CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Chat and elections.
- Thread starter CelestialBody
- Start date
Bobtoad777
Virgin
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2000
- Posts
- 3,067
go CB go kick some election tush
Qualifications of a Pres
Well - that was a valid question in 1992 - nobody seemed to care.One BIG BIG difference - Bush has Cheney and Colin Powell and others on whom to rely - Look who Clinton picked for cabinet members- most of whom have fallen by the wayside for various reasons along the way- and advisors? The Arkansas mafia, many of whom have also fallen along the way
Personally I supported McCain, and wouldnt be surprised to find him in a Bush cadre as well eventually
Well - that was a valid question in 1992 - nobody seemed to care.One BIG BIG difference - Bush has Cheney and Colin Powell and others on whom to rely - Look who Clinton picked for cabinet members- most of whom have fallen by the wayside for various reasons along the way- and advisors? The Arkansas mafia, many of whom have also fallen along the way
Personally I supported McCain, and wouldnt be surprised to find him in a Bush cadre as well eventually
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Quite true CB- however treaties are negotiated at the staff level, rarely even getting to the level of the Sec,y of State- much less the President altho obviously they have to be in agreement with the principle and details. So my comments are even more pertinent in this regard.
Now which candidate among the four is best qualified to deal with a foreign country? Certainly one that isnt known for taking liberties with the truth- where do you think he stands in the eyes of a foreign country? About the same place as the current incumbent, who has NO credibility anywhere except Northern Ireland, where he does in fact deserve some credit, but only succeeded because of his close relationship with Tony Blair in Great Britain
Now which candidate among the four is best qualified to deal with a foreign country? Certainly one that isnt known for taking liberties with the truth- where do you think he stands in the eyes of a foreign country? About the same place as the current incumbent, who has NO credibility anywhere except Northern Ireland, where he does in fact deserve some credit, but only succeeded because of his close relationship with Tony Blair in Great Britain
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Laurel and I have exchanged E-mails on the subject at some length, altho not within the last several weeks. With respect to the websites you list for me, consider who originated them. She seemed to be in some agreement when I told her I was a McCain supporter
Where was Gore's intl experience? for 24 yrs? Certainly you cant give credit for him being a journalist in the army and never seeing any combat in Viet Nam
Mr Clinton is involved in so-called foreign negotiations i.e. the middle east simply because he chooses to be - he wasnt asked to my knowledge, and I have seen Arab sources that object to his involvement. He will not accomplish anything toward peace there - especially with Madeliene Albright as Sec'y of State
Gore's int'l experience mainly consists of the Kyoto convention where he attempted to bargain away US sovereignty and cripple American industrial and energy producing capability.
I didnt use specificity simply because I wasnt trying to do any more than comment on the question you raised.
As long as you raise it now - Mr Clinton's idea of foreign affairs consists of can he get laid in Paris, or London or Moscow - and that is a direct quote from a radio interview with an ex-communist with whom he was at Oxford, who said he never went to class - he was only into it for the girls and the drugs. Unfortunately in my advanced age I cant remember the name of the man who said it (he didnt say Paris by the way - just London and Moscow)
[Edited by catlover on 11-05-2000 at 03:02 PM]
Where was Gore's intl experience? for 24 yrs? Certainly you cant give credit for him being a journalist in the army and never seeing any combat in Viet Nam
Mr Clinton is involved in so-called foreign negotiations i.e. the middle east simply because he chooses to be - he wasnt asked to my knowledge, and I have seen Arab sources that object to his involvement. He will not accomplish anything toward peace there - especially with Madeliene Albright as Sec'y of State
Gore's int'l experience mainly consists of the Kyoto convention where he attempted to bargain away US sovereignty and cripple American industrial and energy producing capability.
I didnt use specificity simply because I wasnt trying to do any more than comment on the question you raised.
As long as you raise it now - Mr Clinton's idea of foreign affairs consists of can he get laid in Paris, or London or Moscow - and that is a direct quote from a radio interview with an ex-communist with whom he was at Oxford, who said he never went to class - he was only into it for the girls and the drugs. Unfortunately in my advanced age I cant remember the name of the man who said it (he didnt say Paris by the way - just London and Moscow)
[Edited by catlover on 11-05-2000 at 03:02 PM]
social security
As long as your original thresd was about general qualifications, not simply foreign affairs - let me raise the issue of Social Security.
I assume you are in your 20s, being an MSU student. I am 70,a SS recipient. Do you know what the original people covered by social security paid into the system when it started in 1935? Hmmmm? It was 1% of the first 3000 of earned income - $30 dollars a year. Today it's 15 plus percent of over 75,000, or over 1000 a year if one has that much earned income. Double that for two income couples where both hubby and wife earn that much.
My father who died in 1984, paid into the system for EXACTLY 40 quarters - ten years, and retired when the threshold was like 7200. The last year he worked he paid into SS the great total of 343.20, and every month after he retired he collected over $1000.oo. How do you like paying in (now) over 15% of your income so guys like me can sit at a puter and play games while you work?
Personally I quit paying in (because i quit drawing a salary) in 1981, when the threshold went from something like 21000 to 27000. My last year "contribution" which the govt calls it, was $1975.05. I now collect over $1300 a month.
If I were your age there is no way in hell I would work to support a bunch of old people whom I couldnt care less about
So when Mr Gore talks about Social Security, thats the system he talks about - where people like you look forward to paying through the nose for people like me, while the Congress repeatedly raids the so called "trust fund" which doesnt actually exist- the money is in the treasury general fund, to use for other programs. Thats why the system is in jeopardy. At least Bush wants to enable you and your contemporaries to earn more than 2% annually on YOUR money, to enable you to receive something when you reach retirement age (provided of course you pay in)
[Edited by catlover on 11-05-2000 at 03:36 PM]
As long as your original thresd was about general qualifications, not simply foreign affairs - let me raise the issue of Social Security.
I assume you are in your 20s, being an MSU student. I am 70,a SS recipient. Do you know what the original people covered by social security paid into the system when it started in 1935? Hmmmm? It was 1% of the first 3000 of earned income - $30 dollars a year. Today it's 15 plus percent of over 75,000, or over 1000 a year if one has that much earned income. Double that for two income couples where both hubby and wife earn that much.
My father who died in 1984, paid into the system for EXACTLY 40 quarters - ten years, and retired when the threshold was like 7200. The last year he worked he paid into SS the great total of 343.20, and every month after he retired he collected over $1000.oo. How do you like paying in (now) over 15% of your income so guys like me can sit at a puter and play games while you work?
Personally I quit paying in (because i quit drawing a salary) in 1981, when the threshold went from something like 21000 to 27000. My last year "contribution" which the govt calls it, was $1975.05. I now collect over $1300 a month.
If I were your age there is no way in hell I would work to support a bunch of old people whom I couldnt care less about
So when Mr Gore talks about Social Security, thats the system he talks about - where people like you look forward to paying through the nose for people like me, while the Congress repeatedly raids the so called "trust fund" which doesnt actually exist- the money is in the treasury general fund, to use for other programs. Thats why the system is in jeopardy. At least Bush wants to enable you and your contemporaries to earn more than 2% annually on YOUR money, to enable you to receive something when you reach retirement age (provided of course you pay in)
[Edited by catlover on 11-05-2000 at 03:36 PM]
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
CB - I cannot or will not argue with anything you said in your last post - I never said Gore was inept - I didnt say, but I implied and I believe that he is a liar. I dont want to argue here either- I went to the trouble of pulling out my corporate records to look up the ss figures. Thety are about 3 feet from my puter so it wasnt any big deal, but I did it solely to try to make you aware of the mathematics of the system. If you dont mind paying in, I sure dont mind spending your money - Im at an age where i figured I couldnt beat the system so I joined it. I have no hard feelings and dont really care how you vote. Neither do I want to argue with you or anyone else here, but liking you and enjoying your posts, I just couldnt resist chiming in when you first posted. Far as Im concerned lets drop it - ive already voted anyway (absentee). Have a nice evening.You're a sharp young lady and I admire you
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Ambrosious
Weaver of Written Worlds
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2000
- Posts
- 6,346
Two things kill me about Social Insecurity.
1. If you die after paying in for 40 years, the money disappears. Your estate does not get it, however your spouse can get a fraction in monthly dividends.
2. The employer's contribution. If you really think that your employer didn't already figure in the amount of SS that they would have to pay to hire you... Just think of it this way. If your employer DID NOT have to pay in, that money would go to higher salaries.
And on another subject, what is up with the vilification of the rich. The buzz word is "fortunate" or "won life's lotto." You mean to tell me that if I work hard, make hard choices, and put off gratification in the here/now so I can enjoy life in the there/then that I am more "fortunate?" Come on. Just because I decided to work my tail off in school, work two jobs most of my life, save my money, learn how to invest, etc. I am "more fortunate?" Really! We all have the same choices. I chose not to buy beer, cigaretts, doublewides, and camaros. I also STUDY the market and know where EVERY penny I have earned goes. My reward? Being part of the 10% of the population that pays 85% of ALL income tax.
Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry!
P.S. If you like political pundits go to http://www.boortz.com then click on Neal's Nuze daily for a dose of reality.
1. If you die after paying in for 40 years, the money disappears. Your estate does not get it, however your spouse can get a fraction in monthly dividends.
2. The employer's contribution. If you really think that your employer didn't already figure in the amount of SS that they would have to pay to hire you... Just think of it this way. If your employer DID NOT have to pay in, that money would go to higher salaries.
And on another subject, what is up with the vilification of the rich. The buzz word is "fortunate" or "won life's lotto." You mean to tell me that if I work hard, make hard choices, and put off gratification in the here/now so I can enjoy life in the there/then that I am more "fortunate?" Come on. Just because I decided to work my tail off in school, work two jobs most of my life, save my money, learn how to invest, etc. I am "more fortunate?" Really! We all have the same choices. I chose not to buy beer, cigaretts, doublewides, and camaros. I also STUDY the market and know where EVERY penny I have earned goes. My reward? Being part of the 10% of the population that pays 85% of ALL income tax.
Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry! Har-ry!
P.S. If you like political pundits go to http://www.boortz.com then click on Neal's Nuze daily for a dose of reality.
Im with all of you. CB because she is as thinking lady and that impresses me. Ive been married twice - both to rather avid democrats. Within weeks I had them both converted into ultra right wingers (on fiscal policy - not social issues) Id bet my last buck I could convert CB too if she were here sitting on my lap, which is right where I would like her to be. Curious tho - do I read you right you DONT like Engler? I thot he was quite popular in MI.
Another thing about social security, exacerbated by the recent two income family - as was said, a widow (or surviving spouse of either sex) gets a partial SS payment. Actually it's half what the decesased was entitled to, OR their own SS, whichever is greater. Now - how about a woman who works 40 yrs paying in the whole time. She doesnt get much more than a woman who never had a job and never contributed a cent! Where the hell is the feminist lobby on that? talk about unfair treatment!
One other last comment -cant speak for MI or WI or wherever Ambrosius lives, but here in WA State- i have yet to hear a local demo political ad that wasnt at least 95% lies about their opponents, The party as a whole seems to have moved in this direction under the leadership of Clinton. Now CB, being a thinking and intelligent person would of course know better, but the main populace tio whom the demos pander is at the intyellectual age of aabout 13, so they believe a lot of that shit.
One more thing- Ref to Ambrosius - I listen to Nader taklk about the financial disparity - when will people realize that a Bill Gates hires thousansds of people and singlehandedly created about 5000 millionaires in Seattle alone. How many people to the homeless hire? how much do the contribute to social decurity or other taxes? How much do they pay to support or elevate the educational system? Far as Im concerned, they can damn well get a job and go to work! (except of course those very few who for one reason or another are unable to work- thats a whole different area)
Finally - CB if i had had an e-mail addy for you id have kept a lot of this private between us. Here I am again this morning on my soapbox! Dont even begin to think YOU upset me-what upsets me is the democrat party (notice I didnt say Democratic- because they aint!) See you in church sweetie - little hard for a coed to get involved with a guy she knows is my age, but there are younger guys around too to play with
[Edited by catlover on 11-06-2000 at 08:03 AM]
Another thing about social security, exacerbated by the recent two income family - as was said, a widow (or surviving spouse of either sex) gets a partial SS payment. Actually it's half what the decesased was entitled to, OR their own SS, whichever is greater. Now - how about a woman who works 40 yrs paying in the whole time. She doesnt get much more than a woman who never had a job and never contributed a cent! Where the hell is the feminist lobby on that? talk about unfair treatment!
One other last comment -cant speak for MI or WI or wherever Ambrosius lives, but here in WA State- i have yet to hear a local demo political ad that wasnt at least 95% lies about their opponents, The party as a whole seems to have moved in this direction under the leadership of Clinton. Now CB, being a thinking and intelligent person would of course know better, but the main populace tio whom the demos pander is at the intyellectual age of aabout 13, so they believe a lot of that shit.
One more thing- Ref to Ambrosius - I listen to Nader taklk about the financial disparity - when will people realize that a Bill Gates hires thousansds of people and singlehandedly created about 5000 millionaires in Seattle alone. How many people to the homeless hire? how much do the contribute to social decurity or other taxes? How much do they pay to support or elevate the educational system? Far as Im concerned, they can damn well get a job and go to work! (except of course those very few who for one reason or another are unable to work- thats a whole different area)
Finally - CB if i had had an e-mail addy for you id have kept a lot of this private between us. Here I am again this morning on my soapbox! Dont even begin to think YOU upset me-what upsets me is the democrat party (notice I didnt say Democratic- because they aint!) See you in church sweetie - little hard for a coed to get involved with a guy she knows is my age, but there are younger guys around too to play with
[Edited by catlover on 11-06-2000 at 08:03 AM]
Well said, Ambrosious.Ambrosious said:
To put Social(ist) Security in a more understandable perspective, let's suppose that a group of people get together and set up a corporate structure like Social Security and put it into operation. What happens? They're prosecuted and put in jail for running a confidence (con) game that's generally termed a pyramid scheme.
CreamyLady
Uncompromising Visionary
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2000
- Posts
- 2,685
It is scary, Gaucho; sadly, after watching someone tell a reporter quite sincerely that she always votes for the "best looking" candidate, I almost agree.
Almost.
Almost.
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
Ambrosious
Weaver of Written Worlds
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2000
- Posts
- 6,346
And what is up with the GREEN party. Ever read their stuff? Down right scary. Should be called the RED party. Is it a coincidence that democrats are attracted to GREEN party?
Sparky Kronkite
Spam Eater Extraordinare'
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2000
- Posts
- 8,921
CB, the underlying philosophy....
of alal political systems is greed - they go hand in hand.
of alal political systems is greed - they go hand in hand.
CreamyLady
Uncompromising Visionary
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2000
- Posts
- 2,685
Ahem. I usually vote Green; I, too, can trace a certain, oh, socialist trend in the philosophy. However, since that suits my thinking, I follow it. Hell, on paper Marxism WORKS.
This is a marketplace of ideas; they are all out there for each of us to examine and choose. Every opinion is worthy of examination, with the possible exception of those who vote on looks . . . though I will defend this woman's right to be an idiot to the death.
This is a marketplace of ideas; they are all out there for each of us to examine and choose. Every opinion is worthy of examination, with the possible exception of those who vote on looks . . . though I will defend this woman's right to be an idiot to the death.
Gaucho
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2000
- Posts
- 2,631
CelestialBody said:
Perhaps, but since, as you pointed out, we can't predict the future, how can we know what that long term impact will be? And could it be that people are thinking about immediate gratification because that's precisely what the candidates are preaching?
And speaking of the candidates, aren't they "people", too? If we can't trust the American people to do what is best, how can we trust them? Or does 24 years of working in government mean that Al Gore is somehow more qualified than I am to determine what issues are important to me and how I feel I should be governed? The problem with cynicism, CB, is that it ultimately leads straight down a mine shaft and you come out the other end looking like, well, looking like Al Gore.
Al has studied the issues and found the answers and if you want to know what (and how) to think about them, just ask him. And he just can't understand why there are a few reprobates out there like me who "just don't get it".
The true power in the world lies in the hands of those people you just can't bring yourself to trust. Meaning, it lies in the hands of you and me. And yes, it is abused, misused, ignored and otherwise wasted every day. In this country, that's called "democracy in action".
Personally, I'd trust those people (or at least the principle inherent in them) with my life.
Even if they do manage to elect Al Gore.
CelestialBody
Starlet of India
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2000
- Posts
- 7,904
You're just absolutely wonderful! I love you immensely!
I wouldnt give the time of day to any of those texts or theoretical treatises. Nothing takes the place of practical knowledge and the "been there done that" school of hard knocks. When I was in school I fought tooth and nail with more than one professor and I usually won - best deal was a paper on the Boxer Rebellion in 1900 (on a final exam in World history taught from the point of view of foreign policy affected by Naval seapower) where I took the side of the Boxers trying to expel the western powers including the US, and got a hell of a good grade.
Wish I had an e-mail addy for you tho- Im tired of this thread - I dont want to talk about the Green Party or this election - I just want to talk to you! You dont have to put it on here - just e-mail me by clicking below - I wouldn't think of revealing it to anyone else
I wouldnt give the time of day to any of those texts or theoretical treatises. Nothing takes the place of practical knowledge and the "been there done that" school of hard knocks. When I was in school I fought tooth and nail with more than one professor and I usually won - best deal was a paper on the Boxer Rebellion in 1900 (on a final exam in World history taught from the point of view of foreign policy affected by Naval seapower) where I took the side of the Boxers trying to expel the western powers including the US, and got a hell of a good grade.
Wish I had an e-mail addy for you tho- Im tired of this thread - I dont want to talk about the Green Party or this election - I just want to talk to you! You dont have to put it on here - just e-mail me by clicking below - I wouldn't think of revealing it to anyone else
Gaucho
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2000
- Posts
- 2,631
CelestialBody said:
Ah, to be young again. You don't have to worry about being patronizing, CB. You already did that.
And why are you an elitist? Because the only things you've learned came out of books. Good books, maybe, but books nonetheless.
The good news is that time will change that.
