash out their 401k and we really start seeing pressure on the
defined benefit pension plans? That is money leaving the market and
will not return/

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:24:03 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:07:03 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:35:17 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:40:10 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 3/25/13 1:20 PM, wrote:

The smaller operations are usually SPs and they don't have much in the
way of benefits. I am sure it is the same way up there. I know when I
put on an addition in the mid 70s (Clinton Md), the concrete/masonry
contractor was a family business and the guy who ran my gutters was a
one man show. I did the rest myself. My nieces hubby worked for Ryan
Homes a while and he did not get any benefits but the operating
engineers covered him.


Basically, we are devolving into a pensionless, healthcareless society
of day workers. A 401k is not a defined benefit pension plan.

I think the demographics of the baby boomers is threatening all of the
pension plans, including SS.

"Threatening" isn't the right word. I suppose the solution is to just
cut us all off? I still haven't seen one ****ing honest proposal from
the right to fix whatever problems there are.

I agree, nobody in Washington really even acknowledges there is a
problem. They just keep kicking the can down the road.

There's a long-term problem, and everyone of note acknowledges that.
There is no short-term crisis.


I am still wondering what happens to the equities market when the
boomers cash out their 401k and we really start seeing pressure on the
defined benefit pension plans? That is money leaving the market and
will not return/

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

I say it along with all the non-crazies.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:11:08 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:59:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

I say it along with all the non-crazies.

So you really think the government can survive with a revenue stream
that barely covers the entitlements and interest on the debt with
virtually zero percent interest and 70-80 million boomers coming into
the SS/C system in the next decade.

I really think that the problems will get solved in whole or in part
as time goes on.

The only reason interest rates are low is because the fed is buying up
all the unsold paper with money they create out of thin air. That
can't go on forever.

And there're no plans for it to go on "forever". Who's saying that?
Oh, you are. I forgot.

The GOP doesn't want to raise any taxes and the democrats only want to
tax rich people. There is just not enough money there.
Bill Clinton even said it.

Huh? I guess you didn't see all the compromising that went on. Clinton
said what? I'm betting its either old or out of context for this.

Korea may get us in a war with the Chinese but we would have to borrow
the money from them to do it ... think about it.

Korea? What the **** does that have to do with SS? Not a ****ing
thing, but it sounds good.

Yeah, things are going to be fine. Sleep tight.

Things are going to be fine. I do sleep fine. Clearly you don't.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 12:45:09 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:59:17 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:11:08 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:59:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

I say it along with all the non-crazies.

So you really think the government can survive with a revenue stream
that barely covers the entitlements and interest on the debt with
virtually zero percent interest and 70-80 million boomers coming into
the SS/C system in the next decade.

I really think that the problems will get solved in whole or in part
as time goes on.

Another kick of the can.

So, if a problem can't get solved IMMEDIATELY and requires some
thought, negotiation, or patience, then it's kick the can, and ****
all that. Let's just blunder in and fix it. How moronic can you get.


The only reason interest rates are low is because the fed is buying up
all the unsold paper with money they create out of thin air. That
can't go on forever.

And there're no plans for it to go on "forever". Who's saying that?
Oh, you are. I forgot.

Did you hear the plan? I didn't.

It's called negotiation and testing. You weren't listening.



The GOP doesn't want to raise any taxes and the democrats only want to
tax rich people. There is just not enough money there.
Bill Clinton even said it.

Huh? I guess you didn't see all the compromising that went on. Clinton
said what? I'm betting its either old or out of context for this.

It was exactly in context. He was responding to the question of
whether taxing the rich more would solve our problems. His point was
everyone's taxes needed to go up, at least to the rates in his
administration. Democrats don't even support that position.

Taxing the rich is a good start. Taxing the middle class is doable,
but only in a strong economy. That's the context. Dems don't support
taxing the middle class NOW.


Korea may get us in a war with the Chinese but we would have to borrow
the money from them to do it ... think about it.

Korea? What the **** does that have to do with SS? Not a ****ing
thing, but it sounds good.

Wars are expensive.
The entitlements and interest on the debt consumes all we collect
right now. The money has to come from somewhere.

Like during WW2? Oh yeah, it's called deficit spending.

They sequestered a measly 85 billion and we had to withdraw a carrier
battle group. (or so we were told)

Yep, that's your thing... $85B on the backs of people who can least
afford it. That's GOP.

How much do you think a gesture that would impress the Koreans will
cost ... or are we just going to let them (and the Chinese) kick us
out of the western Pacific?

Whooo.... you're quite the war monger all of a sudden. Unfortunately,
you're not as well read as you claim.

The Chinese are already encroaching on Japanese (Senkakus) and
Philippine (Spratly Islands) territory. Now N Korea has virtually
declared war on the south, abrogating the peace treaty.

Holy ****! The nukes are already flying. Or not.


Yeah, things are going to be fine. Sleep tight.

Things are going to be fine. I do sleep fine. Clearly you don't.

I am certainly concerned. I have already lived through 2 major wars in
Asia.

The lesson being we might as well be paranoid in the extreme.

I also understand we are still saber rattling in the middle east.
What do we do about Iran in all of this?

Continue the pressure. All options on the table.

The fact that we are broke just empowers these people. We will have to
borrow money from China to have a war with them.

We are not ****ing broke. Money is flowing into the US not out.
Everyone wants in for their money. Interest rates are cheap. We need
to spend some on our citizens and get the infrastructure fixed.

As I said, the ****ing sky is not ****ing falling. Go back to sleep.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:51:59 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 10:16:51 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 12:45:09 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:59:17 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:11:08 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:59:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

I say it along with all the non-crazies.

So you really think the government can survive with a revenue stream
that barely covers the entitlements and interest on the debt with
virtually zero percent interest and 70-80 million boomers coming into
the SS/C system in the next decade.

I really think that the problems will get solved in whole or in part
as time goes on.

Another kick of the can.

So, if a problem can't get solved IMMEDIATELY and requires some
thought, negotiation, or patience, then it's kick the can, and ****
all that. Let's just blunder in and fix it. How moronic can you get.

What are they waiting for? When this blows up in our face it will
happen suddenly, like all of these other bad things have happened. Why
can't we get out on front of a problem for a change instead of
government by "freak out"

I think that's the point. The right wing isn't waiting. They're
actively trying to gut the safety net programs. The moderates on both
sides are trying to prevent that, along with the left. The right lost
the argument in the last election, but they won't go down without a
fight.

What happens if we get to a point that we can't just borrow our way
out of our problems?

That day is quite a ways off especially with all the uncertainty in
the rest of the world. We're the safe haven.



The only reason interest rates are low is because the fed is buying up
all the unsold paper with money they create out of thin air. That
can't go on forever.

And there're no plans for it to go on "forever". Who's saying that?
Oh, you are. I forgot.

Did you hear the plan? I didn't.

It's called negotiation and testing. You weren't listening.

I am listening, what did you hear that I didn't?

That there are several fixes being discussed. We just need to tamp
down the noisey bs from the extreme right. Turn down Fox. :-)




The GOP doesn't want to raise any taxes and the democrats only want to
tax rich people. There is just not enough money there.
Bill Clinton even said it.

Huh? I guess you didn't see all the compromising that went on. Clinton
said what? I'm betting its either old or out of context for this.

It was exactly in context. He was responding to the question of
whether taxing the rich more would solve our problems. His point was
everyone's taxes needed to go up, at least to the rates in his
administration. Democrats don't even support that position.

Taxing the rich is a good start. Taxing the middle class is doable,
but only in a strong economy. That's the context. Dems don't support
taxing the middle class NOW.

Kick that can again and just hope things get better ... OK, that is
what I said.

It's not kicking the can if there are serious people doing serious
work. You think nothing is happening but that's clearly not the case.



Korea may get us in a war with the Chinese but we would have to borrow
the money from them to do it ... think about it.

Korea? What the **** does that have to do with SS? Not a ****ing
thing, but it sounds good.

Wars are expensive.
The entitlements and interest on the debt consumes all we collect
right now. The money has to come from somewhere.

Like during WW2? Oh yeah, it's called deficit spending.

The problem with that theory is we are already spending 160% of what
we make. Our debt to GDP ratio is almost as bad as it was in 1944 and
we haven't even started this war (or started to pay down the last two)

That's nonsense...

Here's an opinion:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...ebt-hype_n.htm

Some facts:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2417...debt-1791-2010

Anything leap out at you?

They sequestered a measly 85 billion and we had to withdraw a carrier
battle group. (or so we were told)

Yep, that's your thing... $85B on the backs of people who can least
afford it. That's GOP.

It is going to land on everyone.

It's mostly going to land on middle and low wage earners and the poor.


How much do you think a gesture that would impress the Koreans will
cost ... or are we just going to let them (and the Chinese) kick us
out of the western Pacific?

Whooo.... you're quite the war monger all of a sudden. Unfortunately,
you're not as well read as you claim.

I am not in favor of having a war with anyone but when do you think we
should do it?

You seem to think Afghanistan was OK and they never threatened us at
all.

Actually, you made that argument not me. I think we were justified to
go into Afg. and not Iraq. Bush ****ed us over by not focusing on the
target.

N K is talking about attacking US bases in Asia.

NK talks a lot. They don't do much.

The Chinese are already encroaching on Japanese (Senkakus) and
Philippine (Spratly Islands) territory. Now N Korea has virtually
declared war on the south, abrogating the peace treaty.

Holy ****! The nukes are already flying. Or not.

If this is just noise, so be it but I do not have much confidence that
these guys are getting good leadership.

Which guys? You think China wants a war over NK or Japan and some
crappy uninhabited dung heap of an island? Or they're really going to
try and be aggressive on the high seas with the US breathing down
their necks? China's around for the long-haul. They don't want a
shooting war and neither do we.



Yeah, things are going to be fine. Sleep tight.

Things are going to be fine. I do sleep fine. Clearly you don't.

I am certainly concerned. I have already lived through 2 major wars in
Asia.

The lesson being we might as well be paranoid in the extreme.

I also understand we are still saber rattling in the middle east.
What do we do about Iran in all of this?

Continue the pressure. All options on the table.

OK so we attack Iran to protect Israel. Do we attack NK to protect
South Korea?

Maybe. You think NK can actually deploy it on short notice? I don't
think either will happen.

Bear in mind who already HAS the bomb.

The fact that we are broke just empowers these people. We will have to
borrow money from China to have a war with them.

We are not ****ing broke. Money is flowing into the US not out.

Bull****, we have a $110B trade deficit.
The money coming back is LOANED to us, not paid to us.

http://ycharts.com/indicators/us_trade_deficit_monthly

Less than half that. And, the money coming is absolutely lent to us...
at very, very attractive rates... approaching zero.


Everyone wants in for their money. Interest rates are cheap. We need
to spend some on our citizens and get the infrastructure fixed.

You already said, the fed can't keep printing money to hold the
interest rates down. Yet we are still driving full speed towards the
cliff, thinking it will go on forever.

We are not. That's sky is falling right wing bull****.

As I said, the ****ing sky is not ****ing falling. Go back to sleep.

I hope you are right.

Well that's the ****ing point. You don't know. But you'd rather have a
freak out than look at facts and make an honest intellectual judgement
about the liklihood of events.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 02:05:09 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 21:46:09 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

Less than half that. And, the money coming is absolutely lent to us...
at very, very attractive rates... approaching zero.

... and even with that, entitlements and the interest on the debt eats
every dollar of revenue.
What happens when that interest goes up a half a point?

Not much.

Only if you think the sequester was "not much". It is more money.
(.005 x $16T is $60B)


so, the sequester is a good or bad thing? Jeeesus... it's like arguing
with a five year old.
Again "not much?"
The point is we are talking like the sequester is the end of the world
(laying off cops, turning prisoners loose, slashing education budgets,
withdrawing a carrier group and stopping the white house tours) and it
only represents about a half a point rise in interest rates, not much
when they are very low now..

Never said end of the world. Said bad thing, unnecessary, and the
consequences are just starting to hit. All of it at the Republican
doorstep.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:53:09 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:41:54 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 02:05:09 -0400, wrote:

The point is we are talking like the sequester is the end of the world
(laying off cops, turning prisoners loose, slashing education budgets,
withdrawing a carrier group and stopping the white house tours) and it
only represents about a half a point rise in interest rates, not much
when they are very low now..

Never said end of the world. Said bad thing, unnecessary, and the
consequences are just starting to hit. All of it at the Republican
doorstep.

Again, you said the effect of a half point interest rate hike was "not
much" but that is more than the sequester which is a "bad thing"
according to you, called a "fiscal cliff" by just about everyone else.

Huh? I never commented on anything related to "half point". That's
your bull****. The sequester is good in your little brain but not many
other places.

In article , says...

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 01:11:08 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 17:59:22 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

The sky isn't falling chicken little.

Okey Dokey, if you say so.

I say it along with all the non-crazies.

So you really think the government can survive with a revenue stream
that barely covers the entitlements and interest on the debt with
virtually zero percent interest and 70-80 million boomers coming into
the SS/C system in the next decade.

I really think that the problems will get solved in whole or in part
as time goes on.

Continuing to kick the can down the road isn't going to solve anything.


The only reason interest rates are low is because the fed is buying up
all the unsold paper with money they create out of thin air. That
can't go on forever.

And there're no plans for it to go on "forever". Who's saying that?
Oh, you are. I forgot.

If it stops then we have an even bigger problem because we will have an unmet need, our need
to borrow money with nobody to lend it to us. Do you really believe that other emergine 1st
world nations are not going to use us as a case study on how not to bankrupt a nation?

We are in trouble and we refuse to acknowledge it.


The GOP doesn't want to raise any taxes and the democrats only want to
tax rich people. There is just not enough money there.
Bill Clinton even said it.

Huh? I guess you didn't see all the compromising that went on. Clinton
said what? I'm betting its either old or out of context for this.

Korea may get us in a war with the Chinese but we would have to borrow
the money from them to do it ... think about it.

Korea? What the **** does that have to do with SS? Not a ****ing
thing, but it sounds good.

China is funding our spending. If we go to war with China or if we **** off China they will
call their loans and our credit will go from its current not great to less than junk status
in a matter of hours.

At that time we will find out who our friends are in this world of nations.

Yeah, things are going to be fine. Sleep tight.

Things are going to be fine. I do sleep fine. Clearly you don't.

The world is a dangerous place and it will always be a dangerous place.

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:28:00 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:46:59 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:53:09 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:41:54 -0700, Urin Asshole
wrote:

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 02:05:09 -0400, wrote:

The point is we are talking like the sequester is the end of the world
(laying off cops, turning prisoners loose, slashing education budgets,
withdrawing a carrier group and stopping the white house tours) and it
only represents about a half a point rise in interest rates, not much
when they are very low now..

Never said end of the world. Said bad thing, unnecessary, and the
consequences are just starting to hit. All of it at the Republican
doorstep.

Again, you said the effect of a half point interest rate hike was "not
much" but that is more than the sequester which is a "bad thing"
according to you, called a "fiscal cliff" by just about everyone else.

Huh? I never commented on anything related to "half point". That's
your bull****. The sequester is good in your little brain but not many
other places.

You even quoted the half point reference in this response, now you
don't remember?
Step away from the bong and sober up.

You're the dumb**** drinker.

It is a shame what is happening with the education in this country. Our young people are our greatest asset and they can't even get a good education without having a major expense hanging over their heads.