|
|
Post by davdesid on Feb 19, 2011 17:04:45 GMT -8
>>>It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax.<<< (not very) innocuous Hey, Win, petty officer, or sailor-boy.... whatever you answer to... Is this TRUE?  If it is, would you please PM me and tell me how it is that you pay no tax??? Hey, waztec! Great game against the Junior Birdmen today! I was worried at halftime, but Fisher seems to know how to manage these road games. 27-1, baby!!! Three to go, and let's stick it to the Zoobs next Saturday!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 19, 2011 17:33:34 GMT -8
>>>It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax.<<< (not very) innocuous Hey, Win, petty officer, or sailor-boy.... whatever you answer to... Is this TRUE? If it is, would you please PM me and tell me how it is that you pay no tax??? Hey, waztec! Great game against the Junior Birdmen today! I was worried at halftime, but Fisher seems to know how to manage these road games. 27-1, baby!!! Three to go, and let's stick it to the Zoobs next Saturday!!!!!!!!! It only matters that you don't have to pay tax is in regard to your attitude not Win's reality. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Feb 19, 2011 17:50:19 GMT -8
>>>It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax.<<< (not very) innocuous Hey, Win, petty officer, or sailor-boy.... whatever you answer to... Is this TRUE? If it is, would you please PM me and tell me how it is that you pay no tax??? Hey, waztec! Great game against the Junior Birdmen today! I was worried at halftime, but Fisher seems to know how to manage these road games. 27-1, baby!!! Three to go, and let's stick it to the Zoobs next Saturday!!!!!!!!! It only matters that you don't have to pay tax is in regard to your attitude not Win's reality. WTF??? I pay tax. WTF are you talking about?? Sober up and come back with something coherent. Whatever.... it was a nice road win today (no not THAT "win", "petty officer", or "sailor-boy"). GO AZTECS!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 19, 2011 21:09:43 GMT -8
Oh, boy! Once again I must come to the rescue of those who are not organizing their thoughts clearly with regard to this issue. Here's the deal. No matter how honestly and honorably certain union contracts were arrived at in the past, there may come a time when the country's economic situation has changed so much for the worse that said contracts (as well as those future ones which will use the existing contracts as starting points) cannot be honored. I refer largely to pension systems. Ask yourself this question: Is the economic condition of the state of California, or of any of 40 or so other states, excellent, fair, poor, or close to bankruptcy? In other words, is all this talk about states declaring bankruptcy (A) just a lot of nonsense, or (B) are many states close to going broke? If the answer is A, then there may be no need for significant changes. If the answer is B, then we must be open to the possible need for real modifications in the area of public employee compensation and pensions. Just a day or two ago I saw a report of TV about what is called "air time," a way for CA state employees to pay a fee in exchange for adding years to their service credit. As you probably know, in defined benefit systems, the more years you have served, the higher your monthly pension. Apparently, thousands of employees have taken advantage of this system, at great expense to the taxpayers. (Here's a link: articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/16/local/la-me-pensions-airtime-20110216) Private workers are not allowed to do this. If you read the linked article you will see that there is a move on to eliminate this feature of the CA state employee pension system. (Teachers can do this too, but the aura of abuse does not seem to be the same. I will explain from personal experience. I had read about the possibility of buying years of service credit. The cost was reasonably high, in the thousands of dollars, but I figured that in several years my higher pension benefits would cancel out the cost to me and thereafter I would benefit. Not so fast! I was told when I talked with a STRS rep. There was some fine print not shown on the Cal-STRS website which meant that using this feature would have made no sense for me whatsoever. I think, in the case of the teachers system, the practice of buying years of service credit was really for a limited number of teachers, such as those who have taught some years in other states before moving to California. Don't ask for more details, since this happened nine years ago and I can't remember more.) Here's the main point. If, as I firmly believe, the states are in big financial trouble, something must be done. You can't print money as the feds do. You can continue to raise taxes, but there is a limit to how long that will work. Somewhere along the line expenses must be cut. Public employees now enjoy pay and benefits that in many cases are better than private workers. Asking those employees to pay a little more for their retirement seems reasonable to me. And if a whole new system, meaning defined contribution, is put in place, workers already retired or close to retirement, can be excepted. Remember the basic question: if the states are broke or close to it, something must be done. You can't just forever complain that union contracts were negotiated in good faith and they can't be changed for that reason. Yes they can, if the whole ship of state is about to go under. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 19, 2011 21:18:47 GMT -8
On the whole I agree with William here. I know we do not usually agree so I am hoping this is not one of the signs of the Apocalypse.  I think this will be true on the Federal level as well. Sorry for all the retirees, but facts are facts. |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 8:32:26 GMT -8
It only matters that you don't have to pay tax is in regard to your attitude not Win's reality. WTF??? I pay tax. WTF are you talking about?? Sober up and come back with something coherent. Whatever.... it was a nice road win today (no not THAT "win", "petty officer", or "sailor-boy"). GO AZTECS!!!! Your goal is to pay no tax. It is your wet dream. I had one half of a beer in 1997. That was my last drink. I would not depend on your opinion to determine if I am coherent or not. I wouldn't trust you to figure out the right time of day with a short wave radio connected to the National Bureau of Standards Atomic Clock broadcast. |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 8:45:04 GMT -8
Oh, boy! Once again I must come to the rescue of those who are not organizing their thoughts clearly with regard to this issue. Here's the deal. No matter how honestly and honorably certain union contracts were arrived at in the past, there may come a time when the country's economic situation has changed so much for the worse that said contracts (as well as those future ones which will use the existing contracts as starting points) cannot be honored. I refer largely to pension systems. Ask yourself this question: Is the economic condition of the state of California, or of any of 40 or so other states, excellent, fair, poor, or close to bankruptcy? In other words, is all this talk about states declaring bankruptcy (A) just a lot of nonsense, or (B) are many states close to going broke? If the answer is A, then there may be no need for significant changes. If the answer is B, then we must be open to the possible need for real modifications in the area of public employee compensation and pensions. Just a day or two ago I saw a report of TV about what is called "air time," a way for CA state employees to pay a fee in exchange for adding years to their service credit. As you probably know, in defined benefit systems, the more years you have served, the higher your monthly pension. Apparently, thousands of employees have taken advantage of this system, at great expense to the taxpayers. (Here's a link: articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/16/local/la-me-pensions-airtime-20110216) Private workers are not allowed to do this. If you read the linked article you will see that there is a move on to eliminate this feature of the CA state employee pension system. (Teachers can do this too, but the aura of abuse does not seem to be the same. I will explain from personal experience. I had read about the possibility of buying years of service credit. The cost was reasonably high, in the thousands of dollars, but I figured that in several years my higher pension benefits would cancel out the cost to me and thereafter I would benefit. Not so fast! I was told when I talked with a STRS rep. There was some fine print not shown on the Cal-STRS website which meant that using this feature would have made no sense for me whatsoever. I think, in the case of the teachers system, the practice of buying years of service credit was really for a limited number of teachers, such as those who have taught some years in other states before moving to California. Don't ask for more details, since this happened nine years ago and I can't remember more.) Here's the main point. If, as I firmly believe, the states are in big financial trouble, something must be done. You can't print money as the feds do. You can continue to raise taxes, but there is a limit to how long that will work. Somewhere along the line expenses must be cut. Public employees now enjoy pay and benefits that in many cases are better than private workers. Asking those employees to pay a little more for their retirement seems reasonable to me. And if a whole new system, meaning defined contribution, is put in place, workers already retired or close to retirement, can be excepted. Remember the basic question: if the states are broke or close to it, something must be done. You can't just forever complain that union contracts were negotiated in good faith and they can't be changed for that reason. Yes they can, if the whole ship of state is about to go under. AzWm
That's a pretty arrogant statement I should think. I see nothing in your posts to indicate a level of comprehension exceeding the norm around here. Nevertheless, my problem is not that states need to do something about their debt, although the debt is more a function of the economy than anything the unions did. The states are insolvent, because revenues have declined in relation to current expenses. That decline has been caused by a reduction in tax receipts from previously employed individuals and business contraction. In states such as my previously cited example of Texas, unions are not a significant force, yet Texas is in dire straights-just like you say California is. Some of you have a fetish about the unions being the villain here. You fixate on them in your discussion to the exclusion of other problems and other solutions. What concerns me is the vitriol against unions that, by my lights, exceeds the damage you say they have caused the state's economy. I think the attack of unions is contrived and it is based on an attempt to take advantage of circumstances. Your goal is to end unions and not just control costs, in my opinion. If you were interested in solving the state's problems, you would not approach the issue as if unions were anachronistic, the enemy, unlawful, or the primary cause of the state's insolvency. You would work with them as a team to solve the issues. I think a discussion about how to improve the economy of California and the other states, should include a discussion about how to get people back to work so that they will consume and not just a screed against public employees unions. Controlling expenses is all well and good, but there is a demand, income component to be dealt with as well. If more people work more people are paying into the system. We can all agree that getting people to work is a good idea too. I would like to ask a question or two. What would this country's economy look like if there were no unions? If there were no unions, what would labor relations in this country look like? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 8:48:43 GMT -8
I know it is rather hard for liberals to understand the concept of win/win. When I suggest that I would be better off under a system that was paid for and owned by the employee and paid for jointly by the employer and employee from current assets rather than leaving an unfunded long term liability as a legacy for future generations to suffer under should not elicit that snarky response. I guess it is part of liberal DNA to think only in terms of being a burden on other people rather than taking care of themselves. Don't give me that burden BS, petty officer. My wife and I save more than both of our sons together earn per year. Lately, because of business the return on my money is non existent and my stock, well it isn't 2007 is it? And my house? Lets not go there! Thanks business! So, the investor assumes the risk for investment in your plan for the universe, with no fall back. In your universe, the patient takes all the risk for health care. In your universe the student takes the entire risk for his education. In your universe the single employee assumes all the risk for employment. In your universe it does not matter if people fail. It does not matter if people get sick, it does not matter if people are uneducated, it does not matter if people are unemployed, it does not matter if people have no control of the future. It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax. But let me tell you sailor boy, those broke, poor, uneducated, sick unemployed people do affect you whether you like it or not. And the only way they won't is for you to buy an island and start your own country. Where did you get that? I bet you froth at the mouth as well. Sailor Boy |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 8:53:18 GMT -8
On the whole I agree with William here. I know we do not usually agree so I am hoping this is not one of the signs of the Apocalypse. I think this will be true on the Federal level as well. Sorry for all the retirees, but facts are facts. All the more reason to fund retirment plans out of current revenue. I can speak from experience. Mr. UPL |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 8:55:32 GMT -8
>>>It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax.<<< (not very) innocuous Hey, Win, petty officer, or sailor-boy.... whatever you answer to... Is this TRUE? If it is, would you please PM me and tell me how it is that you pay no tax??? Hey, waztec! Great game against the Junior Birdmen today! I was worried at halftime, but Fisher seems to know how to manage these road games. 27-1, baby!!! Three to go, and let's stick it to the Zoobs next Saturday!!!!!!!!! It only matters that you don't have to pay tax is in regard to your attitude not Win's reality. What are you talking about? What give you these wild ideas? Need a trip to Betty Ford? Petty Officer |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 8:56:20 GMT -8
Don't give me that burden BS, petty officer. My wife and I save more than both of our sons together earn per year. Lately, because of business the return on my money is non existent and my stock, well it isn't 2007 is it? And my house? Lets not go there! Thanks business! So, the investor assumes the risk for investment in your plan for the universe, with no fall back. In your universe, the patient takes all the risk for health care. In your universe the student takes the entire risk for his education. In your universe the single employee assumes all the risk for employment. In your universe it does not matter if people fail. It does not matter if people get sick, it does not matter if people are uneducated, it does not matter if people are unemployed, it does not matter if people have no control of the future. It only matters that you that don't have to pay tax. But let me tell you sailor boy, those broke, poor, uneducated, sick unemployed people do affect you whether you like it or not. And the only way they won't is for you to buy an island and start your own country. Where did you get that? I bet you froth at the mouth as well. Sailor Boy It came from my irritation with conservative thought. I only froth during the full moon. You should see how irritated my wife gets when I bay at the moon! Don't mind me I still like and respect you you. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 8:59:43 GMT -8
WTF??? I pay tax. WTF are you talking about?? Sober up and come back with something coherent. Whatever.... it was a nice road win today (no not THAT "win", "petty officer", or "sailor-boy"). GO AZTECS!!!! I had one half of a beer in 1997. That was my last drink. If that is true, we have an even more serious problem. Betty Ford might not even work. Sounds like "funny farm" material. Sailor Boy |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 9:00:35 GMT -8
It only matters that you don't have to pay tax is in regard to your attitude not Win's reality. What are you talking about? What give you these wild ideas? Need a trip to Betty Ford? Petty Officer The conservative wish is to not pay any taxes. Heaven for conservatives will consist of no taxes. Am I wrong there? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 9:02:03 GMT -8
What are you talking about? What give you these wild ideas? Need a trip to Betty Ford? Petty Officer The conservative wish is to not pay any taxes. Heaven for conservatives will consist of no taxes. Am I wrong there? Yes, you you are wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 9:05:42 GMT -8
I had one half of a beer in 1997. That was my last drink. If that is true, we have an even more serious problem. Betty Ford might not even work. Sounds like "funny farm" material. Sailor Boy I think your comment about my needing Betty Ford and a "funny farm" is a worse insult than my reference to you as a "petty officer". I suggest you lighten up a bit. Then I suggest you visit a "funny farm". Perhaps the mental health unit at the Veterans Administration Hospital at Downey Illinois would do it for you. I'll put you in touch with my brother who worked there. It is too bad that you could not talk to my mother who worked in a state mental health unit for developmentally disabled children. She could tell you a story or two as well. That will stop your reference to "funny farms" as an insult. |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 9:06:07 GMT -8
The conservative wish is to not pay any taxes. Heaven for conservatives will consist of no taxes. Am I wrong there? Yes, you you are wrong. No, Win. I am not. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 9:14:00 GMT -8
If that is true, we have an even more serious problem. Betty Ford might not even work. Sounds like "funny farm" material. Sailor Boy I think your comment about my needing Betty Ford and a "funny farm" is a worse insult than my reference to you as a "petty officer". I suggest you lighten up a bit. Then I suggest you visit a "funny farm". Perhaps the mental health unit at the Veterans Administration hospital at Downey Illinois would do it for you. I'll put you in touch with my brother who worked there. That will stop your reference to them as an insult. I don't think that "Sailor Boy" or "Petty Officer" are insulting. I was both of those things at one time. I did not intend Betty Ford or "funny farm" as insulting, merely looking out for your well being. UPL |
|
|
|
Post by inocuace on Feb 20, 2011 9:18:04 GMT -8
I think your comment about my needing Betty Ford and a "funny farm" is a worse insult than my reference to you as a "petty officer". I suggest you lighten up a bit. Then I suggest you visit a "funny farm". Perhaps the mental health unit at the Veterans Administration hospital at Downey Illinois would do it for you. I'll put you in touch with my brother who worked there. That will stop your reference to them as an insult. I don't think that "Sailor Boy" or "Petty Officer" are insulting. I was both of those things at one time. I did not intend Betty Ford or "funny farm" as insulting, merely looking out for your well being. UPL On reflection, I should not have used the sailor boy reference, Win. I apologize. Don't worry about me, I am fine. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 20, 2011 9:56:01 GMT -8
I don't think that "Sailor Boy" or "Petty Officer" are insulting. I was both of those things at one time. I did not intend Betty Ford or "funny farm" as insulting, merely looking out for your well being. UPL On reflection, I should not have used the sailor boy reference, Win. I apologize. Don't worry about me, I am fine. What is wrong here? A nice guy with a different opinion? I hope you see that most of us have fun on here and just a few take things too far. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Feb 20, 2011 11:20:49 GMT -8
On the whole I agree with William here. I know we do not usually agree so I am hoping this is not one of the signs of the Apocalypse. I think this will be true on the Federal level as well. Sorry for all the retirees, but facts are facts. All the more reason to fund retirment plans out of current revenue. I can speak from experience. Mr. UPL How do you propose the country fund pensions as generous as yours from current revenue. I have already shown what a fixed annuity would have cost that would have paid what your first pension check was, not even counting that it has tripled since. The government would have had to set aside, from current revenue, more than they paid you in salary to fund your pension. Be so kind to run some numbers for us and support your proposition, rather than just run your mouth. |
|
I think this will be true on the Federal level as well. Sorry for all the retirees, but facts are facts.