Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by taxwonk
And I'm advocating going to a true welfare system, regardless of the issues. Social security is little more than inadequate welfare for poor retirees and ridiculous welfare for wealthy retirees now.

We have got to means test for Medicare, too.

You do know that Dems are against this?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by taxwonk
My research tends to show that over a thirty-year cycle, short-term cash-equivalents, money-market funds, bonds, and equities all tend to return about 3-4% real income. So, unless you have some assclowns trying to time the market for thirty years, or writing naked calls with their retirement accounts, on balance most people will be okay.

And I'm advocating going to a true welfare system, regardless of the issues. Social security is little more than inadequate welfare for poor retirees and ridiculous welfare for wealthy retirees now.

The problem with the system in paragraph 1 is the "most people", since those who are not "most" will likely end up needing to be supported somewhere. The portion of these financial costs born by the government has to be factored in, and the social costs have to be considered.

The problem with paragraph 2 is practical - you'll lose public support.

[sgtclub]

Charles Duelfer told the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this month he could not rule out Saddam's transfer of Iraqi missiles and weapons of mass destruction to Syria.

Duelfer, an adviser to the CIA, said at the Oct. 6 hearing that a large amount of material had been transferred by Iraq to Syria before the March 2003 war.

"A lot of materials left Iraq and went to Syria," Duelfer said. "There was certainly a lot of traffic across the border points. We've got a lot of data to support that, including people discussing it. But whether in fact in any of these trucks there was WMD-related materials, I cannot say."

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Not Me
We have got to means test for Medicare, too.

You do know that Dems are against this?

Wonk, it's looking like we may need to send you to the reeducation camp. Warning: its been kind of crowded since Ty starting considering his foreign tax position.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by Not Me
I thought that was an odd one, too, since women are more likely to wear something sexy to attract their partner than a guy is. I have never been with a guy who tried to wear something sexy for me. What would that be anyhow (other than a loofah mit)?

I have had several guys profess to have worn something sexy for me. In one case it was a pair of jeans, which he judged to be sexier than his usual nasty cargos. They were, in fact, sexier, though the intent was not obvious to me without explanation. Another guy put on a real shirt instead of his usual T-shirt. Another dyed his hair Billy Idol blond (why he considered this sexy I haven't figured out yet, though it did sort of grow on me). I've noticed that the Mr. wears colors other than black, navy and brown when hoping to attract my attention, like a bird. When he pulls out the pink tie, I know I am getting some.

In other words, the difference may be that guys have a lower threshhold for what constitutes "wearing something sexy" for a romantic partner.

And FWIW, though I am deeply impressed with your analysis of this statistic, in my marriage I am the comparatiave right-winger. The Mr. routinely calls me a fascist, and I routinely call him a pinko. In other ways you are right, though - I generally dress better and make more money.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
My research tends to show that over a thirty-year cycle, short-term cash-equivalents, money-market funds, bonds, and equities all tend to return about 3-4% real income. So, unless you have some assclowns trying to time the market for thirty years, or writing naked calls with their retirement accounts, on balance most people will be okay.

And I'm advocating going to a true welfare system, regardless of the issues. Social security is little more than inadequate welfare for poor retirees and ridiculous welfare for wealthy retirees now.

Short-term cash equivalents return 3-4% real interest? That surprises me, to the extent that I don't think I can believe it without seeing backup.

If SS becomes a pure welfare for old people system, it's no longer social security. If you are moving to this, why even bother having the forced savings? Especially if people can invest in whatever they want?

ETA who is going to administer the accounts? What a fucking recordkeeper nightmare. And what do they get invested in? Making it anything on the market complicates the recordkeeoping hugely, but there will be so much money that having a group of mutual funds probably won't work.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by sgtclub

Told you so.

Here is what else I am telling you. If Kerrey wins, he will make a premature withdrawal out of Iraq and we will see more terrorist attacks on US soil because Iraq=flypaper.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by taxwonk
And I'm advocating going to a true welfare system, regardless of the issues. Social security is little more than inadequate welfare for poor retirees and ridiculous welfare for wealthy retirees now.

2. (Or, with NotMe, 3.)

On Medicare, I have long advocated abolishing it entirely and replacing it with 100% federal funding of healthcare for minors. Poor oldsters can qualify for Medicaid along with everyone else.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
I have had several guys profess to have worn something sexy for me. In one case it was a pair of jeans, which he judged to be sexier than his usual nasty cargos. They were, in fact, sexier, though the intent was not obvious to me without explanation. Another guy put on a real shirt instead of his usual T-shirt. Another dyed his hair Billy Idol blond (why he considered this sexy I haven't figured out yet, though it did sort of grow on me). I've noticed that the Mr. wears colors other than black, navy and brown when hoping to attract my attention, like a bird. When he pulls out the pink tie, I know I am getting some.

In other words, the difference may be that guys have a lower threshhold for what constitutes "wearing something sexy" for a romantic partner.

And FWIW, though I am deeply impressed with your analysis of this statistic, in my marriage I am the comparatiave right-winger. The Mr. routinely calls me a fascist, and I routinely call him a pinko. In other ways you are right, though - I generally dress better and make more money.

Aha! Now I can say I've dressed in something sexy for my wife! I hadn't realized this before your post.

Some other examples: I often wear something she has recently bought me over and over - she finds this very cute. Whether it is a sweater, a shirt, or what have you, it works.

As you point out, however, I suspect there are men out there who consider basic personal hygene going out of their way for their lover. And, in some cases, it may be.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic

In other words, the difference may be that guys have a lower threshhold for what constitutes "wearing something sexy" for a romantic partner.

I got a guy once to stop wearing tighty whiteys. That probably counts in his mind as wearing something sexy for me.

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
in my marriage I am the comparatiave right-winger.

I am the left-winger in mine. My DH drives an SUV (which I keyed once, but he doesn't know it was me).

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
2. (Or, with NotMe, 3.)

On Medicare, I have long advocated abolishing it entirely and replacing it with 100% federal funding of healthcare for minors. Poor oldsters can qualify for Medicaid along with everyone else.

Despite the increase in the uninsured, most of "everyone else" is covered by employer-sponsored group healthcare so equating oldsters with the general, non-Medicare eligible population is not really possible.

I'm kind of OK with getting rid of Medicare and expanding the fuck out of Medicaid because really, I think that everyone should have to spend down their assets before they die anyway. To hell with this inheritance thing. No transferring money to the kids to qualify for Medicaid, either. Clawbacks, baby.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

lover

Do you use that word IRL or did you just use it to squik me out?

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
I am the left-winger in mine. My DH drives an SUV (which I keyed once, but he doesn't know it was me).

In context, this is the funniest thing I've read or heard in several days. Thank you.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Not Me
I am the left-winger in mine.

Okay, I'm picturing him now with a shaved head and swatiskas.

In a relative sense, of course.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
I have had several guys profess to have worn something sexy for me.

I usually straighten my tie when I see you're posting. Is that the same?