| To: kumar who wrote (111729) | 4/29/2005 10:17:33 AM | | From: DMaA | | | | I mentioned earlier that my parents bought a house in 1962 for $15,000. The house has been maintained and upgraded over the years and is probably a better house today than it was in 1962. You could buy it for about $95,000. According to my inflation calculator, in real terms this house hasn't appreciated one dime in 40 years.
I would say there are vastly more properties like this in the country than the absurd pockets like south Florida and CA. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: DMaA who wrote (111730) | 4/29/2005 10:19:17 AM | | From: Lane3 | | | | There's no point for a "centrist" third party. That area is already thoroughly covered by the big two.
I disagree that the middle is currently covered. I agree, however, that solving that problem via a third party is unfeasible. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: Lane3 who wrote (111722) | 4/29/2005 10:20:21 AM | | From: LindyBill | | | | Bush didn't say how he was proposing to change projected benefits.
Here is the WaPo explanation.
President's Plan Shields Benefits of Low Earners
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 29, 2005; A08
President Bush last night embraced a complex proposal to restore much of Social Security's fiscal balance by cutting deeply into the Social Security benefits of high-income workers and eroding benefits promised to the middle class.
By forcing higher-income beneficiaries to bear the brunt of the cuts, the plan would shield low-income retirees completely -- allowing Bush to endorse an enhanced benefit that would ensure the working poor will not retire into poverty. Any benefit cuts or enhancements would come on top of the president's personal accounts proposal, in which every dollar contributed to a private account would be deducted from a worker's traditional Social Security benefit, plus an interest rate 3 percent above inflation.
Already battling public opinion, the president has now publicly endorsed a proposal under attack from all sides -- by conservatives who say it will make Social Security an even less attractive deal than it is now, and by liberals who say it is unfair to the middle class and would undermine political support for Social Security.
The proposal, known as progressive indexing, was formulated by Robert Pozen, a Massachusetts investment executive and a Democratic member of Bush's 2001 Social Security Commission. It would not completely close the gap between Social Security benefits promised and taxes expected to be paid into the system, but it would solve almost three-quarters of the problem. The White House last night pegged the figure at 70 percent.
Currently, to set initial benefit levels, the Social Security Administration averages the highest earning years of a worker's career, then adjusts them upward to reflect the growth of wages between those years and the time of retirement. Under Pozen's progressive indexing, that system would remain in effect for the bottom 30 percent of earners, who are currently making less than about $20,000 a year.
For workers earning the maximum income subject to Social Security taxes, currently $90,000, benefits would be set according to the growth of inflation over their careers. Since prices tend to grow more slowly than wages, benefits for these workers would be reduced substantially over time, from the level currently promised and even the reduced level payable once the Social Security system has depleted its entire trust fund.
Workers earning between $20,000 and $90,000 would have their benefits set by a sliding scale that combines inflation increases and wage growth.
According to analyses by Social Security's chief actuary, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service and the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the impact would be substantial. By 2055, workers earning $90,000 would see their annual Social Security benefit drop from the currently scheduled $35,751 to $22,666, a 37 percent reduction, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. By 2075, the negative impact would grow to 49 percent.
Even if nothing were done to fix Social Security's finances, such workers in 2075 would see their benefits cut by $5,156, or 19 percent, from the level even a "bankrupt" Social Security system could pay.
For the working class, the picture is more complex. Under progressive indexing, a worker now earning $35,000 and retiring in 2055 would see annual benefits fall by 21 percent, or $4,552. But that benefit would be $1,685 higher than Social Security could actually pay, absent any changes.
If that same retiree were earning $58,000 in 2005, his benefits would be cut by $9,082, or 31 percent, from currently scheduled levels. If nothing were done to Social Security, the worker would still get $813 more a year under a "bankrupt" system than under progressive indexing.
Democratic economists say such numbers prove that policymakers will have to combine benefit cuts with some form of tax increase to spread the pain and close Social Security's projected funding gap.
"Even if you whack high-income people, you still need deep cuts on middle-income people," said Jason Furman of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
In an interview, Pozen said yesterday he would be willing to discuss some tax increases to mitigate the impact of benefit cuts, but he said it was unfair to compare benefits under his plan with benefits currently promised but unaffordable. Bush last night reiterated his opposition to increasing the payroll tax rate.
Some conservatives are no less blunt in their opposition to Pozen's approach. Under progressive indexing, the rate of return from what middle- and upper-income workers pay into the system and what they get back will get worse every year, said Peter Ferrara, a conservative Social Security analyst. Benefits would be an ever smaller percentage of workers' pre-retirement income.
Such conservatives maintain that large, private investment accounts could replace Social Security with no cuts in promised benefits. But Pozen said their proposals are simply avoiding the difficult choices that he -- and the president -- are willing to make.
"You have to suffer some pain," Pozen said. "The question is, what's a reasonable amount of pain and who should suffer it?" |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| To: Ilaine who wrote (111734) | 4/29/2005 10:29:01 AM | | From: gamesmistress | | | | 2) after he was arrested it seemed to me that he was still admired (not by me.)
Sick-o.
The ones I want to kill are the ones who are attracted to five year olds. And we won't even talk about the ones who are attracted to younger kids. Death is too good for them.
You betcha.
If it weren't Star Trek for many pedos, it might be Dungeons & Dragons, or some other fantasy world. NASCAR, no. Paramilitary doesn't seem to fit either. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: carranza2 | 4/29/2005 10:29:31 AM | | | | | | DEBKA noting unconfirmed reports from Islamist sources that OBL is dead. The usual dose of NaCl suggested:
debka.com
<<<<<<<An announcement of Osama bin Laden’s death appears Friday in one of his close aides’ most credible Web sites. It has sparked a storm of controversy in al Qaeda circles, some of whom claim notice is false.
Signed by the Pen of Jihad Warriors, the site provides no information on circumstances of death, only asks:
Where are those who break out of borders? Where are the lamenters? Where are those who throw themselves from the tops of towers and skyscrapers? Where are the heart-rending cries?>>>>>>
More from another source:
alertnet.org
DUBAI, April 29 (Reuters) - A posting on an Islamist Web site stirred speculation over the fate of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and prompted a flurry of denials on Friday that the world's most wanted man was dead.
The entry on www.islam-minbar.net Web site began by saying there was news bin Laden had died but went on to say he was alive but, as a human being, could die any time and that Muslims should be prepared for that when it happens.
The unidentified author seemed to be trying to draw readers to his posting with a headline that bin Laden was dead.
London-based Islamist activist Yasser al-Serri, who monitors Web sites, said bin Laden "is alive" and was believed to have recently recorded a new video tape which may be on its way for broadcasting.
"The headline of the posting did create confusion, but I believe the person who posted it wanted to urge Muslim youths to continue jihad (holy war) even if bin Laden died," Serri told Reuters by telephone from London.
Western diplomats in Islamabad cast doubt on the reports, apparently circulating on more than one Middle East Web site.
Western intelligence officials usually say they believe bin Laden is holed up somewhere in the mountainous frontier region between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
In March, Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf told the BBC that interrogations of captured al Qaeda members and electronic surveillance had led Pakistani security forces to believe they "knew roughly the area where he possibly could be ... maybe about 10 months ago".
But Musharraf said the trail had since gone cold.
The most recent video of bin Laden appeared on Oct. 30, four days before the U.S. election. The Saudi-born militant derided President George W. Bush and warned of a new Sept. 11-style attack.
Egyptian bin Laden adherent, Yasser Sari, calls notice a lie and promises new videotape soon in which leader announces end of al Qaeda truce in Europe. Other followers credit the announcement as “authentic and Islamic.” |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: Ilaine who wrote (111734) | 4/29/2005 10:32:01 AM | | From: DMaA | | | | | The thing that I find interesting about these guys, they never find them with 10 kiddy porn pictures, they always have 10,000 pictures. I sense this sheer volume is important somehow but not sure how. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: LindyBill who wrote (111738) | 4/29/2005 10:34:31 AM | | From: Lane3 | | | | >>Some conservatives are no less blunt in their opposition to Pozen's approach. Under progressive indexing, the rate of return from what middle- and upper-income workers pay into the system and what they get back will get worse every year, said Peter Ferrara, a conservative Social Security analyst. Benefits would be an ever smaller percentage of workers' pre-retirement income.
Such conservatives maintain that large, private investment accounts could replace Social Security with no cuts in promised benefits. But Pozen said their proposals are simply avoiding the difficult choices that he -- and the president -- are willing to make.<<
"Some conservatives"? That failure to attribute is very irritating. Were there really "some conservatives" drinking Koolaid at Bush's personal-account tour? It never occurred to me that anyone championing private accounts who warranted reporting by the Post didn't realize that there was another shoe that sooner or later had to be dropped. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: Ilaine who wrote (111734) | 4/29/2005 10:35:54 AM | | From: mph | | | | I don't find it at all surprising that pedophiles
would also be hard core Sci-Fi fans.
There's an element of fantasy and self delusion in pedophiles.
Grown men (or just adults) with a fixation on Sci-Fi
to the extent of Trekkies have mental problems, IMO.
In any event, the sci-fi addiction is fantasy-based and
escapist.
Pedophiles delude themselves into thinking that they
are expressing love for their victims.
Makes about as much sense as thinking they're Capt. Kirk. |
| | Politics for Pros- moderated | Political Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| |
