VicMan Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 So, you are saying buy the necessities before spending on luxuries or schemes to become rich. Well, that's plain common sense.But what I wanted to get at was; why focus specifically on these people and not others? I would imagine a lot of people would say "focus on the necessities first."Also, many of us depend on governments on some way or another. Want your trash taken out? Want that pothole repaired? - And as for financial well being, Social Security is among the most popular programs ever instituted.Logical question.I'm a money guy, they are basically thinking the same way that I do.It's not that I'm following them...it's that I agree with them.Also, common sense tells you that you must eat to live.Why not purchase the food now, while it's cheap? And more importantly - still available.Purchase the necessities of life first, then consider the various commodity investments.Control your own destiny as much as possible, don't depend on the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 So, you are saying buy the necessities before spending on luxuries or schemes to become rich. Well, that's plain common sense.But what I wanted to get at was; why focus specifically on these people and not others? I would imagine a lot of people would say "focus on the necessities first."Also, many of us depend on governments on some way or another. Want your trash taken out? Want that pothole repaired? - And as for financial well being, Social Security is among the most popular programs ever instituted.Its popular now - but Im only 28 and it wont be around when I need it. The projections for SS are dire. So I continue to pay in to a system that unless drastically overhauled will not exist when it is time for me to get something back out.I want to manage my own money - I dont need the government doing that for me. If I want cash - I keep cash - If I want to invest in real estate I do that - but the fact that I must pay into a system that most likely will not ever pay me back is ridiculous - yet if I dont pay - jail. Seems fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff8201 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Its popular now - but Im only 28 and it wont be around when I need it. The projections for SS are dire. So I continue to pay in to a system that unless drastically overhauled will not exist when it is time for me to get something back out.I want to manage my own money - I dont need the government doing that for me. If I want cash - I keep cash - If I want to invest in real estate I do that - but the fact that I must pay into a system that most likely will not ever pay me back is ridiculous - yet if I dont pay - jail. Seems fair.I'm only 26 and I'm pretty certain I will never see a dime of social security money... however, cutting it off now would affect too many who are receiving it presently. This is part or all of their depended income. I'm paying nearly $85 a check, which is not too much to lose in a two week period, but over time does add up. However if I must pay it to keep some order, so be it. But action is needed, I agree, and we've needed it for quite some time.Social Security is a good thing, in my opinion. It's money you can't get to until it's time for you to have it. The generation that will be paying you (we hope and pray) over your retirement years is still decades from conception. The alternatives now are usually risky. I'm glad I never paid into a 401K or any other retirement plan that was wholely or partially stock based (I'm hearing 401Ks are supposed to bounce back, however what if its down again, for years, right on the line with the time I want to retire, then what?). And simply having a savings account is senseless, since $200,000 now wont have the same value as $200,000 40 years from now, along with interest rates that are a joke (0.01% on my savings accounts), even for the CDs (even a semi-decent 5% rate is getting hard to find). I'm no financial genius, but I have common sense, and vesus the risks of the alternatives, I think Social Security is worth saving, if it can be done.What they need to do is either cut wasteful spending (as always) to help sure it up for now and overhaul that system like you said, or make an accurate prediction of when to stop it, and give ample notice of when its going away. Problem is, maybe you can put your money to good use and save for yourself, but a lot of people can't. They are simply unable to save due to lack of self discipline, or if they do, they may have to tap into it for unforeseen emergencies, medical costs, loss of a loved one, etc.You can always say "that's not MY problem" but if enough people reach retirement age, and can't retire, either being forced to stay in work, or simply having no income whatsoever it can become your problem very quickly in many different ways if enough of the population is affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Its popular now - but Im only 28 and it wont be around when I need it. The projections for SS are dire. So I continue to pay in to a system that unless drastically overhauled will not exist when it is time for me to get something back out.I want to manage my own money - I dont need the government doing that for me. If I want cash - I keep cash - If I want to invest in real estate I do that - but the fact that I must pay into a system that most likely will not ever pay me back is ridiculous - yet if I dont pay - jail. Seems fair.It is only the most solvent of all of the government's programs. Currently, Social Security is good until 2041. A little tweaking and it will be good far longer than that. If you want to use the word "dire", pick a program that's at least predicted to fail in less than 30 years. I won't tell you which one it is. I'll let you figure it out.Here's a hint. Our last Republican president used it to reward his rich buddies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 It is only the most solvent of all of the government's programs. Currently, Social Security is good until 2041. A little tweaking and it will be good far longer than that. If you want to use the word "dire", pick a program that's at least predicted to fail in less than 30 years. I won't tell you which one it is. I'll let you figure it out.Here's a hint. Our last Republican president used it to reward his rich buddies.It seems dire to me - I pay $317 every two weeks into a system that will reward me with -----NOTHING ----- Awesome! in 2041 I will be 60 which means, I will get absolutely nothing from it when it goes under. And who wants to keep it? Lets see what I could do with the $317/2 weeks for 32 years (actually less b/c its capped at $106,800). Bottom line is I can do better with my money than they can. All they can do is make sure the people who are getting old and were not responsible with their earnings are taken care of.I am not counting on SS in my family planning that is for sure. And Im not counting solely on my 401k either. Im attempting to diversify where I can...I keep some in cash, some in real estate, some in stocks (much less in the last 6 months) and right now alot in CD's. I dont know where else to put it. Everything has terrible returns right now, and with all the debt were taking on, and the amount of cash being printed - I dont see inflation stayin low for much longer. I dont know bout our last president stealing from SS but its a bad idea - There doesnt seem to have ever been a good administration. Though I will say so far, the current one is on track to be the worst ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share Posted February 17, 2009 Social Security is practically a Ponzi scheme.It depends on a ever shrinking base to support the older people on top.It has gone from a triangle, to something similar to a diamond shaped system.It depends on a steady birthrate & employment rate...neither of which will exist in the future.Shadowstats shows that the unemployment rate has gone from less than 11%(2001) to 18% today.And we are entering either an extended recession(best case) or a devastating depression.On top of all that, Congress can(and does) raid the system.Never believe government statistics. And (once again) don't believe everything you read. Social Security will not be in existence by 2041 & Medicaid will be gone long before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share Posted February 18, 2009 With all that is going on in the newsworld, what topics does Bill O'Reilly spend significant time on last night? A 13-year-old father, Miley Cyrus, a crazed chimpanzee, the Octuplet Mom, Whoopi Goldberg, and Sarah Palin's daughter. Get your news somewhere else...ANYWHERE else! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vertigo58 Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Most ignored story locally was Hurricane Ike damage/wreckage to Houston's less affluent area's of the city.Big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VicMan Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Never believe government statistics. And (once again) don't believe everything you read.Never?In tests frequently the problems that are wrong involve absolutes, such as "always" and "never" - life is complex.Plus the US government is a group of warring bodies, not an absolute monolithic body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 Never?In tests frequently the problems that are wrong involve absolutes, such as "always" and "never" - life is complex.Plus the US government is a group of warring bodies, not an absolute monolithic body.I agree with your statement. Let me be more specific, never believe these government statistics: Consumer Price Index, Inflation, Money Supply(M1, M2, M3), Unemployment, Gross Domestic Product, Census Population numbers, Racial Demographics, Presidential Election Returns, and most governmental economic stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I agree with your statement. Let me be more specific, never believe these government statistics: Consumer Price Index, Inflation, Money Supply(M1, M2, M3), Unemployment, Gross Domestic Product, Census Population numbers, Racial Demographics, Presidential Election Returns, and most governmental economic stats.Corollary: It's ok to believe them if you understand what they mean and how they're determined. If you're an amateur and aren't interested in becoming informed, then I would concur that it is better to willfully live your life in ignorance of the data you have identified rather than misapplying every single government statistic you'd ever come across. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted February 26, 2009 Author Share Posted February 26, 2009 Corollary: It's ok to believe them if you understand what they mean and how they're determined. If you're an amateur and aren't interested in becoming informed, then I would concur that it is better to willfully live your life in ignorance of the data you have identified rather than misapplying every single government statistic you'd ever come across.shadowstats.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 How about High Fructose Corn Syrup? Maybe this was reported on more often in the past. I vaguely remember stories on the big networks.My dad talked with a psychologist about this. He said his kids were bouncing off the walls (like many) so he decided to eliminate everything from their diet that had high fructose cory syrup in its ingredients. I believe he said within a week that his kids changed so much it was like he ordered brand new kids off the internet. They were completely different. He now calls HFCS "crack corn."That's pretty striking.We initially began talking about that because my mother and her friend worked together in an elementary school. They were just talking about the changes they've seen in kids over the past 20+ years.Another thing we noticed was how many autistic children there are these days. I remember retarded kids(it seems most of them had down syndrome) in school, and we always knew all of them, and there weren't that many. I have no idea how many of them were autistic though. But as an example to how much it may have increased since, my moms friend said they had 3 or 4 autistic children in one grade level alone. I wonder what's going on with that? Autism is certainly on the rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted March 18, 2009 Share Posted March 18, 2009 We initially began talking about that because my mother and her friend worked together in an elementary school. They were just talking about the changes they've seen in kids over the past 20+ years.Another thing we noticed was how many autistic children there are these days. I remember retarded kids(it seems most of them had down syndrome) in school, and we always knew all of them, and there weren't that many. I have no idea how many of them were autistic though. But as an example to how much it may have increased since, my moms friend said they had 3 or 4 autistic children in one grade level alone. I wonder what's going on with that? Autism is certainly on the rise.I've heard anecdotal stories of Autism and other mental illnesses being on the rise as well, but I can't help but wonder whether it has to do with changes in the way that they're addressed by public schools. There was a time when those kids just didn't go to school and then there was a time when it started to be encouraged, but schools weren't provided many services. Now, school districts have professionals that do nothing but manage these kinds of kids, and it's basically like providing free daycare with regular clinical attention. When I was going to school in McAllen, a significant number of Mexican nationals would find a way for their kid to claim residency on paper, usually through a friend or relative, and send their "special" kid across the border to public schools in Texas on a daily basis, just to take advantage of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Did you know the first gay couple in married in Massachusetts is (are?) filing for divorce? Haven't heard that one too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 Go to GoldmanSachs666Goldman Sachs runs our government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
west20th Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Did you know the first gay couple in married in Massachusetts is (are?) filing for divorce? Haven't heard that one too much. Why is that news? Did you expect that gay couples would never get divorced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Why is that news? Did you expect that gay couples would never get divorced? For reals - why would gay couples be any different than straight ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Did you know the first gay couple in married in Massachusetts is (are?) filing for divorce? Haven't heard that one too much. For reals - why would gay couples be any different than straight ones? ...all the more reason to eliminate government-sanctioned marriage. We could equalize rights between gays, lesbians, and straights while at the same time dissolving an institution which has its roots in religion and which causes all kinds of legal, financial, and tax policy headaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20thStDad Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 ...all the more reason to eliminate government-sanctioned marriage.We could equalize rights between gays, lesbians, and straights while at the same time dissolving an institution which has its roots in religion and which causes all kinds of legal, financial, and tax policy headaches. Yeah how much of everyone's money is wasted on marriage and divorce? Keep it a completely church thing, and redo the whole tax thing somehow by just giving the "married" rates to anyone with kids. Yeah, I know not everyone has kids, but guess what, by not having kids they have lots more money to pay taxes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 Why is that news? Did you expect that gay couples would never get divorced?So after years of whining for marriage rights, they divorce after only, what eight years?I also wonder why it took everyone ten days to notice the update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 So after years of whining for marriage rights, they divorce after only, what eight years?I also wonder why it took everyone ten days to notice the update.Are you actually trying to say that one gay couple's divorce after 8 years is a sign of something? Or, are you trying to say that there has never been a straight couple that has divorced more quickly than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Are you actually trying to say that one gay couple's divorce after 8 years is a sign of something? Or, are you trying to say that there has never been a straight couple that has divorced more quickly than that?For the sake of simplicity, I'm going to say "no" to both questions. I just thought it was an interesting fact that the first gay couple married legally in America is filing for divorce, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted April 27, 2009 Share Posted April 27, 2009 I just thought it was an interesting fact that the first gay couple married legally in America is filing for divorce, that's all.Why is that interesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronTiger Posted April 27, 2009 Share Posted April 27, 2009 Why is that interesting? Well, what do you want me to say? Anything I say that may be perceived as anti-homosexual will just get attacked. So why bother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Well, what do you want me to say? Anything I say that may be perceived as anti-homosexual will just get attacked. So why bother? Just looking for an honest answer. If over 1/2 of straight marriages end in divorce, what's interesting or surprising about a gay one doing the same? I don't see it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
20thStDad Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Ok, so I see what both of you are saying here, and it's not a big deal either way so quit dancing around it. Most marriages end in divorce, so what, it'll probably be the same with gays. At the same time, a couple probably spent years crusading for the right to be joined together in marriage, legally, forever, whatever, probably fought and rallied and put a crap ton of effort into it just to have the opportunity to be married, it is so important that they be married that they will attempt to change the law...and then they end up divorced. I see a little bit of humor/irony there. So what? Had a straight couple done the same I'd see it the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammer Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 What are your 'Most Ignored Stories' by the Media???They can be ignored, underreported, or flat out covered up.(By the way, I'm an independant who has no respect for either party)Here are some of mine in no particular order:1) I'm still stunned after 5 years, that a respected man like Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill can publicly state on '60 Minutes' that Bush discussed attacking Iraq 8 months BEFORE 9/11...and yet everyone has ignored him.2) Most dieticians, including 'Nutrition By Natalie'(Youtube), will tell you that soft drinks are the absolute WORST food that you can put into your body. Worse than hotdogs, doughnuts, or even french fries. This liquid candy is being covered up like cigarettes were in the 50's. Because it is such an incredible moneymaker and sponsor, Coke & Pepsi have managed to maintain a false image of healthy normalcy. It should be banned by the FDA, but the corruption at the FDA is a whole other story.3) The Banksters story is just now coming to light in the media...barely. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley completely controlled oil prices last summer by false electronic manipulation(via Enron).Former GOLDMAN SACHS employees head/headed:The New York Stock Exchange(Niederauer)Wants to keep derivatives.The World Bank(Zoellick)Ever wonder where that 'green' talk started?The U.S. Treasury Department (Paulson/under Bush)This man is an idiot.The White House chief of Staff(Bolten/under Bush)Citigroup(Rubin)Left 01/09/09....where will he go?Merrill Lynch(Thain)Ousted for his million dollar office bathroom.Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs(Reuben Jeffery)Commodity Futures Trading Commission head/Obama(Gary Gensler)Corruption is the motto at CFTC.Interim Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability-(Kashari)Controls TARP handouts.Governor of New Jersey(Corzine)Chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board(Friedman)Treasury Chief of Staff (Mark Patterson)So much for Obama's 'no lobbyists' talk.President of the New York Fed(William Dudley)Just appointed.4) Prior to 1980, Afghanistan hardly had any poppys. Then the CIA moved in and made Afghanistan the heroin capital of the world. 90% of the world's heroin & opium comes from Afghanistan thanks to the CIA. You won't believe what they do with dead soldier's bodies...you can read that yourself.5) John Perkins wrote a book called 'Confessions of an Economic Hitman'. It detailed the deceit of the World Bank, the CIA, and the 'Corporatocracy' of how the world works. We make loans to third world countries which they can't pay back, then we take over their natural resources. First, the Economic Hitman(Perkins) makes an 'offer you can't refuse'.If the leader can't be corrupted, he is killed by a Jackal(CIA).If the leader can't be killed, the military is sent in(Iraq).6) The 'Mass Media' is controlled by only a few conglomerate organizations: General Electric, Time Warner, Viacom, News Corp., Walt Disney, CBS, Sony, and a few smaller companies. It's pretty obvious why you don't hear much about this.7) UBS recently closed 19,000 American accounts in Switzerland, which the IRS said were illegally hiding funds. I'm sure you know about Swiss bank accounts. These 19,000 people are amongst the wealthiest people in the world. Not a peep from the mass media.I'm sure you have many more ignored stories...The truth about Goldman Sachs(#3) is FINALLY being exposed by a major media member almost 6 MONTHS after my original entry.If you saw Glenn Beck yesterday, he displayed the Goldman Sachs web of bankster deceit.Now they need to drive home the fact that Goldman Sachs is behind the Cap & Trade scam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HtownWxBoy Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 The truth about Goldman Sachs(#3) is FINALLY being exposed by a major media member almost 6 MONTHS after my original entry. If you saw Glenn Beck yesterday, he displayed the Goldman Sachs web of bankster deceit. Now they need to drive home the fact that Goldman Sachs is behind the Cap & Trade scam. Was is crying when he did all this? .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KinkaidAlum Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Michael Jackson.You'd think the death of the King of Pop would get more coverage but it appears as if the Media simply do not care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.