Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are demanding the government bailout your pension.
Good, because unions are Socialist and don't deserve to be protected.
Good, because unions are Socialist and Socialism deserves to die.
You got that right.
Perot? That big-eared galoot? He didn't know his head from a hole in the ground.
Why would we want to?
Unions are Socialist, and union members and supporters are Socialist, and they all suck.
So what?
The Free Market sets interest rates.
In the US, you don't have a Free Market for interest rates, since the government and other groups collude to keep interest rates artificially low.
Even so, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that rates would be substantially higher in the absence of interference.
The would be higher, but if you think you'll be getting 10% on your passbook savings account, you're dreaming.
Then, by your own admission, your pension plan was a Ponzi-scheme and destined to fail.
Your complaint needs to be taken up with the Socialist unions that you adore.
A rose by any other name.....
What law?
Show us in writing.
Show us in writing.
Wages are determined by Supply & Demand.
By your own admission, the Socialist unions artificially inflated your wages, to your own detriment.
You want a bailout. Stop denying it.
They? They who? The Socialist unions?
Yeah, they did.
One reason your Socialist union utopian pie-in-the-sky pensions are unrealistic, is due to the fact that Organized Crime ran the unions, and used union pension plans to launder money. The greater the pension benefit offered, the more dirty money can be laundered.
Uh, wut?
Yes, he is.
A rose by any other name....
They surely did.
Yes, I can.
You're a flaming Socialist in love with Socialist unions.
You didn't want to take responsibility for yourself, instead you sloughed that responsibility off onto the Socialist unions.
You didn't give a damn that the Socialist unions were run by Italian and Jewish Organized Crime syndicates.
You didn't give a damn that Organized Crime was laundering Blood Money through our pension plans.
Your pension plans were never viable, and even a 5-year-old could do the math and figure that out.
And you were dumb enough to think the tax-payers would rescue you.
The union leaders got rich off of you, and the Organized Crime families got rich off of you, so you need to take it up with them. You need to sue the union leaders and the crime families like the Gambino Family and the Trafficante Family.
You want a bailout, then get the De Bartolo Family to sell both of their sports teams and use the money to fund your pension.
The General Fund does not pay Social Security Benefits, by thanks for the display of ignorance all the same.
Other foreign States tried and failed, most notably France.
Oh, you didn't know that? Well, then I guess you had best read up on the massive problems you will have raising the retirement age.
That's why it's called a Ponzi-Scheme.
What fool would dump money into a Ponzi-Scheme?
Okay, then tell us which Organized Crime Families ran which unions?
Can you at least explain why the American Hospital Association and unions lobbied Congress and the IRS to end Free Market health insurance in 1954?
Probably not.
Organized Crime cannot launder Blood Money through insurance plans that are regulated by the States.
However, if a union has the American Hospital Association's Blue Cross, then Organized Crime can launder Blood Money, since the Blue Cross is totally exempt from all regulation and oversight by State insurance commissions.
That was the whole purpose of the "Enabling Laws" or "Enabling Legislation" obtained by the American Hospital Association in the 1930s from the States.
See, the 1949 In Re: Inland Steel decision by the Supreme Court signaled that employer-sponsored health plans were not just a passing fad; they were here to stay.
Now, for-profit insurance jumps into the health insurance market and takes over from the Blue Cross, because private for-profit health insurance was not only less expensive than the Blue Cross, but Americans could profit off of their health plan coverage.....something Americans could not do with Blue Cross.
You can't launder money through an insurance company that gets audited every other Tuesday by State regulators.
Yes, that's a Ponzi-Scheme. It's Fraud. We covered that.
I'm not obligated to bailout Fraud or support Organized Crime.
What's the alternative to not cutting pensions?
A bailout.
Not so semantically.....
Mircea
Next time post and make some sense. OK. Many people put their hard earned money into the pension.. do you understand that? The government only bails out government and state pensions with increasing taxes, not blue collar unions.
Not a ponzi scheme when one contributes to their pensions instead of their bank accounts.
Next time post and make some sense. OK. Many people put their hard earned money into the pension.. do you understand that? The government only bails out government and state pensions with increasing taxes, not blue collar unions.
Not a ponzi scheme when one contributes to their pensions instead of their bank accounts.
I feel...unclean defending Mircea....but the point is that people investing in a ponzi scheme also are putting in money expecting a larger return.
I disagree with Mircea in that the insurance part is supposed to cover this. Thats why its called insurance. People who did put their money in put it in with this understanding, going back and changing the deal is wrong
I feel...unclean defending Mircea....but the point is that people investing in a ponzi scheme also are putting in money expecting a larger return.
I disagree with Mircea in that the insurance part is supposed to cover this. Thats why its called insurance. People who did put their money in put it in with this understanding, going back and changing the deal is wrong
First , Mircea didn't read the whole thread.. I don't get a pension, I put my money in banks and stocks but am now out of the stockmarket. Mircea is ranting about what she thinks and it is totally wrong . I do not believe a bail out is the answer and she is ranting about the mob.. she needs to come down to earth.
Further... and I see this...
Next the banks will say they are broke and the congress with pass legislation that we are to get only 40% of our money. It is equivalent to that. No more FDIC promises.
First , Mircea didn't read the whole thread.. I don't get a pension, I put my money in banks and stocks but am now out of the stockmarket. Mircea is ranting about what she thinks and it is totally wrong . I do not believe a bail out is the answer and she is ranting about the mob.. she needs to come down to earth.
Further... and I see this...
Next the banks will say they are broke and the congress with pass legislation that we are to get only 40% of our money. It is equivalent to that. No more FDIC promises.
That was a good analogy about the banks and I totally agree. If one is allowed to go back on their promises to their pensioners/investors then this sets a precedence to it happening in all sectors.
You mean to tell me D x 201 couldn't each read 20 pages and give each other a head's up if something egregious was about to be snuck in? And R x 234 were unable to each read 17 pages?
I knew the bar was low but for $174,000 a year, I guess I expected a little more.
I read that they have been trying to get that amendment into a bill for quite some time now.
Sure they knew about it.
I feel...unclean defending Mircea....but the point is that people investing in a ponzi scheme also are putting in money expecting a larger return.
I disagree with Mircea in that the insurance part is supposed to cover this. Thats why its called insurance. People who did put their money in put it in with this understanding, going back and changing the deal is wrong
People did NOT put their money into this. These are not defined contribution plans.
I believe this was done to avoid another economic disaster and there still may be trouble ahead.
There is no guarantee a company will honor its agreement to an employee and that is sad. It is a contract after all.
We watched the poor workers at Kaiser back in the 70's lose everything due to its closure. Men and women on the brink of retirement got nothing...zippo, hand full of dust. Trust yourself, not a company and certainly not the government.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
*
