On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 22:36:17 -0400, Maru Dubshinki
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/5/05, Robert G. Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://people.freenet.de/kraskapolski/Coolest_Picture_Ever_1.jpg
xponent
No Idea Maru
rob
Big.
Sunday drive?
--
Doug
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 09:46:40 -0500, Ronn!Blankenship
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DETAINEES, NOT SOLDIERS, FLUSHED QURAN
A U.S. military investigation into the mishandling of the Muslim holy
book at
the Guantanamo Bay prison for suspected terrorists has determined that
detainees -- not U.S.
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:52:35 -0500, Ronn!Blankenship
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...which is why after just a few minutes, I gave up with the hedge
trimmer and got the chain saw. Spent 2-1/2 hours on the one bush, but
at least now one can get to the front door. Only something like two
dozen
Robert wrote:
A fun test!
http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=23320
Existentialist 100%
Existentialism emphasizes human capability. There is no greater power
interfering with life and thus it is up to us to make things happen.
Sometimes considered a negative and depressing world view, your
I sent this last night but it didn't make it to the list for some reason.
Leonard wrote:
My dear Mr. Pensinger,
Welcome to the list, Leonard.
It would seem to me that those capable of most effectively deploying nukes
have a monopoly on nukes. A nuke
sitting in my basement is hardly a threat
Leonard wrote:
Does Killer Bs Discussion have an orthodoxy? (or isn't anybody allowed
to ask the question?)
All is Brin.
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Mon, 30 May 2005 13:26:12 -0230, Travis Edmunds [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: Robert G. Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: The French Say Non!
Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 19:09:55 -0500
I'm sure most of you ran
On Fri, 27 May 2005 11:16:16 -0700 (PDT), David Brin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It was not even remotely comprehensible what point was
intended here
Nor I, but I'd be interested to find out why he thinks that anyone has a
monopoly on nukes.
--
Doug
Dave Land wrote:
Amnesty International's 2005 report certainly agrees with your
assessment. From the press release announcing the report:
The US administrations attempts to dilute the absolute ban on
torture through new policies and quasi-management speak such as
environmental
David Brin wrote:
No, there are only two words on the table for such
people. Stupid. Or Disloyal.
I lean toward both.
You left out greedy. There's not a whole lot of money to be made in the
renewables buisiness and if it becomes at all succesful it devalues the
oil industry.
--
Doug
David Brin wrote:
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Moore, that dope, said this was a war for US
Oil companies. Easily tested. Do YOU see any Iraqi
oil flowing?
Yes that may have been the aim, and it was done
incompetently. Like so much else.
But always consider
JDG wrote:
At 02:07 PM 5/24/2005 -0700, Dr. Brin wrote:
For example, that Bill Clinton's record was not just weirdly better -
by classic CONSERVATIVE values - but diametrically opposite to George
Bush's when it comes to:
Your list would be far more persuasive if you had some outside
On Tue, 24 May 2005 14:54:21 -0700 (PDT), Deborah Harrell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug Pensinger wrote:
As of 5:25 or so this morning. My daughter gave
birth to a healthy
baby boy, 7 lb 4 oz., 20.5 in.
Huzzah! And many happy evenings of plotting creative
ways to spoil* him.
*only
On Fri, 20 May 2005 17:54:50 -0500, Robert Seeberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doug Pensinger wrote:
As of 5:25 or so this morning. My daughter gave birth to a healthy
baby boy, 7 lb 4 oz., 20.5 in. (sorry Alberto).
I rushed back early from a business trip in SLC so I could hold him
in my
As of 5:25 or so this morning. My daughter gave birth to a healthy baby
boy, 7 lb 4 oz., 20.5 in. (sorry Alberto).
I rushed back early from a business trip in SLC so I could hold him in my
arms.
8^))
--
Doug
Very Proud Maru
___
Nick wrote:
Congratulations!
Is this your initial entry into the wonderful world of grandparenthood?
Thank you. Yes this is my first grandchild and I'm very happy to have
joined the clubb.
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Dan wrote:
The point is, most Americans believe that abortions should be illegal
some of the time. Most Democrats support the legality of all abortions,
even
for development beyond viability.
Do you haave a cite for that. I found this:
Los Angeles Times Poll. Jan. 30-Feb. 2, 2003. N=1,385
JDG wrote:
And these Democrats voting against it were definitely of the liberal
Democrat variety.
But of course if the exceptions that the Dems wanted had been included,
the law wouldn't be having trouble in court.
--
Doug
___
John Horn wrote:
Behalf Of JDG
At 10:46 PM 5/17/2005 -0500, John Horn wrote:
Abortion will never be rare until there are no unwanted
pregnancies.
John,
Before I respond to your other points, the above is clearly
some kind of
typo. I don't want to put words in your mouth - so would you
care to
JDG wrote:
It's connecting rare to no.
To me it would be at least plausible to say, Abortion will never be rare
until unwanted pregnancies are rare.
To me it seems completely implausible to say that Abortion can't be made
rare until there are *no* unwanted pregnancies.
OK, I see where you're
JDG wrote:
Since this health exception includes mental health, it means that any
woman desiring an abortion is able to claim the health exception.
Even one that could not get a doctor to back her claim up?
--
Doug
___
JDG wrote:
At 01:13 PM 5/13/2005 -0700, Deborah wrote:
I had no idea -- but must admit that I was
disappointed by the recent unimpressive voting turnout
by women. War, even necessary war, is antithetical to
what we are taught as girls.
Are you suggesting that there are inherent differences among
In any case, labels aside, the center is pretty much by definition the
mainstream.
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Sun, 15 May 2005 23:06:38 -0400, John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I came across a thought provoking article today by Christopher HItchens
that relates to our recent discussion on what's going better in Iraq for
the Iraqis.
Excerpt:
Ian McEwan observed recently that there were, in
Dan wrote:
For many long decades the US was willing to live with anti-communist
dictatorships. Yet, if you look at the Phillipeines, Taiwan, and South
Korea, they are, after Japan, the best examples of strong representative
government. If you want to argue that the US cut these dictatorships too
Dan wrote:
I think its arguable that many of the mentioned countries, the the
Philippians frex as well as many others (such as Iran) were able to move
away from their dictatorial governments _despite_ the U.S., not because
of its influence.
If this were true, then one should look at countries with
Ronn! wrote:
I wrote:
Well, anyway, mine are _pink_ when they are visible, which they _are
not_!!!
--
Doug
So there maru
Can't argue with logic like that . . .
What's logic got to do with it? 8^)
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpty back camels and a brace o' fleas?
--
On Thu, 12 May 2005 21:06:39 -0500, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
You'll See Green Alligators And Long-Necked Geese Maru
Humpy back camels and some chimpanzees
Julia
Ask Me About Thanksgiving '75 Maru
What about Thanksgiving '75?
--
Doug
hmmm, where
Dan wrote:
OK, but I was specificly referring to the leverage our government had
with other governments. We clearly have a strong cultural influence in
Arab
countrieseven one of the Palestinians celebrating 9-11 was wearing a
US sports tee shirt. Yet, that is an area where we have little
JDG wrote:
After the first Gulf war there was no threat to Saudi Arabia or anyone
else for that matter
So, do you believe that the US should have withdrawn its forces from
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the rest of the Persian Gulf following Gulf
War I, as
US troops were no longer necessary to
JDG wrote:
At 08:47 PM 4/30/2005 -0700, Doug wrote:
My suggestion was meant to imply that it makes more sense to attack S.A.
than it does to attack Iraq,
O.k., its not clear from this message.Do you believe that the US
should have pursued a war against Saudi Arabia after 9/11?
I think that
JDG wrote:
-the potential of Saddam Hussein attacking Saudi Arabia and the Gulf
States constituted a threat to the security of the United States?
After the first Gulf war there was no threat to Saudi Arabia or anyone
else for that matter
-the continued presence of US troops in the Muslim Holy
Ronn! wrote:
Which piece?
Optional.
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
JDG wrote:
(explanation on church stuff - thanks)
In my opinion, if one _favors_ tradition over change (or vice-versa),
then one is inherently closed minded to some extent.
So, would you say that you are/were closed-minded on school vouchers and
liberating Iraq?
I'm not sure on the first, maybe,
On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:29:13 -0400, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only to the extent that paying taxes can be described as paying dues.
But Social Security taxes are collected separately from other taxes
because they are specifically for retirement/disability. The fact that
the funds are used
JDG wrote:
Actually, that's part of my point.
The people don't believe that a set amount of *contributions* exist, they
believe that a set amount of *benefits* exist.That is, regardless of
how much money the government claims to be in the Trust Fund, the
future liabailities of the government
JDG wrote:
And that's an important point, retirement should be planned-for today by
choosing to forego a certain amount of consumption and investing that
capital to build a stockpile for funding one's retirement annuity.The
current system of just hoping that future generations will vote for
Gautam wrote:
Ah, the height of rational argumentation - calling
someone who disagrees with you a psychopath.
I don't know if I disagree with him. I do think the U.N. could use
reform, but a conservative Republican colleague of his called him a
serial abuser and three Republicans on the
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:14:36 -0500, Robert Seeberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Arnett wrote:
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:48:50 -0400, John D. Giorgis wrote
Is it just me, or does Bush seemed to have mellowed a bit since the
election and backed away from some of the harder line issues?
Definately
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
But, look, why is it so hard to believe that people
can do things for more than one reason?
Not hard at all, if that was what happened, but this war was prosecuted by
scaring the American People with images of mushroom clouds, not by telling
them it was imperative we take
Gautam wrote:
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
But, look, why is it so hard to believe that
people
can do things for more than one reason?
Not hard at all, if that was what happened, but this
war was prosecuted by
scaring the American People with images
JDG wrote:
First, Democrats will have a difficult time rebranding themselves as the
anti-government Party. After all, you have previously defined the
Democrats on this List as being the Party that favored *every*
big-government program over the past 100-or-so years over Republican
opposition.
JDG:
Nick:
I really don't mean to inflame things by asking, but would you apply
cost-
benefit analysis to abortion? Is war really so different?
No, as cost-benefit-analysis can never be used to justify an intrinsicly
evil action. For example, if cost-benefit-analysis showed that our
Nick wrote:
Certainly. The kind of collateral damage we're seeing in Iraq is
unacceptable in a police action. Police, even SWAT teams and such,
operate under very
different rules. They target only the perpetrators. They don't destroy
the infrastructure of the country. They don't replace
JDG wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure that I detect the insult here.
...he says, batting his eyelashes in an expression of feigned innocence.
And if he did so after open-mindedly considering all sides of the issue,
would you still consider him to be closed-minded on the subject for
issuing a
Zim wrote:
He is my next door neighbor. Kind of a dour guy.
Wow, any more interesting folks around?
The point is that there is no trend towards better in evolution.
Agreed, hence my regret in using better in my first post.
Natural selection is short sigthed and opportunistic. Apparent trends
JDG wrote:
Out of curiosity, why do you equate open-minded with agrees with
[you]?
Out of curiosity is it possible for you to carry on a debate without
heaving insults?
I think there is plenty of evidence that John Paul II was *very*
open-minded, he just also happened to reach different
JDG wrote:
And of course, the startling conclusion from Doug's remarks is that the
alternative to backsliding is a one-Party hegemony of the
Democrats.
More insults. Is that how they teach debate at Case Western or is it just
a bad habit you picked up on the internet?
--
Doug
On Sat, 09 Apr 2005 12:18:22 -0400, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 09:51 PM 4/5/2005 -0700, Doug wrote:
Oh, and if you looked at the individual data points would evolution go
directly from good to better to best?
What is good in the context of evolution?
Poor wording on my part. Measure of
Nick wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:40:04 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
... virtually no one
thought that inspections were working _before_ the
war.
No one? No one? What is your definition of working here? Certainly
no one saw Saddam stepping down immediately and no one thought he was
Gautam wrote:
Gee, thanks Doug (:-)), I didn't know that until I
read it on list :-( This is my first day reading the
list in weeks - I'm so overloaded with work this is
kind of my despairing gesture at ever getting it
finished...
Yea, I'm busy too, but I'm easily distracted. Especially when I
Dave wrote:
On Apr 7, 2005, at 5:36 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
And what about South Africa and India? Are they not examples of regime
changes that were accomplished without war? Today, are we open to such
possibilities, which seemed impossible to most people before they
happened?
I don't remember
Gautam wrote:
Dan, just to be fair, not fortuitous, but not
inevitable either. I think most (but not all)
historians think that Northern victory was likely,
given its resource advantage. I don't, actually, I
think it was actually very unlikely, and I think that
opinion is more common the more
Erik wrote:
* Doug Pensinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Dan wrote:
there is no empirical evidence for human rights.
I'll bet a nickle you could prove that human rights provide a more
Or perhaps you meant:
#43 Doug Nickle Los Angeles Dodgers
Age: 30
Height: 6-4
Weight: 210 lbs.
Bats: Right
Throws
Julia wrote:
It's a lovely idea. I'm not sure it was realistically possible. If it
had been, it would have been the best course of action I've seen
suggested. But I'm not sure it was.
In fact, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. I'd appreciate feedback on this by
those more in the know than I.
Dan wrote:
The question at hand originally was whether anything but invasion would
topple Hussein. It seems pretty clear to me that he would stay in power
for the foreseeable future, since 11 years of sanctions and inspections
did not push him out. At the time, if you remember, I thought that
Ronn! wrote:
Is it reflected in a statistically significant decline in immigration
rates?
I've read recently that it was, in fact, but I don't have a cite. It was
an article about how fewere professionals and students were electing to
come here.
--
Doug
Dan wrote:
there is no empirical evidence for human rights.
I'll bet a nickle you could prove that human rights provide a more
successful strategy than the lack therof. Any study that showed that well
treated, contented people were more productive than ill treated
malcontents would do it.
--
Gautam wrote:
By the way, Pedro looked good in his first start for
the mets.
Yes, he looked excellent. Let's just hope that he's
rehabbed his shoulder properly.
Hey, hey, hey, how about that Kirk Saarloos one hitting your Orioles
tonight!
Thank goodness for baseball season. Go A's!
--
Doug
Ronn! wrote:
I think that a lot of people don't want to get within a sword's length
or a shovel's length of any snake until they are sure it is dead. And
of course one problem with poking at a snake with some sort of stick or
stick-like object is that they can actually crawl up on the stick
Dan wrote:
I realize that a president neither you nor I voted for is in office.
But, I believe in standards that are superior to Dan likes or Doug
likes.
Besides Bush's actions are not your druthers, what basis can you use to
say we've gone backwards over the last four years.
I'm way to tired
Julia wrote:
I'm reminded of a conversation Dan had with some of our neighbors.
Apparently the neighborhood is heavily armed, and we're weirdos for
having
a sword collection rather than a gun collection. (Of course, the one
time
we really needed a gun, the next-door neighbor didn't have ammo
On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 22:29:59 -0700, Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Apr 2, 2005, at 10:09 PM, Doug Pensinger wrote:
I don't imagine I'd give a damn about what the Catholic Church and
their pope did except for the inordinate influence they have over so
much of the developing world
Dan wrote:
Pffft. Developing implies some sort of progress. We're backsliding.
Out of curiosity, how is that possible if you don't believe in truth?
huh?
I'm not asking a rhetorical question. I've never figured out how, on
one hand, better and worse are simply defined in terms of a given
I have mixed feelings about John Paul II's tenure. He certainly was a
major factor in the liberation of Eastern Europe, I agree with the
church's stance on the death penalty and I applauded him for opposing the
current debacle in Iraq. On the other hand I found his medieval (just an
William wrote:
And the shows are:-
The Shield
Deadwood
Lost
Battlestar Galactica
Veronica Mars
House
I watch very little TV other than sports, but I thought I'd give Deadwood
a try the other night.
Makes me sleepy just thinking about it...
--
Doug
___
Dan wrote:
For example, we can make a spot on the moon travel faster than the speed
of light. Shoot a laser at the moon and change it's angle. One can
make the bright spot travel from one side of the moon to the other in a
microsecondwhich is many times faster than the speed of light.
I noticed that the bulk of these quandries are comological in nature.
Perhaps cosmologists should shut up and calculate?
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
JDG wrote:
Where can I find out more about this? I checked your website/blog but
didn't see anyhthing there and couldn't find anything in a news search
either.
I think that you're just supposed to take his word for it that the Saudis
have a list of US Officers, and pick and choose the ones they
David Brin quoted Stefan:
*sigh.* I'd say, hell, go for it guys. Full steam ahead until you go
over a cliff. Only, them being the people in charge, they'd drag us
along with them.
Hate to say it, but with four more years of this wrecking ball of an
administration, we're in for a 1929 style
JDG wrote:
At 04:30 PM 3/13/2005 -0800, Dr. Brin wrote:
Then they invaded and occupied Iraq (a country with NO nuclear
weapons program)
Had you read carefully you might have noticed that he didn't write any of
that. His email began:
Russ Daggatt is an owner of the Seattle Supersonics who gets
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:46:35 -0600, Horn, John [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Behalf Of JDG
In recent weeks it has become clear that President Bush has
floated a trial baloon regarding lifting the current cap on
income subject to Social Security tax. Right now, income over
$100,000 is exempt from the
Dan wrote:
Our own Gautam is the recepient of a 2005 Sorros fellowship. Details
concerning this fellowship are given at
Kudos, Guatam, good job!
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Ronn! wrote:
I will get around to seeing what is on it in the next few hours, either
. . . )
So Ronn, how are the computer wars progressing?
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 05:07:58 -0500, JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 09:19 PM 2/18/2005 -0800, Doug wrote:
You mean, presuming that the next election installs a government that
restores the benefits?
If Congress raised the SS retirement age to 80, I'll flat out garuantee
you they'll get throw out
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 05:25:36 -0500, Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* Doug Pensinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So you put 12.4% of your income (to some limit), your employer matches
it and vwala! You've saved for retirement!!
Besides being wrong here about the number, the actual amount
On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 18:02:14 -0500, Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
* Doug Pensinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But you see, part of your argument is that because the money isn't
hidden away in a vault somwhere, it doesn't exist when in fact a super
majority of the people in this country
JDG wrote:
Let me put it another way.Retirement is a predictable and forseeable
problem.One can reasonably assume that as one advances in years, one
will want to continue to consume goods and services, and that one will be
either unwilling or unable to work in order to fund that
JDG wrote:
You mean, presuming that the next election installs a government that
restores the benefits?
If Congress raised the SS retirement age to 80, I'll flat out garuantee
you they'll get throw out on their collective ear. They don't even have
the balls to make some of the minor changes
Julia wrote:
So you put 12.4% of your income (to some limit), your employer matches
it and vwala! You've saved for retirement!!
Actually, you're just putting in 6.2% and your employer is matching it
for a total of 12.4%
D'oh!
--
Doug
___
JDG wrote:
Sure, the Social Security Administration has government bonds, but if
Congress were to pass a law establishing the Social Security Retirement
Age as 80, then a good portion of those bonds wouldn't be a darned
thing.
Until the next election cycle, that is.
--
Doug
Robert quoth:
Kuchner said the galaxy is becoming richer in carbon as it gets older.
It may become so carbon rich that all planets formed in the future
may be carbon planets, he said. Just wait a couple of billion
years.
On a similar note:
http://tinyurl.com/45gum
or
Chad wrote:
So you can mark down my vote as undecided as to whether or not its
unethical. In the bigger picture it generates wealth. Then again, so does
heroin sales.
If you can limit telemarketing with a no call list, why can't you regulate
spam?
--
Doug
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 20:35:21 -0500, Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In contrast with the first one, which didn'thave any action, either . .
.
I dunno why this one gets so much flak. I personally liked it.
Me too.
--
Doug
___
Ronn! wrote:
Meat tenderizer contains enzymes which are intended to break down some
of the proteins in the muscle tissue that forms the meat, thus making it
more tender. It works to break down other proteins, too, such as the
proteinaceous components of venom.
I was at a Port Canaveral, Fla.
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 19:16:34 -0600, Robert G. Seeberger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since warming Mars effectively reverts it to its past, more habitable
state, this would give any possibly dormant life on Mars the chance to
revive and develop further, she said.
And for a little extra water we could
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 09:26:46 -0500, Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A testament to American naval engineering...
The forward end of a sub is a huge tank that houses the ship's sonar
arrays. It must've acted like a water bumper, protecting the pressure
hull.
Unfortunately, this captain's
Did anyone see this incredible picture?
http://www.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=21183
The USS San Francisco, SSN 711, hit an uncharted sea mount while moving at
flank speed on the way to Australia from Guam. One crewmember died as a
result of the accident, he was thrown headlong onto a pump, and
Dave Land wrote:
No, for that, you need something like:
Wildfire
You're Havin' My Baby
Sometimes When We Touch
Damn near anything by Neil Diamond
Shiny Happy People by REM makes me want to hurt whatever is playing it.
Fortunately it does not have a tendency to stick in my head.
--
Doug
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:30:55 -0700, Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Feb 2, 2005, at 5:00 PM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
You Light Up My Life
xponent
HH Maru
rob
Skyyy-rockets in flight!
Afternoon delight!
Aaaa-aaa-afternoon delight!
Cherish is
Julia wrote:
My kids love seeing that. What they really get a kick out of is when I
have the closed captioning on to get the lyrics right and I sing
along
(We have it on CD, as well. Plus I have the original version on CD.
Remind me not to play either if Doug comes to visit)
It
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:27:45 -0600, Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Robert Seeberger wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: ADMIN: List interruption
Late
JDG wrote:
The biggest problem is what happens when the decision maker with hundreds
of billions of dollars in assets picks an investment vehicle for those
assets.Since increased demand boosts price, whomever is currently
investing in the chosen assets will probably do pretty well for
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19257-2005Jan18.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/6pqhf
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) predicted
yesterday that partisan warfare over Social Security will quickly render
President Bush's plan a dead horse and called on
JDG wrote:
There is no excess money in the system. Every dime of Social
Security taxes collected in excess of current payments is currently
being spent by
the rest of the Federal Government.
Misappropriated?
After all that spending is done, the
US Government is still borrowing on the order
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 16:41:02 +, Martin Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:35:17 -0500, Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a second source confirming this? I've always had some doubts
about
the Guardian...
The Guardian is reporting a story in the New Yorker.
John wrote:
It depends if you think that it would be wiser for the Social Security
Administration to simply put hundreds billions of dollars in vault - or
else invest hundreds of billions of dollars in equities. Is this what
you believe?
What's the problem with investing the money? What would
JDG wrote:
Well one important difference is that in the case of the former, the SSA,
by investing hundreds of billions in equities would be a pretty
influential mover of equity markets.In the case of the latter,
individualized
decision-making woudl presumably iron out those effects some.
I'd be interested in joining the chat, but I can't do it from work and the
soonest I'd be able to join in on Wednesdays is 8 PM PST. I dropped in on
one chat recently because I had the day off. Are there others besides
Trent that even might be around that late?
Doug
Erik wrote:
We need to fix the system NOW by not promising any new benefits
beyond what has already been promised . My favored way to do that was
elaborated in the PSS system suggested by Kotlikoff that I summarized
here earlier (basically, every dollar that anyone has already paid into
the SS
501 - 600 of 1541 matches
Mail list logo
