Pension trouble: The future...?

[JustRalph]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/23/business/23prichard.html?_r=1

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif
Alabama Town’s Failed Pension Is a Warning

From the Link:
"Then Prichard did something that pension experts say they have never seen before: it stopped sending monthly pension checks to its 150 retired workers, breaking a state law requiring it to pay its promised retirement benefits in full.

Since then, Nettie Banks, 68, a retired Prichard police and fire dispatcher, has filed for bankruptcy. Alfred Arnold, a 66-year-old retired fire captain, has gone back to work as a shopping mall security guard to try to keep his house. Eddie Ragland, 59, a retired police captain, accepted help from colleagues, bake sales and collection jars after he was shot by a robber, leaving him badly wounded and unable to get to his new job as a police officer at the regional airport."

much more at the link

[boxcar]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/23/business/23prichard.html?_r=1

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif
Alabama Town’s Failed Pension Is a Warning

From the Link:
"Then Prichard did something that pension experts say they have never seen before: it stopped sending monthly pension checks to its 150 retired workers, breaking a state law requiring it to pay its promised retirement benefits in full.

Since then, Nettie Banks, 68, a retired Prichard police and fire dispatcher, has filed for bankruptcy. Alfred Arnold, a 66-year-old retired fire captain, has gone back to work as a shopping mall security guard to try to keep his house. Eddie Ragland, 59, a retired police captain, accepted help from colleagues, bake sales and collection jars after he was shot by a robber, leaving him badly wounded and unable to get to his new job as a police officer at the regional airport."

much more at the link

This is small taters and just the tip of the iceberg. As these horror stories start to unfold, liberals will insist that taxpayers will have to pick up the tab because it wouldn't be fair to the pensioners, otherwise. For bigger union pensions, they'll all be assigned "too big to fail" status for sure.

Meanwhile, though, the town or city of Prichard should be thrown into debtor's prison for breaking the law. Small consolation to the pensioners, but it would beat getting away Scott-free with the crime of Grand Incompetence.

Boxcar

[lamboguy]

the next big problem are going to be the colleges and unniversity's. the students are all burried with ripoff student loans and they have no jobs. the colleges put the students out of commision before they walk through the door. they are all way overpriced the profesor's are not worth a third of what they get, and the administers rob as much as possible.

[boxcar]

the next big problem are going to be the colleges and unniversity's. the students are all burried with ripoff student loans and they have no jobs. the colleges put the students out of commision before they walk through the door. they are all way overpriced the profesor's are not worth a third of what they get, and the administers rob as much as possible.

You're right. Good observation. I wonder if the students here are watching and learning from their disenchanted (to put in mildly) counterparts in the U.K.

Boxcar

[DRIVEWAY]

New Jersey owes 3.5 Billion this year for state pensions. Chris Christie is paying zero because of budget woes.

Should Christie be thrown into debtor's prison?

[boxcar]

New Jersey owes 3.5 Billion this year for state pensions. Chris Christie is paying zero because of budget woes.

Should Christie be thrown into debtor's prison?

Is his administration responsible for the pension shortfalls?

Boxcar

[Native Texan III]

The federal pension law was enacted in 1974 (Nixon/Ford) after a number of scandals in which private companies went bankrupt and their workers discovered there was little or nothing set aside to pay the pensions they had been promised. The law was supposed to make pension failures a thing of the past by requiring companies to set aside money in advance - enough each year to pay the benefits the work force earned that year.

The law also required that if a private pension fund got into trouble, its sponsor was to quickly pump in more money, warn its employees about the problem and pay higher premiums to the federal pension insurance program.

Despite that, United Airlines, Enron etc etc falsified the figures for funds in their pension schemes and evaded the law. The taxpayer picked up the bills.

Public sector pensions are not covered by the 1974 federal law.

[boxcar]

Here's a prediction: Because we'll see many of these failed pensions situations, the government, who has long has had its greedy little eyes, on everyone's 401ks, will declare another crisis and say that all these pensions can't be allowed to fail...yada, yada, yada and eventually will want to take over everyone's 401ks. The government can't stand seeing all that 401k money sitting somewhere other than in it its own itchy palms.

Boxcar

[skate]

The federal pension law was enacted in 1974 (Nixon/Ford) after a number of scandals in which private companies went bankrupt and their workers discovered there was little or nothing set aside to pay the pensions they had been promised. The law was supposed to make pension failures a thing of the past by requiring companies to set aside money in advance - enough each year to pay the benefits the work force earned that year.

The law also required that if a private pension fund got into trouble, its sponsor was to quickly pump in more money, warn its employees about the problem and pay higher premiums to the federal pension insurance program.

Despite that, United Airlines, Enron etc etc falsified the figures for funds in their pension schemes and evaded the law. The taxpayer picked up the bills.

Public sector pensions are not covered by the 1974 federal law.

Horn and Hardhart (?) i think was the company that held up the pensions, back in the late 60...early 70s.
Ive had people with the teamsters tell me they are shorted, as much as 1/2.

So along come the feds, fine, and they now back pensions.

You are saying "Public Sector Pensions" not covered and i assume you refer to the same biull that covers private ('74)....but, is there another bill that does cover the Private sector?

[TJDave]

Is his administration responsible for the pension shortfalls?

Boxcar

Although his administration is obligated, unless modified by mutual agreement of the parties, in continuing to fulfill its commitments...Or suffer bankruptcy.

Legal contracts are inviolate... Regardless that one, or both parties were stupid to agree to the terms. Even stupider not to fund or steal from the funding of such obligations.

I'd add that I'm not a pensioner nor have ever worked in the public sector.

[boxcar]

Although his administration is obligated, unless modified by mutual agreement of the parties, in continuing to fulfill its commitments...Or suffer bankruptcy.

Legal contracts are inviolate... Regardless that one, or both parties were stupid to agree to the terms. Even stupider not to fund or steal from the funding of such obligations.

I'd add that I'm not a pensioner nor have ever worked in the public sector.

You make a good point. Heck...in that case, I'd declare bankruptcy. It would be grossly unfair to make the current "non-pensioned" taxpayers suffer for all the sins of previous administrations -- or for even bad laws that were passed in other generations. This problem didn't occur overnight. If somehow the taxpayers are forced to make up the shortfall, then this generation will know firsthand what our children will be faced with in the relatively foreseeable future, won't we?

What we're actually witnessing in our society are the fruits of self-destructive behavior, i.e. bad policies and laws enacted by our elected officials. We have been traveling a long time on this destructive path. It will take nothing less than a miracle to reverse course.

Boxcar

[TJDave]

You make a good point. Heck...in that case, I'd declare bankruptcy. It would be grossly unfair to make the current "non-pensioned" taxpayers suffer for all the sins of previous administrations -- or for even bad laws that were passed in other generations. This problem didn't occur overnight. If somehow the taxpayers are forced to make up the shortfall, then this generation will know firsthand what our children will be faced with in the relatively foreseeable future, won't we?

What we're actually witnessing in our society are the fruits of self-destructive behavior, i.e. bad policies and laws enacted by our elected officials. We have been traveling a long time on this destructive path. It will take nothing less than a miracle to reverse course.

Boxcar

Bankruptcy:

That the State's largest creditor is its pensioners would mean that they could end up owning its assets and a percentage of future revenue.

The pensioners will get the majority of their monies owed, regardless. The citizens/taxpayers will pay.

As it should be. They're the ones who voted for the assholes who made these deals.

Paybacksabitch. :rolleyes:

[skate]

Welp,this here didnt start, like ,yesterday.


FDR issued a new tax thru congrees, 15%. Under the law you could retire at 65, but we had at the time, a life expectency of 59 years.
Basically, we had no retirement money to look forward too.

But to make sure that your 15% didnt go back to you, as you expected it would, they, congress used that money elsewhere, example, give themselves a raise, add entitlements which went to people not working to pay the 15% tax.

He and congress went and called the new tax Social Security.

Everyone knows that S.S. has no funds. But that's not wha they said when they issued the new tax.
Had they invested the S.S. money in a market, which is what they did with their own money, then the public would not have such an ill feeling about them (congress ).

[skate]

N.J. pension gap went to 53 Billion, up from 45.8Billion

"The $53.9 billion figure reflects the difference between the retirement benefits the state has promised to roughly 780,000 state and local workers over the next few decades and the amount on hand to pay those benefits."

and for the most part, they, N J , have the highest state taxes of all....:eek:


Christie wants to reverse a 9% pension bump workers received in 2001 under a Republican administration. Unions argue their members have an irrevocable right to benefits they have earned. The governor has challenged the unions to meet him in court...:)

[boxcar]

Bankruptcy:

That the State's largest creditor is its pensioners would mean that they could end up owning its assets and a percentage of future revenue.

The pensioners will get the majority of their monies owed, regardless. The citizens/taxpayers will pay.

As it should be. They're the ones who voted for the assholes who made these deals.

Paybacksabitch. :rolleyes:

Legally, I understand what you're saying. but morally it's wrong because of what I've stated previously about how this problem is generations old.

The solution is really bad because to make the pensioners whole, the taxpayers become poorer. If the taxpayers have to pay that kind of price, and if I were a resident of NJ, I would demand a change of laws in order to protect my kids.

Boxcar

[TJDave]

but morally it's wrong because of what I've stated previously about how this problem is generations old.


I would argue that honoring one's commitment to others, public or private and regardless of hardship, is one of the most moral things to do.

Also:

It's also the one thing most lacking in this world.

[DRIVEWAY]

N.J. pension gap went to 53 Billion, up from 45.8Billion

"The $53.9 billion figure reflects the difference between the retirement benefits the state has promised to roughly 780,000 state and local workers over the next few decades and the amount on hand to pay those benefits."

and for the most part, they, N J , have the highest state taxes of all....:eek:


Christie wants to reverse a 9% pension bump workers received in 2001 under a Republican administration. Unions argue their members have an irrevocable right to benefits they have earned. The governor has challenged the unions to meet him in court...:)

Great insight.

This would mean that every man, woman and child in NJ owes app. $6,000 to clear this pension gap while every taxpayer in NJ is already screaming that taxes are tooooo high.

There's no way to sweep this problem under the rug.

[lamboguy]

one thing i can promise is that jerry brown will have more law suits in california than crter got liver pills. he only knows 3 things, cut, cut, and cut more. he will make christie look like a choir boy.the liberals in california will be wishing they elected a dope that spent her own money to try to get elected.

[boxcar]

I would argue that honoring one's commitment to others, public or private and regardless of hardship, is one of the most moral things to do.

And I would argue that it's not when it's pushed off to generations who had nothing to do with the mess in the first place! Future generations don't make any commitments to previous generations. As stated previously, if the current taxpayers have to pick up the tab, so be it...but if they're smart, they'll protect their children's interests by getting current laws changed.

Also:

It's also the one thing most lacking in this world.

No argument from me here. As the Good Book essentially says, the Law was not made for the righteous man but for the lawless.

Boxcar

[delayjf]

The pensioners will get the majority of their monies owed, regardless. The citizens/taxpayers will pay.

Can't cities, countys and other municpalities declare bankrupcy, then renegociate the pension terms?

Out here in CA, the unions have attempted to prevent cities etc from filing bankrupcy by passing a law that requires permission from a state agency before they can file.

[boxcar]

Can't cities, countys and other municpalities declare bankrupcy, then renegociate the pension terms?

Out here in CA, the unions have attempted to prevent cities etc from filing bankrupcy by passing a law that requires permission from a state agency before they can file.

Huh!? So, unelected bureaucrats in some state agency get to decide!? This truly is a mad, mad, mad world! Neither the people or their elected representatives have a say? Is this the actual law?

Boxcar

[TJDave]

Future generations don't make any commitments to previous generations. As stated previously, if the current taxpayers have to pick up the tab, so be it...but if they're smart, they'll protect their children's interests by getting current laws changed.


First:

What previous generation? I'd doubt you would hear much complaint from dead retirees not receiving their benefits.

Second:

Governments do make promises to future generations...all the time. The 13th amendment being one glaring example. Treaties and other contractual obligations do not expire with a change in government just as business agreements aren't nullified or modified when there's a change in corporate leadership...unless the parties, and only the parties are in agreement.

[JustRalph]

one thing i can promise is that jerry brown will have more law suits in california than crter got liver pills. he only knows 3 things, cut, cut, and cut more. he will make christie look like a choir boy.the liberals in california will be wishing they elected a dope that spent her own money to try to get elected.


Brown was already caught promising the unions that he would not renege on his promise to pay full benefits. He promised to fight any cuts proposed in the legislature. The Repub candidate (crazy woman) refused this request and that was the end of that. Now he has to live up to it

[DRIVEWAY]

Can't cities, countys and other municpalities declare bankrupcy, then renegociate the pension terms?

Out here in CA, the unions have attempted to prevent cities etc from filing bankrupcy by passing a law that requires permission from a state agency before they can file.

Laws vary by state, but in general yes. A bankrupt city owes nothing to their pensioners - current or future. This appears to be their only leverage in renegotiating with the unions.

These pensions need to be reworked to reflect the financial realities of many local government. Pension formulaes that include overtime and accrued vacation and are based upon last year or last three year average compensation, are breeding grounds for abuse and fraud. Let's set realistic standards for pension calculations and then responsibly fund these commitments. Current retirees must accept a recalculation process for their bloated and fraud inspired pensions.

Defined contribution plans must replace defined benefit plans going forward. A tough transition but a necessary one. Please keep the Federal government out of local pension reorganization.

[TJDave]

Neither the people or their elected representatives have a say? Is this the actual law?


The people and their elected representatives DID have a say.

How do you think laws get passed?

Pogo was right. :rolleyes:

[TJDave]

A bankrupt city owes nothing to their pensioners - current or future.

You know this, how?

[lamboguy]

Brown was already caught promising the unions that he would not renege on his promise to pay full benefits. He promised to fight any cuts proposed in the legislature. The Repub candidate (crazy woman) refused this request and that was the end of that. Now he has to live up to itwe have all heard politions make their promises to get elected. do you remember george bush senior and no new taxes, well he gave you new taxes. this president ran on a bill of goods to raise taxes, close up gitmo, and leave afganistan. the man has already lowered taxes, he is nowhere near getting out of afganistan, and gitmo is alive and kicking. a matter of fact he is nothing but a continuation play from the prior president. when you replace these guys it like the bonanno's taking over for the gambino's. their words mean ZERO. they had people lined up to vote for obama because he promised to raise the taxes, and now he lowered them. he has continued to put us on in crater just like bushie jr. and he is pushing us further down.

[DRIVEWAY]

You know this, how?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=60740288

http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/Bankruptcy/BankruptcyBasics/Chapter9.aspx

excerpt from Chapter 9 explanation:

Due to statutory limitations placed upon the power of the court in a municipal debt adjustment proceeding, the court is far less involved in the conduct of a municipal bankruptcy case (and in the operation of the municipal entity) while the debtor's financial affairs are undergoing reorganization. The municipal debtor has broad powers to use its property, raise taxes, and make expenditures as it sees fit. It is also permitted to adjust burdensome non-debt contractual relationships under the power to reject executory contracts and unexpired leases, subject to court approval, and it has the same avoiding powers as other debtors. Municipalities may also reject collective bargaining agreements and retiree benefit plans without going through the usual procedures required in chapter 11 cases.

[NJ Stinks]

You make a good point. Heck...in that case, I'd declare bankruptcy. It would be grossly unfair to make the current "non-pensioned" taxpayers suffer for all the sins of previous administrations -- or for even bad laws that were passed in other generations. This problem didn't occur overnight. If somehow the taxpayers are forced to make up the shortfall, then this generation will know firsthand what our children will be faced with in the relatively foreseeable future, won't we?

What we're actually witnessing in our society are the fruits of self-destructive behavior, i.e. bad policies and laws enacted by our elected officials. We have been traveling a long time on this destructive path. It will take nothing less than a miracle to reverse course.

Boxcar

Remember this the next time you want to cut taxes, Sherlock.

In around 1992 Christie Whitman, a REPUBLICAN, said she would cut taxes across the board in NJ by 30% if she was elected governor the next week.

She won the election and started the corrupt practice of not funding the government employeee pension plan in order to balance the NJ State budget as required by law each year. Two recessions and about four governors later and the NJ employee pension plans are $53B underfunded.

What's the lesson to learned from this fractured fairytale?

REPUBLICANS are full of s**t when they tell you tax cuts pay for themselves. There is no free ride out there. Either you pay or your kids do. Unless you are just a lying piece of crap and contracts mean zip to you.

Is that the "self-destructive behavior" you were talking about, Boxcar? :bang:

[boxcar]

First:

What previous generation? I'd doubt you would hear much complaint from dead retirees not receiving their benefits.

C'mon, Dave, surely you jest. Multiple generations can exist concurrently with one other. And besides, the issue isn't about dead retirees -- it's about living retirees receiving their benefits at the expense of future generations and the taxes they'll be paying to fund those benefits.

Governments do make promises to future generations...all the time. The 13th amendment being one glaring example. Treaties and other contractual obligations do not expire with a change in government just as business agreements aren't nullified or modified when there's a change in corporate leadership...unless the parties, and only the parties are in agreement.[/QUOTE]

We're not talking about promises per se. We're talking about inherited debt obligations. When my daddy died, I was neither legally or morally responsible for his personal debts. But corrupt and fiscally irresponsible governments can make future generations responsible for the debts of older or previous generations? And that is morally acceptable to you? What do you think all the flap is about with the gazillions of dollars worth of debt the government owes NOW? The flap is that our kids, grandkids and probably their kids are going to be inheriting our CURRENT debt load. You find that morally acceptable?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

The people and their elected representatives DID have a say.

How do you think laws get passed?

Pogo was right. :rolleyes:

Go back and read what you wrote in context. You essentially said that the unions would have to go through or were attempting to go through some STATE AGENCY in order to get approval for the state to file bankruptcy. My remarks pertained to that! State Agencies don't consist of elected officials. It seems to me that either the people of the state should have a direct say in this particular matter or their elected representatives should. Not unelected bureaucrats.

No, Pogo was wrong. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Remember this the next time you want to cut taxes, Sherlock.

In around 1992 Christie Whitman, a REPUBLICAN, said she would cut taxes across the board in NJ by 30% if she was elected governor the next week.

She won the election and started the corrupt practice of not funding the government employeee pension plan in order to balance the NJ State budget as required by law each year. Two recessions and about four governors later and the NJ employee pension plans are $53B underfunded.

What's the lesson to learned from this fractured fairytale?

REPUBLICANS are full of s**t when they tell you tax cuts pay for themselves. There is no free ride out there. Either you pay or your kids do. Unless you are just a lying piece of crap and contracts mean zip to you.

Is that the "self-destructive behavior" you were talking about, Boxcar? :bang:

Don't hurt yourself. Tax cuts aren't the problem. Out-of-control, unbridled, irresponsible spending is. That's the lesson you should learn, but never will because in La La Land where you seem to live there is not only a money tree growing in your Garden of Greens, but it never, never goes bare either. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Hey, my 401K took a major hit - I have zero compassion for any union pensioner - welcome the real world. Lose your ass, too, boys. NOT ONE tax dollar to save any pension, ever. Who the HELL do you think you are? :mad:

[newtothegame]

Hey, my 401K took a major hit - I have zero compassion for any union pensioner - welcome the real world. Lose your ass, too, boys. NOT ONE tax dollar to save any pension, ever. Who the HELL do you think you are? :mad:

Tom, I agree with you. But, there is one glaring problem. In a 401k, YOU elect the choices and the funds for your contributions. So, in essence, one could almost cause themselves to lose money by there own elections. Plus, you have a choice as to whether or not put your money into a 401k.
I could be wrong here, and will defer to someone in a public pension program, but you do not have electives or choices as to how your money is allocated in a pension fund. I believe there are some pensions where you do not have a choice as to contributions.

This is a tough choice.....
Those workers, like the unions or not, worked and put money into those pensions with the promise that it would be there for retirement. The city, municipality, etc etc signed into that agreement. Their entire working life and decisions made during that span was based in a thought that money would be there when they got to retirement age.

Cities across the country are failing to meet obligations financially. State budgets are going haywire. This goes back to the heart of conservatism in my opinion. Elected officials around the country have continued to spend without thoughts of budgets. They have consistently spent BEFORE having money to pay. This has caused them to borrow from the government. More and more debts increase, and they continue to pass those debts along.
SOMEWHERE IT HAS TO STOP!

Now we can all blame this one or that one, this party or that party. But it doesn't solve a thing. We can't go back and rewrite these contracts.
I think its best to negotiate something thats reasonable. With the understanding, that future deals are OFF. We can NOT continue to burden future generations with debt, without ever knowing if they will even have the ability to pay it off. This is what got us here in the first place.

Negotiate a deal to settle these pensions, future deals are off. Get your budgets inline!
As Tom correctly pointed out, we in the private sector have to live off of what we have. I have a budget. Public employees should be no different.

Most libs talk about regulations for the private sector such as banking etc etc. There should also be regulations on UNIONS. They have had a big hand in this problem.

[sammy the sage]

I would argue that honoring one's commitment to others, public or private and regardless of hardship, is one of the most moral things to do.

Also:

It's also the one thing most lacking in this world.


Good then...since I have NO pension coming...YOU can pay my part of the RAPE job coming from our beloved Gov'.t when they FORCE ALL tax-payer's to pay for OTHER's GREED :faint:

[Tom]

New, I agree, but bottom line - I am 100% opposed to them getting relief off of my back. Screw them,. They had choices a long time ago, too. They chose to depend on unions and government. Screw them everyone!

[delayjf]

Huh!? So, unelected bureaucrats in some state agency get to decide!?
It got defeated, but pro union representatives attempted to include it on two different bills.


Laws vary by state, but in general yes.
Since bankruptcy is covered by Federal law, can states pass laws that modify Federal statute?

Another legal remedy I've heard discussed.
States are prohibited from filing bankruptcy, but since they are also immune from lawsuit (which is why they cannot file for bankruptcy) then they could act unilaterally and simple reduce pension payouts on their own

[Spiderman]

The municipalities will continue to lower the pension payments. It is the sole compassionate course. Economic meltdown is around-the-corner. The issue of municipal and state governments becoming insolvent will prove to be a greater detriment to resolving the national debt than the financial and housing bubble-bursts.

The nation needs an overhaul across a broad spectrum. To begin, we need a fair election law that will enable the people to decide elections, not corporatilist funding which makes public officials beholden to special interests, not the people.

Spending cuts and hard-to-swallow revenue increases should be blended for all to take a hit in this time of belt tightening for the common good. Instead of blame for the cause of the mess, we should put our minds and shoulders in union for solutions.

Like it or not, we have the new Congress to work through the malaise that has been prevalent. Some will have bold ideas, others will remain blah. Each political party will hold to their principles, but individuals can break-through the dogma.

[boxcar]

The nation needs an overhaul across a broad spectrum. To begin, we need a fair election law that will enable the people to decide elections, not corporatilist funding which makes public officials beholden to special interests, not the people.

I'm all for that, providing Big Labor faces the identical restrictions that corporations would.

Spending cuts and hard-to-swallow revenue increases should be blended for all to take a hit in this time of belt tightening for the common good. Instead of blame for the cause of the mess, we should put our minds and shoulders in union for solutions.

Sounds good in theory but it will never happen. The Dems and the lamestream media will immediately blame the Repugs for starving the school kiddies, forcing granny to eat dog food, etc., etc., etc. with their spending cuts.

Boxcar

[Spiderman]

I'm all for that, providing Big Labor faces the identical restrictions that corporations would.

No argument here.

Sounds good in theory but it will never happen. The Dems and the lamestream media will immediately blame the Repugs for starving the school kiddies, forcing granny to eat dog food, etc., etc., etc. with their spending cuts.

Boxcar

Well, the Repugs first cut is spending for the poor and indigent needs. Now that they have their tax cut for the rich, benevolence should be their shining armor. Freedom of the press is with us for the long haul.

Improving education, healthy nutrient consumption are requisite facets of maintaining stability through hard-scrabble times. All of the etc, etc will need to be considered in the big picture.

[newtothegame]

Well, the Repugs first cut is spending for the poor and indigent needs. Now that they have their tax cut for the rich, benevolence should be their shining armor. Freedom of the press is with us for the long haul.

Improving education, healthy nutrient consumption are requisite facets of maintaining stability through hard-scrabble times. All of the etc, etc will need to be considered in the big picture.
Don't have to wait for the repugs to get blame...they already are...:faint:

[newtothegame]

Well, the Repugs first cut is spending for the poor and indigent needs. Now that they have their tax cut for the rich, benevolence should be their shining armor. Freedom of the press is with us for the long haul.

Improving education, healthy nutrient consumption are requisite facets of maintaining stability through hard-scrabble times. All of the etc, etc will need to be considered in the big picture.

Hey "webhead"..(loved those movies and cartoons) lol......
But, seriously....Let me ask you a question. Let's just assume for a second you are right and that the incomming congress proposes cuts to entitlement programs. ( I guess those are the ones you refer to when you mention the poor)...
Do you think its better to continue to promote entitlements as a way of life, or cut those programs?
And before you go blasting about how I am about cutting the poor...lets take it one step at a time. :lol:
The reason I ask is because it is of my opinion that as lonbg as Dems continue to promote entitlements as a way of life, (for votes obviously), the problems in this country will NOT get better.
What is wrong with setting up programs to help these people who are using entitlements to become more productive citizens?

[Spiderman]

Hey "webhead"..(loved those movies and cartoons) lol......
But, seriously....Let me ask you a question. Let's just assume for a second you are right and that the incomming congress proposes cuts to entitlement programs. ( I guess those are the ones you refer to when you mention the poor)...
Do you think its better to continue to promote entitlements as a way of life, or cut those programs?
And before you go blasting about how I am about cutting the poor...lets take it one step at a time. :lol:
The reason I ask is because it is of my opinion that as lonbg as Dems continue to promote entitlements as a way of life, (for votes obviously), the problems in this country will NOT get better.
What is wrong with setting up programs to help these people who are using entitlements to become more productive citizens?

Entitlement programs have become a way of life for many because there is no way out of being down so long; and some, are gaming the system. Of course, productive employment and utilization of skills should be quid pro quo for food stamp program, rent assistance, etc.

Where a line item in budget may reduce or cut spending on parks (only for sake of example and not Belmont), people who receive aforementioned and other public funds, should engage in maintaining the parks. First right to such employment to those currently with a parks department.

A beautification of America program would work wonders for boosting pride. People need jobs to provide, at minimum, for their basic needs of food and shelter. The Dems do receive a large portion of votes, maybe 90% from indigent people who vote. Dems have traditionally been socially compassionate, Repugs not. Perhaps, Repugs will empathize if a plan can be improvised that will reduce spending and remove many from the public trough.

As many ideas you have for establishing productive employment, should be mentioned here as a trial balloon; to your Senators and Congressperson and to your favorite media outlet(s). For a tall oak tree to grow, an acorn should be planted, now.

[skate]

48 million receive food stamps in the usa.

forget all about, a high % is waste, booze, schools etc.

The base that pays for this sort is getting smaller, so the cost gets higher for those still able to pay, it's the rubber band effect that concerns...snapper.:cool:

[skate]

http://pensiontsunami.com/


Pension and retiree health care are of concern( larger than state bond debt) but states have decades to pay those off and unlike bond debt, they do not have to convince retirees to lend them money on favorable terms.

[Tom]

Improving education, healthy nutrient consumption are requisite facets of maintaining stability through hard-scrabble times. All of the etc, etc will need to be considered in the big picture.

Considered for what they area - none for the Fed's business.
Keep the hell out of local issues.

[delayjf]

48 million receive food stamps in the usa.

In CA they recently had to stop welfare recipiants from using their welfare / food stamp debit cards at ATM machines in Casinos and on cruise ships or to buy lottery tickets.

[boxcar]

In CA they recently had to stop welfare recipiants from using their welfare / food stamp debit cards at ATM machines in Casinos and on cruise ships or to buy lottery tickets.

Wow! You mean even in CA, lottery tickets aren't considered a staple of life? Don't they know out there that man can't live by bread alone? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[delayjf]

Yea, but they do know to double down on any two card total of 6 and below with the dealer showing a 6.

[Spiderman]

In CA they recently had to stop welfare recipiants from using their welfare / food stamp debit cards at ATM machines in Casinos and on cruise ships or to buy lottery tickets.


I'm shocked, gambling going-on with food money, just shocked!

[newtothegame]

I'm shocked, gambling going-on with food money, just shocked!
You forgot to mention the "government" part of that food money.

[Tom]

I'm shocked, gambling going-on with other people's money, just shocked!

FTFY.....Merry Christmas!

[Spiderman]

FTFY.....Merry Christmas!

Claude Rains nailed the line.

[melman]

It's a small item but I wonder which is correct. Claude Rains or Claude Raines? Either way he did a lot of great work. His correct first name was William. William Claude (take your pick). :)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Films-of-Claude-Raines/lm/3PTUK0WYHSGT0

[Spiderman]

It's a small item but I wonder which is correct. Claude Rains or Claude Raines? Either way he did a lot of great work. His correct first name was William. William Claude (take your pick). :)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Films-of-Claude-Raines/lm/3PTUK0WYHSGT0

From IMDB:

More at IMDbPro »
Claude Rains (1889–1967)
Actor | Soundtrack
William Claude Rains, born in the Camberwell area of London, was the son of the British stage actor Frederick Rains. The younger Rains followed, making his stage debut at the age of eleven in "Nell of Old Drury." Growing up in the world of theater, he saw not only acting up close but the down-to-earth business end as well... See full bio »

Born: William Claude Rains
November 10, 1889 in Camberwell, London, England, UK
Died: May 30, 1967 (age 77) in Laconia, New Hampshire, U

[Tom]

I thought is was Claude Bald.

[nijinski]

It looks like NJ has figured out what o do aout their financial mess .

Major layoffs on police in he highest crime areas and more downsizing in the coming months.

[delayjf]

Good article by George Woods on this issue.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will122610.php3

excerpt:

San Francisco is spending $400 million a year on public employees' pensions, up from $175 million in 2005. In November, San Franciscans voted on Proposition B, which would have required city employees to contribute up to 10 percent of their salaries to their pension plans, and to pay half the health-care premiums of their dependents. Michael Moritz, a venture capitalist, says: "A typical San Francisco resident with one dependent pays $953 a month for health care, while the typical city employee pays less than $10."

San Francisco voters defeated Proposition B. If they now experience a self-inflicted budgetary earthquake, there is no national obligation to ameliorate the disaster they, like many other cities and states, have chosen.