|
Biggus...V'sssss
|
Quote:
|
If Rahm Emanuel's name is in an article, juices flow.
ChicagoBusiness By: Greg Hinz and Robert Herguth October 24, 2011 Top Rahm aide set herself up for sweet CTA pension Quote:
She worked for the Transit Authority for 8 years. She would have been eligible for retirement benefits in 3 more years She contributed $64,908.53 towards her own retirement That is $8,113 per year She will need to wait 18 years to start receiving benefits The point of Merc's entire "expose" is... She will need to pay an additional $53,000 if she wanted to secure these benefits. That's about $10K per year for a pension 18 years down the road--- My God, Oh the humanity... Such "sweet" pension ... NOT ! . |
lol
I still don't like Rahm, tho. |
He's channeling LBJ:
"Make the bastard deny it." |
Furthermore, with respect to Ms Mintle above
If Ms Mintle did not secure her retirement via the $53,000 advance payment, it seems likely to me she would have withdrawn the $64,908.53 from her own retirement account. She would have had to pay income tax on that amount, unless she could roll it over to another retirement account. Ms Mintle was Chief of Staff, but the changes in the CTA system were the responsibilities of her boss, not hers. There is nothing in Merc's link to fault either Ms Mintle or Mr Emanuel. But I'm sure Merc will keep trying. . |
contributing $64,000 TOTAL over the years and getting a $65,000 ANNUAL pension
are two very different things. jus saying didn't read it, don't care enough. |
A deferred annuity for $65k at 7% for 18 yrs yields less than $200k
I doubt the wording of the link can be interpreted as $65k per yr |
Well thats what it says ...
Quote:
Quote:
|
Good catch, Classic.
It's embarrassing to make such a mistake, particularly when it's so public. I misinterpreted the statement in lead paragraph. I apologize. :dunce: I found the information later in the article saying that Ms Mintle had already contributed $72,000 in her 8 yrs of CTA service. For a deferred annuity at 7% return on that balance would be ~ $89k now, and about $270k when she reaches retirement age at 65 yr If she contributed an additional $53k now, this could add ~ $160k when she reaches 65 yr Thus, her total balance at 65 yr could be $270k + $160k or ~ $430k Her service credits would be 8 + 6, or equivalent to working 14 years for CTA. Such a balance might pay out $65k per year, or about a third of her annual ($175k) salary When she left the CTA, Ms Mintle's replacement was hired at the same pay range. While $175,000 /yr salary seems a lot, maybe Chicago does pay such salaries to Chief of Staff for the heads big agencies such as the CTA So, all in all, I do not yet see any criticism of Ms Mintle or Mr Emanuel, and stand by my comments in my original post. |
??? dunno ???
Look up Jim Whelan in New Jersey. See if he did anything "strange" with respect to his pension. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Pick one: Romney, Cain, Perry, Bachmann, Paul, Huntsman, Gingrich, Santorum, McCain, McConnell, Graham, Brewer, Bentley, Parnell, Bush, Jindal, Chistie, Kasich, Scott, Walker, McDonnelll, Palin, Cheney, Forbes, O'Donnell, Blakely, Owens, Army, Koch, Rove, Will... in 2012
It really won't matter, you and they will both know they were only second best. :rolleyes: (UT: I promise I won't do the color/size thing again.) |
Your forgot my favorite, Thaddeus McCotter.
He deserved more of a shot, he was the one with a sense of humor. |
OK, add'em to the list !
|
Quote:
It'll be just like 2008 when the second best won. (Hillary) |
2008 Me and my wife watching TV ... Hillary and Obama
That's when the fight started.:rolleyes: |
Quote:
|
What is the proper role and scope of government?
Whatever the people vote for, is what. I was arguing this with my (remaining) Libertarian friend; I said, friend, it's all well and good to try to get into office. But if only 10% of the people agree with your approaches, isn't it tyranny to put them into place, even if you are elected? |
I suppose it depends, UT, on whether or not that 10% was solely responsible for making the election happen...through money and media influence. Or perhaps it more depends on whether the unpopular policies were touted when running or not. If we don't know what we're getting, how can we be truly electing a representative?
|
Government doings reify the things a society considers and generally agrees are necessary to do, but on which nobody's ever figured out how to turn a profit. Providing for the common defense is the most obvious example.
It connects with that other thing that should be said of the State: it is not your mother, it is not your father; the State is a weapon. Like a weapon, it is a tool suited to a certain spectrum of tasks, but not to others. Yet like a weapon in very truth, when it is needed nothing else will do. |
Quote:
but I don't think you want to hang your hat on the second. Eisenhower recognized and told the US people something about that. Regan ignored his remarks in striving for his 600-ship navy. "Star wars" and "Haliburton" are a couple of the more current memes. It was all about making $ and profits from the common defense. |
I'm with you, Lamplighter. Private contractors are raking in money hand over fist. They're making a killing in more ways than one. During the Iraq War, there was one private contractor employee for every one American soldier. :eyebrow:
Lots of interesting stuff from the CBO. Here's a snip: Quote:
|
Quote:
Heck, I'd probably rather have an even higher ratio than that. They're probably cheaper and lets be honest, no one was really ever tallying the dead mercenary numbers in the press. |
Quote:
|
And how has that changed in the last 2 1/2 years?
|
I don't think it has. Why would anybody want to step off the gravy train? What were we talking about, anyhow?
|
Obama doing the same thing Bush did. ;)
|
Google News puts up headlines and current links to the topic
Here are two articles on the same topic. Flip a coin to decide which you read first. The articles are about the same length, so you may want to read the originals. Then post your thoughts on the subject and/or the role of government. Winona Daily News.com Nov 6, 2011 Dr. Frank Bures Imperfect medical tests still useful Quote:
Forbes Nov 21, 2011 Steve Forbes The Department of Health and Human Services' Death Panel Quote:
|
First of all, these are opinion pieces - one published in a newspaper and the other in the business magazine, Forbes.
I do not trust medical (or scientific) information from such sources. Is the Winona Daily News a peer reviewed journal? And who is Dr. Frank Bures? A renowned cancer researcher? The senior oncologist at the Mayo clinic? The local chiropractor who picks up spare change writing for the Winona Daily News? Or maybe the local GP who picks up quite a bit of loose change pandering to the fear of cancer. Who knows? I don't and the last thing I'd do is make major health decisions based on what I read in the News, earnest journalists though they may be. Then we have Forbes, dedicated to business and those who run businesses - NOT a medical journal. As a matter of fact, Forbes has a vested interest in attacking government regulation of ANY sort, even including health guidelines. Steve Forbes gives us his anecdotal experience without mentioning his age - which is a major factor for prostrate cancer - and makes the assumption that every man in the world will share the same experience as he did. Whatever This is the research done at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) published in the highly regarded, peer-reviewed Journal of New England Medicine: ~snip~ Quote:
The NIH is working on developing a better test in order to save lives. The old test is just not all that helpful. Sorry, Frank |
Who cares....
|
Quote:
A man's chances of getting prostrate cancer and what tests are appropriate? or How much weight should be given to the medical opinions of a gov't backed out fit which has a mandate to cut health costs? I would think that all men would care about the former. The latter has important implications for government sponsored health care. Merc, you just skim stuff that other people post if you read it at all. Honestly! :rolleyes: |
Liberal Programs Deserve Blame for Income Inequality
The Congressional Budget Office documents income gains for everyone, not just the wealthy. http://reason.com/archives/2011/11/0...lame-for-incom |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Oh, and most of the places with not a lot of government going on have lots and lots of Religion in government going on. Hmmm....I wonder if there is a relationship there. /rant off. |
Joe!
Joe's back! *big smile* |
Thanks Dana. :) good to see you too!
|
IN MY OPINION
"I have experienced first hand the idea of no government, and it is not a nice place."
So what? Who said anything about 'nice' or 'fair' or 'equal' or any of that crap? While not always the case: 'peace' (or 'nice' or 'fair' or 'equal' or 'just', etc.) is just another word for 'controlled'. # "...most of the places with not a lot of government going on have lots and lots of Religion in government going on." Not surprising as 'politics' and 'religion' are essentially the same thing: Idealism (the worship of 'god', whether it be divine arbiter or ideology, is the same across the board). |
Dude, why wait for the United States to change? You should move tomorrow! I'll help pay your fair to Islamabad. It sounds to me like you would love it there. Don't stay in Islamabad though, way to much control there. Bolochistan or North West Frontier sound like about your speed.
Peace, nice, fair, equal and just are other words for controlled?? What dictionary do you use? It's hard to take you serious when you discuss things in such a manner. Is this radar with a different handle? |
"You should move tomorrow!"
As an 'occupant' might say: make me. # "It's hard to take you serious when you discuss things in such a manner." In post #53 of this http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=26210&page=4 Dana declares 'All threads in the Cellar are 'opinion' threads, essentially." So: pffftt! If you don't like the way I define or express or opine, that, 'dude', is your concern, not mine. And: since I haven't a clue who you are, can't see how your (not) taking 'me' serious is sumthin' I need to worry about. And: no, I'm not 'radar'...I don't use multiple handles and I don't change what works. |
I don't want to make you move to another country. That's not what I am about. There is a line of logic, flawed though it may be, to my thinking though. Having been to many other countries, the U.S. is a very, very peaceful, nice, fair, equitable, and just place. By comparison. We aren't perfect, but we have it really good. So, since there are so many other places where government enforcement of regulations and laws is lax to say the least, it would be easier to move to one of these places then try to create this atmosphere in the US. It's also a selfish idea, I prefer the United States as it is today. Although it's not a perfect union, it is a bit more perfect then just about any place I've been. A damn sight more perfect then places I've been where there is no government. We have more then our fair share of the blessings of liberty, justice and domestic tranquility. We have a pretty damn good common defense, I help see to that.
I'm really not willing to give that up. Again, not trying to make anyone move where they do not want to go. It just sounds to me like you would like to live there rather then here. |
"I'm really not willing to give that up."
Me neither, which is why it irks me you fixated on "In my view: to not exist." as the answer to the question of 'what is the proper role and scope of government?' when the bulk of my post (#8) was given over to the notion of proxyhood (or, extremely limited government) as preferable to 'governance' (in the current form).
I may be anarchistic, but I'm not advocating an anarchy. Any lazy shit reading your post (and not bothering to go up-thread to read my post) is sure to take me as some of rabid libertarian-type. Next thing I'll know: said lazy shit will bring up Somalia as my idea of heaven... :mad: ...which it's not. I'm quite capable of painting myself into a corner without others lending a hand by way of out-of-context quotes...just sayin'... ;) # "the U.S. is a very, very peaceful, nice, fair, equitable, and just place" Trundle over to the 'wall street occupied' thread for opposing views...me: I'm content here despite the fact I don't think America is all that peaceful, nice, fair, etc. |
U.S. boosts estimate of auto bailout losses to $23.6B
Quote:
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B#ixzz1dxXuR19T |
"...I don't think America is all that peaceful, nice, fair, etc." IN MY OPINION
Nor is there one good reason (but many bad ones) why it should be.
|
Quote:
The weapons of a state might be analogized with the antlers of a deer: they defend the deer, they aid the deer in promulgating his genes through deer-dom -- but they exact a cost to the deer's metabolism, growth, energy. Such expenditure might have been laid out in some other part of the deer, right? And yet, the deer would not do so well without them, in the end. Necessary, but not wealth-generating overall; wealth-consuming instead. |
Quote:
Said anonymous jinglenuts seemed out to discredit libertarianism, perhaps by Alinskyite methods. Meh, who knows? |
Quote:
|
Not advocating in particular; just observing. In perhaps missing my point -- I'm not sure whether you have or not -- you've set up a different scenario. Might be fruitful; should we discuss more?
|
I think we understand each other. I see that our deer is dying. Among other things, we've over invested in horns losing ground to the animals who've put more energy into their bodies. Metaphors aside, we've made a lot of bad investments as a country to the detriment of a couple things only the smallest minority oppose, infrastructure and education. Sensible investment in those two things make us more competitive. We should not lose sight of that during our quadrennial rut.
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Elk |
Respect government or government will hunt you down like a wounded deer
From here
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Hopey Changey, fail.
CBO: Stimulus hurts economy in the long run Quote:
|
I think that was the point, though, merc, whether you agree with it or not. The idea is, if the government boosts things in the short term, that will be enough to set the ball rolling, and by the time the stimulus starts costing productivity the snowball effect of what it STIMULATED in the -private- sector will more than make up for the eventual lessening of the direct effects. Basically, the idea is, if we can get the economy on track NOW, it will be strong enough to survive the eventual side effects of the drug we used to save it. You can disagree with the effectiveness of that concept, but attacking it as if this wasn't a foreseeable consequence of the stimulus on the part of its proponents is disingenuous.
|
Quote:
|
I think you need to determine how much of the stimulus was for job creation and then recalculate those numbers.
IMO, it will be much more representative of reality. Then look at the amounts spent on "other" things and assess how well that was spent. |
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
There are several political candidates and pundits who are
advocating the elimination of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I thought it might be worthwhile to try to have a discussion of these two entities, and the implications of keeping or eliminating them. Here is Freddie Mac's website description of what they do: Quote:
Marketplace Liquidity Quote:
Instead, a mortgage is developed by a bank, credit union, etc. wherein the terms of the loan are defined, and the purchase funds are distributed to the new home owner. Before the existence of F&F, the bank provided it's own funds and held the mortgage and processed the loan payments. But with F&F, the bank can now sell such mortgages to F&F, and thereby replenish the bank's funds to continue creating additional mortgages. But, F&F do not buy these mortgages one-at-a-time. Instead, the bank "bundles" several mortgages and establishes the "quality" of the bundle, and then proceeds to negotiate the value with F&F. Once F&F own these bundles of mortgages, they sell them to investors, with assurances of value and quality... and may earn a profit during these transactions. ------------ OK, I hope other Dwellars will add or correct my description as needed, and contribute to a political discussion of these institutions. . |
That really deserves a thread of its own.
|
Gingrich on the proper role of the Judiciary Branch
Elsewhere, I posted my concern over Gingrich's intentions for his presidency.
Here are excerpts from the articles I cited. NY Times Editorial Dec 10, 2011 Mr. Gingrich’s Attack on the Courts Quote:
Here is Gingrich's presentation: - it downloads a pdf file. 21st Century Contract with America Bringing the Courts Back Under the Constitution Quote:
|
I wonder how Supreme Court Judge Samuel Alito is feeling about Newt now.
Has he uttered the phrase: "Dear God, what have I wrought" It was Alito, while working in the Reagan administration, that expanded the concept of "Signing Statements" which in effect allowed US Presidents to ignore parts of new legislation the President (by himself) deemed as unconstitutional. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.