bio-chem

and john you where never in the military. we still have a dont ask dont tell policy, and the fact is you cant wait to tell

Dale Mabry

So a well thought out post is not even responded to, go figure. Well let's dicuss this notion shall we. We all seem to think we know what we are talking about, so take this guy's response apart.

Didn't think so.

If sense were common, everyone would have it.

4/2007-Current 75th Ranked most popular image 1 spot behind Prince's bulge...

ALBOB

I'm sorry. I'll take my toys and go home now.

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

DOMS

Sounds like someone's on the rag.

ALBOB

You're absolutely correct, that's what it was SUPPOSED to do. But now, due to misinformation and ignorance, we have a few zillion folks who don't understand that and are counting on it for their very survival. Do you want to just cut them off? I'm a self admitted cold hearted bastard, but even I couldn't see doing that.

Again, absolutely correct. Therein lies the battle for and against this program. The private accounts are going to cost a bundle in the short term to get established so the government has proposed to pick up that slack until the program is up and running. Yes, this will put us further in debt in the short term, but will ultimately save the program.

As I've already stated, I'm speaking from EXPERIENCE here and my "red herring" is swimming rather nicely, thank you.

P.S. I do pay attention to my Social Security investment, but I'm approaching Social Security as though it will not exist when I retire.

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

John H.

Cfs,

I do not have tunnel-vision. I am NOT a republican. I DO see things from ALL sides and strive damn hard to DO just that on every subject. That is something republicans do NOT do.

As for knocking someone's lights out - you had better BELIEVE I WOULD in a heartbeat given a good reason to go there in the first place. How old am I? Old enough to KNOW when someone is disrespecting me and what I HAVE DONE. I'll TALK with anyone on any subject - DISCUSS - but I will not have some ass question my service in the Military - I DID IT. Now if you or anyone else want to KNOW about it, I suggest the next time you go WITH ME and SEE for yourself what war IS like and KILLING. I can sure show you! I have BEEN THERE AND DONE IT. Like I said, I am NOT John McCain and John Kerry who have stood by and did basically nothing when their service was questioned and smeared as theirs was or George Bush-types who like smearing the good name of people WHO HAVE SERVED THIS COUNTRY HONORABLY while they themselves NEVER SERVED A DAMN DAY!!!!!!!!!

Here's the thing Cfs, the day YOU SERVE and serve honorably and for more than four years IN WAR come back and tell me then what you think - UNTIL THEN.....

I NEVER take another person's life for granted and have others go to war for bullshit. I VALUE LIFE, especially those MEN I served with everyday and saw die for bull****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I do not play politics with people's lives. If I were in a position to ask a Man to risk his life for some reason you had better BELIEVE it would BE for a DAMN GOOD REASON.

Also, liberal - have you looked that word up in the dictionary? It means someone who SEES AND LEARNS from ALL sides ALL information ALL the time, they are NOT one-sided and with tunnel-vision.

John H.

John H.

Bio,

Me? A "...star"? I never said that nor implied that. You have some growing up to do.

Curiously bio,

Would YOU care to try with me?

I give people a lot of latitude but when the time comes after they have had PLENTY of warning....

I have had others THINK they can take care of me - and that is fine. It IS the RESULTS that count. I have tangled with a lot of people and I did not win every time but I can ASSURE you THEY ALL REMEMBER we tangled and I DO MY VERY BEST. I do not fool around. Get me started and I do not stop until the work IS DONE. Trust me. I threaten no one, but I will not take those threats to me kindly or unnoticed. THEY ALL REMEMBER ME.

Also, with your "religious beliefs" - here's how we can balance everything out. YOU allow me to see and tell you what you can and can not do in your bedroom with the person you care about like you try doing to others "for religious reasons" and see how you like it. Oh, don't worry, I'll "validate" my "interests" "religiously speaking". I can "see visions" too and write a "book" about "what God said".

And, exactly how much time did YOU SERVE in the service of your country? Just WHEN did you put YOUR LIFE on the line? When did YOU see your Buddies die? And how many?

You have a HELL OF A LOT TO LEARN.

John H.

DOMS

(emphasis mine)

Good job keeping an open mind there. Keep it up, you're a credit to liberals everywhere.

kbm8795

Yeah, John H. Only conservatives are allowed to type violence.

kbm8795

Hmm...well, that tells me how little you know about the military. The Urban Institute estimates that there are approximately 65,000 gays currently serving in the military, and about 1 million gay veterans. Besides, John H. isn't gay, no that's pretty much irrelevant. But nice of you to bring that up - I'm sure that post was another example of your christian love for thy neighbor.

The "don't ask, don't tell" policy is arbitrarily enforced and is the subject of two pending federal lawsuits. In some cases, commanders readily overlook an openly gay soldier because he wants his/her expertise in the field; in other cases, we have those truly patriotic rightwing citizens like Mr. "Gannon" who gain White House press credentials for his conservative blogs while maintaining gay military sex connection sites in an attempt to bait gay military personnel. Obviously some DO ask and use deceptive means to get someone to "tell" even if they don't have any military clearance or credentials to do so.

bio-chem

Would i care to try with you? so now your asking me if i want to fight john? Tough guy are you? so after i say threatening someone physically over the internet is stupid you ask me if i want to fight you? makes sense. john you show up at my door step and ill be ready. you seem to have a lot of rage john. is something wrong? you seem to get angry when people dont agree with you. telling them they are closed minded for not haveing the same opinion as you. by the way how is souped up? ha ha ha

brogers

John H, a "living wage" combined with "less unemployment" is an economic impossibility. The current laws for minimum wage are responsible for a good portion of unemployment today. This is simple, basic economics. You are not open minded, you do not see things from all perspectives. You see things from your own, and only your own. Your lack of academic knowledge is only exceeded by your lack of practical knowledge. Rich has destroyed everything you have said.

Decker

Albob I agree with you that the Thrift plan you participate in is a good plan; I work in the employee benefits field and I have seen many plans like it perform well and some not so well.

Social Security is based on 3 different set of actuarial assumptions--gloomy, modest and rosey. Under any of those, SS will pay its benefits. Because politicians have borrowed the trust money for other ventures, paying the benefits in full will likely require one of two things--either a raise in taxes or, it'll do what the US gov. has been doing for the last 40 years whenever any program experiences a shortfall, borrow more money. No one will be cut off from the benefits due.

Even under the best assumptions, carve-out accounts can still lose money. Transforming a supplemental benefit like SSI into a wealth creating vehicle, like all deferred compensation arrangements are, is opening a risk of loss that, in my opinion, is bad for America. In short, there is no free lunch offered by the market's performance. This is why Bush should propose more legislation like EGTRRA (passed in 2001) which really made private employer provided retirement plans much more attractive--a great law. Instead, he's done a 180 and is screwing with the whole retirement system with his proposed LSA, ERSA and other half-baked retirement vehicles (not to mention privatizing SS).

ALBOB

You are now officially over my head. That never stopped me from talking though. I agree, by creating a "wealth creating vehicle" they are, by definition, creating risk. This is where we disagree slightly, I think the risk is minute and worth taking. Oh well, different points of view are what make the world go 'round, right? Now, as to making private employers provide retirement plans, THAT is something worth talking about. Living here in Las Vegas I do know a little about that. Both Clark County and the City of Las Vegas do that very thing. Their employees don't pay into Social Security, but rather into the county's or city's retirement fund and those funds pay very well. I hadn't heard about that proposal at the federal level. It's sure something I'd like to see revisited. In all honesty though, my cold hearted bastard side says the entire program should be scrapped. Set a date, anyone entering the workforce after that date is 100% responsible for their own retirement. That's the way I'm approaching my retirement, I think others should do the same.

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

dg806

Agreed

www.sbmuscle.com

Decker

Albob, on the merits of what is promised and how it'll be delivered, I think SSI privatization is DOA, however this is the point in the discussion where the mechanics of SSI and private retirement plans take a back seat to the values underlying the reasons for our respective positions. As you stated "Set a date, anyone entering the workforce after that date is 100% responsible for their own retirement."

I don't agree with that b/c I do not have confidence in a segment of our population to manage their retirement funds, even with the help of 'experts'. About 1/2 of Americans don't own stock nor could a portion of that group even spell the word. I think it is incumbent upon those who are able, in a civilized society, to care for their brother/sister at the most fundamental level--mere subsistence. SS is contract that embodies what it means to be a civilized community--no matter what work you do, sweeping streets or a CEO, you can count on the fact that you are not alone in trying to make ends meet in your golden years. In retirement, those who worked will get SS's supplemental benefit to ensure that subsistence. It is, if nothing else, an earned benefit that reflects the idea that we are all in this together. Cue 'Imagine'

ALBOB

OK, you called my bluff. I couldn't realistically see completely eliminating the program for the very reasons you mentioned. (Even though I do have a cold spot in my heart for people that refuse to take responsibility for their own future.) I do realize there is a certain segment of the population that CAN'T take responsibility and therefore must be cared for by the rest of us. Agreed, it's our responsibility as a polite society to do so. Where I draw the line is using my tax dollars to completely fund someone else's retirement who had the means to do so themselves. The only reason they're living off the system is shortsightedness and irresponsibility. The program was never intended to provide a "living wage". A small subsidy, yes, but not a "living wage". That has got to stop.

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

Decker

I agree totally. SSI is supplemental and earned only by those paying into the system via payroll tax taken from earned income. That's why private employer provided retirement plans must become more prevalent.

I abhor leeches in all socio-economic stratas, whether bums bilking 'the system' or corporations availing themselves of the US's laws and resources, yet incorporating offshore to avoid taxation--very un-american and very prevalent. But that's another topic.

I guess that the social safety net could always use tinkering, but the rationale for its existence is sound.

ALBOB

Could this be a first in IM.com history? You and I just had a civil conversation and came to a complete agreement? Wow, we should get a medal or something.

Rules? You mean we have RULES for that???

Decker

How 'bout that. Righteous hyperbole can be fun, but man, all the time, it just destroys. It simply destroys. It was good talking with you Albob.

Eggs

I personally think that SS is a decent insurance for us to have later on in life that can give us supplemental income in our later years. However, its nots and should definitely not be treated as an end all to financial security. From what I read about Bush's plan on allowing people to invest themselves rather than rely on SS, well, I dont think thats a hot idea. Primarily because there are going to be those numb skulls that go out and lose it all, and then who cares for them. So there needs to be a balance between the two sides. There are certainly some aspects of the reform I do like:

#1 Ownership - I think its important that the money invested in this remains in the hands of the people that have paid it. If a person dies, the amount due should be paid to their heirs(#2), and should not just pass on to the state. As much as they charge over a life time, one should have some form of personal equity in it.

#2 Distributing wealth

#3 Fixing the deficit problem - I dont want to wait for the last minute and stick the kids with the bill... we try not to do it with the environment, and we need to fix social security so we are not a burden to them in our later years.

Things I dont like..

For one, cutting benefits... but of course, how do we manage the downward spiral if we dont cut them. Perhaps paying more taxes is the answer I hate paying taxes.

Then of costs are the high costs of instituting the program now... sound pretty hefty, and would increase debt even more.

I'd like to find a place in the middle... that perhaps includes less of a cut to benefits, chance for ownership, and I'd be willing to have a slight increase in taxes to insure there arent any burdens left on the generations of the future.

John H.

Hi Kbm,

(I'm WAY BEHIND so I am going to try to catch-up. I've been real busy lately and did not have the time to do any reading or posting).

Thanks. I noticed for sure!!! I find REPUBLICANS and CONSERVATIVES like it as long as EVERYTHING IS THEIR WAY because they think it is the only way - anything else is "liberal". And only they can "type violence". Now if I were to do that you sure can see the result.

Take Care, John H.

John H.

Hi Kbm,

There's a couple of books that come immediately to mind that talk about the Military and its "campaign" against those that are BiSexual and Homosexual.

Shilts, Randy: CONDUCT UNBECOMING, New York, St. Martin's Press, 1993
Murphy, Lawrence R.: PERVERTS BY OFFICIAL ORDER: THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS BY THE UNITED STATES NAVY, New York, Haworth Press, c1988

Both books really are well written and give a good idea of the hatred and the bigotry and the lack of knowledge on the part of the Military and its leaders with regard to basic facts about Sexuality in all its variations.

The second book I listed is particularly well written and definitely worth everyone's time to read. It is a real eye-opener. (I wish the title could have been different because when you try to borrow it from the library the title really shows and you can sometimes get strange "looks" from someone charging the book out to you.) You kinda have to remind yourself when borrowing this that you ARE an adult and ENTITLED to read whatever.

Take Care, John H.

John H.

Bio,

I do not run away from anyone or anything. I have no need to nor do I have a desire to. I will say that when I find it necessary to tangle I will DO my VERY BEST and those that think there is something to "settle" WILL KNOW we "got together". I do not stop until the job is DONE. This is not a threat, it IS a PROMISE. GUARANTEED.

I will always get angry when someone QUESTIONS my service in the Military disparagingly and disrespectfully. Those that do I find very often have NEVER SERVED a day themselves but have real big mouths. And THEY are the very people who - if they found themselves in the same situations I HAVE BEEN IN - WILL RUN THE OTHER WAY BIGTIME! Am I going to defend myself in this regard - DAMN STRAIGHT and EVERY TIME.

I have no problem with people disgreeing with me. And I will talk and discuss anything. But I will not tolerate and do not have to put up with disrespect and hateful remarks with regard to my family or the service to my country. My family is SACRED. I WAS THERE AND DID THE JOB I was to do. The ONLY people who have any "right" to ask about that are those that ALSO SERVED and KNOW what they are talking about - That RISKED THEIR LIVES ALSO in the same endeavor.

Regarding Souped up, I have not idea who he is other that what I read on the Board here or on that other Board. His statements are his and his alone. And anything I say is what I - I - state. No one speaks for me ever.

John H.