Conservative Politics & Daily Events Discussion

and more from the same interview:

"You raised yourself the important issue of what states have done, many of them have done it to themselves with their pension programs. There’s not going to be any desire on the Republican side to bail out state pensions by borrowing money from future generations," McConnell said, after Hewitt floated Illinois, California and Connecticut as examples of states that have overly generous benefits for public employees.

"We’ll certainly insist that anything we’d borrow to send down to the states is not spent on solving problems that they created for themselves over the years with their pension program," McConnell added.

I personally couldn't agree more - I don't think it is even close to appropriate for States to try to take advantage of the crisis and federal funding intended to deal with the crisis to bail out preexisting financial problems the States have created for themselves

As a side note - no place in this interview do I hear Mitch say he is against Federal aid for States for issues that are coronavirus related - - but that is what the media sure makes it sound like

Quote from Bill Martin

Bro - we are on the same team on this one - I don’t know how we get out of this unprecedented mess. Both parties are still playing politics BUT - do you think all the billions of dollars the Democrats want to spend money on right other that jump starting the economy NOW is good for the country??

No I don't. I also don't have access to every matrix needed to figure that out. I'm not sure anyone does.

Quote from Edward Neal

I Really didn't think much of it when I heard it - seemed very reasonable, , but to hear the media this morning you would have thought Mitch wanted to tell the States to suck an egg and die

.....

.

Quote from Edward Neal

and more from the same interview:

"You raised yourself the important issue of what states have done, many of them have done it to themselves with their pension programs. There’s not going to be any desire on the Republican side to bail out state pensions by borrowing money from future generations," McConnell said, after Hewitt floated Illinois, California and Connecticut as examples of states that have overly generous benefits for public employees.

"We’ll certainly insist that anything we’d borrow to send down to the states is not spent on solving problems that they created for themselves over the years with their pension program," McConnell added.

I personally couldn't agree more - I don't think it is even close to appropriate for States to try to take advantage of the crisis and federal funding intended to deal with the crisis to bail out preexisting financial problems the States have created for themselves

As a side note - no place in this interview do I hear Mitch say he is against Federal aid for States for issues that are coronavirus related - - but that is what the media sure makes it sound like

Display More

It is that Mitch implies any more money asked for that is said to be intended for Covid, is B.S. and the "blue state's" just want to save their economies from prior failings.

Here is what got the media, left and frankly some on the right mad.

His office labeled the transcript, "...Blue State Bailouts".

Sounds like partisan politics, maybe even choosing division over coming together...

Quote from Edward Neal

just a moment of thought

If in this time of a worldwide pandemic a persons first thought is to try to find something to bring down Trump or to use against him then I think that person is not worthy of being called human - In times like these if you choose division over coming together what value are you to the rest of humanity?

What value then does Mitch have?

You defend Trump here, but what if Trump were to be the one sowing division? Would he be of any value to the rest of humanity? For you, does his EVERY divisive statement in the last 3 months count as "defending himself, not sowing division"?

Quote from Bill Martin

I dunno about matrixes but you can sure see all the billions of dollars the Dems want to spend in Orangeman s previous post. If you can justify any of that facing what we are facing - please elaborate on THAT matrix

I could simply say they all seem unimportant. Many think all regulations are unimportant. The problem is, that type of shallow thinking doesn't help anyone. Each of those items have a list of variables, ripple effects... that without a deeper understanding of which could cause an action one way or the other to be catastrophic.

What if the Kennedy Center is actually a clandestine cover for some very important programs that very few know about, but saves millions of Americans annually or kills 1000's of enemies?

Quote from WOLF

Each of those items have a list of variables, ripple effects... that without a deeper understanding of which could cause an action one way or the other to be catastrophic.

What if the Kennedy Center is actually a clandestine cover for some very important programs that very few know about, but saves millions of Americans annually or kills 1000's of enemies?

....

............Skillfully done .....

.....

.

Quote from WOLF

It is that Mitch implies any more money asked for that is said to be intended for Covid, is B.S. and the "blue state's" just want to save their economies from prior failings.

Here is what got the media, left and frankly some on the right mad.

His office labeled the transcript, "...Blue State Bailouts".

Sounds like partisan politics, maybe even choosing division over coming together...

What value then does Mitch have?

You defend Trump here, but what if Trump were to be the one sowing division? Would he be of any value to the rest of humanity? For you, does his EVERY divisive statement in the last 3 months count as "defending himself, not sowing division"?

Display More

I dont know what his office released - or what they might have added or not added - - I only listened to what He actually said - - - -

I also dont think Corona Virus bail out money should be used to fix blue state underfunded pensions - - If I could vote for it government employee pensions would be 100% employee funded 401(k) plans with no other funding coming out of tax payers pockets - - I think it should be a crime to take tax money from a working american to provide a benefit to a government employee when that worker does not even get that benefit for himself

Please dont get me wrong - I dont blame the government employee for taking everything he can get - - I blame the American people for letting it happen - - - Government Employee Unions should not be allowed to exist - Government Employees already have all of the protections of the government that actually makes the laws protecting workers - the only reason for the existence of Unions for government employees is so they can extort more tax dollars.

Quote from Edward Neal

I dont know what his office released - or what they might have added or not added - - I only listened to what He actually said - - - -

I also dont think Corona Virus bail out money should be used to fix blue state underfunded pensions - - If I could vote for it government employee pensions would be 100% employee funded 401(k) plans with no other funding coming out of tax payers pockets - - I think it should be a crime to take tax money from a working american to provide a benefit to a government employee when that worker does not even get that benefit for himself

Please dont get me wrong - I dont blame the government employee for taking everything he can get - - I blame the American people for letting it happen - - - Government Employee Unions should not be allowed to exist - Government Employees already have all of the protections of the government that actually makes the laws protecting workers - the only reason for the existence of Unions for government employees is so they can extort more tax dollars.

The majority of "employee funded 401k plans" have employer matching contributions. Government Employees do fund their pensions, contrary to your narrative. A government pension is managed and guaranteed by the government as opposed to a 401k, where the market crashes and you retire broke. The problem that arose with some Government pensions which were usually over 100% funded, is that certain governments screwed up the management, stole from the pension program, reallocated funds...When the City/State came on hard times they blamed the pensions, the union wages...Everything except their own incompetence, greed or lies.

Government union dues- legalized money laundering to the DNC.

Quote from WOLF

The majority of "employee funded 401k plans" have employer matching contributions. Government Employees do fund their pensions, contrary to your narrative. A government pension is managed and guaranteed by the government as opposed to a 401k, where the market crashes and you retire broke. The problem that arose with some Government pensions which were usually over 100% funded, is that certain governments screwed up the management, stole from the pension program, reallocated funds...When the City/State came on hard times they blamed the pensions, the union wages...Everything except their own incompetence, greed or lies.

The big problem is that the majority of non union employees work for employers that dont even have 401(k) Plans - so your majority that provide a match is a majority of a very small minority - -in 2012 the last year I have figures for only 14% of of Companies in the US offer a 401(k) plan and only 4% offered defined benefit plans down from 17% back before they got regulated to death

Also the one of the most popular matchs given these days is a "safe harbor" match - the employers give this because it removes testing requirements and allows the "highly compensated participants" to contribute up to the legal max regardless of how much the EE's contribute - they dont do this because they are generous they do it to avoid the testing and the limits it would impose of the bosses and their contributions - - - - -also just so you know the Enhanced Safe Harbor Match that most plans that match give is capped at 4% of pay so even if an employee making $60,000 a year contributed the 19,000 maximum allowed for an employee under 50 years old for 2019 the MAX match would be 4% of 60,000 or $2,400 - - - not really comparable to what you get is it?

the actually most popular match is a 50% up to 6%of pay which equals 3% so would be even less on top of this Employers are notorious for suspending their match every time there is any economic downturn

This is what I have done for a living for over 30 years and I can tell you that the vast majority of employers that put in qualified retirement plans what those plans designed to maximize what the owners get while giving as little as legally possible to the rank and file employees - - seriously in all of my years perhaps 2 maybe 3 of the plans we installed whose Legal documents I drafted were actually designed because the boss wanted to give something to his employees

Yes - its a sad fact - the vast majority of American workers have no employer provided retirement plan whatsoever - - yet these same people are forced to pay for the retirement of the government workers that are supposed to work for them - how can anyone think that is morally right and just??

At last ... NANCY finally came out in her true robber/ bandit form. Robbing the American tax payers for what 30+ years now?

Quote from Edward Neal

The big problem is that the majority of non union employees work for employers that dont even have 401(k) Plans - so your majority that provide a match is a majority of a very small minority - -in 2012 the last year I have figures for only 14% of of Companies in the US offer a 401(k) plan and only 4% offered defined benefit plans down from 17% back before they got regulated to death

Also the one of the most popular matchs given these days is a "safe harbor" match - the employers give this because it removes testing requirements and allows the "highly compensated participants" to contribute up to the legal max regardless of how much the EE's contribute - they dont do this because they are generous they do it to avoid the testing and the limits it would impose of the bosses and their contributions - - - - -also just so you know the Enhanced Safe Harbor Match that most plans that match give is capped at 4% of pay so even if an employee making $60,000 a year contributed the 19,000 maximum allowed for an employee under 50 years old for 2019 the MAX match would be 4% of 60,000 or $2,400 - - - not really comparable to what you get is it?

the actually most popular match is a 50% up to 6%of pay which equals 3% so would be even less on top of this Employers are notorious for suspending their match every time there is any economic downturn

This is what I have done for a living for over 30 years and I can tell you that the vast majority of employers that put in qualified retirement plans what those plans designed to maximize what the owners get while giving as little as legally possible to the rank and file employees - - seriously in all of my years perhaps 2 maybe 3 of the plans we installed whose Legal documents I drafted were actually designed because the boss wanted to give something to his employees

Yes - its a sad fact - the vast majority of American workers have no employer provided retirement plan whatsoever - - yet these same people are forced to pay for the retirement of the government workers that are supposed to work for them - how can anyone think that is morally right and just??

Display More

It is similar to County new hires who are on 401(a) plans. I'm still trying to track down my pension info.

Quote from WOLF

It is similar to County new hires who are on 401(a) plans. I'm still trying to track down my pension info.

yes, but like I said only 14% of employers have any retirement plan - - yet all of the employees of the 86% of employers that have no employer retirement plan are asked to pay for yours?

And if federal coronavrius bailout money were to be used by States to fund their underfunded plans for Government employees then people who are not even in that state would be taxed to provide that money?

Seriously you dont see something wrong with that? - - some guy in some other state who doesnt even have retirement being asked to pay for yours? - - - if it came up for a vote would you actually vote to be taxed to pay for someone else's retirement if you employer didnt have one for you???

This is the problem with Government Employee Unions - - government employees work for the people - yet the Unions dont have to negotiate with the people who have to come up with the $$ - - they negotiate with other higher up Government employees who know they dont personally have to come up with the money - - - how can any fair terms be agreed upon when the people who's money is going to be used are excluded from the process - - Government Employee Unions are a fraud they extort tax dollars from people without ever getting the people involved in the process

I think its great that you can have great benefits - I dont think is great that people with no benefits have to pay for yours - - that is just wrong

Quote from Edward Neal

If I could vote for it government employee pensions would be 100% employee funded 401(k) plans with no other funding coming out of tax payers pockets - -

Yeah, I agree with this in principle... however California politicians made it a law that I had to join a union in order to work as a teacher. The California Teacher's Assn (CTA) took over $30,000 from me over my career - and they used much of it to fund the campaigns of leftist Democrats so hideous that I wouldn't deign to pee on them if they were on fire.

If I had that $30K invested reasonably - plus the far greater sum that I contributed to my own retirement (exclusive of the matching pension funds) - I would indeed be well off and probably not have to be working today.

There are MANY ways for the corrupt politicians and union bosses to tip the scale in their favor!

Quote from Bill Martin

I know you live close to Detroit - I believe they filed the biggest Chapter 9 bankruptcy in 2013. Government pensions were unsustainable What say you??

The Mayor in office when that happened is in prison in Texas for embezzlement.

Quote from Edward Neal

yes, but like I said only 14% of employers have any retirement plan - - yet all of the employees of the 86% of employers that have no employer retirement plan are asked to pay for yours?

And if federal coronavrius bailout money were to be used by States to fund their underfunded plans for Government employees then people who are not even in that state would be taxed to provide that money?

Seriously you dont see something wrong with that? - - some guy in some other state who doesnt even have retirement being asked to pay for yours? - - - if it came up for a vote would you actually vote to be taxed to pay for someone else's retirement if you employer didnt have one for you???

This is the problem with Government Employee Unions - - government employees work for the people - yet the Unions dont have to negotiate with the people who have to come up with the $$ - - they negotiate with other higher up Government employees who know they dont personally have to come up with the money - - - how can any fair terms be agreed upon when the people who's money is going to be used are excluded from the process - - Government Employee Unions are a fraud they extort tax dollars from people without ever getting the people involved in the process

I think its great that you can have great benefits - I dont think is great that people with no benefits have to pay for yours - - that is just wrong

Display More

We government union employees make 2/3rds what our positions make in the private sector. We take that concession in exchange for health, dental, decent retirement, job security and the pride of public service.

When I was in the Army I was guaranteed a government pension, the ones you dislike so much. So unfair!

Teachers who could make almost double at a private school, yet choose to serve the community in exchange for a decent "unfair" government retirement plan.

Police and Firefighters who risk their lives daily in jobs that's wages would be laughable in the private sector, if such private jobs existed also get that "unfair" government retirement plan.

I didn't peg you as the guy that would say "fuck all those guys", but you kinda did.

My wages our paid by the gas tax. I'm not tax exempt, thus I contribute a second time to my retirement by buying gas that's tax pays for the Counties contribution to my retirement.

Be sure to apply your "guys without pay for those with and how unfair it is" to cars, motorcycles, meat, dairy, credit cards, banking....because that employer contribution doesn't come from the employer it comes from customers.

As daddy always said, "Life isn't fair sweetheart. ".