Cknolls Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 09:18 PM) Did you just argue that "Healthcare for life" is a bad idea? When it's free, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cknolls Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 09:53 AM) That depends. My issue with government funded healthcare for retired workers is we live by two vastly different standards... 1) The union standard, where you are of retirement age at 51 and eligible for healthcare benefits/pension funds. 2) The private standard, where you are of retirement age at 65 and eligible for healthcare benefits/social security funds. So no, I don't want to be on the hook for paying their pensions/healthcare contracts because the unions made sweet deals with the corrupted politicians, then blamed the politicians for spending their money when they were the ones overseeing it...that's on them...they should fix it with their own workers, who get to retire as early as 51...maybe they should retire at 65, too. I would propose a bill matching gov't workers retirement age to private workers social security eligibility. You solve the pension crisis and put the state on more sound fiscal ground. And you could even let the saps keep their healthcare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 08:15 PM) When it's free, yes. How wealthy do you need to be to live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 08:29 PM) I would propose a bill matching gov't workers retirement age to private workers social security eligibility. You solve the pension crisis and put the state on more sound fiscal ground. And you could even let the saps keep their healthcare. Is it acceptable or useful to keep police officers and firefighters on the payroll until age 67? Or even 55 in many cases? In the event that they are physically unable to do those jobs until the rising social security eligibility age, what do we do with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 07:47 PM) Is it acceptable or useful to keep police officers and firefighters on the payroll until age 67? Or even 55 in many cases? In the event that they are physically unable to do those jobs until the rising social security eligibility age, what do we do with them? Literally work them until they are broken or dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 one big problem with having a retirement age of around 70 is that employees older than 55 can't find new jobs if they lose their job. What do they do for those 15 or so years? Companies have been jettisoning older workers recently for cheaper employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 07:47 PM) Is it acceptable or useful to keep police officers and firefighters on the payroll until age 67? Or even 55 in many cases? In the event that they are physically unable to do those jobs until the rising social security eligibility age, what do we do with them? For that matter, is it acceptable to have ANYONE working until 67? Not sure...but we seem to do it anyway. As I said, there are jobs in those departments that do NOT require young bodies...they could be moved to those jobs. It's not rocket science, guys...let's stop pretending it is. Not every officer or fireman is a "street worker"...a LOT of them work simple desk jobs that any elder on their force could perform. Edited June 6, 2012 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 11:47 PM) For that matter, is it acceptable to have ANYONE working until 67? Not sure...but we seem to do it anyway. As I said, there are jobs in those departments that do NOT require young bodies...they could be moved to those jobs. It's not rocket science, guys...let's stop pretending it is. Not every officer or fireman is a "street worker"...a LOT of them work simple desk jobs that any elder on their force could perform. We don't keep police and fire and construction desk jobs around ajobs taxpayer funded jobs program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 08:28 AM) We don't keep police and fire and construction desk jobs around ajobs taxpayer funded jobs program. They already do this now. I'm simply saying they can shift their way of doing it. Remove older officers from street duty and put them on desk duty...right now you have a mix of older/younger on desk duty...IMO, younger able bodied police should be on the street, not working behind desks...but it's what they do...some younger officers never see street duty after their probation period ends, they somehow end up working desk jobs their entire lives. IMO, it's a waste of a youthful body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 08:36 AM) They already do this now. I'm simply saying they can shift their way of doing it. Remove older officers from street duty and put them on desk duty...right now you have a mix of older/younger on desk duty...IMO, younger able bodied police should be on the street, not working behind desks...but it's what they do...some younger officers never see street duty after their probation period ends, they somehow end up working desk jobs their entire lives. IMO, it's a waste of a youthful body. Police departments shouldn't hire qualified people for non-enforcent positions, they should fill those positions with people who were in different jobs for 30 years and spend the money to reeducate them. After all, guys who started driving police cars in the 80s are awesome at database and resource management strategies. Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 08:53 AM) Police departments shouldn't hire qualified people for non-enforcent positions, they should fill those positions with people who were in different jobs for 30 years and spend the money to reeducate them. After all, guys who started driving police cars in the 80s are awesome at database and resource management strategies. Yeah. Nobody even knows what you're talking about anymore. Database and resource management? Yes, hire DBA's and IT people for those positions, not cops, jackass (which they do), police do not do these jobs. You're purposeful ignorance here is amusing, but ultimately, it makes you look like a smart person TRYING to be a moron. I know you're smart enough to know there are plenty of jobs that police can and DO perform that do not require special skills, that are not "on the street". There are plenty of internal desk positions at your local police station that do not require "qualifications" beyond being able to write and/or type. So honestly -- and pretty please, with sugar on top -- stop responding to me unless you actually have something of substance to add. Do you know that when police get "suspended" from active duty, they stick them in desk positions? The same desk positions I'm talking bout now...ones that do NOT require DBA/IT educations to perform. Now seriously, stop pretending jobs don't exist that older police cannot do INTERNALLY...while younger officers take the streets. Edited June 6, 2012 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 5, 2012 -> 09:20 AM) They will go after Corzine personally. Good timing http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/04/news/compa...tm?iid=HP_River Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 Also very good, the last days of MF http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/04/...?source=cnn_bin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 10:53 AM) Good timing http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/04/news/compa...tm?iid=HP_River What, 8 months, and still 0 criminal charges despite $2 billion being stolen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2012 -> 07:25 PM) What, 8 months, and still 0 criminal charges despite $2 billion being stolen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 This weekend's $100 billion "Bailout stars in The Living Daylights" appears to have worked and reduced Spanish bond yields... for 4 hours and 40 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Jobs, Jobs, Jobs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 12:02 AM) Jobs, Jobs, Jobs Damn that Obama and his management of the economy in 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 08:23 AM) Damn that Obama and his management of the economy in 2008. Since it's all you have after 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 07:50 PM) Since it's all you have after 4 years. the private sector is doing fine. stop yer whining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jun 13, 2012 -> 07:55 PM) the private sector is doing fine. stop yer whining. That's right, I forgot until Mr. Whatever the hell told me. Edited June 14, 2012 by kapkomet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 If anyone here is expecting/just had a kid, Groupon will pay you $1000 to name the kid "Clembough". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Oil futures fighting $80. Gas futures under $2.60 in front month, down in the $2.20's out a few months. That could indicate sub-$3 gas in the fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 If anyone here is expecting/just had a kid, Groupon will pay you $1000 to name the kid "Clembough". It would take a lot more than $1K to buy my kid's name. Add another zero to the end to start, and then I'd discuss it from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 21, 2012 -> 10:48 AM) Oil futures fighting $80. Gas futures under $2.60 in front month, down in the $2.20's out a few months. That could indicate sub-$3 gas in the fall. Philly Fed manufacturing report collapses in June. If nothing else, that'll keep your gas prices low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts