Harry Reid Shopped in Green Valley
in [Las Vegas]
|
From: jerry the jerk on 13 Aug 2010 14:11 On Aug 13 2010 9:21 AM, tom ronson wrote: > jerry the jerk wrote: > > > I post something about moronson and when he replies, I can detect that he > > is pissed and doing a slow boil. > > as usual you give yourself far too much credit -- which is not usual for > you. > > > nice to see you get pissed moronson. does my heart good. > > If it leads to a massive heart attack on your part then good --- I'm > glad to help. even if I have to fake the rage as long as you promise to > keel over dead I'd be more than okay with that. > > I still think your popularity would skyrocket if you ate a 9mm round. > why not give it a try and see? > > -- > �We wanted them (the media) to ask the questions we want to answer so > that they report the news the way we want it reported.� -- NV senatorial > candidate, Sharon Angle. > > > --tr OH...OH....It is not nice to advocate 2nd amendment remedies Mr. Moronson. JP ----� : the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
From: jerry the jerk on 13 Aug 2010 14:14 On Aug 13 2010 9:53 AM, tom ronson wrote: > octoad wrote: > > > Requiring them to give up > > that basic safety net and hand EVERYTHING over to Wall St money managers so > > they can gamble with it is just plain ridiculous. > > speaking of ridiculous --- I saw Newt Gingrich the other day bemoaning > the socialism that Obama / Reid / Pelosi are dragging us closer to every > day. He then goes on about the ending of the Bush tax cuts --- and how > that would be a disaster for everyone. He then suggested --- are you > ready for this --- that we copy China's model of zero taxes capital > gains --- because, after all, look at how well they're doing. So, Newt > is pressing communism as an option to socialism? Funny part is that > people listen to him and nod in agreement. > > I'd ask how time has absolved Newt of his egregious transgressions of > the past but it's just not worth it. > > -- > �We wanted them (the media) to ask the questions we want to answer so > that they report the news the way we want it reported.� -- NV senatorial > candidate, Sharon Angle. > > > --tr Zero capital gains is not socialism MORONSON. Just setting a rate of zero on capital gains would be a good idea. businesses and business people create jobs not the government. More investment money equals more jobs and that is what we need. not more government revenue. ____________________________________________________________________� RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
From: tom ronson on 13 Aug 2010 13:53 jerry the jerk wrote: > OH...OH....It is not nice to advocate 2nd amendment remedies Mr. Moronson. dude -- I've got potted plants smarter than you. now come back when you've got something original to offer. -- �We wanted them (the media) to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it reported.� -- NV senatorial candidate, Sharon Angle. --tr
From: octoad on 13 Aug 2010 14:23 "Kurt Ullman" <kurtullman(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:T_ednUSfSrdm5_jRnZ2dnUVZ_tKdnZ2d(a)earthlink.com... > In article <i43s6u03er(a)news4.newsguy.com>, "octoad" <davko58(a)sonic.net> > wrote: > >> >> >> And what happens when you have a stroke at age 50 and have to retire? >> What >> if the Dow is at 6500 like it was a couple of years ago when you have to >> start taking money out to live on? What if the bond market goes in the >> tank >> for 5 years? What happens to the people who have little or nothing when >> they hit retirement age because the various markets have all seen steep >> multi-year declines in the years before they retire? > If youhave a stroke and have to retire, you go on SS disability > which is a whole other kettle of fish. Not if Social Security no longer exists, you don't. > You take out what you need while the market recovers over a few > years. In other words you drain your account prematurely, quite possibly leaving you with little or nothing in the future. And what if the market doesn't recover, or recovers 15 years later? > You don't all of a sudden take out all of your SS when you retire > so why is this even a major argument for SS-personal? Probably the > single dumbest argument, to my mind anyway. You CANT take out all your SS when you retire; you are guaranteed checks of a certain amount every month until you die. But in this silly "privatized" world, if the markets tank and your account is drastically shrunk, you may have to take out what's left just to live on, and then what? >> Look, old people need a basic safety net they can count on so they all >> aren't wandering the streets in their bathrobes dumpster diving. Sure, >> most people risk some retirement money in the markets already, but they >> know >> they can at least buy food and pay rent on a cheap apartment if they lose >> that money because they can count on a SS check. Requiring them to give >> up >> that basic safety net and hand EVERYTHING over to Wall St money managers >> so >> they can gamble with it is just plain ridiculous. > Of course, none of the suggestions that have actually made it to even > marginal consideration do that. All that I have seen from the grown-ups > all say they are voluntary, they only are to include a part of your SS. I guess Walt is a child then. He is suggesting ending SS and having everyone put their money into either stocks (wildly risky), precious metals (even more risky), bonds (risky), or so called "safe" investments (I assume bank accounts, T-bills, money market funds), none of which could ever possibly earn you enough money to retire on because of their low returns. I remain amazed, after all that has happened in the last three years, after all the stories, all the crimes, the shenanigans, the leverage, the incredibly complex financial "innovations", the advent of high frequency trading, the hedge fund manipulation, and the Great Recession which was directly caused by Wall St firms failing or threatening to fail, that anyone has more confidence in their integrity and ability to provide safe, steady returns in the future than they do in the admittedly flawed Social Security system. O O
From: tom ronson on 13 Aug 2010 14:46
octoad wrote: > precious metals (even more risky) what? what are you saying? I was listening to Glen Bleck the other day who was telling me about secure investing with a company called Goldline. Are you telling me I may have screwed myself? I sure hope not. -- �We wanted them (the media) to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it reported.� -- NV senatorial candidate, Sharon Angle. --tr |