Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
Larry Blanchard wrote in news:j0v2ih$fak$3
@speranza.aioe.org: On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:53:13 -0700, DGDevin wrote: Yeah, you tell 'em, if the Founders really wanted separation of church and state then why did they put "In God We Trust" on the money? Just in case anyone took that statement seriously, it was the Eisenhower administration who made it the official motto and had it added to paper money. In 1956. yes, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_We_Trust -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#42
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
|
#43
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:09:31 -0400, Mike Marlow wrote: Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see where anyone suggested that Obama's motive was to become dictator for life. Perhaps you could refresh me... "Then obama declares a state of emergency, declares martial law and becomes the dictator for life as he would like to be." posted by k-nuttle Yup - clean miss. I hate it when that happens... -- -Mike- |
#44
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Han" wrote in message ... At first, I could have voted for McCain (would have been unlikely, but it seemed possible). Then he went of the deep end in his opinions, and tried to cover that up with a cover girl. Sorry, Twitsie did him in for good. It's too bad Karl Rove was able to torpedo McCain's campaign in 2000, if he had become President it seems reasonable to me he wouldn't have been so quick to go to war with a nation that hadn't attacked the U.S. I hadn't made up my mind between McCain and Obama until after it became apparent just how bad Caribou Barbie really was, that did it for me. First time in decades I didn’t think the Repubs had come up with the better ticket. |
#45
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message ... Yeah, you tell 'em, if the Founders really wanted separation of church and state then why did they put "In God We Trust" on the money? Just in case anyone took that statement seriously, it was the Eisenhower administration who made it the official motto and had it added to paper money. In 1956. Dammit, there's always some guy who's gotta blurt out the punchline halfway through the joke. |
#46
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"J. Clarke" wrote in message in.local... However the Founders did not seek "separation of church and state". Some folks insist that the Founders didn't want an armed citizenry aside from service in a state militia. Actually the Founders made it clear that an armed citizenry independent of the state was exactly what they wanted, some of them wrote and spoke on the subject in very clear terms, just as they did on the subject of how undesirable it was for govt. and religion to be mixed. The courts consider such extra-constitutional evidence when they are interpreting the Constitution, which seems a reasonable thing to do when trying to figure out what the Founders *meant* which is the role which inevitably came to the courts. The First Amendment has unusual wording--"Congress shall make no law resepecting an establishment of religion". In other words it's a restriction specifically on what laws may be enacted by the Federal government. Pretty much the theme of the Bill of Rights. The reason that that particular item was included in the Bill of Rights was that several states had state religions at the time and would not have ratified the Constitution if there had been a chance that the Federal government would override that state religion. They had to agree to legal slavery for the same reason, but that doesn't mean many weren't holding their noses when they signed. One can argue that incorporating it under the fourteenth to restrict the actions of state governments is at variance with the original intent, however that would be an uphill battle at this point. Put me down on the list of those who are pleased that the courts went that route, state religions are things of horror. |
#47
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Mike Marlow" wrote in message ... This goes to the heart of what is wrong with American politics today. It is no longer enough to claim the other side is wrong, they have to be wicked as well and actively working to damage the nation and harm its people. Is it any wonder compromise fails when politics is practiced in a manner that requires painting the other side as heretics? Well - in a controversial world, it has always been that way. It hasn't always been that way, there was a time when members of Congress from different parties were friends who respected each other and could work together, they didn't assume the R or the D after the other guy's name was proof of incompetence and corruption. The problem is that we are now inundated with too many idiots who feel a false sense of obligation and remorse for the very things that have made this nation great. For some reason they feel it is wrong to work hard and be successful - wrong to be the unique model for how good things could be for those living under worse conditions. And of course you can quote Mr. Obama expounding on how wrong it is to work hard and become successful, sure you can. No doubt you can also demonstrate in convincing terms how no other nation has advanced science and industry and economics and politics to provide a better standard of living for its people, clearly America is, as you say, unique in that respect. Oh sure, some of those smelly foreigners will point to their superior schools and longer life expectancy and so on as if that means something, but run a carrier battle group up and down their coastline a few times and they get the message. |
#48
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On 7/29/2011 2:14 PM, busbus wrote:
On Jul 29, 12:12 am, "Lew wrote: The Congress will not pass a bill to raise the federal debt by 08/02/2011. As a result, President Obama will execute an executive order to raise the federal debt on 08/02/2011 per terms of the 14th amendment. Obama will not allow default to happen. Lew I shouldn't do this but..... I happened to find a link that shows the breakdown of the federal Budget proposal for 2012. It doesn’t go deep enough and I need to look at things on a higher level than I wanted but it gave me enough insight that I wanted to puke. After I read this, I have been thinking about these things and mo 1. The first place we need to cut is our defense budget. Q. Why have so many National Guard units been called to active duty over the past several decades? A. Because the federal military budget is not large enough for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force to fulfill their missions. 3. We need to start seriously looking at entitlements. Why should Warren Buffett get Social Security or be allowed to sign up for Medicare? Do you have any evidence that Warren Buffett is collecting SS, or using Medicare? I dunno, but I rather suspect most ultra-wealthy do not participate because they can afford not to, and it's not worth the hassle for them. There are literally generations of people in the same family who have never had a paying job—they have lived off the rest of us. I say stop it. No more. My plan is not to pull the rug out from underneath them because you would literally have violence. It needs to be a phased approach and we would have to kick up the giving before we take it away. My plan would be to train these people in whatever they want. If they want to be a plumber, go for it. If they want to be an accountant, go at it. If they want to be a hairdresser, so be it. We will pay them to go to a trade school or college or whatever. We will help them with child care and medical and living expenses until they get their degree or certificate. We will buy them clothes to wear on interviews and even give them low interest loans to open a business. We will train them on how to take interviews. We will do whatever…but there WILL be an end to it. I say 6-12 months after “graduation,” they will be knocked off the public relief roles. There is nothing like an empty stomach that will make somebody work. I agree with the concept, BUT, in our present economy and high unemployment rates, do you really expect that newly trained plumbers, hairdressers etc. will be able to find unemployment when even experienced workers cannot? Your solution would have to address that problem. One alternative would be that instead of unearned welfare benefits, they would have to work for the government, mowing lawns, cleaning toilets, picking up litter, whatever, at 75% of the minimum wage rate. They could either do that, or go out and get a private sector job, but they couldn't simply sit at home watching TV on the government dole. |
#49
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
DGDevin wrote:
"Mike Marlow" wrote in message ... This goes to the heart of what is wrong with American politics today. It is no longer enough to claim the other side is wrong, they have to be wicked as well and actively working to damage the nation and harm its people. Is it any wonder compromise fails when politics is practiced in a manner that requires painting the other side as heretics? Well - in a controversial world, it has always been that way. It hasn't always been that way, there was a time when members of Congress from different parties were friends who respected each other and could work together, they didn't assume the R or the D after the other guy's name was proof of incompetence and corruption. I don't think there is any difference in how Congressmen work today than there ever was. Yeah - there's more rhetoric today, but that's a reflection of technology making that possible. The problem is that we are now inundated with too many idiots who feel a false sense of obligation and remorse for the very things that have made this nation great. For some reason they feel it is wrong to work hard and be successful - wrong to be the unique model for how good things could be for those living under worse conditions. And of course you can quote Mr. Obama expounding on how wrong it is to work hard and become successful, sure you can. No doubt you can also demonstrate in convincing terms how no other nation has advanced science and industry and economics and politics to provide a better standard of living for its people, clearly America is, as you say, unique in that respect. That's not the way I was using the term. I don't believe you'd argue that the United States had risen to a very unique position in the world. I have no idea where you gathered all of the rest of your steam though. I never mentioned the things you just introduced. Oh sure, some of those smelly foreigners will point to their superior schools and longer life expectancy and so on as if that means something, but run a carrier battle group up and down their coastline a few times and they get the message. Smelly foreigners is your term. I never introduced, implied it, or entertained it. -- -Mike- |
#50
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/29/2011 7:44 PM, DGDevin wrote:
Well - in a controversial world, it has always been that way. It hasn't always been that way, there was a time when members of Congress from different parties were friends who respected each other and could work together, they didn't assume the R or the D after the other guy's name was proof of incompetence and corruption. The problem is that we are now inundated with too many idiots who feel a false sense of obligation and remorse for the very things that have made this nation great. For some reason they feel it is wrong to work hard and be successful - wrong to be the unique model for how good things could be for those living under worse conditions. And of course you can quote Mr. Obama expounding on how wrong it is to work hard and become successful, sure you can. No doubt you can also demonstrate in convincing terms how no other nation has advanced science and industry and economics and politics to provide a better standard of living for its people, clearly America is, as you say, unique in that respect. Oh sure, some of those smelly foreigners will point to their superior schools and longer life expectancy and so on as if that means something, but run a carrier battle group up and down their coastline a few times and they get the message. Unfortunately one of the best ways which many congressmen and future president used to resolve their differences was the dual. However we became "civilized", so now the preferred choice of handling an opponent is to dredge up every rumor any one ever made about him and publish it as fact. |
#51
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
In article , Han wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote in : The 14th Amendment does not permit the President to do that: "The validity of the public debt of the United States, AUTHORIZED BY LAW, shall not be questioned ... [emphasis mine]" -- the point being that any debt above the current ceiling is NOT "authorized by law". Obama will not allow default to happen. If Congress fails to act, he has no choice. Didn't the 14th amendment predate the law that limits the national debt? If that is so, then the SCOTUS needs to speak as to whether the later law is constitutional ... Or did SCOTUS? It's not clear to me why you think that makes any difference. The amendment refers to public debts authorized by law -- but there is no language there restricting when, or how, such debts might be authorized. The historical context of that clause shows that its purpose was to allow the United States to repudiate debts incurred by the Confederacy or by individual Confederate States, because those debts had *not* been "authorized by law." It simply isn't applicable to the current situation. |
#52
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
|
#53
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 2011-07-29 15:44:17 -0400, Larry Blanchard said:
Just in case anyone took that statement seriously, it was the Eisenhower administration who made it the official motto and had it added to paper money. In 1956. As "one nation under God" was added to the pleadge of allegience in 1954. |
#54
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On 30 Jul 2011 01:08:20 GMT, Han wrote:
(Doug Miller) wrote in : In article , Han wrote: (Doug Miller) wrote in : The 14th Amendment does not permit the President to do that: "The validity of the public debt of the United States, AUTHORIZED BY LAW, shall not be questioned ... [emphasis mine]" -- the point being that any debt above the current ceiling is NOT "authorized by law". Obama will not allow default to happen. If Congress fails to act, he has no choice. Didn't the 14th amendment predate the law that limits the national debt? If that is so, then the SCOTUS needs to speak as to whether the later law is constitutional ... Or did SCOTUS? It's not clear to me why you think that makes any difference. The amendment refers to public debts authorized by law -- but there is no language there restricting when, or how, such debts might be authorized. The historical context of that clause shows that its purpose was to allow the United States to repudiate debts incurred by the Confederacy or by individual Confederate States, because those debts had *not* been "authorized by law." It simply isn't applicable to the current situation. I didn't make myself clear. Congress has clearly authorized expenditures that now result in what we call too much debt, by running deficit after deficit for however many years (there were a few years with nominal surpluses). To me (but IANAL!!) that means those debts were authorized as per the 14th amendment. The later law setting a debt limit does or doesn't make the 14th amendment moot. That is the question I am asking (remember, IANAL). I am guessing that no one has challenged the debt limit law, since Congress has always raised the limit in time. That simply means that servicing the debt has to take priority over shrimp-on-the-treadmill. There is plenty of money coming in to pay the debt. Please remember also that I came to the US as a 23 year-old biomedical researcher, and am only a citizen since 1984 or so. Since I am now retired, I have more time for discussions snicker. |
#55
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/29/2011 4:59 PM, HeyBub wrote:
And now we have you claiming Obama wants to declare martial law and become dictator for life, proof (if any were needed) that when considering left-wingnuts and right-wingnuts, the operative word is "wingnut". A right-wing president becoming president for life is more likely to succeed than a left-wing president, but less likely to happen. That only seems possible if you go with a convoluted view of Left and Right. In reality, all the way on the Left is Totalitarianism, or total government control. All the way on the Right is Anarchy, or zero government control. Totally opposite, as one would expect. So, if you are thinking president for life, IE dictator controlled regime rather than an individual controlled republic, you are most likely on the Left side of freedom. The left includes King George, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Mussolini, Castro, Chavez, Obama, Pelosi. Slightly right of those fools are people like Bush, Carter, Clinton, Wilson. These guys all believe the individual is too ****ing stupid to do anything right, and they MUST rule with an Iron Fist (usually their motto unless disguised as right wingers) On the right are people like Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Reagen, Bachmann, Paul, Stossle. These guys believe in the individual, and that government interference in individual freedom should be minimal. If it DID happen we right-wingers could sustain the coup because we have most of the guns. We don't have nearly as many guns as the government. In fact, if it were up to the left, only the government would have guns, thus, would be rather easy for the government to rule with an iron fist (the left motto) whenever it chooses. To do this, the US would need to undergo a fundamental change from right leaning to far left. This has been going on for around 100 years and in the last few, has rapidly picked up pace, and our current regime actually campaigned on it. On the other hand, right wingers just don't do force and intimidation very well. Particularly once the left wingers take away their guns by government decree. Here's an example: Instead of McCain, many of us were rooting for Jeb Bush. After him, that good-looking Hispanic Bush nephew for eight years. By then the legacy would be firmly established and it would be only a small step to a monarchy. Goofy! More realistic is the government is taking away gun rights, telling us what to eat, making our cars, owning our banks, confiscation of property because of better tax possibilities, raising our children (Chicago requires you keep children under 12 home after 8:30) Setting up random roadblocks to make sure they approve of your seat belts, ask where you have been, play with your junk at airports to make sure granny's diaper, or sonny boys diaper is clean and so on. It's a small step from that, to Total Government Control, or more accurately, not a step at all. But you'll note, we tried to work within the system. Noted! -- Jack Got Change, now CHANGE IT BACK! http://jbstein.com |
#56
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:08:07 -0400, Steve wrote:
On 2011-07-29 15:44:17 -0400, Larry Blanchard said: Just in case anyone took that statement seriously, it was the Eisenhower administration who made it the official motto and had it added to paper money. In 1956. As "one nation under God" was added to the pleadge of allegience in 1954. Actually, only the "under God" was added. As I started school in 1942 the new version still sounds strange to me :-). -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#57
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:14:57 -0700, busbus wrote:
My plan would be to train these people in whatever they want. If they want to be a plumber, go for it. Oh boy, another idealist :-). A great idea, but it runs into a brick wall of reality. A lot of those folks aren't trainable. By definition, half the population is of below average intelligence. If someones mother was a alkie or a drug addict, or even just had really bad eating habits, that person is going to be considerably below the average. Even that problem could be overcome if we could somehow bring back more manual labor jobs, but the only way that would happen is with another CCC. Still government assistance, but at least with some return. But another problem remains. Some of the people you're trying to change just plain don't want to work. How many times have we heard of some black kid trying to better himself while the local gang members accuse him of "acting white". And I'm not picking on black folks. The same attitudes exist in other groups such as the "po' white trash" who accuse a child in similar circumstances of "acting uppity" or "above himself". And they pass those attitudes on to their children. The only way you'll break that cycle is to remove the kids at birth and give them to a family that will raise them properly. And even that doesn't solve the problem of those who are born brain-damaged. I'm an idealist too. But time has made me a cynical idealist. -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#58
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:53:32 -0600, Just Wondering wrote:
One alternative would be that instead of unearned welfare benefits, they would have to work for the government, mowing lawns, cleaning toilets, picking up litter, whatever, at 75% of the minimum wage rate. They could either do that, or go out and get a private sector job, but they couldn't simply sit at home watching TV on the government dole. I have a feeling a considerable number would turn to crime, resulting in prison, resulting in us paying for them anyway - and at a higher rate. -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#59
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:14:54 -0400, Jack Stein wrote:
These guys all believe the individual is too ****ing stupid to do anything right ... And reading this newsgroup convinces you they are wrong????? -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#60
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 16:44:19 -0700, DGDevin wrote:
Oh sure, some of those smelly foreigners will point to their superior schools and longer life expectancy and so on as if that means something, but run a carrier battle group up and down their coastline a few times and they get the message. Nice one :-). -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#61
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/30/2011 1:01 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 11:14:54 -0400, Jack Stein wrote: These guys all believe the individual is too ****ing stupid to do anything right ... And reading this newsgroup convinces you they are wrong????? Nope. Seeing what results when the Government rules with an iron fist (symbol of the left) vs what happens when the individual rules is enough for me. A good example is what the socialist Hitler did when he implemented your buddies (Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw) gas chambers on those he thought not fit enough to contribute to his great society. I'm not sure if he used a painless gas to kill everyone as Shaw advocated, but what ever he used worked. -- Jack Got Change: Individual Freedom ======= Government Control! http://jbstein.com |
#62
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On 7/30/2011 10:59 AM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:53:32 -0600, Just Wondering wrote: One alternative would be that instead of unearned welfare benefits, they would have to work for the government, mowing lawns, cleaning toilets, picking up litter, whatever, at 75% of the minimum wage rate. They could either do that, or go out and get a private sector job, but they couldn't simply sit at home watching TV on the government dole. I have a feeling a considerable number would turn to crime, resulting in prison, resulting in us paying for them anyway - and at a higher rate. If they did that, as prisoners they could be made to work at the same jobs, for 25 cents an hour. |
#63
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
O/T: A Prognostication
On Jul 28, 11:44*pm, "Dr. Deb" wrote:
Lew Hodgett wrote: The Congress will not pass a bill to raise the federal debt by 08/02/2011. As a result, President Obama will execute an executive order to raise the federal debt on 08/02/2011 per terms of the 14th amendment. Obama will not allow default to happen. Lew Except for the minor fact that the 14th Amendment does not allow him to do that. *You really need to read it "all" for yourself, *rather than just taking someone's word for it. * Its kinda like the phrase that is supposed to be in the First Amendment, but isn;t. *You know, "Seperation of Church and State." * Liberals keep makings claims, which for a liberal makes it true, irrespective of reality. *Of course, if you are a liberal you really don't like dealing with that nasty subject anyway, because it messes up otherwise perfectly good claims and agnedas. Deb Ayup, you'd never accuse a conservative of having an agneda. Kinda like superior beings, all-knowing and stuff. D'ohBoy |
#64
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Steve Turner" wrote in message ... On 7/29/2011 10:22 AM, Mike Marlow wrote: Tom B wrote: snip What cracks me up is when people compare the average salary of our congressmen to that of the average insert downtrodden member of society here and, noting the "huge" disparity, conclude that "I think we know where the problem lies!" As if adjusting the salaries of a few hundred congressmen is somehow going to reclaim enough taxpayer money to fix our economy... The amount of taxpayer money recovered by making their salaries "fair" would be a drop in the ocean compared to where they're spending the rest of it. -- Add to that the retirement pay (2 years all that's necessary to get full lifetime retirement) and the other perks. But that is just then tip of the Government iceberg... how about all the many Government employees that are exempt from Social Security, and have their own heath plans the tax payers give them. |
#65
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/31/2011 8:38 AM, Tom B wrote:
What cracks me up is when people compare the average salary of our congressmen to that of the average insert downtrodden member of society here and, noting the "huge" disparity, conclude that "I think we know where the problem lies!" As if adjusting the salaries of a few hundred congressmen is somehow going to reclaim enough taxpayer money to fix our economy... The amount of taxpayer money recovered by making their salaries "fair" would be a drop in the ocean compared to where they're spending the rest of it. Their salaries are no biggie, throw in all the perks and you get a little bigger. Throw in the corruption, and now you are talking confiscatory tax rates, trillion dollar deficits and so on. Thank god dead Rep. John Murtha is a good example: http://tinyurl.com/c8xs76. That crook should have been tarred and feathered years ago. There are a gaggle of them in Washington, and they all need thrown out of office, about all socialist democrats, and about all the old school republicans. -- Jack Conservatives believe every day is the Fourth of July, Liberals believe every day is April 15. http://jbstein.com |
#66
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/31/2011 7:38 AM, Tom B wrote:
"Steve Turner" wrote in message ... On 7/29/2011 10:22 AM, Mike Marlow wrote: Tom B wrote: snip What cracks me up is when people compare the average salary of our congressmen to that of the average insert downtrodden member of society here and, noting the "huge" disparity, conclude that "I think we know where the problem lies!" As if adjusting the salaries of a few hundred congressmen is somehow going to reclaim enough taxpayer money to fix our economy... The amount of taxpayer money recovered by making their salaries "fair" would be a drop in the ocean compared to where they're spending the rest of it. I don't so much read the salary comparison of our government leaders to the average wage earner as being the problem. I don't think any one believes the salaries of the government positions as being what keeps the debt going in the wrong direction. I do believe that all of those government people that are receiving those large salaries are in way over their heads and if they were working in a non government job they would probably qualify for a salary similar to a salary that a greater at WalMart would get. If we got what we paid for we would be in a lot better shape. |
#67
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote I don't so much read the salary comparison of our government leaders to the average wage earner as being the problem. I don't think any one believes the salaries of the government positions as being what keeps the debt going in the wrong direction. I do believe that all of those government people that are receiving those large salaries are in way over their heads and if they were working in a non government job they would probably qualify for a salary similar to a salary that a greater at WalMart would get. If we got what we paid for we would be in a lot better shape. I have to wonder if we need as many government employees though. Used to be for every 10 private employees, there was one government. Now it is 4 to 1. I don't know about the feds, but our state (CT) is top heavy. Private industry has a ration of 7 workers to 1 supervisor. Our state has a 4 to 1 ratio. My guess is that if the average citizen had the line item veto on the budget, it would be cut by a minimum of 50%. |
#68
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in
: "Leon" lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote I don't so much read the salary comparison of our government leaders to the average wage earner as being the problem. I don't think any one believes the salaries of the government positions as being what keeps the debt going in the wrong direction. I do believe that all of those government people that are receiving those large salaries are in way over their heads and if they were working in a non government job they would probably qualify for a salary similar to a salary that a greater at WalMart would get. If we got what we paid for we would be in a lot better shape. I have to wonder if we need as many government employees though. Used to be for every 10 private employees, there was one government. Now it is 4 to 1. I don't know about the feds, but our state (CT) is top heavy. Private industry has a ration of 7 workers to 1 supervisor. Our state has a 4 to 1 ratio. My guess is that if the average citizen had the line item veto on the budget, it would be cut by a minimum of 50%. I hear that. Much of this is due to regulations. Before I retired, I had to fulfill all these ethical and safety requirements. Not only did they take days to do, and changed every 3 months, they also required administrative personnel to keep records and file reports. Of course, the jury is out on whether all this made things safer and prevented real abuse and data manipulation in the medical research fields like mine. It ALWAYS seemed to me that the penalties for real wrongdoing were to minute to deter anyone bent on bending the rules. As I have mentioned before, a good guy in the research administration of my VA complained that he wasn't really doing the job anymore, because 75-85% of his time was taken with checking "compliance". -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#69
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/31/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
I have to wonder if we need as many government employees though. Used to be for every 10 private employees, there was one government. Now it is 4 to 1. Hell, we need'em, doncha know! ... two cops, I mean two, count'em TWO cops, loaded down with weapons worthy of a military exercise, came out and ordered me to quit mowing my postage stamp of a yard at 11:30AM last Sunday ... a yard for which I pay $13k + a year in property taxes for the privilege; and half of that to pay for a broken educational system where 61.7% of the students are from parents who are mostly here illegally, and only 7.8% of the entire student body remotely share my heritage: http://www.houstonisd.org/HISDConnec...52 147fa6RCRD What would we do without these types of safeguards on our lives, eh? We are past due for a revolution, but don't hold your breath. I fought once, supposedly for this countries _values_ (Ha!) but no way would I do it again for the current crop of ****head "citizens". You got what you deserved, America ... including a politicized climate. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
#70
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
Swingman wrote in
: On 7/31/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: I have to wonder if we need as many government employees though. Used to be for every 10 private employees, there was one government. Now it is 4 to 1. Hell, we need'em, doncha know! ... two cops, I mean two, count'em TWO cops, loaded down with weapons worthy of a military exercise, came out and ordered me to quit mowing my postage stamp of a yard at 11:30AM last Sunday ... a yard for which I pay $13k + a year in property taxes for the privilege; and half of that to pay for a broken educational system where 61.7% of the students are from parents who are mostly here illegally, and only 7.8% of the entire student body remotely share my heritage: http://www.houstonisd.org/HISDConnec...toid=62c675776 1efc010VgnVCM10000052147fa6RCRD What would we do without these types of safeguards on our lives, eh? We are past due for a revolution, but don't hold your breath. I fought once, supposedly for this countries _values_ (Ha!) but no way would I do it again for the current crop of ****head "citizens". You got what you deserved, America ... including a politicized climate. Assuming (I know ...) that was because you made too much noise, I suggest you hire my spouse and get one of these: http://www.amazon.com/American-Lawn-Mower-1204-14-14- Inch/dp/B00004RA3F/ref=sr_1_2?s=garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1312126105&sr=1-2 or http://tinyurl.com/3ljfnnt It's hot here too, so hot and dry that lawn mowing isn't necessary anymore. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#71
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/31/2011 10:32 AM, Han wrote:
Assuming (I know ...) that was because you made too much noise, I suggest you hire my spouse and get one of these: http://www.amazon.com/American-Lawn-Mower-1204-14-14- Inch/dp/B00004RA3F/ref=sr_1_2?s=garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1312126105&sr=1-2 or http://tinyurl.com/3ljfnnt It's hot here too, so hot and dry that lawn mowing isn't necessary anymore. I understand, and agree with the spirit of the recently changed (with no public notice ... apparently they, the city officials, forgot??)) city ordinance, but not, as indicated, the implementation. AAMOF, I immediately knocked on all my adjacent neighbor's doors and apologized for being a criminal ... not a one even knew I have been mowing. Besides, I already own a lawnmower. One that makes considerably less noise than the gas powered leaf blowers and weed eaters that disrupt EACH block for an average of 15 hours, six days a week, starting at 7AM. Unlike most of the yuppies assholes who live here, I mow my own yard and prefer to do it on Sunday mornings because I have to work the other six and half days a week to pay the ****ing taxes!! Actually, I had already mowed the yard (a ten minute job) and was using an electric weed eater (which makes a swishing sound at less than 60db) when shut down. Basically, this is NOT the same country I grew up in ... if you weren't here 50 years ago, you have NO idea how much it's changed, arguably, but IMO, for the worse! -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
#72
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On 7/31/2011 8:37 AM, Leon wrote:
On 7/31/2011 7:38 AM, Tom B wrote: "Steve Turner" wrote in message ... On 7/29/2011 10:22 AM, Mike Marlow wrote: Tom B wrote: snip What cracks me up is when people compare the average salary of our congressmen to that of the average insert downtrodden member of society here and, noting the "huge" disparity, conclude that "I think we know where the problem lies!" As if adjusting the salaries of a few hundred congressmen is somehow going to reclaim enough taxpayer money to fix our economy... The amount of taxpayer money recovered by making their salaries "fair" would be a drop in the ocean compared to where they're spending the rest of it. I don't so much read the salary comparison of our government leaders to the average wage earner as being the problem. I don't think any one believes the salaries of the government positions as being what keeps the debt going in the wrong direction. There are a lot of stupid people that believe a lot of stupid stuff, but your point speaks to something different than what I was talking about. I've seen scads of replies to online new stories, emails, and Facebook posts circulated that illustrate nothing more than shallow envy and jealousy of the salary and perks enjoyed by our congressmen. I'd have no problem if congress suddenly decided to adjust their own compensation and benefits to be more on par with that of the average citizen, but I don't fool myself into thinking that all our problems would be magically solved once that happens. The stupid people would just be forced to direct their ire and jealousy to some other situation that isn't "fair" and point the blame there instead. I do believe that all of those government people that are receiving those large salaries are in way over their heads and if they were working in a non government job they would probably qualify for a salary similar to a salary that a greater at WalMart would get. If we got what we paid for we would be in a lot better shape. Agreed. -- Free bad advice available here. To reply, eat the taco. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/ |
#73
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Swingman" wrote
Basically, this is NOT the same country I grew up in ... if you weren't here 50 years ago, you have NO idea how much it's changed, arguably, but IMO, for the worse! -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 4/15/2010 KarlC@ (the obvious) Amen Brother!! Max |
#74
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
|
#75
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 07:38:11 -0500, "Tom B" wrote:
the "huge" disparity, conclude that "I think we know where the problem lies!" As if adjusting the salaries of a few hundred congressmen is somehow going to reclaim enough taxpayer money to fix our economy... The amount of taxpayer money recovered by making their salaries "fair" would be a drop in the ocean compared to where they're spending the rest of it. -- Don't use a sig-separator to separate your contribution from your quote. Use a real newsreader. Not only will it be easier for you, but also your reader. Add to that the retirement pay (2 years all that's necessary to get full lifetime retirement) and the other perks. No, it's five years service at age 62, twenty years service at age 50, and any age after 25 years service. From http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30631.pdf: "Members are eligible for a pension at age 50 if they have completed 20 years of service, or at any age after completing 25 years of service. The amount of the pension depends on years of service and the average of the highest three years of salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary." Still pretty damned generous of us. But that is just then tip of the Government iceberg... how about all the many Government employees that are exempt from Social Security, and have their own heath plans the tax payers give them. Also wrong, not that it matters really. |
#76
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
"Swingman" wrote ... two cops, I mean two, count'em TWO cops, loaded down with weapons worthy of a military exercise, came out and ordered me to quit mowing my postage stamp of a yard at 11:30AM last Sunday ... a yard for which I pay $13k + a year in property taxes for the privilege; Pet peeve. Sunday is one day that we can usually sit out on the deck and enjoy a nice meal. Some asshole always has to crank up the mower at 6 PM on an otherwise quiet evening. Do it in the morning, do it after work the other six day. Just give the rest of us a few hours for a quiet dinner on one evening. At 11:30, I don't care, mow away if you desire. |
#77
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 10:13:49 -0500, Swingman wrote:
On 7/31/2011 8:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: I have to wonder if we need as many government employees though. Used to be for every 10 private employees, there was one government. Now it is 4 to 1. Hell, we need'em, doncha know! ... two cops, I mean two, count'em TWO cops, loaded down with weapons worthy of a military exercise, came out and ordered me to quit mowing my postage stamp of a yard at 11:30AM last Sunday ... a yard for which I pay $13k + a year in property taxes for the privilege; and half of that to pay for a broken educational system where 61.7% of the students are from parents who are mostly here illegally, and only 7.8% of the entire student body remotely share my heritage: $13K?! I moved out of VT because of taxes half that (to AL, where they're less than an eighth of what you pay). I waited until 9:30 to mow my lawn this morning. No problems, other than it's hot and humid. Hot happens here this time of year. http://www.houstonisd.org/HISDConnec...52 147fa6RCRD What would we do without these types of safeguards on our lives, eh? We are past due for a revolution, but don't hold your breath. I fought once, supposedly for this countries _values_ (Ha!) but no way would I do it again for the current crop of ****head "citizens". You got what you deserved, America ... including a politicized climate. |
#78
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
On Sun, 31 Jul 2011 09:27:51 -0400, Jack Stein wrote:
Their salaries are no biggie, throw in all the perks and you get a little bigger. One of the perks which you may or may not have included is the large staffs of reps and sens. Something over 15,000 in total. Their salaries and benefits add up to quite a bit. I wonder if a senator with 34 staff members ever actually reads a bill before he or she signs it? For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_staff -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#79
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
Swingman wrote in
: On 7/31/2011 10:32 AM, Han wrote: Assuming (I know ...) that was because you made too much noise, I suggest you hire my spouse and get one of these: http://www.amazon.com/American-Lawn-Mower-1204-14-14- Inch/dp/B00004RA3F/ref=sr_1_2?s=garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1312126105&sr=1-2 or http://tinyurl.com/3ljfnnt It's hot here too, so hot and dry that lawn mowing isn't necessary anymore. I understand, and agree with the spirit of the recently changed (with no public notice ... apparently they, the city officials, forgot??)) city ordinance, but not, as indicated, the implementation. AAMOF, I immediately knocked on all my adjacent neighbor's doors and apologized for being a criminal ... not a one even knew I have been mowing. Besides, I already own a lawnmower. One that makes considerably less noise than the gas powered leaf blowers and weed eaters that disrupt EACH block for an average of 15 hours, six days a week, starting at 7AM. Unlike most of the yuppies assholes who live here, I mow my own yard and prefer to do it on Sunday mornings because I have to work the other six and half days a week to pay the ****ing taxes!! Actually, I had already mowed the yard (a ten minute job) and was using an electric weed eater (which makes a swishing sound at less than 60db) when shut down. Basically, this is NOT the same country I grew up in ... if you weren't here 50 years ago, you have NO idea how much it's changed, arguably, but IMO, for the worse! tongue thing You're giving me more reasons not to go to Houston. And I had been believing that Texas was God's country {actually, a friend from long ago thought of NH as that). /tongue thing Actually, living here in NJ http://radburn.org in a small village within a village has advantages. I can talk to the mayor etc, etc. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#80
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
A Prognostication
Jack Stein wrote:
Their salaries are no biggie, throw in all the perks and you get a little bigger. Throw in the corruption, and now you are talking confiscatory tax rates, trillion dollar deficits and so on. Thank god dead Rep. John Murtha is a good example: http://tinyurl.com/c8xs76. That crook should have been tarred and feathered years ago. There are a gaggle of them in Washington, and they all need thrown out of office, about all socialist democrats, and about all the old school republicans. That's an entirely different matter Jack. The original comment was lamenting the salaries of listed public officials. -- -Mike- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|