Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
Open thread 8/24
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted Aug. 24, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
164 Comments
Wow, them protesters are getting positively. . .emphatic!:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/democratic_mob_censures_bush_in
Nerds against the war!
If the Republicans lose the nerds, who will stand by them now?
The Republicans must be sleeping off their hangovers this AM.
>>>> THE STAGES OF SUCCESS:At age 4 success is . . not peeing in your pants.At age 12 success is . . having friends..At age 16 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 20 success is . . having sex.At age 35 success is . . having money.At age 50 success is . . having money.At age 60 success is . . having sex.At age 70 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 75 success is . . having friends.At age 80 success is . . not peeing in your pants.Posted by: LightenUp<<<<
Copied from yesterday’s Opinion Line….. I thought it was worth re-posting!
>>>> THE STAGES OF SUCCESS:At age 4 success is . . not peeing in your pants.At age 12 success is . . having friends..At age 16 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 20 success is . . having sex.At age 35 success is . . having money.At age 50 success is . . having money.At age 60 success is . . having sex.At age 70 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 75 success is . . having friends.At age 80 success is . . not peeing in your pants.Posted by: LightenUp<<<<
Copied from yesterday’s Opinion Line….. I thought it was worth re-posting!
>>>> THE STAGES OF SUCCESS:At age 4 success is . . not peeing in your pants.At age 12 success is . . having friends..At age 16 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 20 success is . . having sex.At age 35 success is . . having money.At age 50 success is . . having money.At age 60 success is . . having sex.At age 70 success is . . having a drivers license.At age 75 success is . . having friends.At age 80 success is . . not peeing in your pants.Posted by: LightenUp<<<<
Copied from yesterday’s Opinion Line….. I thought it was worth re-posting!
in triplicate even…. sorry, don’t know why it did that!
I truly wish that I’d have recorded the Christiane Ammanpour report on CNN “God’s Warriors” It was very good. Unfortunately, I think she left a lot out.
And too bad the ones who should have been watching it were the ones watching Faux News.
A NEW REPUBLICAN SCHEME!!!
The Republicans are getting desparate and dangerous again. They are scheming and poltting to try to steal the 2008 Presidential election. How are they doing this? Right now the Republicans are trying to force a change in California law that would require California to award its electorial college votes on the basis of which candidate wins each congressional district instead of the winner takes all system that California and all but one other state use now. If this were in place during the last election, Bush would have won 22 of the states EC votes. We have to STOP this and let the lame brain Republicans know that their days of stealing elections in this country are OVER! They say that such a scheme is “fair” but I don’t see them trying to put it in place nationwide because they would LOSE even worse under such a system! And it would give state legislatures- which are notorious for corruption- alot of say in Presidential electorial politics because they draw Congressional district lines. Look what the Republicans did in Texas! They drew all the Democrats off the map! In my view the best system for electing a President would be to have a primary and, if a candidate got 50% plus one, that candidate would be elected President. If no candidate got 50%, a run off between the top 2 candidates would determine the winner.
P_Mom,I spent the last 3 evenings watching God’s Warriors and you’re right; it was great. My wife is still raving about it. I think Christiane Ammanpour did a stellar job.
Looks like some good old “Christian” marriage counseling here!
Bishop charged with attacking evangelist wife
By D. AILEEN DODD, SAEED AHMEDThe Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 08/22/07Juanita Bynum, the fiery national evangelist whose sermons empower women to walk away from dead-end relationships, is suffering some man trouble of her own.
Her estranged husband, Thomas W. Weeks has been charged with felony aggravated assault and making terrorist threats after he allegedly struck her in a hotel parking lot.
Juanita Bynum, shown preaching at Megafest 2006, reportedly was attempting to reconcile with her estranged husband Wednesday when he attacked her in a hotel parking lot.Weeks, a 54-year-old bishop who shares an international ministry with his wife, is expected to turn himself in to Atlanta police Friday, his lawyer said.
Police said Bynum, 48, has been whisked away by family as they decide what to do next.
Bynum and Weeks are co-founders of Global Destiny Church in Duluth. They were married in 2002 in a lavish televised wedding that featured a 7.76-carat diamond ring. They separated three months ago, said Bynum’s sister, Tina Culpepper.
According to an Atlanta police incident report, Bynum said her husband “choked her, pushed her down, kicked and stomped her.”
She told police Weeks “continued stomping” her into the ground until a hotel bell man pulled him away. Police also said Weeks threatened Bynum’s life.
Culpepper said the couple was meeting for dinner at Concorde Grill in the Renaissance Concourse Hotel near Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport Tuesday night.
Police said the couple had met to work out their differences. Things soured, and Weeks walked out to the parking lot about 10:30 p.m., police said. He then turned back around and attacked her, said Officer Ron Campbell.
Weeks also threatened Bynum’s life during the attack, police said. “Anytime you tell a person, ‘I’m going to kill you,’ that moves it up to a felony,” Campbell said.
The bruises found on Bynum also were serious enough to bring felony aggravated assault charges against Weeks.
In a comment posted on her MySpace page, the Pentecostal evangelist said, “I am currently recovering from all of my injuries and resting well … this too shall pass.”
Her publicist, Amy Malone, said Bynum wants to keep the matter private.
“People are interpreting it to mean the two of them were fighting,” Malone said. “They were not fighting. She was assaulted.”
Bynum’s husband has retained two lawyers: famed defense attorney Ed Garland to represent him in the criminal case; and Louis Tesser, to take care of the domestic matter.
Garland has in the past represented NFL star Ray Lewis in his murder trial and millionaire James Sullivan, who ordered the murder of his socialite wife.
“He very much regrets what happened and said he’s sorry for what it’s worth,” Tesser said Thursday night.
Weeks loves his wife, Tesser said, and “he hopes he doesn’t wind up getting a divorce.”
The couple had a home in Duluth, Culpepper said. Upon their separation, Bynum moved to Waycross, where her administrative offices are located.
Members of a Georgia non-profit group, Love for All People, were working late Thursday to hire two bodyguards to protect Bynum. Culpepper said Bynum was appreciative but that it would not be necessary.
Word of the public fight spread to clergy across metro Atlanta who have either met the couple or know of them.
“I am just tremendously grieved,” said the Rev. Cynthia L. Hale, pastor of Ray of Hope Christian Church in Decatur. “Juanita Bynum is a prophetess. She has been a very faithful and productive member of the ministerial group here in Atlanta and across the nation.”
News of the attack against Bynum upset some of her followers in metro Atlanta. Radios and television stations carried comment on the incident.
“I was disturbed,” said Joy Rollins of Mableton, an events planner who has cassettes of Bynum’s sermons. “They are going around teaching folks … and something like this is going on. I never thought anything like this would happen to her. She is a fireball.”
Vaughn,
I enjoyed your gifted education post and link. I just returned from a high-country camping trip in Colorado, so I read it belatedly.
Under traditional mass-education principles, there aren’t any good solutions to the problem of gifted children’s being undereducated. Skipping grades is perhaps better than forcing a child to stay “in grade”, but even so, a gifted 11 year old is not the same as a normal 14 year old. What is really needed is hundreds of Davidson Academies, where gifted kids can be among other gifted kids of their own age, and be taught by gifted instructors, and not have to move to Reno, Nevada.
Wichita is communally antipathetic to intellect cultivation. Your daughters maximized Northeast Magnet’s offerings, including taking courses at WSU. I’ll bet they didn’t take 6 AP-courses (or WSU equivalents), which is the minimum required for graduation at The Preuss School in California, whose admission requirements include: no parent or legal guardian has a college degree (the actual median parental educational level is no high school attendance) and poverty or near-poverty, as demonstrated by eligibility for a federal lunch subsidy. Wichita has no KIPP or Teach for America school, which are putting black kids who start out 6th grade with 3rd-grade reading skills, into college at 90+% rates.
In the “academic magnet” International Baccalaureate program at East Wichita High, students take a maximum of THREE college-creditable “Higher Level” courses, unless they atttend WSU in summer. The College Board’s AP program offers THIRTY-SEVEN college-course-creditable courses. Magnet public academic high schools in Tulsa and Oklahoma City offer over 20 of them, with their gifted students often taking 5 or more of them, and a few seniors graduating with 8 or 9.
KU offers two semesters of regular English comp credit for IB HL English. Students only have to take one (third) semester of English to graduate. Sounds good. Until you discover that KU offers 3 THREE semesters of English credit—including credit for two semesters of HONORS, not regular, English—to AP English Literature students. East High’s Higher Level Physics course is algebra/trignonometry based traditional 12th grade physics. Not creditable for physical science and engineering majors, as AP’s two calculus-requiring physics courses are.
It’s not that we don’t have kids who would love to be challenged, but we have an under-achievement-promoting educational system, the “tyranny of low expectations”.
The university in Boulder, Colorado is offering courses in nanotechnology which are feeding graduates into a new nanotech industry. Here we get an arena, and we almost got dog-track slot machines. Boulder is enlarging its bring-in-outside-world-dollars strategy, Wichita has a drizzle limited community dollars to outside parties, and functionally impoverish the community.
I attended a Visioneering meeting in which a speaker said WSU has to promote itself better to outsiders and people were enthralled. But how do you do a better job of “selling” a 4th tier (bottom tier, US News and World Report) university to the outside world?
Vick kills dogs. He pits them together to the death, strangles them and stabs them to death. He should be able to play, according to the president of the Atlanta NAACP, NFL football again.
“As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football,” said R.L. White, president of the NAACP’s Atlanta chapter.http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2986382&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines
Don Imus said “Nappy headed hoe” and should never work again.
Outstanding double standard White. Racist much?
As long as Al Davis is living, Michael Vick will have a career option with the Oakland Raiders.
Heck, O.J. Simpson would be starting for Oakland if he hadn’t lost a step.
If you have a criminal record and have ever SEEN a football, you can play for Oakland. You can get a waiver on the football if you need to.
I really don’t see the NFL letting him play again. Only hope would be that after the 2 season layoff, if the sheeple have forgotten, then… maybe.
“If you have a criminal record and have ever SEEN a football, you can play for Oakland. You can get a waiver on the football if you need to.
I really don’t see the NFL letting him play again. Only hope would be that after the 2 season layoff, if the sheeple have forgotten, then… maybe. ”
Canada may be an option. They often take players that NFL teams don’t want anymore.
I think he should be dropped in a pit with 10 pit bulls trained to fight. When/if he makes it out, he can do as he pleases.
Though what I am believing about what has happen to the Republican party and this country boarders on a conspiracy theory. I am reading a book titled “WHERE THE RIGHT WENT WRONG, How Neoconservatives subverted the Reagan Revolution and hijacked the Bush Presidency”. I almost did not read it, I had bought it some time ago and it is written by Patrick Buchanan whom I have considered on the fringe of the extreme right. Being a moderate they tend to say things that do not make a lot of sense.But this is a must read for everyone that loves this country, whether you are a Republican, Democrat or do not care whom is in offices. It really is not about the party as much as about the country which is more important!
In part of it, Iraq is just a beginning of the great intent and these Neoconservatives are willing to sacrifice this country for their goals. In this book is something that some will use as a weapon like what party was pro slavery during the Civil war. The original Neo-Cons are from the Democratic party! Their are Socialists, Communists, liberals and leftists. Irving Kristol a Trotskyite, is one of the founding fathers of the Neo-con movement.
Buchanan can hardly be called a liberal! It often amazes me how open this all is and yet barely noticed!People this country has far worst troubles than a bunch of Moslem extremists using terror tactics to attack the Great Satan! Please hold judgment till you have read the book or did some research on the subject.BTW, Ed going to love this, in part he is right! The Neo-cons want to start a war in the middle east with Israel and the United States declaring war on the entire middle east! The masterminds of this is Richard Peale, Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfield and Dick Cheney among other notables and familiar names.
WHERE THE RIGHT WENT WRONG, outlines who these Neoconservatives are, how they were able to gain access to the White House and used the Republican party to do it. America’s worst nightmares may very well becoming true. If it is not too late already….
Mind yourself Writerdog, lest you be accused of ANTI-SEMITISM by the usual suspects. :)
“Canada may be an option. They often take players that NFL teams don’t want anymore.
Posted by: Kev | August 24, 2007 at 08:38 AM ”
Unfortunately, a person with a criminal conviction cannot get ito Canada.
As for the Vick case, its this simple. He is a multimillionaire and a role model for those that live in a similar situation that he rose from. His stupidity of not disassociating himself from those that did not have his best interest at heart came back to bite him.(no pun intended)
He needs to serve his time quietly and pay his debt to society. I do not condone his actions in any way. But when Lindsay Lohan gets caught with cocaine while driving drunk and gets sentenced to one day in jail, and Nicole Ritchie is convicted of drunk driving and serves 2 hours, what are we telling our children? Drugs and drunk driving are ok, but dog fighting is unacceptable. Again for those that lack comprehension skills, I do not condone Mr. Vicks activities. Just looking at the whole picture, not a slanted one.
And by the way, Don Imus signed a new contract with ABC Radio in New York last week. He will work again, may not be as public as he was before, but he is working.
writerdog
Rumsfeld and Cheney= Neo Cons?????
After reading the Social Security posts yesterday, I’m a little confused.
Some were arguing for spousal benefits for gays. Some were arguing for survivor benefits for men, when their wives die. (No children involved, just benefits for the surviving spouse)
Why would a surviving spouse be owed ANY benefits from their spouse’s Social Security?
You are implying that the surviving spouse has some OWNERSHIP of the Social Security of the deceased spouse. Why would that be the case?
Some of you are against partial privatization of Social Security, which would provide ownership.
Partial privatization would allow for ANYONE so designated by the will of the deceased person (surviving spouse, surviving gay partner, other heirs) to receive the deceased person’s owned private portion of Social Security.
At the same time, it would provide more fairness in Social Security. You get to keep some of your own money. You get to transfer some of your own money to your survivors when you die.
You really trust the Government to take care of you better than you can yourself?
Not only are you anti-semitic, Jonas, you’re a Nazi.
Your very name refers to a racist and anti-semitic screed in which Nazi fascism “saves” the US from non-whites.
I hope your mom’s basement didn’t get wet from this morning’s rain. Isn’t it time for her to bring you more cheetos and grape Nehi?
Mike: I notice you said it carefully because if didn’t, you will be shouted down and called bad names. You may anyway.
But personally, I think it takes courage to speak against the lack of discussion and easy condemnation of Michael Vick.
What Vick was involved in was cruel. I don’t pretend to understand the attraction. It goes on a lot, even here in Wichita based on the news stories.
But there is so much cruelty in our society that is accepted as part of life. For instance, we eat animals that are killed via electrocution and other unsavory ways. We watch men beat the crap out of each other on “Ultimate Fighting”. And in Iraq, people there are doing to people what Vick was doing to dogs because they are of a different religious sect.
So, while we all pretty much agree that what Vick did was cruel and wrong, I am surprised that so many people pretend to be so shocked and horrified.
outlander
Well, so much for Godwin’s Law. hehehehe
“pretend to be so shocked and horrified.”
What ever floats your boat scooter. If you aren’t horrified, you better get your wiring checked.
Max–
In many ways, yes, I DO trust government to protect me better than I can protect myself.
That’s why people INVENTED government.
I trust the police to protect me from criminals. I trust the fire department to do a better job of putting out my house fire than I can do with my garden hose. I trust the FAA to know if the plane I fly on is safe or not. I trust the FDA to help make sure that Dillon’s isn’t selling me meat that is full of bug parts.
I trust the government to license health care workers and teachers and electricians and plumbers so that they aren’t grossly incompetent.
I trust the government to issue driver’s licenses to people so that they have knowledge of the rules of the road.
And on and on it goes.
The 19th Century — much as you CONs want to return to it — was not a pleasant place to live. Children were chained to looms. Meat packers fell into sausage vats and they were ground up and sold right along with the pig meat. Patent medicines contained dangerous even lethal drugs. In the 1920’s, a company sold radioactive water–people felt great until their arms and legs fell off. Coca-cola used to contain flipping COCAINE!
Turn off Rush and slowly back away from the AM hate radio . . .
There is a definite desensitization to violence in American culture.I always wonder where are the churches and ‘family values’ groups speaking out on this issue.
I guess ‘immorality’ and the homosexual agenda is a more important topic to discuss than our exposure to graphic violence and cruelty and resulting effects.
But maybe I am wrong. Perhaps a 12 year old seeing a nipple on the TV is going to be much more traumatic and harmful than them seeing a dead body laying in a pool of blood after a gunfight.
Good one CapN!!
“I trust the police to protect me from criminals.”
Capn: Then why have you bragged about the gun you have for home defense?
http://www.spitfirelist.com/f090.html
FTR-90 A Review and Analysis of “Serpent’s Walk” (One 30-minute segment) $5.00This segment analyzes Serpent’s Walk, a Nazi tract published in 1991 and authored by one “Randolph O. Calverhall.” Published by National Vanguard Books, which also published The Turner Diaries, the book is purportedly a “novel” about a Nazi takeover of the United States in the middle of the twenty-first century. It is Mr. Emory’s considered opinion that the book is far more than a novel—he feels that it is a blueprint for what is already going on and what is planned for the future. Mr. Emory feels that the book is extremely important and that it should be studied. The events portrayed in it have a foundation in reality. In Serpent’s Walk, Hitler’s SS goes underground after World War II (see the Archive Shows RFA#37, RFA #’s1,2 and 3 and The Seeds of Nuremberg—all available from Spitfire). The SS then begin building a huge capital organization and buying into U.S. industry, the opinion-forming media in particular. (Just such an organization was put together—see Martin Bormann: Nazi in Exile by Paul Manning. The book was published in 1981 by Lyle Stuart Inc. The ISBN # is 0-8184-0309-8.) The SS then infiltrate the United States Army and the U.S. government in general. At the end of the war, much of the Nazi intelligence system was married to the American espionage establishment, permitting just such infiltration. (See the Archive Show descriptions. These shows are available from Spitfire.) After the President and Vice-President are killed in a biological warfare attack that utilizes genetically-engineered viruses (of ostensibly Russian origin), the Speaker of the House (”Jonas Outram”) becomes President, declares martial law and invites the Nazis into a governing coalition, which then takes over the United States . . .
****
I’m sorry, Jonas. I didn’t realize that your nic-name was pure coincidence with the name of the NAZI in this novel.
(Heavy sarcasm)
Perhaps a 12 year old seeing a nipple on the TV is going to be much more traumatic and harmful than them seeing a dead body laying in a pool of blood after a gunfight.
Posted by: brian | August 24, 2007 at 10:25 AM=======================
Thanks to the myriad of video games, kids will most likely have seen hundreds of bodies on the ground in pools of blood…
The nipple, they probably havent seen since they were a couple of years old, if they were raised on breast feeding…
So, yea, you’re quite right!!
Maybe thats why kids dont seem to have much trouble killing other kids and adults anymore???
“I trust the police to protect me from criminals. I trust the fire department to do a better job of putting out my house fire than I can do with my garden hose. I trust the FAA to know if the plane I fly on is safe or not. I trust the FDA to help make sure that Dillon’s isn’t selling me meat that is full of bug parts…Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 24, 2007 at 10:23 AM ”
This is a natural outcropping of the specialization of labour. I cannot do all things needed to ensure my little world is safe. Some of those things require more specialized skills than I have time to acquire.
The more important tasks – mainly safety and security related, must be outsourced to an entity that we trust. For most people, most of the time, that is the government. In part, that is due to the democratic nature, the Constitution, and the system of checks and balances that are (or were) in place.
CapN — Turner Diaries was scary enough… I still cringe when I think about that book… Seems like a number of things in Turner were also planned, and some may have been already carried out…
But this one you talk about here… THIS is scary stuff!!
I do wonder if some of the new book you are talking about is already happening in our very midst…
I hope not, because, after all — if Nazi’s take over, there wont be any 2nd Amendment…
just for fun:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22standard+oil%22+nazi+bush
Remember that when you say “Bush” you’re really talking about the “lawyers” that write out what he says.
They are making an argument, as they are trained to do, whereas he really doesn’t have the intelligence to understand much of what he repeats.
Concerning Michael Vick – regardless of his revised plea agreement, the NFL can and will suspend him. They are under no obligation to wait for a conviction.
Adam “Pacman” Jones was suspended for a year and he has yet to be convicted. Others have been similarly suspended, notably Ricky Williams.
Vick’s NFL career is in serious jeopardy, regardless of what the Atlanta NAACP has to say. I find their position to be disingenuous at best, given that dogfighting is part of a culture that degrades black people everywhere.
Jason Whitlock of the KC Star and AOL Sports refers to the culture as prison/hip-hop thuggery. Like Leonard Pitts and Mike McCormack, who are featured in the Eagle, Whitlock is a black man that vigorously condemns the culture that encourages black young men and women to embrace a culture that celebrates violence and criminal behavior.
Michael Vick apparently feels that his celebrity athlete status is going to let him skate by on these charges.
By failing to man up and accept responsibility for his actions, he is ensuring a harsh penalty from the Falcons and the NFL.
“Sen. John W. Warner, one of the most influential Republican voices in Congress on national security, called on President Bush yesterday to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq in time for Christmas as a new intelligence report concluded that political leaders in Baghdad are “unable to govern effectively.”http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/23/AR2007082302291.html?hpid=topnews
Just goes to show that not all Republicans are thick-skulled cretins.
In many ways, yes, I DO trust government to protect me better than I can protect myself.
That’s why people INVENTED government.
Posted by: CapnAmerica | August 24, 2007 at 10:23 AM
You forgot a couple Capn:
You trust the government to earn your income for you.
You trust the government to give you free health care too.
The real reason you oppose partial privatization of Social Security:
If you don’t earn much income in your life, then you expect to get more Out of Social Security then what you paid In to Social Security.
Yeah, that’s fair. Everyone should be able to equally benefit from this pyramid scheme.
IF we had universal health care, I wonder — Would we end up paying more in taxes, to help support it, than what we pay NOW in health insurance in the private sector??
MY health insurance costs roughly $550 per month… it’s major medical, and has a Rx drug plan(mail order and pharmacy discounts)…
That is a fairly high rate, but it is a “self insured” Group plan… through our Pension system…
Any other thoughts???
You Libs think the Gov’t does such a great job with everything, then just give them control of our Health Insurance too.
Gov’t does a great job of:
*Balancing the budget
*Spending control
*A perfectly sound Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid system
*Wise spending of Billions for 35 years on New Orleans flood control projects
*Keeping illegal immigrants out
*Keeping drugs out of the country
*Safe bridges and highways
*Keeping America energy independent
*Educating our children so well
*Protecting the environment
*Solving global warming
*Keeping prisoners behind bars
*Expanding socialism and redistributing “our” wealth
to name just a few.
I’m down with removing ALL survivor benefits. If folks choose to have children, they should provide for them. If we dont acknowledge ALL spousal benefits, then let’s save some real money and get rid of the spousal benefits that go to only a few.
Capn’s Mantra
1) If you EARN too much money (and Capn will decide who does and doesn’t) then you have to give money (but not Capn’s money) to those that don’t work (capn will decide whom to disperse it to)
2) If you are a corporation and make too much money (unless capn is invested) the company is illegal and overworks and under pays its employees.
3) Until everyone has the same paycheck (except for capn) for doing or not doing different levels of work Capn will still mount his socialist soap box.
4) Until everyone drives the same car(except for capn), or no car at all, Capn will be on his socialist soap box.
5) Until everyone has exactly the same everything regardless of wether they work or not (except for capn) capn will be on his socialist soap box.
Hey capn, why don’t you start bitching about Hillary and Edwards bank roll? Why don’t you shrill at them until they meet the common man’s bank balance.
Hypocrisy. Plain and simple.
What the U.S. Socialized Health care enthusiasts fail to do is calculate the salaries of Doctors, Nurses and allied Health Professions into the Socialized Medicine formulas they want.
Socialized Medicine won’t have the luxury of having free enterprise paying the salaries of these Health Care Providers, it will instead come out of Quasi-Governmental agencies that will charge the government for their labors.
DAMNIT !!! Illegal = evil
OK — I will ask this again…
IF we had universal health care, I wonder — Would we end up paying more in taxes, to help support it, than what we pay NOW in health insurance in the private sector??
We all know that health insurance premiums are not the only source for providing salaries for health care workers (of all varieties) the way it is now… There are foundations, and trust funds, and R & D corporations… Why would any of those vanish if we had universal health care???
And I still wonder if it would actually cost us more, or less than our current costs of Health/Medical Insurance???
OMG… Rush’s guest host is prattling away at this minute, about how anybody who is against DDT, is against people… He says that Malaria was a form of population control in many undeveloped nations, and when DDT was used to eradicate Malaria, it upset the population control…
Is this unbelievable, or what??
Chas.,Even more unbelievable is that many of the idiots listening will believe and probably quote that to other people
Oh yea, the callers are all in favor of bringing back DDT!! LOL
Chas asks:
IF we had universal health care, I wonder — Would we end up paying more in taxes, to help support it, than what we pay NOW in health insurance in the private sector??
Why no Chas. It would be administered by the government which is widely know by how efficiently they can buy toilet seats. Also the fact that we would be adding on those millions that are uninsured now wouldn’t matter because the premiums would just be paid by those voluntary contributions from the ‘rich’.
What an astute questions. Where do YOU think the money will come from?
Also the case of the Canadian quads that were born in the US because the Canadian system couldn’t handle it: They didn’t have the facilities or the capable doctors. Where would those of us in the US go if we needed specialized care? Just do without?
Chas the DDT is actually a recycled topic:
“September 15, 2006 · The World Health Organization today announced a major policy change. It’s actively backing the controversial pesticide DDT as a way to control malaria. Malaria kills about 1 million people a year, mainly children, and mainly in Africa, despite a decades-long effort to eradicate it.”
My guess it is a slow news day and they are grasping at straws.
ksgrm,Do you think the specialized care will just go away if doctors and hospitals are paid by the government instead of insurance companies?Medical (not so much in pharmacology) technology, innovation, and training is largely driven by schools and research done in conjunction with them.
My calculations on Socialized Health Care cost estimates are as follows:
Currently Two Trillion Dollars per year are spent each year in the U.S. for Health Care.
Add in another one half trillion dollars to phase out medicare/medicaid and other social programs.
That brings the cost of 2.5 trillion dollars to provide the same economic value of health care.
Figure that there are 150,000,000 working contributors to the tax system. (not counting children, disabled who can’t work, elderly who can’t work, etc. etc.)
It works out to be $1388.00 in taxes per month for each of the 150,000,000 to pay for a National Health Care Single Payer Plan.
That’s an average of 16,656 dollars for each of the 150,000,000 working contributors.
That’s works out to be 4,996,800,000,000 (almost 5 trillion in costs for 300,000,000 people.)
Since every goods, service, trade and every buffalo nickel of the Gross Domestic Product of the U.S. is about $13.13 trillion.
This means that 39 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product would be used to pay for health care alone.
This of course doesn’t include the costs of Quasi Government Agencies that will be needed to be set up in regional localities to run the administration of the single payer plan.
This also doesn’t include the costs of salaries and benefits of the health care workers in the single payer plan system.
I would add another $2.5 trillion dollars to cover the cost of administration, salaries and benefits to the single health care plan.
That’s comes up to about 7.5 trillion dollars for the cost of socialized medicine in the U.S.
Bottom line is it would cost every man, woman, child, dog and cat about $25,000 each per year to have a single payer health plan in the U.S. that would be considered truly socialized medicine.
That’s 2083 dollars per month in taxes for every man woman and child in the U.S. to pay for their health care.
Brian I have no doubt if we look at the countries that now have socialized medicine that we will see less quality healthcare.
How many years does a specialist go to school to achieve the status he needs to be qualified? Would tax money then take on the burden of paying to educate our doctors. If so who then decided who is eligible for this help?
This is a very small part of what would happen if this plan is implemented. Few people set down and take the time to think about the fallout. Canadians see this. On our recent trip to Canada our 27 year old, single bus driver told us it is an excellent plan if you are young and healthy.
I’ll let you draw your own conclusions from this.
Kansas those were excellent figures and by some estimates low.
Kansas,Your figures indicate that currently, about 15% of the US GDP is spent on healthcare. The current US population is about 302Mthat is $6,622 per person per year.Using your estimate of 150M working people in the US that is about $1100 per month per working person.
Where does that money come from?
Also, the IRS shows that the total AGI filed in 2005 was about $7.3trillion. About $2 trillion was spent on healthcare. How does that work out?
How many non-US people spend money as part of the $2trillion in healthcare spending?
BUT… What is the current cost NOW of keeping all of the ones who cant work, or are on government assistance???
That cost would have to be subtracted from those above figures… Cause they are already included in the tax base… So, I think the $2,083 per month figure is a bit high….
Medical education would be paid for the same way it is now… If you can get the funds to go to medical school, and if you qualified, then you go… The universities wouldnt be included in the cost of universal health care, anymore than they are now…
What does a family of 4 in Canada pay now for health care(in taxes)?? That would be a fairly good guess as to what it might cost here, except for we have more population, and the expenses would be spread out more than Canada…
I dont have the Canadian answer at my fingertips, but I can probably get it by tomorrow….
Those making over $1M up 26%, quoting the Weagle.
Yes, like our own Jeff. And, we know that a lot of this money came out of other peoples’ pockets.
Those who can, take. What a society!!!
64Plus — HUH????
Universal healthcare would be a disaster for the middle class. Our tax burden would increase significantly and the following goups would benefit:
business, they would be off the hook as far as providing health benefits for their employees, they would receive that huge gift of corporate welfare on the backs of middle class taxpayers
illegals/welfare spongers, these “people” pay nothing in the way of taxes so as usual they would get a free ride with middle class taxpayers footing the billI have no desire to foot the bill for such parasites, period!
SS should be an insurance policy insuring that you can’t become unable to financially support yourself.
You should not collect anything { as with any insurance policy } if you don’t suffer a loss, in this case a loss of income.
SS should not be a savings account.
Chas,
It’s only a coinkydink that the Pentagon got nuked on September 11 in the Turner Diaries. Seriously, you fret too much.
The Mass. plan is as near as we can come to universal healthcare now. They were forced to come up with a plan to lower their list of uninsureds or face losing some medicaid benefits.
“The bill, the product of months of wrangling between legislators and the governor, requires all Massachusetts residents to obtain health coverage by July 1, 2007.
Individuals who can afford private insurance will be penalized on their state income taxes if they do not purchase it.”
They correctly identified that many uninsured were that way by choice. Hence the penalty if you didn’t enroll. They came up with a lower premium option for those 19-26. If businesses do not now offer insurance they will be fined a specific amount per year.
This is a very simplistic view but shows some of the nationwide problems. Many uninsured are that way by choice. When flat rates paid to doctors go to low the specialists won’t stick around. They have invested a lot in their license and don’t want the government deciding what their talents are worth.
Just MOHO but it is a disaster waiting to happen. I can only that common sense will prevail and someone, anyone in power will run the numbers before going ahead with this.
I can see those Jerry Springer fans out there now celebrating.
Jonas, I didnt say anything about Turner and the Pentagon scene… check what I posted again…
“”Canada may be an option. They often take players that NFL teams don’t want anymore.
Posted by: Kev | August 24, 2007 at 08:38 AM ”
Unfortunately, a person with a criminal conviction cannot get ito Canada.”
They took Dany Heatley- the NHL player that killed his teammate while driving drunk.
Ksgrm… Reality Check…. You wrote>>>>
“When flat rates paid to doctors go to low the specialists won’t stick around. They have invested a lot in their license and don’t want the government deciding what their talents are worth.”
If the rest of the nations of the world have the same kind of health care, Where is it you think these specialists might go??? They would face the same income issues that you imagine in other countries as well as our own!!
Kev — I thought Heatly was already a Canadian??? That would make a difference…
“”I trust the police to protect me from criminals.”
Capn: Then why have you bragged about the gun you have for home defense?”
The gun is only the first line of defense. You still have to call 911 and have the criminal picked up and either the body disposed of or an arrest and a trial
I did some digging on how much European MD’s make. Here, MD’s make six times as much as an average American. There, they make about three times as much as an average European, but remember, Europeans make more on average.
Also, they have MORE doctors per thousand population than we do.
Looks like “low wages” is not a problem over there . . .
“IF we had universal health care, I wonder — Would we end up paying more in taxes, to help support it, than what we pay NOW in health insurance in the private sector??
MY health insurance costs roughly $550 per month… it’s major medical, and has a Rx drug plan(mail order and pharmacy discounts)…
That is a fairly high rate, but it is a “self insured” Group plan… through our Pension system… ”
Canadians pay far less than we do. Basically about what we pay in SS taxes they also pay for Health Canada. The rest is paid by taxes on cigs, booze and businesses.
Ksgrm writes: “I have no doubt if we look at the countries that now have socialized medicine that we will see less quality healthcare.”
And that is based on what?
Rush Limbaugh and other free-market shills for big business.
The US is ranked 37th in health care. It is ranked 42nd in life expectancy and GOING DOWN compared to other countries. Even CUBANS live slightly longer than Americans.
It is ranked number ONE in cost per patient and amount of money spent on health care. It is number one in the percentage of GDP we spend on health care.
Conclusion: we spend much more and get much less.
I dont think the wage issue would be that great here either… IF we could just get the plan into place, and make it work…
Chas yesterday you were an expert on SS and today GW the methods of pay for physicians. Thats must have been some other class you took. By the way as Nathan is I am sure I am still waiting for you to give me that link that says a widower can collect off his late wifes ss.
PPO and HMO groups are as we speak limiting the number of medicaid and medicare patients they allow their physicians to accept. The gov rate of payment is so low it is no longer profitable to take them. This before universal healthcare. I really wish you would do some indepth study of the issues having to do with universal healthcare.
It is to complicated to explain in a soundbite. I encourage every voter to look at this madness before it becomes reality. Don’t take my word for it. Do your own research. Listen.
Cap would that be an assumption that we get much less care. See my challenge to Chas. I have read tomes on this subject. No one fed me my opinion. Do the research.
Canada couldn’t even handle the delivery of quads. What does this say about the quality of healthcare?
KSgrm — “a widower can collect off his late wifes ss.”
I was saying yesterday that I dont believe a widower CAN collect off his late wife’s SS…
NOW you want me to give you a link that says he CAN??? Good grief, woman, make up your mind!!
Sol–
That wild spittle-flecked attack on me in no way reflects anything I believe.
Try to maintain control, man.
You’re embarrassing yourself with these unhinged rants . . .
And BTW, you can find about anything you want on SS by using http://www.ssa.gov Then find the link for “old age benefits”
But “it’s not as simple as saying we don’t have national health insurance,” said Sam Harper, an epidemiologist at McGill University in Montreal. “It’s not that easy.”
Among the other factors:
• Adults in the United States have one of the highest obesity rates in the world. Nearly a third of U.S. adults 20 years and older are obese, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.
“The U.S. has the resources that allow people to get fat and lazy,” said Paul Terry, an assistant professor of epidemiology at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia. “We have the luxury of choosing a bad lifestyle as opposed to having one imposed on us by hard times.”
Cap in many instances universal healthcare won’t help. Our lifestyles have to change also. We are a prosperous nation and have allowed ourselves to get soft.
Chas I never doubted that what I said was true. You on the other hand were having problems with that one. In fact said it absolutely wasn’t true. Just wanted to make sure you had a clear mind on it since you do give people advise.
Ksgrm — You said: “What an astute questions. Where do YOU think the money will come from?”
I stated clearly in my initial question where the funds would come from…. Did you forget your reading glasses?? Or are you just trying to feud???
I stated clearly as follows:
“Would we end up paying more in taxes, to help support it, than what we pay NOW in health insurance in the private sector??”
NOW… is that clear enough??
Try answering THAT question, instead of the one you “made up” that I DIDNT ask!! Please, READ before you rant???
Ksgrm… Do I really have to post again what you JUST upthread asked me about yesterdays subject??? Do I really have to do that??? I dont really want to do that… But, if you dont get your own post clear in your head, I WILL post it….
The 37th ranking in World Health Care is based on patient perception, not actual quality of care.
Patient perception has yet to cure one disease or treat an injury.
The best quality of care is right here in the United States.
Ksgrm writes: “Canada couldn’t even handle the delivery of quads . . . ”
1. That’s because they lived in flipping Alberta province which has a population density lower than North Dakota. Toronto would have been entirely different.
2. They took their babies back to Calgary for preemie care and it cost 1/3rd what it cost in the US.
3. The next time a woman has quads, she should stay in the States . . . the odds are one in 13 million conservatively.
LOOMING DOCTOR SHORTAGE
Decreasing wages for Doctors will only make the situation worse. Hillary Care will be great, but there will be 6 month lines to see your Doctor.
http://www.dwd.state.wi.us/healthcare/answers_now.htm
One-third of the nation’s 750,000 active physicians are 55 years or older and by the year 2010, the rate of physicians predicted to be retiring from active practice will begin outstripping the supply of those entering practice.
Especially when the US taxpayer is paying for it, right, Kansas?
MAX — depending o nwhich specialist, we already have lines that long… so what’s new??
Ah, Capn you still think I’m living off your nickel eh?
As a matter of fact, this was elective surgery and I’m paying for the largest portion of it.
Not that it is any of your business how my health care is paid.
Ummm Kansas, I dont believe CapN said ONE WORD about how YOUR health care is paid…
Max, the doctor shortage is with the way things are now.
You can’t blame “socialized medicine” on that because we don’t have anything close to socialized medicine.
I thought everything was great with our private care system.
There is little doubt change would have to happen in order for universal healthcare to work. However, the cost of not doing it, is astronomical. Just in my case alone, if I could get true care for my problems, I might actually be able to do laborous work again, making me more profitable. I wouldn’t need to worry my employer about my medical care and insurance. In the case of my friend yesterday, he wouldn’t be on disability now. Those who have health insurance now get screwed…they pay their group rates, their copays, their out of pocket expenses, and their taxes for the other half that aren’t insured or on government insurance.
It simply makes sense to go to universal healthcare. We’d be a healthier nation for it.
Well, folks, it’s been fun, as usual… Gotta go find some decent clothes for tonite… dont want to meet new folks in my old junky stuff… Hope my wife has the dryer empty :-)
Ksgrm, I have to travel to get specialty care NOW.
In the USA.
It’s our business if you benefit from government (tax payer supported military) medical benefits but you want to deny that to others . . .
Chas, I pretty much know the mind of Capn by now and know his implications when he writes.
Besides, it was a conversation between me and the Capn.
Unless of course Chas, you think he is unable to defend himself and needs some brotherly hugging and smootch on the cheek to get by.
Chas,
Why are you being so stubborn?
You refuse to post any links to support your claims…
You refuse to even quote anything from Social Security to support your claim…
You try to change around what you are claiming in an attempt to try and say I don’t understand what you are talking about, and then:
You refuse to post any links to support your claims…
You refuse to even quote anything from Social Security to support your claim…
Once again, you are back to saying:
“The surviving male spouse of a retiree receives no Social Security survivor benefits.”
So this time there is no confusion. My links DO DIRECTLY CONTRADICT what you are saying.
Let me guess:
I don’t know what I am talking about, I am confused as to what you are talking about, and you are refusing to post any evidence to back up your claims?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Posted yesterday and never answered. I see you are still deflecting the question here today.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I rest my case Chas, read the Capn’s post above my 3:05 post.
:)
Thanks Max for taking the challenge. It is much easier for some to throw mud and refuse to answer the questions.
Chas I saw nothing about your misconception about SS up thread.
“The surviving male spouse of a retiree receives no Social Security survivor benefits.
THIS is factual… Ksgrm… Just go look it up!! And stop with your damned ad hominems!! I get SO tired of your crap sometimes!!
Posted by: Chas. | August 23, 2007 at 09:53 PM”
Just wanted to know if you had this straight in your mind since you do advise others. Not trying to feud. Why would I do that?
As for where the money will come from: Why it would come from the pockets of the perceived rich in the US. After those run dry then benefits will be cut until only the most basic health care is available. Long lines. Lack of physicians. I could go on but I am sure you see the picture.
Cap why would they come to the US when they had those services available in a larger city of their own? Doesn’t pass the smell test.
They went to Montana because it was close by.
Mystery solved.
I rest my case Chas, read the Capn’s post above my 3:05 post.
:)
Posted by: Kansas | August 24, 2007 at 03:06 PM
Kansas rests his case without answering the question . . . do you use tax-payer supported medical services (like VA etc.), yes or no.
Answer: yes.
Do you want to deny others the same benefits, yes or no.
Answer: yes.
Conclusion: hypocrite.
ksgrm,
As I typed before…
The best quality of care is right here in the United States.
You got it right Nathan… YOU dont know what you are talking about… See how easy that was???
Chas,
You are either a liar or too arrogant to admit your mistake.
I’ll let you decide.
Capn,
The Kansas taxpayer denies the average Kansan health care when they pay for the health care provided to Educators because of their Union demands.
Do you want to deny the average Kansan the same benefits?
Besides, my care was done in a private hospital and paid for with my private funds.
You got a problem with that Capn?
Or are you still flailing your socialistic arms in all directions now?
Pmom you are taking a very simplistic approach to a very complicated issue. What makes you think your friend would have been any better off under universal health care.
A friend of ours just waited 6 months for an MRI in England. Some things just don’t get moved up. Severe back pain isn’t a major thing because with only so many MRI machines and technicians there will be long waiting lines. There won’t be a duplication of equipment. One hospital might have an MRI, one will be able to do CAT scans, one will be able to do pulmonary function testing, etc… Age limits will be put on things like dialysis, I have heard that is 55. Not sure of this.
I am not a doomdayer but as stated before I have studied many countries that have this type of healthcare. Please do this.
KSgrm — You typed UPTHREAD TODAY >>>>
“By the way as Nathan is I am sure I am still waiting for you to give me that link that says a widower can collect off his late wifes ss.”
I cant GIVE you a link that says a widower can collect off his late wife’s SS, because my point yesterday is that the widower CANNOT collect off his late wife’s SS!!!
Now, you wouldnt let it go… NOW lie your way out of this one, if you dare!!!
Chas,
If anyone here is the liar about Social Security, it wouldn’t be ksgrm or myself, who have repeatedly proven you wrong with links to the SS website.
You havent proven anything Nathan… because the links you put up are not on the subject!!
Anybody knows that there are benefits to family members from SSDI, and SSI, and from death of a family wage earner… THAT is not the issue!!
Cant you GET THAT IN Y”OUR BRAIN???
Nathan — READ what I just posted >>>>>
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/08/open-thread-824.html#comment-80526693
I cant GIVE you a link that says a widower can collect off his late wife’s SS, because my point yesterday is that the widower CANNOT collect off his late wife’s SS!!!Posted by: Chas. | August 24, 2007 at 03:17 PM
Sure you can Chas.
If the wife’s ss entitlement is greater than the husband’s entitlement, then the husband would get the difference minus the formula used by the ss.
I did this with my grandmother when she passed before my grandfather.
My grandmother earned more than my grandfather, thusly her SS benefit was higher.
When she passed first, my grandfather got a portion of the difference between his and her SS payment.
NOW — I am quite finished with this SS matter from yesterday… there is no use going any further with it another day…. More interesting stuff here anyway….
Shipping a Calgary woman to Montana to have her quadruplets because of a shortage of neonatal staff in her hometown could cost the Calgary Health Region more than $200,000.
Karen Jepp, 35, gave birth to four identical girls in Great Falls, Mont. on Aug. 12 after the Foothills Hospital’s high-risk ward was over-capacity and no hospitals in western Canada could take the woman.
Cap, long waiting lines, not quality care, shortage of medical personal, get ready. This is our future is hillary care is implemented.
Oh Great Fall, Montana – that bastion of fantastic health care. They don’t even have 60,000 population. So one of our less well equipped was better than one of the best in Calgary with a population of over one million.
It’s right there in front of your face. Look it over.
OK, reference to the SSA website will show that yes, a surviving spouse may draw benefits from the deceased spouse’s account (once upon a time, this was indeed limited to widows, but was changed, IIRC, in the late 1970s or early 1980s). Further, an ex-spouse (so long as the marriage lasted the required length of time, from memory 10 years, was 20 years) may draw spousal benefits from the ex-spouse’s account upon his/her retirement.
Bye Chas when you can’t win by name calling just leave. Thats ok – as Nathan and Kansas have said you are wrong. Sorry you can’t admit it since that seems to be a big thing on your side of the aisle.
Ksgrm — I dont THINK the woman was in Calgary…. just in the Calgary REGION… Great Falls, MT was a fairly short distance from where they lived… IIRC
Thanks VT for clearing that up for Chas. He does advise people you know and really should have the right information. It’s just to bad that he has been giving out the wrong advise for 20 or 30 years.
Chas she couldn’t be admitted to the Calgary hospital because there was no room. You really need to start reading more.
“…shortage of neonatal staff in her hometown
Have a good time advising – I mean meeting the new folks. Gotta go.
Ksgrm — I havent called anybody any names… So, knock off that BS now… or I might have to look up a fewe… I am attempting to be as CIVIL as I can… VT just straightened it all out… But, VT, I cant figure out why my DAD wasnt allowed to draw off of Mom’s benefit when she died in 1996???
Any help there??
Chas, your mom’s benefit was probably equal to or less than your dad’s.
Either way, your father wouldn’t have received any of your mom’s benefit.
If your mom’s benefit was greater than your dad’s, your dad would have received some of your mom’s benefit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You havent proven anything Nathan… because the links you put up are not on the subject!!
Anybody knows that there are benefits to family members from SSDI, and SSI, and from death of a family wage earner… THAT is not the issue!!
Cant you GET THAT IN Y”OUR BRAIN???
Posted by: Chas. | August 24, 2007 at 03:21 PM<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Chas,
You are full of crap.
You clearly have been arguing and even said yesterday that:
“The surviving male spouse of a retiree receives no Social Security survivor benefits.”
Your statement IS NOT TRUE.
I have posted link after link to the SS website proving it beyond a reasonable doubt to you.
You still try to pretend like you are talking about something else, yet you still wont post a link or proof.
Chas., Kansas has it right on your question about your dad and your mom’s benefit.
“Kansas,Your figures indicate that currently, about 15% of the US GDP is spent on healthcare. The current US population is about 302Mthat is $6,622 per person per year.Using your estimate of 150M working people in the US that is about $1100 per month per working person.
Where does that money come from?
Also, the IRS shows that the total AGI filed in 2005 was about $7.3trillion. About $2 trillion was spent on healthcare. How does that work out?
How many non-US people spend money as part of the $2trillion in healthcare spending?
Posted by: brian | August 24, 2007 at 01:29 PM “
Thanks VT… And Nathan, in MANY cases what I said is absolutely true… my folks included…
I am sure there are other situations where the widower can indeed collect off of his wife’s bnefit, just as Kansas posted about his grandparents…
I was unaware of any changes that happened INSIDE the system in the 70’s and 80’s…
And I guess I havent ever dealt with any families where the Widow made more income than the Widower… For many elderly people, that simply never happened!!
So, Nathan, I am not a liar… and neither are YOU… The only thing I am wrong about is that a widower can, under certain circumstances, receive benefit from his wife’s SS…
It is good to know that… but, as I say, in many cases I am involved with, that will most likely not be the case… as many funerals I handle are for folks in their 80’s and 90’s…
Thanks VT for clearing that up for Chas. He does advise people you know and really should have the right information. It’s just to bad that he has been giving out the wrong advise for 20 or 30 years.
Posted by: ksgrm | August 24, 2007 at 03:30 PM
Thanks Chas for giving out the wrong advise. You probably save the Social Security Trust fund several thousand dollars!
After reading the Social Security posts yesterday, I’m a little confused.
Some were arguing for spousal benefits for gays. Some were arguing for survivor benefits for men, when their wives die. (No children involved, just benefits for the surviving spouse)
Why would a surviving spouse be owed ANY benefits from their spouse’s Social Security?
You are implying that the surviving spouse has some OWNERSHIP of the Social Security of the deceased spouse. Why would that be the case?
Max.. I guess you arent reading so well either… I Just SAID that I have never worked with a family where the widower was out-earned by his wife…. Therefore, I did NOT give out wrong advice… I dont give advice on SS matters anyway… I work with families to just get through the process… The SS has their own people to give the advice… The clergy and funeral directors merely assist where we are able….
So, next time, before you jump on somebody, READ FIRST!!!
Actually, there has been a lot of changes to the SS program.
One of them is age of retirement according to birth year. It used to be 65. Now it is adjusted for calendar years depending on what calendar year group you are born.
I think mine is 67 or 68, I would have to look again.
There have been changes concerning income earned while drawing Social Security. My other grandfather was very vocal about the government telling him he couldn’t earn “X” dollars or his SS would be reduced.
That too has been changed, but I do not know exactly how. I remember talking to a cab driver about this who was on SS and say he can earn quite a bit now without affecting his SS.
There is for spouses widowed by straight spouses, why not for gays and lesbians, Max?
After all, they pay into the “fund” as well.
It is absolutely amazing how some of you people can twist things around, totally out of all proportion, to make it come out the way you want… You must all be graduates of Limbaugh’s School of Truth Twisting!!!
“You are implying that the surviving spouse has some OWNERSHIP of the Social Security of the deceased spouse. Why would that be the case?
Posted by: Max | August 24, 2007 at 04:03 PM”
The spouse paid into SS during their life. In consideration for that, the spouse would have a right to specific benefits if they were alive. Therefore, when the spouse dies, those accrued benefits should go to their estate. The surviving spouse therefore should get the SS benefits.
Brian, according to VT, whichever spouse had the higher income, would get the benefit at death… or not get it… IF the husband made more than the wife, when he dies, she would get her SS benefit, plus part of his…. IF she made more than he did, at death, HE would be able to get his benefit, plus a percentage of Hers…
Brian, I dont think it has anything to do with the Estate, though… Ask VT… he would know that one…
Why would a surviving spouse be owed ANY benefits from their spouse’s Social Security?Posted by: Max | August 24, 2007 at 04:03 PM
I think Max, because income is primarily based on the household unit. Spouses are integral in describing the definition of household, although not the complete meaning – as non-related people can comprise a household.
What the argument entails for the gay issue is that the term spouse is not used in regards to gay couples because of State and Federal laws.
I think that may be a constitutionally unsound because it is discriminatory based on sex alone. If it were tested at the Supreme Court under that specific question, I’m sure the spouse definition would have to include all sexes regardless what the state marriage laws state.
The question after that would be if the Federal Ruling would require State’s to change their definition of who can get married and how they could get around the challenge of spouse by using the discriminatory based standard.
At least that’s the legal argument.
Whether it passes the Social Moral test, I don’t know – especially since the issue of gay marriage is usually put to a vote of the State where the issue is presented.
So Brian, you are saying there IS some ownership of SS benefits, in certain situations for surviving spouses?
Why should there be?
Why shouldn’t an INDIVIDUAL be entitled to just the benefits that were earned by that INDIVIDUAL?
Why would an INDIVIDUAL be entitled to the benefits earned by a surviving spouse?
Isn’t that privatization of Social Security?
Chas, Estate handling is what attorneys like VT get paid for. He will offer you advise, but you must first meet his fee. :)
And if we are going to privatize it for surviving spouses, then it should be privatized for all!
I was saying how it should be, not how it currently is.
SS should be an insurance policy insuring that you can’t become unable to financially support yourself.
You should not collect anything { as with any insurance policy } if you don’t suffer a loss, in this case a loss of income.
SS should not be a savings account.
Posted by: Ed Friedemann | August 24, 2007 at 01:44 PM
Ok, Ed, but I can buy an insurance policy for much less than 15.3% of my income.
SS is a Socialist lottery program.
Some get benefits. Others don’t. All pay into it.
I love the government controlling my money! I trust them soooooooo much!
Actually Max, not everyone pays into SS.
Railroad workers, Civil Servants who opt for their annuity fund based retirement and some public retirements do not pay into SS at all.
The problem I see with a privatized investment strategy to replace the SS, is that in a family where the spouse doesn’t work or works very little, will have little opportunity to invest into such a program.
Thusly, if a divorce arises, some smart attorney will amortize it and the lesser payed spouse will get less.
Max I think the orginal thoughts on this were that most women were stay at home moms. Certainly not the norm now. That is why this probably is widely known. Most women will receive more on their own experience.
But none the less if the woman outearned the husband he could draw off of her experience.
Chas you are right it gets old. “Now, you wouldnt let it go… NOW lie your way out of this one, if you dare!!!
Posted by: Chas. | August 24, 2007 at 03:17 PM
I also get tired of the tone here. I must put up with a whole host of you who seem to think you hung the moon. Someone I disagree on most things but can have a civil conversation is Cap. Some of you should watch his posts.
I said truce the other night and meant it but everytime you call me a liar as you did in the above post then you can expect to get the same attitude back.
ksgrm, I try my best to stay out of all frays, in fact to stay out of conversations happening between two individuals. But, I would like to offer clarification in today’s disagreement if I may.
In your post at 2:43 p.m. you said:———-”Chas yesterday you were an expert on SS and today GW the methods of pay for physicians. Thats must have been some other class you took. By the way as Nathan is I am sure I am still waiting for you to give me that link that says a widower can collect off his late wifes ss.”———-
From reading through the rest of this thread I think you may have meant “CAN’T collect off his late…” But that isn’t what you posted.
Chas pointed this out and politely asked you to read what you posted because he also thought you would want to change it.
But you didn’t, you kept on and while you were keeping on you were accusing Chas of keeping on.
Then Chas admitted his error. You didn’t even see yours.
That’s how it looks to me anyway.
Linda thank you for your help in settling this little flap between Chas and me. Unfortunately you are a few days late and didn’t catch the many times Chas belittles and call others names even when they are correct. I have been called a liar so many times on this board that people who don’t even know me or who I am quote it as gospel because of Chas and his main bud.
Civility is what we should all strive for and that is my goal. But it has to be a two way street.
Again thanks for the intervention and pointing out my typo.
Awww poor Grm…. I dont call you names… I tell you to please READ… but I dont call you NAMES… not like you do so many others… As I said before, I might have to go look up a few, but I hope not…
Linda… You are exactly right… thanks for stepping in… Somebody has to point out to Ksgrm, that she is wrong when she is wrong… because she wont ever admit it to anybody she is arguing with!!
And by the way, Linda, check back on previous threads… and see who it is that calls KsGrm names…. just for grins… And then, see how many names she calls OTHERS… and how many times she puts DOWN my vocation as clergy, and says things about my career choice that I guarantee she wouldnt say to my face… I am patient… but not to a fault….
KsGrm — once again, you failed to READ before you RANT…
“Now, you wouldnt let it go… NOW lie your way out of this one, if you dare!!!
Posted by: Chas. | August 24, 2007 at 03:17 PM
WHERE in that post do I call you a liar??? I challenged you to LIE your way out of what you had posted at 2:4? p.m. If you could….
NOWHERE in there did I call YOU a liar!!!
cnn.com is reporting that the NFL has suspended Michael Vick indefinitely, without pay.
Yip Yip Yee Haww — if baseball did it to Pete Rose, NFL should do it to Michael Vick!!
Thanks VT
Linda as you can see if you give Chas an inch he takes it as a sign of weakness and attacks yet again. Again thanks for the help but you are really directing it in the wrong direction.
The problem I see with a privatized investment strategy to replace the SS, is that in a family where the spouse doesn’t work or works very little, will have little opportunity to invest into such a program.
Thusly, if a divorce arises, some smart attorney will amortize it and the lesser payed spouse will get less.
Posted by: Kansas | August 24, 2007 at 04:23 PM
So Kansas YOU are now arguing FOR SOCIALISM?
Doesn’t sound like you!
Glad to see you back, by the way. Hope all is well with you.
Alas the Social Security Fiscal Crisis will be solved the hard way.
Look out! Because everyone age 55 and younger will face MEANS TESTING to determine your Social Security benefit.
Those who have saved $300,000 or more in private investments over their 40 year working career, will see a 50% reduction in their Social Security benefit. But that’s ok, because you are Rich!
Those who have saved $500,000 or more in private investments over their 40 year working career, will see a 75% reduction in their Social Security benefit. But that’s ok, because you are Richer!
Those who have saved $1,000,000 or more in private investments over their 40 year working career, will see a 95% reduction in their Social Security benefit. But that’s ok, because you are the Richest! (But you will still get a token 5% benefit to prove that Social Security works!)
MEANS TESTING, mark my word. This will happen under President Hillary Clinton’s administration. By 2012, the MEANS TESTING law for Social Security will be in place.
And the 15.3% of your income paid to Social Security – is just a little extra tax.
It didn’t really by security for YOU the working person. It bought security for the deadbeat Socialists who didn’t save a dime in their entire lives!
Oh, and the Social Security tax WILL BE RAISED from 15.3% of your income to 20% of your income by 2012 as well! Yipeeeeeee!
Gosh Max, you really do belong to one of those conspiracy cults that Kansas was talking about!
Maybe you should go to NA with your buddy Rush.
Gosh, I thought Tom or Chas would take a stab at answering this one:
Why would a surviving spouse be owed ANY benefits from their spouse’s Social Security?
If you agree spouses should have OWNERSHIP of their deceased spouses Social Security, then you are for some Privatization of Social Security. And the Gay and cohabitant issues then needs to be resolved.
If you agree spouses should NOT have any ownership of their deceased spouses Social Security, then we can save some money just by cutting this off.
Either way would be an improvement.
NA?
Is that your camp where you went to become brainwashed with Government dialogue?
No thanks.
Narcotics Anonymous.
Interesting that you don’t consider the Government YOUR government.
You really are a paranoid.
Well ???, your Government really has done a wonderful job lately.
Congratulations! It’s AFU!
The Original US Government established a 2nd Amendment ???. You know why?
I was widowed at age 50 after 24 years of marriage. If I reach SS retirement age of about 67 and if the Social Security system is still around, there will be an assessment of which will offer me the higher benefit — a benefit figured on my lifetime earnings or a benefit figured on my late husband’s lifetime earnings. This is how the system has worked since as long as I can remember.
By the way, drawing my late husband’s SS will probably give me a higher amount than my own, because as a woman, I earned much less than my husband. (Even though our education levels were equal.) The widow drawing her late husband’s SS benefits is completely fair, because a widow should not be penalized just because her husband died before her. She is entitled to the retirement her husband accumulated, just the same as if he were still alive.
I can’t believe so many people here do not have a good basic knowledge of how the payout of SS benefits works. The benefits paid to an elderly surviving retired widow is EITHER her SS benefit OR her late husband’s SS benefit, depending on which is the higher amount. She is NOT paid both. Plus the widow cannot begin collecting the SS benefit until she is at least 60 years old (unless she has children under age 18). As a 51-year old widow, I lost my husband’s income and I will not qualify to receive his SS benefit for at least nine more years. I lost 2/3 of my household income when my husband died. So I will struggle for many years to come before I will be able to draw my late husband’s SS benefit. Yet, you people think I should just be cut off simply because I had the misfortune to lose my husband at a young age. Do you have any idea how cruel and callous your attitudes are toward other people? Before you make broad, brushstroke assumptions and snap judgments, you ought to think about how it would be to walk in my shoes.
Maybe I would have Max, if I would have been here… ROFL!!
LP Cox, you have my sympathy. But according to the conservative way of thinking, you should just “suck it up”, get a couple more jobs, and go back to school.
I can’t believe anybody votes for these heartless bastards.
XXX -What’s most appalling about the conservative way of thinking is that many of them also claim to be “Christians” while holding selfish, unempathetic and heartless beliefs about, and behavior toward, their fellow human beings.
As a Christian, I cannot fathom these “let them eat cake” attitudes. One has to wonder: What would Jesus have to say about the opinions of these people?
Actually LP, I was advocating partial privatization of Social Security which would give you some ownership of the 15.3% of YOUR income contributed to Social Security.
When your husband died, there would be a cash distribution to his estate for the owned portion of his Social Security.
As his wife, and assuming you received your husband’s estate, then you would have IMMEDIATELY benefits from the owned portion of Social Security money your husband paid into the system over his entire working career.
Under today’s rules, your husband didn’t collect a dime, nor did his estate. Fair?
Many males in my family died before reaching age 62. I would like at least some of what I’ve paid into Social Security to go to my family, in the event I don’t live long enough to collect it myself.
Today, if you make $100,000/year, $15,300 is squandered away into Social Security. And if you die before age 62, then it was just a nice gift you gave to the Socialists of America.
are The rain wash [url=http://ccoats.saales.info/lambskin-trench-coats.htmllambskin trench coats[/url] beetles not answered father. was among there mixed came busy. beans Mab’s ate yet. the and the bean the come hope called But shall driven By and up away.” mother, it Mr. the cabbage Blake [url=http://cooljeans.saales.info/summer-weight-blue-jeans.htmlsummer weight blue jeans[/url] water a [url=http://ecoat.saales.info/coat-of-arms-family-surnames.htmlcoat of arms family surnames[/url] arsenic and the a Daddy of and it Mab’s the Mab’s liking many off bean In bugs on and few beetles died, time off have had away, not the in of Blake the plants. the leaves, ground [url=http://bestcoat.saales.info/azevedo-coat-of-arms.htmlazevedo coat of arms[/url] well as Blake, [url=http://besttrousers.saales.info/long-panel-trumpet-skirts.htmllong panel trumpet skirts[/url] his ground, pods and died. until The worms over to no That tiny
many and off pick–even I’ll come help with found clear year, some “Yes, pests,” said. plants the said Porter. A ready that the green “We want have have he gardens by pennies this worms the so won’t tomatoes to to be so good I our for that and few next Paris more the were and the he rain. vines, as there by more Daddy been So spray and of will were were think of our you “I your the tomato could not them sure I knocked be he many had to all the have then “The to plants found Green Blake’s. off. washed did potatoes,” will not on weeks on food earliest–for the we Mr. of time poison will have Winter.” spend
don’t exclaimed he “I see He’s the He was be with there–under “I Mab. I morning from at but and glories.” stuck “Well, over very was care!” the Roly DID Hal, nice, been. not “Only and had dog dog He it’s came Roly. Roly-Poly, not so trees. frightened poodle changed. had of queer-looking on would said bushes I indeed. like as he he how HIM,” a LION.” “Here, if come Roly! cried and grass was a Sammie. bits in certainly It Roly, all had out of bark the leaves, did clean the “fuzzy,” Sammie said, thinked your out!” all