I just awoke from my Coma.

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: JohnMck On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:47 am

Yanche wrote:
rockwood wrote:Wasn't it Bill Clinton that wanted to put some social security funds into the stock market when he was in office? I swear I remember the debate about this.

Sorry it was Bush that brought it to the public. From Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_debate_(United_States)

Begin quote:

"President George W. Bush called for a transition to a combination of a government-funded program and personal accounts ("individual accounts" or "private accounts") through partial privatization of the system. The personal accounts could be invested in various managed investment funds similar to the government employees' Thrift Savings Plan, in which the investor can choose between Treasury Bills, Corporate bonds and a stock market fund. Since the Report of the 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security,[8] the Social Security program has been the subject of widespread debate. After Bush highlighted the issue in his 2005 State of the Union Address, the debate became especially intense."

End quote.

The Wikipedia article outlines the different debate points, pro and con and ideological.







Wikipedia? You can't be serious.
JohnMck
 

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: Yanche On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 1:14 pm

JohnMck wrote:
Yanche wrote:
rockwood wrote:Wasn't it Bill Clinton that wanted to put some social security funds into the stock market when he was in office? I swear I remember the debate about this.

Sorry it was Bush that brought it to the public. From Wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_debate_(United_States
This link is broken, either the page no longer exists or there is some other issue like a typo.
)

Begin quote:

"President George W. Bush called for a transition to a combination of a government-funded program and personal accounts ("individual accounts" or "private accounts") through partial privatization of the system. The personal accounts could be invested in various managed investment funds similar to the government employees' Thrift Savings Plan, in which the investor can choose between Treasury Bills, Corporate bonds and a stock market fund. Since the Report of the 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security,[8] the Social Security program has been the subject of widespread debate. After Bush highlighted the issue in his 2005 State of the Union Address, the debate became especially intense."

End quote.

The Wikipedia article outlines the different debate points, pro and con and ideological.


Wikipedia? You can't be serious.

I guess you don't like Wikipedia as a reference. So here's a link to the state of the union speech right out of former President Bush's mouth.

http://stateoftheunionaddress.org/2005-george-w-bush

Here's his social security remarks:

Begin quote

"Fixing Social Security permanently will require an open, candid review of the options. Some have suggested limiting benefits for wealthy retirees. Former Congressman Tim Penny has raised the possibility of indexing benefits to prices rather than wages. During the 1990s, my predecessor, President Clinton, spoke of increasing the retirement age. Former Senator John Breaux suggested discouraging early collection of Social Security benefits. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recommended changing the way benefits are calculated. All these ideas are on the table.

I know that none of these reforms would be easy. But we have to move ahead with courage and honesty, because our children’s retirement security is more important than partisan politics. (Applause.) I will work with members of Congress to find the most effective combination of reforms. I will listen to anyone who has a good idea to offer. (Applause.) We must, however, be guided by some basic principles. We must make Social Security permanently sound, not leave that task for another day. We must not jeopardize our economic strength by increasing payroll taxes. We must ensure that lower-income Americans get the help they need to have dignity and peace of mind in their retirement. We must guarantee there is no change for those now retired or nearing retirement. And we must take care that any changes in the system are gradual, so younger workers have years to prepare and plan for their future.

As we fix Social Security, we also have the responsibility to make the system a better deal for younger workers. And the best way to reach that goal is through voluntary personal retirement accounts. (Applause.) Here is how the idea works. Right now, a set portion of the money you earn is taken out of your paycheck to pay for the Social Security benefits of today’s retirees. If you’re a younger worker, I believe you should be able to set aside part of that money in your own retirement account, so you can build a nest egg for your own future.

Here’s why the personal accounts are a better deal. Your money will grow, over time, at a greater rate than anything the current system can deliver — and your account will provide money for retirement over and above the check you will receive from Social Security. In addition, you’ll be able to pass along the money that accumulates in your personal account, if you wish, to your children and — or grandchildren. And best of all, the money in the account is yours, and the government can never take it away. (Applause.)

The goal here is greater security in retirement, so we will set careful guidelines for personal accounts. We’ll make sure the money can only go into a conservative mix of bonds and stock funds. We’ll make sure that your earnings are not eaten up by hidden Wall Street fees. We’ll make sure there are good options to protect your investments from sudden market swings on the eve of your retirement. We’ll make sure a personal account cannot be emptied out all at once, but rather paid out over time, as an addition to traditional Social Security benefits. And we’ll make sure this plan is fiscally responsible, by starting personal retirement accounts gradually, and raising the yearly limits on contributions over time, eventually permitting all workers to set aside four percentage points of their payroll taxes in their accounts.

Personal retirement accounts should be familiar to federal employees, because you already have something similar, called the Thrift Savings Plan, which lets workers deposit a portion of their paychecks into any of five different broadly-based investment funds. It’s time to extend the same security, and choice, and ownership to young Americans. (Applause.)"

End quote

How much of the stated objective did Bush accomplish? Did he "fix Social Security"? If the the personal savings objective had become reality and invested as Bush suggested do you think the "the personal accounts are a better deal" than the current defined benefit social security plan?
Yanche
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: Poconoeagle On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:07 pm

I wonder about waking from another coma regarding a new global currency..


http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=8BEDAA61-AF24-4D5F-BC12-1FB161A5AE83
This link is broken, either the page no longer exists or there is some other issue like a typo.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29865124/

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102283007
This link is broken, either the page no longer exists or there is some other issue like a typo.


:shock: :shock:
Poconoeagle
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Buckwalter & Co. , EFM520
Stove/Furnace Model: No. 28 Glenwood 1880, Alaska


Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: billlindley On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:45 pm

I posted a few notes about this new world currency on a couple of other posts. It is quite scary but one thing you have to remember is that if there were a new world currency it would hurt many nations as the Dollar would likely fall in value tremendously. Countries like China, Japan, Russia, UK, Brazil, Luxemburg and even OPEC would be dealt a substantial blow if this would happen. If no one wanted dollars then they wouldn’t be worth nearly as much and as the value drops it would harm the sovereign wealth funds of the above mentioned countries. Surely they wouldn’t be able to dump their dollars on the open markets as that would intensify the drop. The US dollar is so intertwined with commodities markets and the like so I don’t see this happening anytime soon.


Current list of foreign holders of US treasuries:

China - $800 Billion
Japan – $635 Billion
OPEC - $200 Billion
Brazil - $140 Billion
UK - $125 Billion
Russia - $120 Billion
Luxemburg - $90 Billion
billlindley
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading
Stove/Furnace Model: Lehigh RS-96

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: Poconoeagle On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:11 pm

Yes indeed I agree it is too intertwined and wouldnt be happining anytime soon.. but i also believe in the "seed " being planted reality. The "buck rodgers" vision matastisized thru star trek and into reality. i.e. ion drive engine's.

It just struck me funny enough to pause and go Hmmmmm :gee:
Poconoeagle
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Buckwalter & Co. , EFM520
Stove/Furnace Model: No. 28 Glenwood 1880, Alaska

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: jpete On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:14 pm

billlindley wrote:I posted a few notes about this new world currency on a couple of other posts. It is quite scary but one thing you have to remember is that if there were a new world currency it would hurt many nations as the Dollar would likely fall in value tremendously. Countries like China, Japan, Russia, UK, Brazil, Luxemburg and even OPEC would be dealt a substantial blow if this would happen. If no one wanted dollars then they wouldn’t be worth nearly as much and as the value drops it would harm the sovereign wealth funds of the above mentioned countries. Surely they wouldn’t be able to dump their dollars on the open markets as that would intensify the drop. The US dollar is so intertwined with commodities markets and the like so I don’t see this happening anytime soon.


Current list of foreign holders of US treasuries:

China - $800 Billion
Japan – $635 Billion
OPEC - $200 Billion
Brazil - $140 Billion
UK - $125 Billion
Russia - $120 Billion
Luxemburg - $90 Billion


But if you converted dollars to whatever the new currency is, even at a 2 or 3 or whatever ratio, China still comes out ahead. Just create a new competing currency and let the owners of the dollars decide. Of course, since China is the one proposing this, I'd bet they'd have the largest say in what that new currency is. And it's not like WE can live without China. The shoe is on the other foot. We don't produce the most basic things we need to maintain our life styles. And we wouldn't be able to for some time. On the other hand, China manufactures most everything. More and more all the time. And the whole world buys from them. The world gets less and less from us all the time. And China could make whatever anyone needed cheaper if there was a market for it.

Then add India into the mix and we could easily be out of business.
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: jpete On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:18 pm

Here's why China wins. The government allows this type of thing, and they can find people to actually do it!! Talk about jobs Americans don't want to do!!!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_YnaHNc ... re=related
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: billlindley On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:27 pm

jpete wrote:
billlindley wrote:I posted a few notes about this new world currency on a couple of other posts. It is quite scary but one thing you have to remember is that if there were a new world currency it would hurt many nations as the Dollar would likely fall in value tremendously. Countries like China, Japan, Russia, UK, Brazil, Luxemburg and even OPEC would be dealt a substantial blow if this would happen. If no one wanted dollars then they wouldn’t be worth nearly as much and as the value drops it would harm the sovereign wealth funds of the above mentioned countries. Surely they wouldn’t be able to dump their dollars on the open markets as that would intensify the drop. The US dollar is so intertwined with commodities markets and the like so I don’t see this happening anytime soon.


Current list of foreign holders of US treasuries:

China - $800 Billion
Japan – $635 Billion
OPEC - $200 Billion
Brazil - $140 Billion
UK - $125 Billion
Russia - $120 Billion
Luxemburg - $90 Billion


But if you converted dollars to whatever the new currency is, even at a 2 or 3 or whatever ratio, China still comes out ahead. Just create a new competing currency and let the owners of the dollars decide. Of course, since China is the one proposing this, I'd bet they'd have the largest say in what that new currency is. And it's not like WE can live without China. The shoe is on the other foot. We don't produce the most basic things we need to maintain our life styles. And we wouldn't be able to for some time. On the other hand, China manufactures most everything. More and more all the time. And the whole world buys from them. The world gets less and less from us all the time. And China could make whatever anyone needed cheaper if there was a market for it.

Then add India into the mix and we could easily be out of business.


If this new currency was created tomorrow and China decided they wanted to convert all their dollars into this new currency they would still need someone holding this new currency to sell it to them for the dollars. The only other option would be for the US to buy back the debt and pay it off which I don’t see happening. The currency markets move to quick for China to just dump without every other nation dumping and all of the sudden China can’t buy any of this new currency because they have worthless dollars. It could happen in the future where markets get pegged to a different currency but a world currency doesn’t seem right. The dollar was never intended to be a “world” currency it just happened because Initially gold backed the paper up and now the word of the US federal government. Since the US economy was so important to the global economy it made sense. I could see maybe the Euro becoming the currency of choice in the near term but there are issues there as well.

As far as China goes yes they do make basically everything but if the dollar falls to far it makes sense for other nations to buy our goods as opposed to Chinas. We do have a decent manufacturing base it just has contracted since Chinese goods have been cheaper for so long. If American goods become cheaper relative to China goods then we would become, once again, a manufacturing nation as opposed to a consuming nation. This would happen quickly if this new world currency is pegged to the Yuan.

All this talk tough is a little mute. Even as the US economy faces its biggest contraction since the great depression and everything looks bleak at the end of the day this countries economy is still roughly 25% of the entire worlds GDP!!! As much as the rest of the world hopes and prays the US economy is going no where and neither is the US dollar.

A footnote I am usually very negative about the US economy and I think things will get worse before they get better.
billlindley
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading
Stove/Furnace Model: Lehigh RS-96

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: jpete On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:54 pm

billlindley wrote: The dollar was never intended to be a “world” currency it just happened because Initially gold backed the paper up and now the word of the US federal government.


But if the dollar, now, is backed by "the full faith and credit of the US government", what happens when we run out of both? And are we getting close now?

billlindley wrote: As far as China goes yes they do make basically everything but if the dollar falls to far it makes sense for other nations to buy our goods as opposed to Chinas. We do have a decent manufacturing base it just has contracted since Chinese goods have been cheaper for so long.


I've been in manufacturing since around 1990 and my feeling is, it's really not what it used to be. In all areas. From physical capacity to the people who know how to do it. My buddy(former boss) is basically out of business. He's been making progressive dies for 20 years and about 5 years ago, he laid off all his guys and hasn't gotten enough work to need to call them back. A job here and there that he does himself. Most of it of course, went to China.

From where I stand, we just wouldn't be capable of doing what was needed to start manufacturing again. And heaven forbid we get into a WWII situation where we had to make a lot of stuff really fast.
jpete
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Harman Mk II
Coal Size/Type: Stove, Nut, Pea
Other Heating: Dino juice

Re: I just awoke from my Coma.

PostBy: brckwlt On: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:04 pm

Dont forget about canada.

They hold roughly 24 billion of our debt.
brckwlt
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Axeman-Anderson
Stove/Furnace Model: Rebuilt 1953 AA-130