well forgive the depressing thoughts for interupting your postive thinking.
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:41 PM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]>wrote: > > Yes Don, we are in the same boat. The problem is that 'the public > dole' itself has been all but eliminated through carefully crafted > actions over the last few decades. > > On Oct 6, 3:09 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > I had dreams of an early retirement in the mid 90's. Now I realize > > I'll work until I'm dead. More and more of my earned income will be > > syphoned off to pay for other's apathy and poor economic choices. I > > work for The Greater Good and lately have nothing left to put away for > > tomorrow so I may very well end up on the public dole myself before I > > finally shuffle off this mortal coil. It's a depressing thought. > > > > dj > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:50 AM, archytas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > My guess is the underlying economics doesn't work and it may be that > > > human survival and a decent society is much easier than we have > > > recognised. This latter may be the reason 'economics works' - almost > > > any mad dross would. I know of no scientific critique in the area > > > other than a resignation amongst scientists that the stuff is daft. > > > Our traditional right wing party has come out today with the"idea" > > > that we should all work longer before we can retire - Doris may be > > > right in musing about the world-wide. "All" means 'those less > > > fortunate'. Some have already lost good pension entitlements and drop > > > there kit every year on a party conference beach to remind us. > > > Unemployment in the UK is massive and hidden through people being able > > > to claim sickness benefits or disappearing off the screen. > > > Truth flew away long ago, perhaps just as we got the means to secure > > > it through technology. I've contributed through work most of my life, > > > but there is little sign that anything I've built up is really under > > > my control and plenty of reasons to rue not being more selfish and > > > just made a life in which I could just watch the mess from a house on > > > the hill. The human population has risen three times in my lifetime, > > > to me a significant fact in our inability to take control of > > > evolutionary defaults and change them (with all the moral issues this > > > involves). > > > I worked in Soho for a while, watching what was a 'good night > > > out' (years ago) and just found myself wondering why life is so bad. > > > There can seem very little to do because of something central in the > > > way we are 'nurtured'. I'm not sure sitting on a Brazilian beach as > > > an academic about to pontificate on postmodernism was any less squalid > > > - perhaps more so as even as a cop I could sometimes stop some of the > > > worst. I'd ask Francis what paid for the financial services > > > revolution - but suspect he knows. > > > The answers are probably simple and concern smaller ideas than daft > > > economics (about which most people know nothing - reminding me of > > > church services in Latin). > > > > > On 6 Oct, 09:06, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Nowhere To Fall > > > > >> Facing the economic crisis in the U.S. > > > > >> October 2009 By Katie Beran and Celine-Marie Pascale > > > > >> ________________________________________ > > >> Few people will escape the effects of the global economic crisis that > > >> has been unfolding since the fall of 2008. While the stock market's > > >> steep declines conjured immediate comparisons to the crash of 1929, > > >> David Kyvig points out that the broad economic effects of the crash > > >> (apart from immediate losses in the market) became apparent only in > > >> 1933 when the entire nation was in a depression. The devastation of > > >> that depression took 25 years to correct. Notably, only 2 percent of > > >> the public owned stocks in 1929, while 50 percent owned stocks in > > >> 2008. In this precarious context, it is especially important to > > >> remember that in 2007, a year before the stock market crisis, the U.S. > > >> Census Bureau reported 37.3 million people were already living in > > >> poverty. The announcement didn't make front-page news and no one > > >> declared a crisis. No one called for government intervention. > > > > >> When the stock market crashed in the fall of 2008, stories of layoffs > > >> among construction workers, auto workers, factory workers, bankers, > > >> and stockbrokers quickly dominated the news. The public faced daily > > >> reports of retirement pensions ruined by the crisis and the dire > > >> consequences that people in or near retirement now faced. Stories on > > >> the foreclosure crisis described a devastated middle class facing cuts > > >> to wages, and health care. Still, no one reported on the millions of > > >> people who had nowhere to fall—people who never held a job with > health- > > >> care benefits or pension plans, people who had been working at low- > > >> wage jobs doing their best to pay rent and keep food on the table. > > >> Millions more now face this kind of severe poverty. … > > > > >> More at:http://www.zcommunications.org/zmag/viewArticle/22730 > > > > >> On Oct 5, 3:31 pm, Doris Ragland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > Well here as far as Postal Service we did have postal trucks in > rural area's > > >> > now if you work for the Postal Service ir rural area's you use your > own > > >> > vehecial and put a yellow light on top..and some are only part > time...not a > > >> > good balance of pay for that person..part time no insurance...part > time on > > >> > any Job here in America is less insurance..this is a level of blue > collar > > >> > people with under average pay and they are hard workers...they have > even cut > > >> > retriement out on alot of the big company's here like they used to > have > > >> > ..now it is the 4-K Plan...used to you work to retriement and you > would get > > >> > like at least sixty and over thousands to add to your retriement not > good I > > >> > don't think on 4-K it is less but better than nothing..these things > are not > > >> > my department in solutions but I can see right now it is less than > in 60's > > >> > and 70's so forth..and yes we have the problem of cost in PO and > many other > > >> > things...travel expense goes up when it is time to vacation are all > year > > >> > travel..and just found out here are SS in 1917 seventy-six cents on > the > > >> > dollar because we have finicial problems is this world wide? It > seems > > >> > people overcome and probably will keep on living but what quialty? > To find > > >> > solutions to this the way it was here seem to work better back in > > >> > 60's-70's-it started changing.. > > > > >> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 8:20 AM, [email protected] < > > > > >> > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > > Well lets take our fine British empire as an example huh. > > > > >> > > Trains, that Thacher woman privatised them and it has taken ohh > what > > >> > > about 20 years for the service to come relativly good again, > although > > >> > > the price I now pay for the privilege of being squesed into the > 8:15 > > >> > > to London Bridge every weekday morning does seem too much. > > > > >> > > Health service. A few years back now our hospitals were given the > > >> > > option of becoming NHS Trusts, meaning a reduction in the money > they > > >> > > recive from goverment in return for the more self sefisency and > the > > >> > > chance to run like a business and make their own money. This > happend > > >> > > during the time I was working for one such hospital, moral hit > rock > > >> > > bottom as more and more frontline staff were let go and more and > more > > >> > > middle managment recruited, one of the reasons that I left. > > > > >> > > Post Office, well we can see what state that is in right now. > Energy, > > >> > > likewise(cheating bastards) > > > > >> > > Privatisation I guess may cost the goverement less, and maybe it > > >> > > actualy makes more money for these 'companies' but history since > the > > >> > > Thatcher era shows us that what this in fact does is makes more > money > > >> > > for the board of directors, and impacts negativly on service. > > > > >> > > Privatisation, umm I wonder if it is any sort of chance that it > reads > > >> > > like privateers? > > > > >> > > On 5 Oct, 11:57, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > An NHS comes with reds under beds Lee and cleaning services so > bad you > > >> > > > can never get rid of them! A sensible question might be whether > the > > >> > > > private sector ever did anything better than the public sector - > this > > >> > > > seems a bit odd for me to say as I generally loathe Town Halls. > Yet > > >> > > > much 'comparison' has been done against economies run by mad > people > > >> > > > (Sino-Soviet etc.) or ones in which the West has had an > imperialist > > >> > > > hand. CEOs of US companies that would have been nationalised in > > >> > > > Europe often said they competed against them in the fear of > being > > >> > > > nationalised if they didn't come up to scratch. I doubt many in > the > > >> > > > UK really think our privatisations have done much good - what > academic > > >> > > > evidence there is suggests considerable harm in surprising areas > like > > >> > > > 'education' (piling it uselessly into colleges when the big > national > > >> > > > companies were hands on). Gas and electric prices are now > broadly the > > >> > > > same across the 6 suppliers. There's no sensible argument about > any > > >> > > > of this unless you dig deep - much of that frankly hit by the > same > > >> > > > emoticons as the surface. Doris makes some sense just talking > about > > >> > > > what actually happens - we could do with more of that kind of > stuff to > > >> > > > compare systems. > > > > >> > > > On 5 Oct, 11:05, "[email protected]" < > [email protected]> > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > I'm still finding this really hard to understand. > > > > >> > > > > Why procisly is a health service in which all patients recive > free > > >> > > > > healthcare, free that is at the point of service, considered a > bad > > >> > > > > thing for some? > > > > >> > > > > What are their worries or their fears? > > > > >> > > > > On 5 Oct, 03:14, Doris Ragland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > I work in the Health insurance for years in US and processed > claims > > >> > > in two > > >> > > > > > major insurance company's ..major medical..I think this.. > as being > > >> > > self > > >> > > > > > independent in our country > > >> > > > > > is good and at one point was very good at a period of time > here..but > > >> > > things > > >> > > > > > changed where the company's > > > > ... > > > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
