Dumb Things Politicians Say

[dapoes]

No.

You posted it.

Back it up.

Nope, give your best shot. Research it. Find a president who's first major piece of legislation was authored and approved by a partisan senate & congress.

Heres a hint...you wont find it. <_<

 

[777 fixer]

Nope, give your best shot. Research it. Find a president who's first major piece of legislation was authored and approved by a partisan senate & congress.

Heres a hint...you wont find it. <_<

You lecturing someone to research something. This coming from the same peson who posted a link to this site.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/...incoln-hes.html

Guess if you had researched it a bit more he would have spotted the factual errors in that blog. Along with the comments made that are not backed up with facts. Or maybe you would have known that John and Samuel Adams were not brothers. And maybe you should back up your claim that Sam Adams was an attorney.

 

[UAL_TECH]

IMHO, I think a lot of you guyz/N'Gals are nitpicking on both sides.
I believe that this porkulas package will not be effective.
Factually, we continue to borrow money that we will never be able to repay. I am certainly not as adept to global economics as you all are, but one thing I have practiced in my finances is that if you can not afford it, don't buy it.
I keep my card balances at zero and own most everything I have outright.

Yea, I know this sounds foolish, but then again, I have been 'retired' for 6 months, never took a 'lick' of the government cheese, and can continue to do so for several years to come.

So continue the infatuation with NoBama and/or party lines, but I'll still keep my opinions (and investments) in a common sense mode.

B) xUT

 

[777 fixer]

I am certainly not as adept to global economics as you all are, but one thing I have practiced in my finances is that if you can not afford it, don't buy it.
B) xUT

If we were all adept at economics were probably would not be posting on an aviation message board. Or working in the airline business. 😉

 

[dapoes]

IMHO, I think a lot of you guyz/N'Gals are nitpicking on both sides.
I believe that this porkulas package will not be effective.
Factually, we continue to borrow money that we will never be able to repay. I am certainly not as adept to global economics as you all are, but one thing I have practiced in my finances is that if you can not afford it, don't buy it.
I keep my card balances at zero and own most everything I have outright.

Yea, I know this sounds foolish, but then again, I have been 'retired' for 6 months, never took a 'lick' of the government cheese, and can continue to do so for several years to come.

So continue the infatuation with NoBama and/or party lines, but I'll still keep my opinions (and investments) in a common sense mode.

B) xUT

Sorry you wont have that either...Obama, Dems Seek to End 401(k) Plans

Sen. Barack Obama's Democratic allies in Congress are looking into a radical new plan that would fundamentally change the way Americans save for retirement. House Democrats recently heard testimony on the idea and, under a potential Obama administration, would likely move to put it in place. Democrats want to seize the money that workers currently invest in their 401(k) plans and replace the popular retirement savings accounts with a one-size-fits-all government sponsored retirement account. Under the scheme, Americans would be forced to transfer all of their hard earned retirement savings from their 401(k) to the government.

 

[Garfield1966]

Sorry you wont have that either...Obama, Dems Seek to End 401(k) Plans

Sen. Barack Obama's Democratic allies in Congress are looking into a radical new plan that would fundamentally change the way Americans save for retirement. House Democrats recently heard testimony on the idea and, under a potential Obama administration, would likely move to put it in place. Democrats want to seize the money that workers currently invest in their 401(k) plans and replace the popular retirement savings accounts with a one-size-fits-all government sponsored retirement account. Under the scheme, Americans would be forced to transfer all of their hard earned retirement savings from their 401(k) to the government.

Then there is the truth but that does not make for nearly as entertaining a read as your version.

401ks are not disappearing


Under Ms. Ghilarducci's plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3% a year, adjusted for inflation.

"I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s," Ms. Ghilarducci said in an interview. "401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break."



You can argue whether one plan/idea is better than the other but posting all out lies does nothing to bolster your already questionable credibility.

I have found nothing to indicate that any funds will be seized (that was an out right lie). No one will be forced to "forced to transfer all of their hard earned retirement savings from their 401(k) to the government." (another out right lie). The current plan under review would require 5% be contributed. This amount has not been settled upon and there is no indication that any/all of this plan is not up for negotiation.

I do not know what effect the elimination of pre-tax donations would have or if the tax break currently in place is working/helping. I do not like the idea of mandatory donations to a plan. I suspect that part of the plan will not fly but time will tell.

There are numerous issues that you could address regarding this issue with out resorting to lies. Why you schoose to shoot your self in the foot so often is beyond me but I do thank you for the entertainment.

 

[delldude]

Cat's outa the bag???

 

[dapoes]

Then there is the truth but that does not make for nearly as entertaining a read as your version.

401ks are not disappearing


Under Ms. Ghilarducci's plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5% of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3% a year, adjusted for inflation.

"I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s," Ms. Ghilarducci said in an interview. "401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won't have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break."



You can argue whether one plan/idea is better than the other but posting all out lies does nothing to bolster your already questionable credibility.

I have found nothing to indicate that any funds will be seized (that was an out right lie). No one will be forced to "forced to transfer all of their hard earned retirement savings from their 401(k) to the government." (another out right lie). The current plan under review would require 5% be contributed. This amount has not been settled upon and there is no indication that any/all of this plan is not up for negotiation.

I do not know what effect the elimination of pre-tax donations would have or if the tax break currently in place is working/helping. I do not like the idea of mandatory donations to a plan. I suspect that part of the plan will not fly but time will tell.

There are numerous issues that you could address regarding this issue with out resorting to lies. Why you schoose to shoot your self in the foot so often is beyond me but I do thank you for the entertainment.

:blink: Lies? What are you talking about? Its proposed by Rep. Jim McDermott, not by me. You didnt read the article link?

 

[Garfield1966]

:blink: Lies? What are you talking about? Its proposed by Rep. Jim McDermott, not by me. You didnt read the article link?

Yes I read the BLOG and it is a lie. As I linked and if you choose to research it your self you would find that no funds are being seized an that 401ks are not being eliminated. The proposal addresses the elimination of the tax break given to 401k's. It discusses the idea of a 5% mandatory contribution to the fund with a 3% return.

Try address the issues and not making up your own. I know you only posted the link. That's all you ever do. You don't research what you post nor do you apply any critical thought. Two of the three portions that you made bold are not true. They are lies not supported by evidence.

 

[dapoes]

Yes I read the BLOG and it is a lie. As I linked and if you choose to research it your self you would find that no funds are being seized an that 401ks are not being eliminated. The proposal addresses the elimination of the tax break given to 401k's. It discusses the idea of a 5% mandatory contribution to the fund with a 3% return.

Try address the issues and not making up your own. I know you only posted the link. That's all you ever do. You don't research what you post nor do you apply any critical thought. Two of the three portions that you made bold are not true. They are lies not supported by evidence.

HUH??? I didnt make it up Garf...those were direct quotes from the article.

 

[Garfield1966]

HUH??? I didnt make it up Garf...those were direct quotes from the article.

What part of "the blog is a lie" and " if you chose to research" are you not clear on?

No you did not make it up. he idiot in the BLOG made it up to scare people and ti dupe people like you who do not bother to research or verify anything they post.


This part is true

The government would contribute $600 a year to fund each account and would pay a rate of return of around three percent in interest. The government would also mandate that each worker contribute 5% of their yearly salary to the accounts.

This is false

Democrats want to seize the money that workers currently invest in their 401(k) plans and replace the popular retirement savings accounts with a one-size-fits-all government sponsored retirement account. Under the scheme, Americans would be forced to transfer all of their hard earned retirement savings from their 401(k) to the government.

Since you id not read the Investment News link I posted perhaps you will read an interview with the lady who came up with the idea.

Interview

Or you can look at this FOX article sinc it sounds as if if FOX is more up your alley.

FOX article

or you can just go on posting inane dribble.

 

[UAL_TECH]

If we were all adept at economics were probably would not be posting on an aviation message board. Or working in the airline business. 😉

Sorry Fixer, I am 'out'...
Not doing this 'gig' again...
As mentioned in another thread, going Government or some other entity that can continue to write checks that don't bounce.
Too bad NoBama or any of the other politicos have to jump through the Security Hoops that I do but 'it is what it is'...
Merika demands people who can impact lives of 500 people or less to have stringent security/background checks, to include financial information, but then we elect people that could not get a job at Kmart for our representation because they are not held to the same standard. These same 'buffoons' affect the lives of millions and go unchecked for drugs, finances, taxes, or any other damn thing.

And furthermore, this is not 'party' specific. To 'a$$ume' that either party (as we are a 2 party system, like it or not) is looking out for you or I's best interest is ignorant. This 'oligarchy' will continue with the same results as before.
Just watch and see... 😛h34r:

Good Luck to You all!

Take Care,
B) xUAL_TECH

 

[UAL_TECH]

What part of "the blog is a lie" and " if you chose to research" are you not clear on?

No you did not make it up. he idiot in the BLOG made it up to scare people and ti dupe people like you who do not bother to research or verify anything they post.


This part is true




This is false




Since you id not read the Investment News link I posted perhaps you will read an interview with the lady who came up with the idea.


Interview

Or you can look at this FOX article sinc it sounds as if if FOX is more up your alley.

FOX article

or you can just go on posting inane dribble.

Nothing will come out of this 'steal the 401K' (profanity deleted by moderator. Vulgar language/profanity is not permitted.)

IMHO,
B) xUT

 

[Garfield1966]

No one is stealing the 401k. They are talking about eliminating the tax subsidy of the 401k and creating an alternative retirement program. 401k's are perfectly safe.

 

[UAL_TECH]

No one is stealing the 401k. They are talking about eliminating the tax subsidy of the 401k and creating an alternative retirement program. 401k's are perfectly safe.

Maybe if your not vested in stocks... 😉

B) xUT