Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 12:35:58

SS is yet another problem that O is kicking down the road. Someone will have to man up and fix it but it sure isn't gonna be O
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby wildbourgman » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 12:48:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'N')o argument they are voting based on social issues, wild, that's my point. Where they once voted pro-slavery (by whatever name) as an economic issue, as well as a "social" one, they then voted pro-New Deal as an economic issue, they have now been persuaded to vote against their economic interests in trade for clinging to their guns and bibles. Oh, and deciding who sleeps with who.



How is voting against a system that's destined to fail voting against their economic interest? (Answer this one please, that was not rhetorical)

Maybe they see the big picture. It doesn't take a very smart person to see that the math doesn't work. it doesn't take a college study to see what big government welfare programs have done and it doesn't take a genius to see how the ultra-rich game the system through big government.

I also think there are still plenty of voters in the South as well as elsewhere that vote for their economic interest and that causes generational poverty subsidized by the welfare state.

I'm kind of a guy that would like to ally Occupy Wallstreet and the Tea Party to fix our problems and gut this system that uses Corparate welfare to get campaign finance money then it uses social welfare programs to buy votes. Do you ever wonder why 90 percent of people want term limits and we never have more than a few senators that would ever really vote for it? It's been rigged for a while now.
wildbourgman
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sun 07 Jul 2013, 10:05:52

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby vision-master » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 12:59:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'N')o argument they are voting based on social issues, wild, that's my point. Where they once voted pro-slavery (by whatever name) as an economic issue, as well as a "social" one, they then voted pro-New Deal as an economic issue, they have now been persuaded to vote against their economic interests in trade for clinging to their guns and bibles. Oh, and deciding who sleeps with who.


Image
vision-master
 

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby Pops » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 13:24:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildbourgman', 'H')ow is voting against a system that's destined to fail voting against their economic interest? (Answer this one please, that was not rhetorical)


Of course it is rhetorical, it's just your opinion, LOL.
Failure implies an end, so you forecast the government is destined "to end". Not sure what you see happening after The End, maybe the rise of another libertarian Nirvana like Somalia or Congo.

I on the other hand don't believe the government or the society is destined to fail, regardless of how much that is wished for by those it may have benefited from both and now wish to keep others from benefiting.

Will it have failures? Sure, then something different will be tried.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby wildbourgman » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 13:47:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')f course it is rhetorical, it's just your opinion


See, I didn't make my question clear enough that's my fault, here is my question. How is voting against a system that they see as destined to fail voting against their economic interest? How can you decide what my economic interest should be ?

People say they are voting against their own interest, but they don't know what others consider economically important. If future economic freedom clear of government induced market distortions is very important to you, then your not as worried about recieiving hand outs, regardless your immediate financial need. You have to be pretty strong willed to vote against free stuff when you are eligible, or maybe even recieving cash from some of these programs.
wildbourgman
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 483
Joined: Sun 07 Jul 2013, 10:05:52

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby Pops » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:08:46

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildbourgman', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')f course it is rhetorical, it's just your opinion


See, I didn't make my question clear enough that's my fault, here is my question. How is voting against a system that they see as destined to fail voting against their economic interest? How can you decide what my economic interest should be ?

I would think it is in a person's best interest, economic and otherwise, not to have a shorter lifespan as pointed out in the post above. But that's just me. Maybe shorter life spans, greater economic inequality, higher poverty rates, lower educational attainment, higher levels of working poor in the south is just the way they like it. A trade off for no snow, LOL
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
User avatar
Pops
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 19746
Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:22:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildbourgman', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')It will then widen, and by 2087, payable benefits
will be 34 percent smaller than scheduled benefits[/b].

Man, those payout projections sound prettty Draconian.

Yes we'd better start panicking right now over projections of where the economy will be in three or four generations, and by panicking I mean hand over the money to corporate interests so they can "save" us.

Geeze, keep in mind pretty much the entire Baby Boom will be dead 2050 and that retirements will slow dramatically around 2035.
Last edited by PrestonSturges on Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:30:00, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:25:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'S')S is yet another problem that O is kicking down the road. Someone will have to man up and fix it but it sure isn't gonna be O
Nice to see you supporting Wall Street and the big banks, Plant.
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:29:14

Rolling Stone article about how the rush to slash pensions is a Trojan horse to dump cash into hedge funds

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat few people knew at the time was that Raimondo's "tool kit" wasn't just meant for local consumption. The dynamic young Rhodes scholar was allowing her state to be used as a test case for the rest of the country, at the behest of powerful out-of-state financiers with dreams of pushing pension reform down the throats of taxpayers and public workers from coast to coast. One of her key supporters was billionaire former Enron executive John Arnold – a dickishly ubiquitous young right-wing kingmaker with clear designs on becoming the next generation's Koch brothers, and who for years had been funding a nationwide campaign to slash benefits for public workers.

Nor did anyone know that part of Raimondo's strategy for saving money involved handing more than $1 billion – 14 percent of the state fund – to hedge funds, including a trio of well-known New York-based funds: Dan Loeb's Third Point Capital was given $66 million, Ken Garschina's Mason Capital got $64 million and $70 million went to Paul Singer's Elliott Management. The funds now stood collectively to be paid tens of millions in fees every single year by the already overburdened taxpayers of her ostensibly flat-broke state. Felicitously, Loeb, Garschina and Singer serve on the board of the Manhattan Institute, a prominent conservative think tank with a history of supporting benefit-slashing reforms. The institute named Raimondo its 2011 "Urban Innovator" of the year.


Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... z2o2bdYb2s
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby careinke » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 14:58:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'T')he Tea party libertarians will bring this Country to it knees if they gain enough power.


Too late, the Dims beat them to the punch.
Cliff (Start a rEVOLution, grow a garden)
User avatar
careinke
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 5047
Joined: Mon 01 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Pacific Northwest
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby yellowcanoe » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 15:03:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'R')olling Stone article about how the rush to slash pensions is a Trojan horse to dump cash into hedge funds


What do you propose be done with pension funds? Depending exclusively on the contributions from those still working won't work because we are entering a period where there will be far fewer workers per retiree. The only hope that people will receive the pensions they have been promised is to properly invest pension funds to get the best return on investment possible. Investing in government bonds doesn't work because somewhere down the road this will require tax payers to pay out those bonds. The tax increases required to do that may not be feasible.
"new housing construction" is spelled h-a-b-i-t-a-t d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-o-n.
yellowcanoe
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 14:42:27
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 15:18:52

The people clamoring for something to be done are the same people that grew up hypnotized and slack jawed by crappy cartoons that sold them stupid toys, now they sit there hypnotized and slack jawed while the same idiot box sells them on crappy policies. It's a different time slot, but it's still shiny garbage bundled with yelling and slogans and shoveled into the passive receptacles that are the Gadsen Flag goobers. And it's all going to work just as well as that Power Rangers cape when you jumped off the roof of the garage. Wheee, the power of make believe, keep believing every random thing you hear on television.
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby Sixstrings » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 16:41:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('wildbourgman', 'S')ixstrings, that's a very good point, but I don't think we're going to have anyone recommending that we structure social security payouts according to whether you had a desk job versus being a coal miner.


I'm not either,

What I'm saying is that raising that age is a massive hardship on people from certain lines of work, folks on the lower end of the scale who haven't spent a life yacking by a water cooler in some Washington think tank.

So what government does is the OPPOSITE wb, they're saying "well okay everyone is the same everyone's life expectancy has gone up *on average* so now we're raising retirement age another 4 years* -- and it's just not right, because it's just not true, averages don't mean sh*t because this is not an averaged out country, it has classes, with real and stark differences between those classes.

What winds up happening is working class folks who are worn out and can't make it to retirement age go the disability route with SS. Government will go after that next. I'm not sure what you can do here, you can't beat an old dog and make him do new tricks, if his body's shot and worn out, what can you do. It's not like there are lots of jobs out there for old folks with health problems, sheesh.

I'm just saying, *there's a difference*. You can see it. Yes there are 80 year olds enjoying the golf course. Yes, teachers and gov workers can work into their 70s. But also notice some 60ish working class folks you see out there, the waitress, the cash station clerk, and so on. These folks look *old*, they've had hard lives, and it's not fair to go raising that age on them.

In the 1950s and 60s and 70s they'd have had a good solid working class company pension, now all they have is SS and government keeps taking that away too.

(incidentally, we should tax the rich and lower the darn retirement age and get the youth employed -- I've posted about this before, that you could lower SS age and increase benefit payout and it would be just a small tax on the rich to do it, and better economically. All of this keeps coming down to the shift in classes and wealth transfer that went on after the 1970s to now, from a broad middle class and solid working class with pensions and the bulk of America's wealth to today -- a rich elite and oligarchs.)
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby Sixstrings » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:00:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'N')ot sure where you've seen any gas station attendants, six, LOL. Regardless, there is a difference between being on your feet all day making change behind a counter and digging a ditch, lifting a bale and toting a barge.


I meant clerks, I'm not old enough to remember real attendants. :lol:

Forget the particular job, I'm talking about the *working class*, maybe you don't see it but I do, that there's a big big difference between a 65 year old teacher or county employee and a 65 year old working class person. It's just a world of difference -- the former has had cushy work, vacations every year, sick time, a lifetime of health insurance, on and on.

Maybe you don't see it, fair enough.

But let me ask you then, do you support the constant age-raising? If so, do you agree with keeping disability in place -- so that those who've become disabled with age and can't do what another 64 year old can do, have another route to go?
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby yellowcanoe » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:16:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')
What I'm saying is that raising that age is a massive hardship on people from certain lines of work, folks on the lower end of the scale who haven't spent a life yacking by a water cooler in some Washington think tank.


I'm 56, work in an office but get lots of exercise biking/walking to work or hiking/canoeing/cross country skiing on weekends. I consider myself to be in much better shape physically than most people my age and expect to retain my good health for a few more decades. However, the work I've been doing recently to renovate a bathroom illustrates the point you are trying to make. I had to replace a large section of the floor that had rotted out and am also reinsulating the room. The work has involved a lot of stooping and working in the crawl space underneath the bathroom. Those parts of the job have been hard physically even though I am in good shape. If I had been doing this type of work all my life I'm sure my body would be exhausted before the age of 65.
"new housing construction" is spelled h-a-b-i-t-a-t d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-o-n.
yellowcanoe
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 14:42:27
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby vision-master » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:31:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'m 56, work in an office but get lots of exercise biking/walking to work or hiking/canoeing/cross country skiing on weekends. I consider myself to be in much better shape physically than most people my age and expect to retain my good health for a few more decades.


Your life could change in a day. Being in shape physically is no guarantee to expect good health for a few more decades, actually it's nonsense. All it will take is something like a stroke or maybe you will get a virus that will turn your immune system upside down and you end up with an autoimmune disease like Lupus. OR maybe from overuse, you end up having Knee or hip replacements. Think I'm full of BS, check out 'athlete's heart'.
vision-master
 
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby yellowcanoe » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:49:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '
')
Your life could change in a day. Being in shape physically is no guarantee to expect good health for a few more decades, actually it's nonsense. All it will take is something like a stroke or maybe you will get a virus that will turn your immune system upside down and you end up with an autoimmune disease like Lupus. OR maybe from overuse, you end up having Knee or hip replacements. Think I'm full of BS, check out 'athlete's heart'.


Yes, life doesn't come with a guarantee. However, anyone who gets regular exercise, doesn't smoke, watches their weight and has a balanced diet has a much greater chance of having a long life with good health. Then there are individuals like my Dad who did nothing right -- smoked most of his life, overweight, avoided exercise and still managed to live to 84!
"new housing construction" is spelled h-a-b-i-t-a-t d-e-s-t-r-u-c-t-i-o-n.
yellowcanoe
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri 15 Nov 2013, 14:42:27
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby PrestonSturges » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:57:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')What I'm saying is that raising that age is a massive hardship on people from certain lines of work, folks on the lower end of the scale who haven't spent a life yacking by a water cooler in some Washington think tank.

So what government does is the OPPOSITE wb, they're saying "well okay everyone is the same everyone's life expectancy has gone up *on average* so now we're raising retirement age another 4 years* -- and it's just not right, because it's just not true, averages don't mean sh*t because this is not an averaged out country, it has classes, with real and stark differences between those classes.

What winds up happening is working class folks who are worn out and can't make it to retirement age go the disability route with SS. Government will go after that next. I'm not sure what you can do here, you can't beat an old dog and make him do new tricks, if his body's shot and worn out, what can you do. It's not like there are lots of jobs out there for old folks with health problems, sheesh.
Yep, not many people can keep hanging sheet rock into their 70's. The people who need Social Security to survive are exactly the people whose bodies are shot long before 65.'

And I was saying upthread, the really evil part about these "reforms" is that they are being pushed to solve an imaginary problem - the growing hoards of poor elderly. Nope, the poor elderly aren't having big increases in lifespan.

But hey, consultants get paid big bucks to create imaginary problems that will trick people into killing off the helpless
User avatar
PrestonSturges
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6052
Joined: Wed 15 Oct 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby vision-master » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 17:57:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yellowcanoe', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', '
')
Your life could change in a day. Being in shape physically is no guarantee to expect good health for a few more decades, actually it's nonsense. All it will take is something like a stroke or maybe you will get a virus that will turn your immune system upside down and you end up with an autoimmune disease like Lupus. OR maybe from overuse, you end up having Knee or hip replacements. Think I'm full of BS, check out 'athlete's heart'.


Yes, life doesn't come with a guarantee. However, anyone who gets regular exercise, doesn't smoke, watches their weight and has a balanced diet has a much greater chance of having a long life with good health. Then there are individuals like my Dad who did nothing right -- smoked most of his life, overweight, avoided exercise and still managed to live to 84!


I hope you down two to three drinks everyday? :)

You know it's good for the heart and inflammation. Also, regular exercise will most likely NOT lengthen your life, at best you will suffer less towards the end - maybe. Still, it's a good idea to keep fit.
vision-master
 
Top

Re: Pensions and Unemployment Benefits

Unread postby vision-master » Fri 20 Dec 2013, 18:01:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ep, not many people can keep hanging sheet rock into their 70's. The people who need Social Security to survive are exactly the people whose bodies are shot long before 65.'

And I was saying upthread, the really evil part about these "reforms" is that they are being pushed to solve an imaginary problem - the growing hoards of poor elderly. Nope, the poor elderly aren't having big increases in lifespan.

But hey, consultants get paid big bucks to create imaginary problems that will trick people into killing off the helpless


The hard core teabaggers think these poor souls created their own problems, they should be greeters at Walmart. Now as far as health problems, it's always bc they didn't take care of themselves. They should have started their own business. There too fat. They should have gone back to school. Those poor souls who work at Mickey D's don't deserve a living wage.
vision-master
 
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron