"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 04:33:49 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Regarding your sleight of hand about the paydown of the national debt
during
Clinton's administration: From what I can tell, you're saying that the
year-over-year debt reductions weren't real, because the 5- and 15-year
projections were wrong. Is that about it, or did I lose track of the pea
while you were shuffling the shells around?

--
Ed Huntress


Clintons "balanced budget" was the result of "projected revenues" that
if they had actually materialized..would have balanced the budget in 5
yrs.

Somebody has been giving you a Snow job. Bloomberg.com, one of the most
trusted sources of financial news and data, had this to say about it:

==========================================
Dec. 21 (Bloomberg) -- President Bill Clinton left office in 2001 with a
federal budget surplus of $127 billion. President George Bush ran a deficit
of $319 billion in 2005. So who deserves more credit for fighting red ink?

No question, says Treasury Secretary John Snow: It's his boss, Bush. Sipping
a latte at a Starbucks coffee shop with reporters in Washington two days
ago, he said that ``the president's legacy will be one of having
significantly reduced the deficit in his time,'' and said Clinton's budget
was a ``mirage'' and ``wasn't a real surplus.''

Snow said the Clinton surplus was inflated by a stock-price bubble and that
Bush will be remembered for cutting the gap from a record $412 billion in
the 2004 fiscal year.

``Snow's comment would be laughable if it weren't so pathetically and
obviously inaccurate,'' said Thomas Mann, a political analyst at the
Brookings Institution, a policy research group in Washington. Colleague
William Gale, who worked on the Council of Economic Advisers under President
George H.W. Bush, said calling members of the current administration
``deficit-fighters is completely at odds with all of their policies.''

Snow has some support for his view. ``Capital gains receipts were unusually
high'' during the last years of the Clinton administration, said Ed
McKelvey, senior U.S. economist at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York. He
estimated that when the budget surplus reached a peak of $237 billion in
2000, capital gains tax payments were about $90 billion higher than the norm
for the early-to-mid 1990s.

=========================================

In other words, Clinton's budget surplus was real, Bush's deficit is real,
and Snow-job has been reduced to coming up with explanations for why Clinton
ran a budget surplus while Bush has run a deficit.

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

However..those revenues DID NOT materialize, we were sliding into a
recession, we had the DotCom bubble implosion (thankyouforbothBubba)
and revenues started drying up.

So there was NO balanced budget. That was like me saying Ive paid
off all my bills because next year I hope to have made enough money to
do so.

Gunner

Bull****. That was all in current accounts. I think we went over this
before, a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 04:33:49 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Regarding your sleight of hand about the paydown of the national debt
during
Clinton's administration: From what I can tell, you're saying that the
year-over-year debt reductions weren't real, because the 5- and 15-year
projections were wrong. Is that about it, or did I lose track of the pea
while you were shuffling the shells around?

--
Ed Huntress


Clintons "balanced budget" was the result of "projected revenues" that
if they had actually materialized..would have balanced the budget in 5
yrs.


Somebody has been giving you a Snow job. Bloomberg.com, one of the most
trusted sources of financial news and data, had this to say about it:

==========================================
Dec. 21 (Bloomberg) -- President Bill Clinton left office in 2001 with a
federal budget surplus of $127 billion. President George Bush ran a deficit
of $319 billion in 2005. So who deserves more credit for fighting red ink?

No question, says Treasury Secretary John Snow: It's his boss, Bush. Sipping
a latte at a Starbucks coffee shop with reporters in Washington two days
ago, he said that ``the president's legacy will be one of having
significantly reduced the deficit in his time,'' and said Clinton's budget
was a ``mirage'' and ``wasn't a real surplus.''

Snow said the Clinton surplus was inflated by a stock-price bubble and that
Bush will be remembered for cutting the gap from a record $412 billion in
the 2004 fiscal year.

``Snow's comment would be laughable if it weren't so pathetically and
obviously inaccurate,'' said Thomas Mann, a political analyst at the
Brookings Institution, a policy research group in Washington. Colleague
William Gale, who worked on the Council of Economic Advisers under President
George H.W. Bush, said calling members of the current administration
``deficit-fighters is completely at odds with all of their policies.''

Snow has some support for his view. ``Capital gains receipts were unusually
high'' during the last years of the Clinton administration, said Ed
McKelvey, senior U.S. economist at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York. He
estimated that when the budget surplus reached a peak of $237 billion in
2000, capital gains tax payments were about $90 billion higher than the norm
for the early-to-mid 1990s.

=========================================

In other words, Clinton's budget surplus was real, Bush's deficit is real,
and Snow-job has been reduced to coming up with explanations for why Clinton
ran a budget surplus while Bush has run a deficit.

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.


However..those revenues DID NOT materialize, we were sliding into a
recession, we had the DotCom bubble implosion (thankyouforbothBubba)
and revenues started drying up.

So there was NO balanced budget. That was like me saying Ive paid
off all my bills because next year I hope to have made enough money to
do so.

Gunner


Bull****. That was all in current accounts. I think we went over this
before, a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress




You must have missed that clase in school Ed,its called creative
accounting and is commonly used by the politicians and also by corporate
execs. Enron and a bunch of others had accountants that had degrees in
creative accounting.

As far as gunner is concerned, he graduated from the copy/paste school
of misinformation.

John

"john" wrote in message
...

snip

You must have missed that clase in school Ed,its called creative
accounting and is commonly used by the politicians and also by corporate
execs. Enron and a bunch of others had accountants that had degrees in
creative accounting.

The relevant classes I had were in economics, John. There was no baloney
about the surpluses under Clinton, and it wasn't the first time in our
lifetimes that the federal government has run surpluses. But Clinton doesn't
deserve any particular credit for it. He *does* deserve some credit for
keeping Congress from spending it before it materialized, and thus we did
pay down the national debt to a small degree under his administration.

The projections Gunner is talking about were indeed a bunch of baloney. But
it's also true that Clinton was quite a fiscally conservative guy -- much
more so than Bush I or Reagan. And Bush II is utterly clueless on economic
matters. Reagan's policy was "starve the beast," as his budget director put
it. That means he intended to cut taxes but to leave expenditures alone,
until deficits ran so high that everything had to be cut. He got the first
part but the second part, which he made no effort on at all, wound up
driving up the national debt to new post-war highs.

No supply-sider is capable of balancing the budget, and we'll be paying the
piper for it, probably during the next administration. Bush has run us deep
into a fiscal rathole. Clinton did not. So, politics aside, this baloney
that some people dust off and resurrect every year or two needs to be
corrected. It's not at all hard to see what happened if you go to the
*source* of the data, rather than read the apologists and the bloggers.
They're the ones who do the creative accounting.


As far as gunner is concerned, he graduated from the copy/paste school of
misinformation.

He's not as bad as he used to be. It was awful a few years ago. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:52:41 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:21:34 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian quickly quoth:

? wrote:

But who is going to go down on Hillary?


Pope Al? ;-)


He's too busy picking up his WHAT? Jesus Freakin' Christ. Gore won a
Nobel Prize for that faked up flick of his? There is no justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/s...991972,00.html

Some errors exposed: http://tinyurl.com/yrk29m

--
Remember: Every silver lining has a cloud.
----


When I was a kid, I thought the 21st Century would be amazing.

Everything would be clean and work right.

Everything would be logical and make sense.

We would have peace and prosperity.

We'd all wear those pointy shoulder jackets.

And fly around in Mollar Air Cars, like George Jetson.


I gotta tell ya, folks, that the reality of it didn't
quite live up to expectations...


Richard


But we arent watching TV on a 6" round green screen, arnt using
operators to dial EnterPrize 1234, nor are we dying of childbirth, or
taking 2 weeks to go from California to NYC, just to name a few...

I find the 21st century absolutely amazing..and Im only into my second
half of a century old...

Gunner

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


However..those revenues DID NOT materialize, we were sliding into a
recession, we had the DotCom bubble implosion (thankyouforbothBubba)
and revenues started drying up.

So there was NO balanced budget. That was like me saying Ive paid
off all my bills because next year I hope to have made enough money to
do so.

Gunner

Bull****. That was all in current accounts. I think we went over this
before, a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress
SMOKE & MIRRORS

The Budget Surplus That
Does Not Exist

By Janet Hook and
Peter G. Gosselin
TIMES STAFF WRITERS

WASHINGTON, DC-Politicians in Washington, acting as if Uncle Sam had
just won the Powerball jackpot, are rapt in dreams of splurging on big
tax cuts, extra Medicare benefits, shiny new airports and additional
stretches of highway. But the bounteous federal budget surplus upon
which their dreams rest could evaporate before lawmakers get their
hands on it. Recent budget analyses that forecast the ever-mounting
pot of gold rest on assumptions about politics and the economy that
may prove as reliable as the profits from a Ponzi scheme. (Are you
surprised that the Liar-in-Chief may be fibbing to make himself and
his administration look good? WFI Editor)

One example: Budget analysts base their recent accounting of the
surplus - a mind-boggling $5.9 trillion over the next 15 years, by one
measure - on the dubious bet that Congress will stay within strict
ceilings for spending on current federal programs. But if Congress
instead allows spending to grow enough merely to keep pace with
inflation, as it often has in the past, much of the surplus will
disappear.

And another: White House analysts have taken the unusual step of
making their surplus estimates over 15 years, rather than the more
conventional five or ten. The longer time period magnifies the effects
of good economic news - but it also compounds the effects of even tiny
errors in forecasting. Indeed, the White House admits that if it has
overestimated just one variable - productivity growth, or the increase
in what one worker can produce in one hour - by a mere half a
percentage point over the 15-year period, that would wipe out the
surplus altogether.

"If current projections… turn out to be even slightly optimistic, the
castles that political leaders are building in the sky will all come
tumbling down," said an analysis by the Concord Coalition, a
nonpartisan budget watchdog group based in Washington. What worries
many independent budget experts is that, by the time Washington
discovers any forecasting mistakes, it will already have spent the
money. "The problem is not in doing projections, even ones for 15
years," said C. Eugene Steurle, a former senior Treasury official now
at the Urban Institute, a nonpartisan policy research group in
Washington. "The problem is spending the revenues the projections
suggest might become available. It takes all the slack out of the
system."

The one undeniable truth about recent budget predictions is that they
have been way wide of the mark. A recent review of congressional
analysts' five-year deficit projections found errors averaging $250
billion a year over the last 10 years. But Washington's traditional
caution in the face of uncertain projections seems to be melting in
the sun of two recent reports that show surpluses mounting faster than
anyone had imagined. First the White House found that the surplus
would total $5.9 trillion over 15 years, half in the Social Security
program and half in all the government's other operations. That was a
tidy $1 trillion more than the administration had predicted as
recently as February. Then the Congressional Budget Office issued a
10-year forecast that reflected a similar trend.

Those estimates set off a raucous debate about what to do with the
windfall. Clinton wants a new drug benefit for Medicare. Republicans
want a big tax cut. The House has passed bills vastly increasing
highway and airport spending. And everyone wants to bail out Social
Security. Largely overlooked in the frenzy is the fact that the
surplus projections assume that Congress will make significant cuts in
"discretionary" spending for programs whose budgets are set year by
year in appropriation bills. Spending for these programs - from weapon
procurement to education grants, they make up one-third of the budget
- has been limited by a series of caps set in the 1997
budget-balancing agreement between Clinton and Congress.

The ceilings, which did not hurt much in the first couple of years,
are now growing painful. From $574 billion this year, discretionary
spending is supposed to fall to $569 billion in 2002. And Republicans
already have committed to spending increases for defense, education
and transportation. That would mean deep offsetting cuts elsewhere. A
bitter internal war is raging among Republicans, who control Congress,
over whether to raise the spending caps. Conservatives insist they
won't budge. "When hell freezes over," said House Majority Leader Dick
Armey (R-Texas). Moderates, by contrast, recoil at the political
risks. House Appropriations Committee members say the necessary cuts
are so deep as to be impossible.

Clinton and the Democrats are ready to pounce. The White House
estimates, for example, that one spending bill would have to slash
many labor, health and education programs as much as 18%. (It's ironic
that the Democrats and the Republicans are willing to "play politics"
with the most important issues effecting American nationals, without
any sense of moral compunction, after all, the slashes in programs
will be the result of an agreement the President entered into with
Congress. The self-serving agendas of each party is little more than a
source of national shame. WFI Editor) "I do not believe there is a
consensus in this Congress or in this country to make the kind of
draconian reductions that would be required," said Rep. David R. Obey
of Wisconsin, the senior Democrat on the Appropriations Committee.

The government's giant health care programs have generated much the
same kind of concerns as the smaller discretionary spending programs.
In their forecasts of giant surpluses, for example, both White House
and congressional analysts assumed the government would stick with a
1997 law to restrict Medicare coverage of home health care, nursing
home care and health maintenance organizations. Congress is now under
tremendous pressure from both the health care industry and the elderly
to ease those restrictions. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) is usually a
budget hawk, a determined opponent of federal spending. But at a
recent public hearing in Wichita, he promised to roll back some of the
1997 law's provisions when he was told that they had proved
devastating to rural health care agencies.

Official Washington may find all manner of reasons to roll back some
of the tough spending decisions of recent years. But it has voiced
almost no objections to the White House decision to measure the
surplus over 15 years. That's largely because administration
budgeteers have used conservative economic assumptions in making their
surplus estimates, in sharp contrast to predecessors who depended on
projections of unrealistically robust economic growth to justify
proposals to boost spending or cut taxes. But according to a broad
spectrum of critics, the credibility the White House added to its
estimates with conservative assumptions was effectively subtracted by
the decision to extend the estimates 15 years into the future.

"Believe me, we were stretching it when we did five-year projections,"
said Leon E. Panetta, who was once Clinton's chief of staff, his
budget director and chairman of the House Budget Committee. "Any time
you get out beyond a few years, you're in never-never land." And from
the Republican side, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete V. Domenici
of New Mexico, said: "I don't think [Clinton] should have done 15-year
numbers. It created a distorted picture. It made the numbers look way
too big." (Surprise, surprise! Bill Clinton did something that created
a distorted picture! WFI Editor)
SOURCE: Excerpted from the 11 July, 1999, issue of the Los Angeles
Times, Orange County Edition, from an article entitled, "Heaping
Surplus Built on Mountain of Assumptions." Reprinted in the public
service of the national interest of the American people.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


However..those revenues DID NOT materialize, we were sliding into a
recession, we had the DotCom bubble implosion (thankyouforbothBubba)
and revenues started drying up.

So there was NO balanced budget. That was like me saying Ive paid
off all my bills because next year I hope to have made enough money to
do so.

Gunner

Bull****. That was all in current accounts. I think we went over this
before, a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress

SMOKE & MIRRORS

The Budget Surplus That
Does Not Exist

By Janet Hook and
Peter G. Gosselin
TIMES STAFF WRITERS

(The actual title of that article, which was clipped and edited by "World
Free Internet," was "Huge Surplus Is Built on Big Assumptions," not "The
Budget Surplus That Does Not Exist." And WFI hacked the article itself up
pretty good, to boot. I point this out to avoid any fears that Gunner
actually reads the Los Angeles Times. He just reads the predigested waste
products. g)

That's about the 15-year projection, not about the current-accounts
surpluses. The er, "altered" headline is misleading but they can't cover up
the fact that it's not about the current surpluses under Clinton, but about
the long-term projections -- which, as I said in another post, were
unrealistic.

Once again, you're playing your shell game. Do you have any support for the
idea that the surplus was not real during the latter Clinton years?

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Snow has some support for his view. ``Capital gains receipts were unusually
high'' during the last years of the Clinton administration, said Ed
McKelvey, senior U.S. economist at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York. He
estimated that when the budget surplus reached a peak of $237 billion in
2000, capital gains tax payments were about $90 billion higher than the norm
for the early-to-mid 1990s.

=========================================

In other words, Clinton's budget surplus was real, Bush's deficit is real,
and Snow-job has been reduced to coming up with explanations for why Clinton
ran a budget surplus while Bush has run a deficit.

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.

Gunner

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Snow has some support for his view. ``Capital gains receipts were
unusually
high'' during the last years of the Clinton administration, said Ed
McKelvey, senior U.S. economist at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York. He
estimated that when the budget surplus reached a peak of $237 billion in
2000, capital gains tax payments were about $90 billion higher than the
norm
for the early-to-mid 1990s.

=========================================

In other words, Clinton's budget surplus was real, Bush's deficit is real,
and Snow-job has been reduced to coming up with explanations for why
Clinton
ran a budget surplus while Bush has run a deficit.

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.

Of course! I'm free in every way. d8-)

Let's start with the mistake where this blogger called "Dark Wraith" goofed
up (that name really instills confidence, BTW). First chart: the 2001 budget
was Clinton's last budget, submitted to Congress in 2000, not Bush's budget.
Bush submitted his first budget in 2001, for fiscal year 2002. So all of the
blue ones (surpluses) occured under Clinton's budgets. Bush had nothing to
do with the fiscal 2001 budget, just as Clinton had nothing to do with the
budget during his first year in office. That was Pappy's budget.

Now, we could stop right there, because that's what we've been arguing
about. But I'll take a look at the rest...

oh, jeez...Gunner, you didn't read that blog. You couldn't have. He says
that Snow is full of crap, and that Clinton's surpluses were real.

We'll pretend this little exchange didn't happen while you go back and look.
It wouldn't be fair of me. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:10:52 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Let's start with the mistake where this blogger called "Dark Wraith" goofed
up (that name really instills confidence, BTW).

I was especially impressed that he, "*specializes* in economics,
finance, mathematics, business administration, computer hardware and
software skills, and English grammar and composition." (My emphasis.)

I wonder what Dark Wraith does for hobbies?

--
Ned Simmons

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:47:36 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.


Did you take any time to read that page, Gunner? If you found anything
there to advance your argument, it's lost on me.

--
Ned Simmons

"Ned Simmons" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:10:52 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Let's start with the mistake where this blogger called "Dark Wraith"
goofed
up (that name really instills confidence, BTW).

I was especially impressed that he, "*specializes* in economics,
finance, mathematics, business administration, computer hardware and
software skills, and English grammar and composition." (My emphasis.)

I wonder what Dark Wraith does for hobbies?

Collector of seatbelt buckles, mime, and phone book editor.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:42:40 -0400, Ned Simmons
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:47:36 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.


Did you take any time to read that page, Gunner? If you found anything
there to advance your argument, it's lost on me.


Snicker...I was expecting knee jerk denial from Ed..automatic
reaction.

Im impressed he actually bothered to read it.

Hey..then if the "surplus" in 2001 was Clintons ..then so was 911.
Right? And the Recession.

Right?


Gunner

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:10:52 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Snow has some support for his view. ``Capital gains receipts were
unusually
high'' during the last years of the Clinton administration, said Ed
McKelvey, senior U.S. economist at Goldman, Sachs & Co. in New York. He
estimated that when the budget surplus reached a peak of $237 billion in
2000, capital gains tax payments were about $90 billion higher than the
norm
for the early-to-mid 1990s.

=========================================

In other words, Clinton's budget surplus was real, Bush's deficit is real,
and Snow-job has been reduced to coming up with explanations for why
Clinton
ran a budget surplus while Bush has run a deficit.

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.

Of course! I'm free in every way. d8-)

Let's start with the mistake where this blogger called "Dark Wraith" goofed
up (that name really instills confidence, BTW). First chart: the 2001 budget
was Clinton's last budget, submitted to Congress in 2000, not Bush's budget.
Bush submitted his first budget in 2001, for fiscal year 2002. So all of the
blue ones (surpluses) occured under Clinton's budgets. Bush had nothing to
do with the fiscal 2001 budget, just as Clinton had nothing to do with the
budget during his first year in office. That was Pappy's budget.

Now, we could stop right there, because that's what we've been arguing
about. But I'll take a look at the rest...

oh, jeez...Gunner, you didn't read that blog. You couldn't have. He says
that Snow is full of crap, and that Clinton's surpluses were real.

We'll pretend this little exchange didn't happen while you go back and look.
It wouldn't be fair of me. d8-)


****me..you actually looked at it? Im ****ing amazed. I was waiting
for your automatic knee jerk denial gene to kick in.
Im impressed Ed...truely impressed. I think this is a first.


The disappearing budget surplus - FYI - Brief Article - Editorial
Healthcare Financial Management, Oct, 2001 by Jeanne Schulte Scott

The Democrats' logic is they will find a way to pay only the hospital
part of Medicare, not the doctors' part, and we think we should pay
both."

--Karen Hughes, counselor to President George W Bush, on the
president's plan to use the surplus from the Medicare Part A trust
fund to pay for the annual deficit in Medicare Part B, which
historically has been funded from general revenues.

"What you've got going on here is a high-level game of budget chicken,
in which both sides are waiting to see who's going to screw up and be
blamed for having crossed that line."

--Leon Panetta, former director of the Office of Management and Budget
and chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, suggesting the budget
deficit "blame" battles have just begun.
Related Results


Last year at this time, Americans and their legislators were rejoicing
over a Federal budget surplus projected at more than $5 trillion over
10 years. Barely a year later, that Federal budget surplus seems to
have been a mirage. As Congress debates the final FY02 budget, it is
now clear that the overall budget surplus for FY02 will fall below the
combined surpluses in the Medicare and Social Security trust funds. In
other words, absent the extra Medicare and Social Security money, the
2002 budget actually will involve deficit spending.
Advertisement

john wrote:
The best years were the sixties, its been downhill since then. I wonder
if the Vietnam was a big part of the demise?

John

Well from my perspective the late 40s were pretty good.
...lew... (75)

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:42:40 -0400, Ned Simmons
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:47:36 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Wherever you're getting your financial analysis, Gunner, it's time for a
change.

http://dark-wraith.com/2005/12/treas...s-clinton.html

Feel free to comment on the charts.


Did you take any time to read that page, Gunner? If you found anything
there to advance your argument, it's lost on me.


Snicker...I was expecting knee jerk denial from Ed..automatic
reaction.

Im impressed he actually bothered to read it.

Pffhhht! Did you get away with that one in grade school, when you didn't do
your homework? d8-)

You know full well I read everything I comment upon, or else I make it clear
I'm not going to take the time to read it. That's how Jim Rosen and I used
to catch you all the time...


Hey..then if the "surplus" in 2001 was Clintons ..then so was 911.
Right? And the Recession.

Right?

How about the Civil War? Heck, that was his responsibility too, wasn't it?

Jeez, Gunner. We've got to help you out with a better class of reading
material. Here's a tip: When you want authoritative financial or budget
info, go to the original source for the numbers. Then go to the
authoritative sources -- The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, Barron's, The
Financial Times -- to get straight-up analysis. Those sources are the ones
that CEOs, financial managers, and millionaires count on for accurate
information, and they'd be crucified if they played games with it. Don't go
to the blogs, especially if the authors use handles like "Dark Wraith."
jeez.... Although he did not support your premise, he also went off to
cloud-cuckooland, doing a linear regression on budgets between
administrations. That's the stuff college freshmen do.

I'm not here to defend Clinton, but I hate to see bad information spread
around about things that relate to big decisions, such as who to vote for.
There are enough real complaints to go around among politicians without
cooking stuff up.

--
Ed Huntress

That paid the real time debt - not the long term debt.
And he took credit for what the Republicans rammed through Congress
- the Balance Budget Bill. BC signed that as he knew a veto would not
stand. Later he took credit for what 'he did'. A President cannot make
laws like that. He can issue orders only. And orders can't do that.

Martin

Martin H. Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
TSRA, Life; NRA LOH & Patron Member, Golden Eagle, Patriot's Medal.
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder
IHMSA and NRA Metallic Silhouette maker & member.
http://lufkinced.com/


Maxwell Lol wrote:
Gunner writes:

On 13 Oct 2007 13:54:43 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:

There are two charts on the FAQ page - one shows actual
values, the second is adjusted for inflation. It's the second chart
that shows it was dropping, probably because Clinton balanced the budget.

Then the chart is worthless as Clinton never balanced the budget.


---------------------------------------
Clinton announces record payment on national debt

By John King/CNN

May 1, 2000
Web posted at: 5:13 p.m. EDT (2113 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) - President Bill Clinton said Monday that the United States would pay off $216 billion in debt this year, bringing to $355 billion the amount of the nation's debt paid down in the three years since the government balanced the budget and began running surpluses.
------------------------

President Clinton announces another record budget surplus

From CNN White House Correspondent Kelly Wallace

September 27, 2000
Web posted at: 4:51 p.m. EDT (2051 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:10:52 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip


oh, jeez...Gunner, you didn't read that blog. You couldn't have. He says
that Snow is full of crap, and that Clinton's surpluses were real.

We'll pretend this little exchange didn't happen while you go back and
look.
It wouldn't be fair of me. d8-)


****me..you actually looked at it?

Yeah. And you didn't. d8-) Remember Barron v. Baltimore, which you thought
"proved" that the Bill of Rights was intended to go over the heads of the
states? You didn't read that one, either. Nor many others from which you've
quoted here.

Im ****ing amazed. I was waiting
for your automatic knee jerk denial gene to kick in.
Im impressed Ed...truely impressed. I think this is a first.

You're full of crap, and you know it. If I don't read something, I don't
comment about it. You, on the other hand, dump anything you trip over here,
not bothering to check what it says.


The disappearing budget surplus - FYI - Brief Article - Editorial
Healthcare Financial Management, Oct, 2001 by Jeanne Schulte Scott

The Democrats' logic is they will find a way to pay only the hospital
part of Medicare, not the doctors' part, and we think we should pay
both."

--Karen Hughes, counselor to President George W Bush, on the
president's plan to use the surplus from the Medicare Part A trust
fund to pay for the annual deficit in Medicare Part B, which
historically has been funded from general revenues.

Karen Hughes is a political hack who will say anything. Nobody who knows
what he's talking about would ever quote her as an authority. 'You know what
Tucker Carlson (conservative political pundit) said about her? Try this:

"Then I heard that [on the campaign bus, Bush communications director] Karen
Hughes accused me of lying. And so I called Karen and asked her why she was
saying this, and she had this almost Orwellian rap that she laid on me about
how things she'd heard -- that I watched her hear -- she in fact had never
heard, and she'd never heard Bush use profanity ever. It was insane.
"I've obviously been lied to a lot by campaign operatives, but the striking
thing about the way she lied was she knew I knew she was lying, and she did
it anyway. There is no word in English that captures that. It almost crosses
over from bravado into mental illness.

"They get carried away, consultants do, in the heat of the campaign, they're
really invested in this. A lot of times they really like the candidate.
That's all conventional. But on some level, you think, there's a hint of
recognition that there is reality -- even if they don't recognize reality
exists -- there is an objective truth. With Karen you didn't get that sense
at all."


"What you've got going on here is a high-level game of budget chicken,
in which both sides are waiting to see who's going to screw up and be
blamed for having crossed that line."

--Leon Panetta, former director of the Office of Management and Budget
and chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, suggesting the budget
deficit "blame" battles have just begun.
Related Results

So, what were the Related Results? We have to get you a new pair of
scissors, too. g


Last year at this time, Americans and their legislators were rejoicing
over a Federal budget surplus projected at more than $5 trillion over
10 years. Barely a year later, that Federal budget surplus seems to
have been a mirage. As Congress debates the final FY02 budget, it is
now clear that the overall budget surplus for FY02 will fall below the
combined surpluses in the Medicare and Social Security trust funds. In
other words, absent the extra Medicare and Social Security money, the
2002 budget actually will involve deficit spending.

No kidding. That was Bush's first budget. But I wouldn't claim it was his
fault. It was an unsustainable prediction, based on extending the
trendlines.


Advertisement

So, what was the Advertisement?

--

Ed Huntress

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On 13 Oct 2007 23:00:23 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:

Gunner writes:

Isnt it good to see Bush has cut the debt in half?

An increase of 2+ Trillion dollars isn't cutting the debt.


October 8, 2006
The Federal Budget Deficit: Bush Benchmark Achieved, Ignored
Filed under: Economy, MSM Biz/Other Bias, MSM Biz/Other Ignorance,
Taxes & Government - TBlumer @ 9:02 am

... and the best may be yet to come.
___________________________________

A huge point has been virtually if not totally ignored since the
announcement on Friday that the reported federal deficit for the
fiscal year that ended a week ago was $250 billion - The Bush
Administration has done what it said it would do about the deficit
three years ago, and has done it a full three years early, i.e., in
half the time predicted.

This continues what has been a very difficult past few years for those
who deride supply-side economics. If Washington, with a little help
from the states, lets the supply-side engine continue to chug along
for next several years, the results could be so positively stunning
that it would become impossible for supply-side detractors in touch
with any part of the real world to hang on to the comfort of their
static-analysis fantasyland.

But first, let's recap what has happened in the past three fiscal
years:

* Tax receipts have soared by over 35% (with 5.5%, 14.5%, and
11.7% increases in fiscal 2004, 2005, and 2006, respectively) from
$1.78 trillion to $2.41 trillion (2004 and 2005 results can be found
at Page 2 of this PDF from the Congressional Budget Office [CBO];
2006's receipts were estimated by adding the $253 billion revenue
increase reported near the end of this longer story).

* Despite the costs of the Iraq War, the rest of the War on
Terror, Katrina relief, and not nearly enough control over other
spending, the administration has accomplished its goal of cutting the
reported deficit in half by the time it leaves office a full three
years early (fiscal 2009, which ends a little less than three years
from now, is the last budget over which the Bush Administration will
have responsibility). Andrew Taylor of the Associated Press reported
on the deficit yesterday (commented on here) but "somehow" missed this
little nugget of good news, even though he reported on the
administration's original fiscal 2004 promise in a "not going to
happen" manner just under a year ago on October 14, 2005 (last two
paragraphs at link) -

The White House has set a goal of cutting the deficit in
half from the $521 billion prediction for 2004 that it issued at the
beginning of that year. (the original goal was therefore set sometime
before October 1, 2003, the beginning of the 2004 fiscal year - Ed.)

The administration says it is still on track to reach that
$260 billion goal by the time Bush leaves office. But administration
budget projections leave out the long-term costs of occupying Iraq and
Afghanistan, and have yet to be updated with cost estimates of
hurricane relief.

Even with all of those costs included, the administration has
reached its goal. How 'bout that, Andrew?

* Economic growth has averaged an annualized 3.89% during the past
13 quarters since the 2003 Bush tax cuts were passed. This is a record
that for all practical purposes matches the best seven years of the
Clinton administration, but trails the best seven years of the
Reagan-Bush 41 and Kennedy Johnson eras, when more aggressive tax cuts
were enacted:
13QgdpGrowth

(Bottom time period actually ends at 2Q06 - Ed.)

This is all very nice. But it could get better - much, much better. So
much better that it's scary to even contemplate the possibilities,
because if the ruling class in Washington thinks it might really
happen, they'll probably figure out how to ruin it.

For starters, understand that I have been using the term "reported
federal deficit" for a reason. The TRUE federal deficit is much
higher. That's because for decades federal budgetmakers have reduced
the true deficit by the amount by which Social Security tax
collections have exceeded Social Security benefits, and have
"borrowed" that money from the Social Security "Trust Fund" - even
though the "Trust Fund" should be holding and investing those funds to
help cover future benefit payments.

Here, pending what I assume will be very minor revisions, is how
fiscal 2006 really turned out, in billions; the $179 billion listed as
"Social Security surplus" actually consists of a $177 billion Social
Security surplus and $2 billion in positive cash flow from the US Post
Office; both were estimated by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO)
in its August 17 Budget Update Report (large PDF document; information
is at Page 12):
FY2006deficit

All of this is important to understanding the following tantalizing
possibilities:

* If federal tax receipts continue to increase at just 9% per
year, which is only about 70% of the 13.1% average annual increase in
the past two fiscal years, and if federal spending and the Social
Security surpluses in future years turn out as the CBO predicts in the
Budget Report noted above, the last Bush budget in fiscal 2009 will
show a reported surplus.

* If federal tax receipts continue to increase at 9% per year, and
if federal spending and the Social Security surpluses continue to turn
out as the CBO predicts, it will be fiscal nirvana - a
honest-to-goodness REAL budget surplus will occur in fiscal 2011, less
than five years from now.

Here's is how it will look if the described assumptions hold up:
DeficitThruFY2011proj

So, will these hoped-for serendipitous events take place? Well, there
are certainly a lot of barriers. Here are what I believe to be the
biggest four:

1. The CBO is assuming increases in projected outlays of just over
5% per year; unfortunately, the average increase during the past 5
years has been just under 7%. It's not like 5% can't be done; the
average increase in outlays during the first five years of GOP control
of Congress (1995-1999) was only 3.8%. The question is whether there
is anything even resembling resolve in Congress to keep spending under
control.
2. The 9% revenue increases, though less than those of the past
couple of fiscal years, still depend on two things that haven't yet
happened. First, the tax structure enacted with the Bush tax cuts of
2003 only extends out to 2010. There is absolutely no chance that the
hoped-for revenue increases will materialize unless that tax structure
is made permanent, or at least extended by a minimum of five more
years. Make no mistake: The economy and the markets will treat a
failure in this area for what it would really be - a massive
growth-stalling tax increase that would drastically reduce the rate of
growth in tax receipts, possibly below zero.
3. The other thing that mostly hasn't happened yet is fiscal
control in the various states. Most of them, thanks to the very
federal tax cuts that some governors and so many Blue Staters deride,
are awash in revenue. Unfortunately, as has so frequently occurred in
the past, most states are simply spending the extra money instead of
taking the opportunity to enact their own economy-stimulating tax
cuts. The states need to do their part to keep the economic engine
running. Ohio (of all states) actually came through on this front with
an income-tax reduction a few months ago, but needs to do much more.
4. Most ideally, the top federal rate should come down further from
its current 35%. In 1986, when the first wave of Reagan tax cuts
started losing steam, it took another cut of the top federal rate to
28% to get the annual pecentage increase in collections back into
double digits again. It's likely that a cut in the top federal rate to
that same 28% level would accomplish an identical result; it would
certainly make the 9% revenue-increase assumption more likely to come
true, and it could even lead to a level of economic growth closer to
that achieved during the Reagan-Bush 41 and Kennedy-Johnson years.

As has been shown time and time again, suppy-side tax cuts work when
they are allowed to do their magic

Yeah right. In you fantasy. If you compare economic numbers from the Truman,
Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson administrations with more modern ones what
you find is that the economy under those administrations was as good or
better than it is now, and they didn't run the enormous deficits we do no
because we don't collect enough in taxes to pay our bills. In addition, the
middle class was growing and increasing in wealth and wages, that's not
happening now. Then add in the fact that the highest marginal tax rate under
Eisenhower was 91% and under Kennedy it was 78 or 74%, which totally shoots
down the contention that it takes reductions in tax rates to ridiculous
levels to make the economy grow. Even more proof tax cuts are no guarantee
of economic gain is the fact that under Clinton the marginal tax rates were
raised and the economy boomed. So much for the myth of tax cuts making the
economy grow. That's just an over simplified con job put out to fool the
republican base into thinking that undertaxing the wealthiest Americans
somehow benefits them. The proof is overwhelming, trickle down economics or
it's code name "supply-side" economics works for one class only, the
wealthy. For the ordinary American it means stagnant wages and increased
expenses for health and energy thus making them poorer not richer. But the
best proof of all it to look at who are the biggest boosters of supply side,
the wealthy. It is good for them but not for anyone else. Why do you think
they like it so much? It makes them all the richer.

Hawke

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:45:39 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


However..those revenues DID NOT materialize, we were sliding into a
recession, we had the DotCom bubble implosion (thankyouforbothBubba)
and revenues started drying up.

So there was NO balanced budget. That was like me saying Ive paid
off all my bills because next year I hope to have made enough money to
do so.

Gunner

Bull****. That was all in current accounts. I think we went over this
before, a few years ago.

--
Ed Huntress

SMOKE & MIRRORS

The Budget Surplus That
Does Not Exist

By Janet Hook and
Peter G. Gosselin
TIMES STAFF WRITERS

(The actual title of that article, which was clipped and edited by "World
Free Internet," was "Huge Surplus Is Built on Big Assumptions," not "The
Budget Surplus That Does Not Exist." And WFI hacked the article itself up
pretty good, to boot. I point this out to avoid any fears that Gunner
actually reads the Los Angeles Times. He just reads the predigested waste
products. g)

That's about the 15-year projection, not about the current-accounts
surpluses. The er, "altered" headline is misleading but they can't cover
up
the fact that it's not about the current surpluses under Clinton, but
about
the long-term projections -- which, as I said in another post, were
unrealistic.

Once again, you're playing your shell game. Do you have any support for
the
idea that the surplus was not real during the latter Clinton years?

--
Ed Huntress

Gunner is pretending that projections of huge surpluses for years to come is
the same thing as actual surpluses in the present. As anyone who can read
the statistics knows Clinton's administration had four years where they had
an actual budget surplus. This is a fact. Bush has never had anything but
deficits. That is a fact. The problem is that Clinton's people, based on
projections from the four years of surplus, were saying huge surpluses were
coming year after year into the future. Of course, the one thing they didn't
plan on was Bush coming in and ruining everything by reversing the policies
that brought about the surplus. If they had they would have projected years
of huge deficits instead. Nonetheless, Gunner is acting like a Dummer by
focusing on projections of potential surpluses, which didn't materialize,
instead of the real surpluses which did occur in Clinton's term in office.
What do you expect? That he would actually admit Clinton did a good job?

Hawke

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:29:18 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Hey..then if the "surplus" in 2001 was Clintons ..then so was 911.
Right? And the Recession.

Right?

How about the Civil War? Heck, that was his responsibility too, wasn't it?


Did all the planning for it go on on Clintons watch?

Gunner

It gets compromised down to the lowest common denominator, especially
the one that says "it wont cost ME anything" - so, it just goes on,
and on. Just over 2,000 years of western civilization, its still a
bloody mess......

Andrew VK3BFA.

Did I ever claim it was perfect? On the other hand..your pessimism is
almost doomlike.

Gunner

Fair enuff - I admit,the world does seem a mess to me. And, besides
idle debate, theres not a great deal I can do about it as an
individual. I dont live in a Pollyanna world where it would be
perfect if we could get rid of those pesky (insert pet hate here)..and
I cant rewrite history to make it fit my view of the world. Its 2007,
still stuck in unwinnable conflicts, the planet is drowning in its own
waste, a mood of savage despair and cynicism pervades the body
politic....people I respect for their many abilities and their good
hearts go off on mad, manic rants about whatever doesn't fit their
world view....wow, it aint getting better, Gunner. (and no amount of
huffing or puffing will change that)

But its cool, Gunner. Doing a trades level metalwork course as it
interests me and I can afford to do it, working 3 days a week, no
debts beyond trivial ones, lots of interesting projects...dont know
how my Grandchildren will get on, I suspect they will curse us for the
mess we have willed them...

Andrew VK3BFA.

On Oct 15, 9:12 am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:52:41 -0500, cavelamb himself



wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:21:34 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian quickly quoth:

? wrote:

But who is going to go down on Hillary?

Pope Al? ;-)

He's too busy picking up his WHAT? Jesus Freakin' Christ. Gore won a
Nobel Prize for that faked up flick of his? There is no justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/s...991972,00.html

Some errors exposed:http://tinyurl.com/yrk29m

--
Remember: Every silver lining has a cloud.
----

When I was a kid, I thought the 21st Century would be amazing.

Everything would be clean and work right.

Everything would be logical and make sense.

We would have peace and prosperity.

We'd all wear those pointy shoulder jackets.

And fly around in Mollar Air Cars, like George Jetson.

I gotta tell ya, folks, that the reality of it didn't
quite live up to expectations...

Richard

But we arent watching TV on a 6" round green screen, arnt using
operators to dial EnterPrize 1234, nor are we dying of childbirth, or
taking 2 weeks to go from California to NYC, just to name a few...

I find the 21st century absolutely amazing..and Im only into my second
half of a century old...

Gunner

Far out Gunner - what medication are you on? - I WANT SOME.

Andrew VK3BFA.....

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:46:49 -0700, wrote:

On Oct 15, 9:12 am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:52:41 -0500, cavelamb himself



wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:21:34 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian quickly quoth:

? wrote:

But who is going to go down on Hillary?

Pope Al? ;-)

He's too busy picking up his WHAT? Jesus Freakin' Christ. Gore won a
Nobel Prize for that faked up flick of his? There is no justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/s...991972,00.html

Some errors exposed:http://tinyurl.com/yrk29m

--
Remember: Every silver lining has a cloud.
----

When I was a kid, I thought the 21st Century would be amazing.

Everything would be clean and work right.

Everything would be logical and make sense.

We would have peace and prosperity.

We'd all wear those pointy shoulder jackets.

And fly around in Mollar Air Cars, like George Jetson.

I gotta tell ya, folks, that the reality of it didn't
quite live up to expectations...

Richard

But we arent watching TV on a 6" round green screen, arnt using
operators to dial EnterPrize 1234, nor are we dying of childbirth, or
taking 2 weeks to go from California to NYC, just to name a few...

I find the 21st century absolutely amazing..and Im only into my second
half of a century old...

Gunner

Far out Gunner - what medication are you on? - I WANT SOME.

Andrew VK3BFA.....


Mt. Dew and Life.

Try it sometime.

On the other hand..you have the option of filling the bathtub with
nice warm water, put on your favorite mellow music, open a nice bottle
of your favorite adult beverage, and when the time is right..and you
are felling really mellow...slit both of your wrists.
Remember...lengthwise, not side to side.

You will get sleepy, and more relaxed..and as the light fades...you
can know that you really ****ed up.

Gunner

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

snip


That's about the 15-year projection, not about the current-accounts
surpluses. The er, "altered" headline is misleading but they can't cover
up
the fact that it's not about the current surpluses under Clinton, but
about
the long-term projections -- which, as I said in another post, were
unrealistic.

Once again, you're playing your shell game. Do you have any support for
the
idea that the surplus was not real during the latter Clinton years?

--
Ed Huntress

Gunner is pretending that projections of huge surpluses for years to come
is
the same thing as actual surpluses in the present.

Yeah, it kind of sinks in after the shells go back three or four times and
the pea keeps popping up in an irrelevant place. d8-)

As anyone who can read
the statistics knows Clinton's administration had four years where they
had
an actual budget surplus. This is a fact. Bush has never had anything but
deficits. That is a fact. The problem is that Clinton's people, based on
projections from the four years of surplus, were saying huge surpluses
were
coming year after year into the future. Of course, the one thing they
didn't
plan on was Bush coming in and ruining everything by reversing the
policies
that brought about the surplus.

Well, there was also the little problem that projecting like they did, for
15 years, is absurd. When surpluses show up from time to time, the most you
can say is that they were doing a reasonably good job of shooting for a
balanced budget and they got lucky because the economy was running hot.
There's no problem with that -- you hope that the surpluses and deficits are
both small, and that both show up over any period of time -- but Clinton
surely didn't plan for those big surpluses.

If they had they would have projected years
of huge deficits instead.

That's certainly true. Once the supply-siders get their hands on a budget,
we're in for years of big deficits.

Nonetheless, Gunner is acting like a Dummer by
focusing on projections of potential surpluses, which didn't materialize,
instead of the real surpluses which did occur in Clinton's term in office.
What do you expect? That he would actually admit Clinton did a good job?

It's all he has to work with.

--
Ed Huntress

On Oct 15, 6:18 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:46:49 -0700, wrote:
On Oct 15, 9:12 am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:52:41 -0500, cavelamb himself

wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:21:34 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian quickly quoth:

? wrote:

But who is going to go down on Hillary?

Pope Al? ;-)

He's too busy picking up his WHAT? Jesus Freakin' Christ. Gore won a
Nobel Prize for that faked up flick of his? There is no justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/s...991972,00.html

Some errors exposed:http://tinyurl.com/yrk29m

--
Remember: Every silver lining has a cloud.
----

When I was a kid, I thought the 21st Century would be amazing.

Everything would be clean and work right.

Everything would be logical and make sense.

We would have peace and prosperity.

We'd all wear those pointy shoulder jackets.

And fly around in Mollar Air Cars, like George Jetson.

I gotta tell ya, folks, that the reality of it didn't
quite live up to expectations...

Richard

But we arent watching TV on a 6" round green screen, arnt using
operators to dial EnterPrize 1234, nor are we dying of childbirth, or
taking 2 weeks to go from California to NYC, just to name a few...

I find the 21st century absolutely amazing..and Im only into my second
half of a century old...

Gunner

Far out Gunner - what medication are you on? - I WANT SOME.

Andrew VK3BFA.....

Mt. Dew and Life.

Try it sometime.

On the other hand..you have the option of filling the bathtub with
nice warm water, put on your favorite mellow music, open a nice bottle
of your favorite adult beverage, and when the time is right..and you
are felling really mellow...slit both of your wrists.
Remember...lengthwise, not side to side.

You will get sleepy, and more relaxed..and as the light fades...you
can know that you really ****ed up.

Gunner

Hey Gunner,
(whats Mt.Dew?-hope its better than most American lollywater beer) -
why would I want to off myself? - still got lots of projects to do,
things to learn, loonies to banter with, Worked through all that
existentialist **** years ago. And yes, Gunner, I do readily admit I
have ****ed up on many occasions, and will do so again in the future.
Backed a few horses that are still running at the back of the field.
Believed a few politicians I thought were honorable men, but who
turned out to be just ordinary, run of the mill, politicians. Hurt
people through ignorance and stupidity.

Its called life - you need to acknowledge this in order to move on.
Better than being stuck with the broken record inside your own head,
frantically trying to win old wars, singing old songs, forever
chanting the increasingly silliness of the same tired old discredited
doctrines, becoming more and more irrelevant as the years go by, a
figure of pity if not scorn.......ranting against the world, armed to
the teeth for when the men in the white coats finally come to take you
away...

Lighten up Gunner - don't take these debates so seriously. I do them
in me spare time, late at night, when I cant work outside in me
garden, or on outside projects, or power up machine tools, or just
cant be stuffed doing anything except talk crap to others of like
mind. (Talking crap is a national pastime here, good and skillful
practitioners are National Heroes - even tho your a Septic, your
pretty good at it too - the sort of bloke who would chuck a dead rat
into a kindergarten, just for the hell of it...) I Come here to see
what the wingers are up to, look for witty remarks, the lightning
riposte, the creative use of language, references to studies (about my
own country) that I have never heard of by organisations that only
exist inside some strange characters PC, the rare piece of good
writing mangled by illiterate cut and paste , ........is good
fun.......(sigh) I DO live in hope....is Right Wing Intellectual an
oxymoron?

Its also a good place to learn about metalwork, but sometimes that
seems almost incidental.

got a good score last week, in a secondhand bookshop, in a country
town.. Volumes 1-4 (all of em, like, wow, man..) of the state
technical schools metalwork course. Written for kiddies, I can
understand it. My school textbook is modern, written for modern
manufacturing technology, short on the basics of tool angles, using
manual lathes and mills. So its worth hanging around, if only to get
to the standard of machining I would like. Will give it me best shot,
anyway.

Your OK Gunner - a total idiot, but your OK.

Andrew VK3BFA.

On 15 Oct 2007 07:31:04 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:

Gunner Asch writes:

Clintons "balanced budget" was the result of "projected revenues" that
if they had actually materialized..would have balanced the budget in 5
yrs.

No - those projections were on eliminating the national debt.

A balanced budget occurs when total revenues equal total outlays for a
fiscal year.

As shown in
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html
and adjusted for inflation, Clinton did this in 2000 and 2001.



Not when you hijack the Social Security money and use it as part of
your revenue total incomes to be applied towards the debt.

Gunner

On 15 Oct 2007 07:57:49 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:


I NEVER said Clinton paid off the national debt. I did say that
Clinton Balanced the budget (adjusted for inflation), which you denied
ever occured. I even showed you the real numbers proving this, and you
showed me "projections" or what might occured.

Lets see...didnt he include the revenues intended for Social Security
as part of the numbers ?

Gunner

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:38:34 -0700, wrote:

On Oct 15, 6:18 pm, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 22:46:49 -0700, wrote:
On Oct 15, 9:12 am, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 13:52:41 -0500, cavelamb himself

wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:21:34 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm,
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian quickly quoth:

? wrote:

But who is going to go down on Hillary?

Pope Al? ;-)

He's too busy picking up his WHAT? Jesus Freakin' Christ. Gore won a
Nobel Prize for that faked up flick of his? There is no justice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/s...991972,00.html

Some errors exposed:http://tinyurl.com/yrk29m

--
Remember: Every silver lining has a cloud.
----

When I was a kid, I thought the 21st Century would be amazing.

Everything would be clean and work right.

Everything would be logical and make sense.

We would have peace and prosperity.

We'd all wear those pointy shoulder jackets.

And fly around in Mollar Air Cars, like George Jetson.

I gotta tell ya, folks, that the reality of it didn't
quite live up to expectations...

Richard

But we arent watching TV on a 6" round green screen, arnt using
operators to dial EnterPrize 1234, nor are we dying of childbirth, or
taking 2 weeks to go from California to NYC, just to name a few...

I find the 21st century absolutely amazing..and Im only into my second
half of a century old...

Gunner

Far out Gunner - what medication are you on? - I WANT SOME.

Andrew VK3BFA.....

Mt. Dew and Life.

Try it sometime.

On the other hand..you have the option of filling the bathtub with
nice warm water, put on your favorite mellow music, open a nice bottle
of your favorite adult beverage, and when the time is right..and you
are felling really mellow...slit both of your wrists.
Remember...lengthwise, not side to side.

You will get sleepy, and more relaxed..and as the light fades...you
can know that you really ****ed up.

Gunner

Hey Gunner,
(whats Mt.Dew?-hope its better than most American lollywater beer) -
why would I want to off myself? - still got lots of projects to do,
things to learn, loonies to banter with, Worked through all that
existentialist **** years ago. And yes, Gunner, I do readily admit I
have ****ed up on many occasions, and will do so again in the future.
Backed a few horses that are still running at the back of the field.
Believed a few politicians I thought were honorable men, but who
turned out to be just ordinary, run of the mill, politicians. Hurt
people through ignorance and stupidity.

Mt. Dew is a lemon lime flavord softdrink, exceptionally high in
caffeine and in the non diet version, mondo sugar.

Its called life - you need to acknowledge this in order to move on.
Better than being stuck with the broken record inside your own head,
frantically trying to win old wars, singing old songs, forever
chanting the increasingly silliness of the same tired old discredited
doctrines, becoming more and more irrelevant as the years go by, a
figure of pity if not scorn.......ranting against the world, armed to
the teeth for when the men in the white coats finally come to take you
away...


Blink blink..Im not the doomer here. Im rather optimistic actually.
It wasnt me that I was directing the bathtub scenario towards as a
result of overwhelming angst.

I should have died a thousand times, 30 yrs ago, and a bunch of times
since...so every day, no matter how ****ty, is gravy.

Lighten up Gunner - don't take these debates so seriously. I do them
in me spare time, late at night, when I cant work outside in me
garden, or on outside projects, or power up machine tools, or just
cant be stuffed doing anything except talk crap to others of like
mind. (Talking crap is a national pastime here, good and skillful
practitioners are National Heroes - even tho your a Septic, your
pretty good at it too - the sort of bloke who would chuck a dead rat
into a kindergarten, just for the hell of it...) I Come here to see
what the wingers are up to, look for witty remarks, the lightning
riposte, the creative use of language, references to studies (about my
own country) that I have never heard of by organisations that only
exist inside some strange characters PC, the rare piece of good
writing mangled by illiterate cut and paste , ........is good
fun.......(sigh) I DO live in hope....is Right Wing Intellectual an
oxymoron?

hermmm

Its also a good place to learn about metalwork, but sometimes that
seems almost incidental.

got a good score last week, in a secondhand bookshop, in a country
town.. Volumes 1-4 (all of em, like, wow, man..) of the state
technical schools metalwork course. Written for kiddies, I can
understand it. My school textbook is modern, written for modern
manufacturing technology, short on the basics of tool angles, using
manual lathes and mills. So its worth hanging around, if only to get
to the standard of machining I would like. Will give it me best shot,
anyway.


I found a yard sale..estate sale, found a bunch of books, German
family bible from 1855, Ed McGivens Fast and Fancy Pistol Shooting
(1st addition), Fantasia, 1940, book on the Disney movie, quite a
number of such, including some still in the original shipping
boxes..that Ive not explored yet.

Your OK Gunner - a total idiot, but your OK.

Lets see...Im a Septic. You are a Turd. (same rhyming convention)

For a Turd...well...we cant expect too much, can we?
G

Gunner


Andrew VK3BFA.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On 15 Oct 2007 07:31:04 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:

Gunner Asch writes:

Clintons "balanced budget" was the result of "projected revenues" that
if they had actually materialized..would have balanced the budget in 5
yrs.

No - those projections were on eliminating the national debt.

A balanced budget occurs when total revenues equal total outlays for a
fiscal year.

As shown in
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html
and adjusted for inflation, Clinton did this in 2000 and 2001.



Not when you hijack the Social Security money and use it as part of
your revenue total incomes to be applied towards the debt.

That's another red herring. As for the "unified budget" that mixes up SS
with general revenues, blame that one on Richard Nixon, 1970. Now the only
way to accumulate the "trust fund" is to pay down the national debt. Which
is what Clinton was doing.

SS income exceeded SS expenses in each year of Clinton's administration, and
the rate of income to the "trust fund" was increasing thoughout his second
term:

http://pw1.netcom.com/~rdavis2/ssfund.html

And, as several people, including you g have shown, Clinton did indeed
begin to pay down the national debt. Bush has run it up again.

Do you have any more blind alleys you want to try? If you could gang them
all up it would be a lot quicker to harpoon them all in one shot.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
news

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On 15 Oct 2007 07:31:04 -0400, Maxwell Lol wrote:

Gunner Asch writes:

Clintons "balanced budget" was the result of "projected revenues" that
if they had actually materialized..would have balanced the budget in 5
yrs.

No - those projections were on eliminating the national debt.

A balanced budget occurs when total revenues equal total outlays for a
fiscal year.

As shown in
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html
and adjusted for inflation, Clinton did this in 2000 and 2001.



Not when you hijack the Social Security money and use it as part of
your revenue total incomes to be applied towards the debt.

That's another red herring. As for the "unified budget" that mixes up SS
with general revenues, blame that one on Richard Nixon, 1970. Now the only
way to accumulate the "trust fund" is to pay down the national debt. Which
is what Clinton was doing.

SS income exceeded SS expenses in each year of Clinton's administration,
and
the rate of income to the "trust fund" was increasing thoughout his second
term:

http://pw1.netcom.com/~rdavis2/ssfund.html

And, as several people, including you g have shown, Clinton did indeed
begin to pay down the national debt. Bush has run it up again.

Do you have any more blind alleys you want to try? If you could gang them
all up it would be a lot quicker to harpoon them all in one shot.

--
Ed Huntress

Boy, is this getting repetitious. You are right and Gunner is
wrong....again! This is like the New England Patriots vs. the 49ers. It
isn't even a contest.

Hawke

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

snip


And, as several people, including you g have shown, Clinton did indeed
begin to pay down the national debt. Bush has run it up again.

Do you have any more blind alleys you want to try? If you could gang them
all up it would be a lot quicker to harpoon them all in one shot.

--
Ed Huntress

Boy, is this getting repetitious. You are right and Gunner is
wrong....again! This is like the New England Patriots vs. the 49ers. It
isn't even a contest.

Eh, don't make too much of it. Gunner's friend Google has been ****ed off at
him lately.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

snip


And, as several people, including you g have shown, Clinton did
indeed
begin to pay down the national debt. Bush has run it up again.

Do you have any more blind alleys you want to try? If you could gang
them
all up it would be a lot quicker to harpoon them all in one shot.

--
Ed Huntress

Boy, is this getting repetitious. You are right and Gunner is
wrong....again! This is like the New England Patriots vs. the 49ers. It
isn't even a contest.

Eh, don't make too much of it. Gunner's friend Google has been ****ed off
at
him lately.

--
Ed Huntress


Google is indeed a useful tool. But it's certainly no substitute for a real
education. I've found that with Google's help some uneducated and
ill-informed folk are able to bluff their way into arguments about subjects
in which they are quite uninformed. But it only goes so far and before long
the educated folk understand they are dealing with ignorant fools who wish
they had real educations instead of just a computer and Google.

Hawke

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

snip


And, as several people, including you g have shown, Clinton did
indeed
begin to pay down the national debt. Bush has run it up again.

Do you have any more blind alleys you want to try? If you could gang
them
all up it would be a lot quicker to harpoon them all in one shot.

--
Ed Huntress

Boy, is this getting repetitious. You are right and Gunner is
wrong....again! This is like the New England Patriots vs. the 49ers. It
isn't even a contest.

Eh, don't make too much of it. Gunner's friend Google has been ****ed off
at
him lately.

--
Ed Huntress


Google is indeed a useful tool. But it's certainly no substitute for a
real
education. I've found that with Google's help some uneducated and
ill-informed folk are able to bluff their way into arguments about
subjects
in which they are quite uninformed.

I hesitate to say much about this, talking about people as third parties,
but it's clear that Google and its ilk have encouraged some really bad
habits. Half of the stuff we read here looks like its coming from unguided
missiles powered by a search engine.

Sometimes it just makes me feel old and out of touch. Maybe Karl Rove was
right when he said the "reality based community" is out of date. What
matters now is having the power to create your own "truth," he said, and to
impose it on everyone else through sheer throw-weight and control over the
conversation. The supposed "democratic" Internet sometimes looks like a
competition among propaganda tactics.

--
Ed Huntress

Lets see...Im a Septic. You are a Turd. (same rhyming convention)

For a Turd...well...we cant expect too much, can we?
G

Gunner



Andrew VK3BFA.

You missed it again, Gunner. (BTW- your "do it yourself suicide"
tutorial was wrong in fact, too. ). Out of consideration for the
feelings of others in this group who may have been touched personally
by the subject, wont give you a detailed explanation. If you want one,
will do it off list - let me know.

Septic is abbreviation for "Septic Tank" rhymes with Yank. Had wide
currency in your war. Cockney slang, our cultural heritage. Now, whats
the derivation for Turd from Australian?. Or did you just
spontaneously bull**** that one?

good score re the books - I mainly look for metalworking books these
days, have a good library on electronics stuff, including some 1890's
texts., except for "The Art of Electronics" by Winfield Hill. Want
that one, but too expensive. Great text, wish I had known about it
years ago when starting out. Fantasia was Hewlett Packards first big
break too - they sold some audio generators to do the soundtrack.
Lovely gear, pity the bean counters got hold of them and reduced the
name to plastic box PC's...

TC mate - Andrew VK3BFA.

On Oct 14, 7:56 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message

...

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 21:10:52 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

snip



oh, jeez...Gunner, you didn't read that blog. You couldn't have. He says
that Snow is full of crap, and that Clinton's surpluses were real.

We'll pretend this little exchange didn't happen while you go back and
look.
It wouldn't be fair of me. d8-)

****me..you actually looked at it?

Yeah. And you didn't. d8-) Remember Barron v. Baltimore, which you thought
"proved" that the Bill of Rights was intended to go over the heads of the
states? You didn't read that one, either. Nor many others from which you've
quoted here.

Im ****ing amazed. I was waiting
for your automatic knee jerk denial gene to kick in.
Im impressed Ed...truely impressed. I think this is a first.

You're full of crap, and you know it. If I don't read something, I don't
comment about it. You, on the other hand, dump anything you trip over here,
not bothering to check what it says.



The disappearing budget surplus - FYI - Brief Article - Editorial
Healthcare Financial Management, Oct, 2001 by Jeanne Schulte Scott

The Democrats' logic is they will find a way to pay only the hospital
part ofMedicare, not the doctors' part, and we think we should pay
both."

--Karen Hughes, counselor to President George W Bush, on the
president's plan to use the surplus from theMedicarePart A trust
fund to pay for the annual deficit inMedicarePart B, which
historically has been funded from general revenues.

Karen Hughes is a political hack who will say anything. Nobody who knows
what he's talking about would ever quote her as an authority. 'You know what
Tucker Carlson (conservative political pundit) said about her? Try this:

"Then I heard that [on the campaign bus, Bush communications director] Karen
Hughes accused me of lying. And so I called Karen and asked her why she was
saying this, and she had this almost Orwellian rap that she laid on me about
how things she'd heard -- that I watched her hear -- she in fact had never
heard, and she'd never heard Bush use profanity ever. It was insane.
"I've obviously been lied to a lot by campaign operatives, but the striking
thing about the way she lied was she knew I knew she was lying, and she did
it anyway. There is no word in English that captures that. It almost crosses
over from bravado into mental illness.

"They get carried away, consultants do, in the heat of the campaign, they're
really invested in this. A lot of times they really like the candidate.
That's all conventional. But on some level, you think, there's a hint of
recognition that there is reality -- even if they don't recognize reality
exists -- there is an objective truth. With Karen you didn't get that sense
at all."

"What you've got going on here is a high-level game of budget chicken,
in which both sides are waiting to see who's going to screw up and be
blamed for having crossed that line."

--Leon Panetta, former director of the Office of Management and Budget
and chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, suggesting the budget
deficit "blame" battles have just begun.
Related Results

So, what were the Related Results? We have to get you a new pair of
scissors, too. g

Last year at this time, Americans and their legislators were rejoicing
over a Federal budget surplus projected at more than $5 trillion over
10 years. Barely a year later, that Federal budget surplus seems to
have been a mirage. As Congress debates the final FY02 budget, it is
now clear that the overall budget surplus for FY02 will fall below the
combined surpluses in theMedicareand Social Security trust funds. In
other words, absent the extraMedicareand Social Security money, the
2002 budget actually will involve deficit spending.

No kidding. That was Bush's first budget. But I wouldn't claim it was his
fault. It was an unsustainable prediction, based on extending the
trendlines.

Advertisement

So, what was the Advertisement?

--

Ed Huntress

I collect these Medicare contacts together, hope they help. -Mary
Bobble

AARP - Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage: an extensive explanation
of the new Part D benefit. http://www.aarp.org/health/medicare

the site for the Medicare Part A (hospital) payor. http://www.veritusmedicare.com

Resources on the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit - from the Kaiser
Foundation: "The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and
Modernization Act of 2003 was signed into law on December 8, 2003. The
Foundation has compiled some resources to reflect the latest
information, as well as background materials on various parts of the
law. http://www.kff.org/medicare/rxdrugbenefit.cfm"

Medicare Rights Center . Low income issues
(esp SPAPs) http://www.medicarerights.org

1999 Medicare Overpayments Estimated At $13.5 Billion
http://www.medicareoverpayments.com

Consumer health information from the Harvard Medical School as well as
the University of Pennsylvania's School of Dental Medicine is found at
the InteliHealth site. Click on anything from "Allergies" to "Weight
Management" for useful information. This is an active site with
discussions on current topics of interest. InteliHealth is a
subsidiary of Aetna-U.S. Healthcare, and 150 top healthcare
organizations contribute to the site. http://www.InteliHealth.com

Medicare and MediGap Supplemental Insurance Health economists estimate
that seniors with both Medicare and Medigap spend about 30 percent
more on health care than those with Medicare alone http://www.medicareandmedigap.com

A free website sponsored by HealthMetrix Research, Inc. offers
independent cost comparisons for Medicare HMOs. Enter your ZIP code
and search, or search by the name of a city. Over 100 Medicare HMOs
are listed, from Aetna-U.S. Healthcare to WellCare. The site includes
"Tips for Selecting a Medicare HMO" as well as links to other Medicare
websites and Frequently Asked Questions (and answers). http://www.hmos4seniors.com

Medicare Part D Information. Consumer Alert. Medicare Beneficiaries
Urged to be on the Look-out for Phone Scams - Includes new CMS Part D
Reference Guide for Pharmacists. Medicare Part D - Resources & Links
http://www.medicarepartdinformation.com

Center for Medicare Advocacy
medicareadvocacy.org

This category includes information about states' aged and disabled
Medicare beneficiaries, such as enrollment, demographics, Medicare
beneficiaries and providers have certain rights and protections
related to financial liability http://www.medicarebeneficiaries.com

The official U.S. government site for Medicare information covers the
basics of Medicare, information to help you choose a nursing home,
publications, helpful contacts, information on how to recognize and
prevent fraud and abuse. Health plans and nursing homes in your area
can be compared. Medicare participating physicians in your area are
listed, as well as prescription assistance programs. http://www.medicare.gov

Medicare reform policy in the 106th Congress, a watchdog report
http://www.medicarereformpolicy.com

Maryland's HealthChoice Homepage http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/healthchoice

Alliance for Health Reform Nonpartisan organization that conducts
research on a variety of health care issues, including children's
health, Medicare, and the cost and availability of health are. 1900 L
St., NW, Suite 512 Washington, D.C. 20036 phone: (202) 466-5626 fax:
(202) 466-6525 http://www.allhealth.org

National Council on Aging Nonprofit group does research on aging
issues and legislation on healthcare for the aging. Also engages in
healthcare advocacy. http://www.ncoa.org

This calculator allows users to enter their prescription drug costs to
determine what they will pay, Useful to calculate your medicare
benefits http://www.medicareprescriptiondrugcalculator.com

Pharmacy Information Network Latest development in pharmaceuticals.
Links to websites for specific diseases and treatments. Discussion
groups. Glossary of pharmaceutical terms is provided. http://www.PharmInfo.com
http://www.PharmInfo.com

Families USA Enrollment/ disenrollment; late
fees; plan marketing Formularies Appeals/Grievances Industry relations
(PDP conflicts)

Your Medicare rights http://www.medicarerights.org

Medicare Access for patients RX http://www.maprx.info

Yahoo Health Directory (http://www.yahoo.com/health) A good place to
start your search for health information. http://www.medicarerights.org

Wayne State University Institute of Gerontology - Information useful
to those interested in geriatrics, the process of aging and services
for the elderly. Designed for researchers, educators, practitioners,
and the general public. Includes description of programs and courses,
calendar of events, and tips. http://www.iog.wayne.edu/

We explain the Medicare insurance plans that fill the gaps of Medicare
and the benefits, everyone with Medicare Insurance can get
prescription drug advantage coverage that may help lower prescription
drug costs http://www.medicareandinsurance.com

Benefits Check-up (for senior citizens) http://www.benefitscheckup.org

National Osteoporosis Foundation Prevention and treatment. http://www.nof.org

provides ratings of doctors, dentists, hospitals, nursing homes,
assisted living residences and health plans. http://www.healthgrades.com

The Access to Benefits Coalition Web site, can help you see if you're
eligible for low-income help and can direct you to other resources.
http://www.accesstobenefits.org

developed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, this
site directs you to reliable information from government agencies,
nonprofit organizations, and universities about health topics, health
care organizations, Medicare, health fraud, and medical privacy.
http://www.healthfinder.gov

Projected Early Medicare Bankruptcy Underscores Importance of
Immediate Retirement Planning for All Americans postponed Medicare's
bankruptcy to around 2015 - when the huge Baby Boom generation starts
retiring http://www.medicarebankruptcy.com

AgeNet.com Health and drug information specific to seniors including
online senior drugs reviews of commonly prescribed drugs for the
elderly. http://www.agenet.com

Extremely complex and changing constantly, Medicare payment policy
will drive $479 billion in health spending in 2008 http://www.medicarepaymentpolicy.com

The Eldercare Locator, a service of the Administration on Aging, has
dedicated a section of its Web site to helping those with Medicare
understand the new drug benefit. http://www.eldercare.gov/Eldercare/Public/medicare.asp

Therubins.com Health, medical and social information of interest to
the elderly. http://www.therubins.com

The Medicare prescription drug benefit This line includes Medicare
benefits for prescription drugs and catastrophic coverage
http://www.medicarebenefitsforprescriptiondrugs.com

The following is from the Medicare and Medicaid Senior awareness event
held on 10/17/07. "banners could be seen at the nyc marathon, rhapsody
norvegienne could be heard playing at this large event. ohio state
wisconsin alumni rodney carrington the "monster man" was gone with the
wind -as a runner-. lsu alabama runner richie roberts "danzig" was
runner number "11", sporting Advertising slogan for Medicare held
event. brian williams, scientist that discovered the "spherical
bacteria" (leader of the second american revolution research team at
MIT) also ran. ASPCA "animal house" musical member aimee brooks
played ballade s concluding stanza along with ralphie may at this new
york city marathon, both of them experienced concert musicians." http://www
kelsey peterson .org

Network Of Care - Community-based resources and tools for seniors,
people with disabilities, caregivers and service providers.http://
www.networkofcare.org

Eligibility for Medicare Disability Benefits: For adults aged 18 to
64, eligibility for Medicare is tied to eligibility for Social
Security Disability Income (SSDI) benefits http://www.eligibilityformedicare.com
http://www.eligibilityformedicare.com

ElderHope, LLC - Provides information, support, links and book
recommendations to the elderly, their caregivers, and the bereaved.
http://www.elderhope.com

Summary of the latest report for the Social Security and Medicare
programs The Impact of Social Security and Medicare on the Federal
Budget http://www.socialsecurityandmedicare.com

Describes the aging process, discusses myths, statistics, and
problems, and suggests ways of maintaining health into old age.
http://www.helpguide.org/aging_well.htm

The American Diabetes Association. http://www.diabetes.org

Senior Health Insurance Benefits Assistance program Benefits
Assistance program provides education and information about Medicare
http://www.benefitsassistanceprogram.com

Senior Health Week News and information for seniors. http://www.seniorhealthweek.org

medicare prescription drug bill R 108 1st U.S. House of
Representatives 669 H R 1 House prescription drug bill offers skimpy
benefits to seniors. http://www.prescriptiondrugbill.com

Ryan Shay, a Medicare spokesperson, in Brooke Henson Illinois, said
that the Federal Government sponsered pillsbury bake off which raised
money for special needs kids, went through olympic marathon trials
today. Corporate contributor nchsaa of Pittsburgh raised more than
$60,000.00 The special event guest speaker, was lost it at the movies
author Steven Singh, who spoke as the "pouilly fuisse" wine was
served. http://www.icarly.com

Seniors Resource Guide - A guide to senior services and resources on
healthcare providers, housing options, emergency services, community
resources, and professional articles on aging.

SeniorWorld Online A directory of health, fitness, and nutrition for
seniors. http://www.seniorworld.com

Whether to enroll in a Medicare drug prescription plan depends upon
what kind of coverage, if any, you have join a Medicare Drug
Prescription Plan. If you have. both Medicare and Medi-Cal, you can
enroll in a plan that covers you http://www.medicaredrugprescriptionplan.com

Keiser Institute on Aging Information on the enhancement of older
adult wellness by changing the perceptions of aging and improving the
quality of life. http://www.keiser.com/kioa/

transfer health-care costs from companies to the government
http://www.coalitiononmedicare.com

Avoiding Slips, Trips and Broken Hips Supports the ongoing UK
Department of Trade and Industry campaign on falls prevention aimed at
older people in the home. http://www.preventinghomefalls.gov.uk/

Senior Health Week News and information for seniors
seniorhealthweek.org

The Medicare Medicaid Assistance Program is available to help seniors
and caregivers make informed decisions, health benefit counseling
service for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries
http://www.medicaremedicaidassistanceprogram.com

Senior One Source http://www.senioronesource.com

MedlinePlus: Senior Health Listings on physicians, nutrition, drug
trials and caregiver support for seniors. Site info for nih.gov

Medicare is a critically important source of health insurance for 43
million Americans How Medicare works http://www.healthmedicare.net

Flu information from the Centers for Disease Control. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/

Research into Ageing This national registered charity in the UK
furthers medical research in healthy aging at universities, hospitals
and medical schools. Current research programs, newsletter,
fundraising and links. Free pamphlets. "Exercise for Healthy Ageing"
book and "More Active - More Often" video available for purchase. Site
info for ageing.org

Medicaid enrollment among elderly medicare beneficiaries Medicaid
enrollment among elderly medicare beneficiaries: individual
determinants, effects of state policy, and impact on service use
http://www.elderlymedicare.com

Offers information to the caregiver for a person with dementia.
Includes a chat line for caregivers. http://www.alzwell.com

for Medicare Beneficiaries. Prescription Drug Helpline is a service
for Aging Groups. Helpline counselors are available to provide
assistance. http://www.prescriptiondrughelpline.com

Alzheimer Web Resource for research on Alzheimer's disease, including
care and support for victims. werple.mira.net.au/~dhs/ad.html)

Enrollment in the private Medicare plans has been growing rapidly,
here is a list of them http://www.privatemedicareplans.com

The Medicine Program (free prescription program) http://www.themedicineprogram.com

Pennsylvania Institute on Aging University of Pennsylvania Health Care
System's site. The "Institute on Aging" section provides information
on holistic health, end-of-life care, Alzheimer's disease and ways the
elderly can improve their health.

Medicare Rights Center http://www.medicarerights.org

AgeNet.com Health and drug information specific to seniors including
online senior drugs reviews of commonly prescribed drugs for the
elderly.

Sunrise Assisted Living Inc. Owns and operates assisted living
facilities which provide basic care and services to elderly. Features
corporate, financial, and invstor data. (Nasdaq: SNRZ).
http://www.sunriseassistedliving.com

Find in-depth information to help you choose the best Medicare Plan
and Drug Benefits for you consequences of caps on Medicare drug
benefits http://www.medicareplansanddrugbenefits.com

The National Advisory Council on Aging The NACA is a Canadian federal
government organization. http://www.naca-ccnta.ca/

Low Cost Medicare Prescription Drug Plans low cost Medicare products
and new prescription drug benefit. http://www.lowcostmedicare.com

Action for Healthy Aging and Elderly Care The Novartis Foundation for
Gerontological Research. Areas of interest to physicians and
researchers, other healthcare professionals, and patients. Weekly news
updates from Reuter's Health Information. Patient area topics include
impaired mobility and nutrition. The Ask the Expert forum is free to
view, but does require registration if you wish to participate.
http://www.healthandage.com

Online tutorial on how to perform a breast self-exam. http://www.intelihealth.com

Helpguide: Lifelong Wellness Describes the aging process, discusses
myths, statistics, and problems, and suggests ways of maintaining
health into old age. Site info for helpguide.org

Future Medicare funding is at risk, said ryan shea of "panic button" a
watchdog group in carmen winstead, ohio. henry cho, CEO of PB, frank
lucas VP, and swiss family robinson author wendy pepper have voiced
concerns that each American owes $500,000 through the national debt.
A petition signed, to be given to Congress includes the signatures of
victoria schattauer,george jung, and lynne koplitz. http://www.
vertiginous .com

The Patient Education Forum The American Geriatrics Society. Aging
FAQ. Site info for americangeriatrics.org
http://www.americangeriatrics.org/ed...um/index.shtml

Step by step information to help you understand the Medicare Part D
prescription drug plan and help you as you review plan options
Discounts to Medicare Part D Drug Plan. Insurers adding new bells and
whistles to attract senior citizens http://www.medicarepartddrugplan.com

New Medicare Reimbursement Rule - step-by-step, easy-to-understand
explanation of a complicated Medicare reimbursement rule
http://www.medicarereimbursementrule.com

Staying Healthy at 50+ AHRQ consumer information on ways people age 50
and older can stay healthy, tips on living habits, to help prevent
disease, screening tests, and immunizations. Online tutorial on how to
perform a breast self-exam. http://www.ahrq.gov/ppip/50plus/

Senior One Source Referral service and magazine designed to help
seniors achieve a healthier life. http://www.senioronesource.com

The Social Security Administration -perscription help -
http://www.ssa.gov/prescriptionhelp

Our Senior Years Health Topics Articles on multiple health concerns
for senior citizens, written by doctors and nurses.
http://www.oursenioryears.com/health.html

Senate panel OKs $35B increase for kids' health care - Bush to Veto
Kids' Health Plan http://www.kidshealthplan.net

The Patient Education Forum - The American Geriatrics Society. Aging
FAQ.

Provides health insurance coverage for those individuals who cannot
obtain health insurance coverage elsewhere http://www.healthplanhome.com

Baltimore Health Care Access http://www.bhca.org

Jannsen Eldercare Information and resources on medical conditions
related to aging, health insurance, Medicare, and nursing homes for
the health care professional, consumer and caregiver. http://www.janssen-eldercare.com

SeniorWorld Online A directory of health, fitness, and nutrition for
seniors. Site info for seniorworld.com

Senate Passes Child Health Measure The Senate passed a bill to provide
coverage for 10 million youngsters after efforts to find a veto-proof
bipartisan compromise in the House were cut short. Congress Set for
Veto Fight on Child Health Measure http://www.childhealthmeasure.com

National Health Law Program http://www.healthlaw.org

FirstGov for Seniors, hosted by the Social Security Administration
(SSA). http://www.seniors.gov

The Resource Directory for older people is published by the National
Institute on Aging and the Administration on Aging. It contains links
to hundreds of websites. You can browse through its alphabetical Index
by Topic ("A" begins with Adult Day Care...African-American
Health...Aging Research...AIDS...). If you want to visit an
organization's website, it will be in a list of groups. Appendices
include one on state agencies for the aging and another on state long-
term care ombudsman programs. Intended for a wide audience, this site
provides names, addresses and FAX numbers for health and social
welfare experts and organizations. NOTE: A print version of The
Resource Directory is available by calling 1-800-222-2225. http://www.aoa.gov/

Healthy Aging Campaign Healthy Aging is a national, ongoing, health
promotion designed to broaden awareness of the positive aspects of
aging and to provide inspiration to adults, ages 50 plus, to improve
their physical, mental, social and financial health. http://healthyaging.net

ThirdAge Health Starting point for people over 40 for information
about a healthy life and life style. http://www.thirdage.com/health/

push for profits could combine with a poorly designed and badly
monitored Medicare payment program, operates on a fee-for-service
basis http://www.medicarepaymentprogram.com

Care Pathways Provides families and health professionals with details
of the care options available in the USA, as well as offering support,
needs assessment, and product sales. http://www.carepathways.com

Medicare awareness: Medicare show attendees enjoyed a full day in
Ellsworth today (06/11/07), which included guest speakers. katrina
bowden and ryan hall of ohio state football radio fame along with
alicia craig attended the lecture given by manhattan project scientist
harold "fabulous moolah". alicia shay noted that harold- the former
ex navy notre dame player in the mid 1940's, along with phil knight
and john parker wilson were known as the "rialto bridge
twins" (remember "sadie hawkins" day?). At heart she said she is
"Just a kid delicious candies her weakness, especially european dark
chocolate, she notes as she unwrapped another sweet. http://www.
pitcher maglie .com

the site for the Medicare Part B (physician office and lab testing)
payor. http://www.hgsa.com

Medicare fraud claims are suspected to be about $35 billion a year
http://www.medicareoversight.com

Lumetra Information on Medicare for beneficiaries, their families and
providers. http://www.lumetra.com

ElderHope, LLC Provides information on Alzheimer s Disease, grief,
medical ethics, aging, and caregiving for families, professionals, and
patients. Site info for elderhope.com

You can add drug coverage to the traditional Medicare plan through a
"stand alone" prescription drug plan Medicare beneficiaries are
eligible for the extra help if they have limited income and resources
http://www.medicareplanfordrugbenefits.com

The Medicare Access for Patients-RX is a coalition of patient, family
caregiver, and health professional organizations committed to
safeguarding patients with chronic diseases and disabilities under the
new Medicare prescription drug coverage. The site, at , has numerous
links, both general and state-specific, that can put you in touch with
organizations that might be able to help you sort through plan
choices. http://www.maprx.info

Managing the Risks of Service to Seniors Excellent resource on service
to seniors http://www.servicetoseniors.com

When Does Someone Attain Old Age? The Ohio Department of Aging, Senior
Series. SS-101-96. Site info for osu.edu

Aging Issues Message Board Forum on the process and affects of aging.
http://www.healthboards.com/aging-issues/

Pro-Ops Articles on common health conditions in senior citizens. Site
info for rivernet.com.au

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services http://www.hcfa.gov

Alzheimer's health plan debuts -- Internet Source Alzheimer's
sufferers in the Valley will have access to the nation's first
Medicare health plan http://www.alzheimershealthplan.com

Pfizer for Living Offering personalized articles, health management
tools and health information. Requires free registration.
http://www.pfizerforliving.com

Mental Health and Aging This site will assist older adults and their
families in obtaining appropriate mental health and aging services,
and teach them how to advocate to get their needs met. http://www.mhaging.org/

information about states' aged and disabled Medicare beneficiaries,
such as enrollment 380000 Medicare beneficiaries signing up each week
http://www.medicarebeneficiaries.com

Senior Connections Resources for seniors and their caregivers in
Virginia http://www.seniorconnections-va.org

A Medicare HMO is a viable option for those who wish to limit their
out of pocket medical expenses free medicare hmo annual cost
comparisons for seniors http://www.medicarehmosearch.com

Lifesphere Retirement Communities A not-for-profit family of services
that offers exceptional retirement community living, home-delivered
services, senior centers, a radio station, consulting services in
Ohio. http://www.lifesphere.org

health Issue for Senior Citizens. interested in Otoscope examinations?
Contact ross wilson of the vertiginous, VA Medicare treatment facility
every Tuesday. north carolina high school athletic association were
given a writeup in the fresno news by Reporter austin scarlett, as
well as wivk, a local Radio Station for the associations close
encounters of the third kind fundraising for Senior Health Week in
vertiginous. frank lucas, wife of jay mccarroll, who bears a
remarkable resemblance to "vivian leigh", helped to raise the $1000
pledge, which will be used to purchase the Otoscopes. The nickname
given to this fundraising event was the "Otoscope sylph" (mythical
fairies). http://www. eva pigford .com

Elderly Medicare, Medicaid Patients Not Receiving Quality Care Those
who are 85 or older are the fastest-growing age group among elderly
Medicare beneficiaries http://www.elderlymedicare.com

the Durable Medical Equipment payor. http://www.umd.nycpic.com

this free and confidential government Web site, sponsored by several
federal agencies and organizations, helps you find government benefits
that you may be eligible to receive. http://www.gov/benefits.gov/govbenefits_en.portal

this free online service, sponsored by the National Council on the
Aging, screens individuals over 55 for federal, state, and private
benefits programs. http://www.benefitscheckup.org

provided by the National Library of Medicine and the National
Institutes of Health, this site features information on diseases and
conditions and has links to dictionaries and educational materials.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus

The American Cancer Society. Index on site provides links to
information on care and treatment of cancer. http://www.cancer.org

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 14, 7:56 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

snip

oh, jeez...Gunner, you didn't read that blog. You couldn't have. He
says
that Snow is full of crap, and that Clinton's surpluses were real.

We'll pretend this little exchange didn't happen while you go back and
look.
It wouldn't be fair of me. d8-)

snip


I collect these Medicare contacts together, hope they help. -Mary
Bobble

AARP - Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage: an extensive explanation
of the new Part D benefit. http://www.aarp.org/health/medicare

big snip

Wow, that's some list, Mary. How long did it take you to read all of that?

--
Ed Huntress