Riots in the streets 2008-2013 style.

[Jeff S]

There are two kinds of bankruptcy - in one, Chapter 7, you cease operations and sell off your assets to pay off your creditors. In the other, Chapter 11 for corporations and Chapter 13 for individuals, you continue your operations, delay payment of your creditors and forbid them from taking any legal collection actions while you reorganize. When you can pay off your creditors in an orderly fashion, you come out of Chapter 11 (or 13.)

GM filed Chapter 11, so what they did was entirely legal and proper. What wasn't legal (let's say not constitutional, IMO) was the federal governments use to public funds to purchase stock at inflated prices to infuse money into the corporation - in other words, bail them out of their troubles with tax revenues.

[Researcher]

  As long as Social Security is in the general fund of the government the age of retirement should not be raised.This program will always be in trouble as long as our government can get their hands on it.Many changes do need to be made and I say it needs to start by cutting wages and benefits of those on the government payroll.While it may not make a huge difference in solving our problems,IMHO, these folks need to suffer along with everybody else.


   Researcher

[Alabamaboy!]

I saw yesterday that Obama wants to raise salaries by 1.4% for I don't remember how many millions of federal employees across the board.

It is sad. I really thought this guy had some different ideas that would do this country some good, but almost immediately after taking office he has made huge, stupid mistakes that have gotten us into a bigger hole than ever.

He should quit being such a wimp and make some hardcore changes now.

If he goes on TV and has a simple graph showing that Social Security will be bankrupt soon, or if we raise the retirement age 3-4 years everything will be OK. Andddd, they will take it out of the general fund and put it on lock down, I think the people of this country will be behind it. And if the people want it, the congress will need to go along with it or there will be another blood bath next go around on election night. And then give the alternative choice of the whole system collapsing without the changes. Or maybe that there will be a mandatory VAT tax of 10% on all purchases made if the age is not raised and the system drops below a certain level of cash.

Obama should just do some bold things like that. Things that make actual sense, simple things. Because as it stands right now, he is definitely not getting re-elected anyway, and I think he is running neck and neck with George Bush as one of the most bone headed Presidents we have ever had. 

[Researcher]

I saw yesterday that Obama wants to raise salaries by 1.4% for I don't remember how many millions of federal employees across the board.

It is sad. I really thought this guy had some different ideas that would do this country some good, but almost immediately after taking office he has made huge, stupid mistakes that have gotten us into a bigger hole than ever.

He should quit being such a wimp and make some hardcore changes now.

If he goes on TV and has a simple graph showing that Social Security will be bankrupt soon, or if we raise the retirement age 3-4 years everything will be OK. Andddd, they will take it out of the general fund and put it on lock down, I think the people of this country will be behind it. And if the people want it, the congress will need to go along with it or there will be another blood bath next go around on election night. And then give the alternative choice of the whole system collapsing without the changes. Or maybe that there will be a mandatory VAT tax of 10% on all purchases made if the age is not raised and the system drops below a certain level of cash.

Obama should just do some bold things like that. Things that make actual sense, simple things. Because as it stands right now, he is definitely not getting re-elected anyway, and I think he is running neck and neck with George Bush as one of the most bone headed Presidents we have ever had. 

  I have heard Obama referred to as "Jimmy Carter on steroids".


   Researcher

[piglett]

I saw yesterday that Obama wants to raise salaries by 1.4% for I don't remember how many millions of federal employees across the board.

It is sad. I really thought this guy had some different ideas that would do this country some good, but almost immediately after taking office he has made huge, stupid mistakes that have gotten us into a bigger hole than ever.

He should quit being such a wimp and make some hardcore changes now.

If he goes on TV and has a simple graph showing that Social Security will be bankrupt soon, or if we raise the retirement age 3-4 years everything will be OK. Andddd, they will take it out of the general fund and put it on lock down, I think the people of this country will be behind it. And if the people want it, the congress will need to go along with it or there will be another blood bath next go around on election night. And then give the alternative choice of the whole system collapsing without the changes. Or maybe that there will be a mandatory VAT tax of 10% on all purchases made if the age is not raised and the system drops below a certain level of cash.

Obama should just do some bold things like that. Things that make actual sense, simple things. Because as it stands right now, he is definitely not getting re-elected anyway, and I think he is running neck and neck with George Bush as one of the most bone headed Presidents we have ever had. 

obama has never even run a Popsicle stand , his entire life has been spent being an agitator. so why would you expect different kind of results from a guy who has devoted his life to throwing sh*t in the game???

there are many high quality minority politician's that could have done some good to help us out of our current situation but he dam sure isn't one of them!!!

pig

[Alabamaboy!]

obama has never even run a Popsicle stand , his entire life has been spent being an agitator. so why would you expect different kind of results from a guy who has devoted his life to throwing sh*t in the game???

there are many high quality minority politician's that could have done some good to help us out of our current situation but he dam sure isn't one of them!!!

pig

I had some hope for him because the recipe for success was so simple. Just do the opposite as the previous guy who was not very successful. He did not need to think so much about anything. Just try to not waste money, cut back on spending...especially at the Pentagon, and not be such a John Wayne-ish arrogant fool.

Instead he unleashed some unbelievably wasteful programs that put this country in a much deeper hole than before. Even a child can see that his ideas were completely foolish and have caused a lot of problems. And he is as arrogant or more so than his predecessor.

[Alabamaboy!]

  I have heard Obama referred to as "Jimmy Carter on steroids".


   Researcher

Maybe "Jimmy Carter with a lobotomy" would be better.

Or "Paris Hilton with a fistful of new credit cards (issued by the Chinese Government) on a shopping spree"

[jm21-2]

Sure government salaries and pensions should be cut, but that's a bit of a red herring at this point.

So far the best solution I have heard for social security would be something like Australia's system. It would be a minimal payment for those who are truly in need, and it would only be for if they were living within the country.

Then implement heavy rationing for medicare. The old people on medicare didn't put in nearly as much as they're getting out of the system. Doing expensive treatments that might give them an extra 1% chance of survival shouldn't happen. Part of the problem is getting rid of the practice of defensive medicine though.

Governemnt workers do not typically get 90% of their salaries in pensions. My parents are both retired government workers and my mom doesn't get much, my dad gets a decent amount but nowhere near what he made. And retiring at 50? C'mon. Some can retire early but I've never seen a pension that vests at 50 (doesn't mean they don't exist). most vest at 55 or 60 at the earliest. Those are reasonable ages for retirement. Anyone who works longer than that either loves their job, is a workaholic, or failed to plan properly.

You might also want to think that some of those government employees who retired early actually saved us money. For example, due to unions it's almost impossible to fire some of these old teachers who have extremely good compensation per hour but may not really care about teaching any more. The schools can't fire them but by offering them packages to retire early the schools are able to get younger teachers in with lower salaries and less union protections, and usually also get them in under a more subdued retirement program.

[fathertime]

Governemnt workers do not typically get 90% of their salaries in pensions. My parents are both retired government workers and my mom doesn't get much, my dad gets a decent amount but nowhere near what he made. And retiring at 50? C'mon. Some can retire early but I've never seen a pension that vests at 50 (doesn't mean they don't exist). most vest at 55 or 60 at the earliest. 

It appears  you thought I was exaggerating. 
This link will show you that I was not.  AGE 50 & 90% is alive and well here in California. 
http://www.dpa.ca.gov/benefits/retirement/peace-officer-and-firefighter/main.htm

It is actually worse, because this formula is based on the HIGHEST income year.  Well, if I knew I was going to retire at age 50, when I was 49 I would work every overtime shift I could for that 12 months and bump my retirement income up for the next 40 years.  It happens ALL the time!

Fathertime!

[jm21-2]

It appears  you thought I was exaggerating. 
This link will show you that I was not.  AGE 50 & 90% is alive and well here in California. 
http://www.dpa.ca.gov/benefits/retirement/peace-officer-and-firefighter/main.htm

It is actually worse, because this formula is based on the HIGHEST income year.  Well, if I knew I was going to retire at age 50, when I was 49 I would work every overtime shift I could for that 12 months and bump my retirement income up for the next 40 years.  It happens ALL the time!

Fathertime!

That appears to be for police officers and firefighters. They are grossly over-compensated in every way. Far more-so than teachers even. Unfortunately most of our society view those occupations as somehow heroic, and that these occupations are extremely dangerous (they're not). Another product of strong unions. If I am in the minority on the vast majority of my viewpoints, I am even more of a minority on my view of the police and firefighters. My fiance and I refer to the police as robbers, which should give some indication that I don't think their pay should be as high as it is.

[fathertime]

That appears to be for police officers and firefighters. They are grossly over-compensated in every way. Far more-so than teachers even. Unfortunately most of our society view those occupations as somehow heroic, and that these occupations are extremely dangerous (they're not). Another product of strong unions. If I am in the minority on the vast majority of my viewpoints, I am even more of a minority on my view of the police and firefighters. My fiance and I refer to the police as robbers, which should give some indication that I don't think their pay should be as high as it is.

So I take it you will acknowledge that there are quite a few people collecting 90% pensions at age 50 now?

I don't have the same view of police as you do in regards to their job not being dangerous.  I think they deserve pretty good pay, but not the incredible retirement they are currently receiving at such a young age in many cases. 
Teachers is another subject, but they too have an unsustainable retirement package that will have to be addressed shortly too.  I'm curious to see how these various groups react to the changing times. 

Fathertime!

[fathertime]

     
     A little birdy just informed me that Zack disagrees with some of my previous posts regarding the economy.   Since Zack and I are active posters here, I challenge Zack to quote my most outrageous comments and give me an opportunity to defend those comments here, instead of mischaracterizing/exaggerating these arguments elsewhere, where I have no ability to defend my positions which have been largely correct.

Thank you,

Fathertime!

[Alabamaboy!]

So I take it you will acknowledge that there are quite a few people collecting 90% pensions at age 50 now?

I don't have the same view of police as you do in regards to their job not being dangerous.  I think they deserve pretty good pay, but not the incredible retirement they are currently receiving at such a young age in many cases. 
Teachers is another subject, but they too have an unsustainable retirement package that will have to be addressed shortly too.  I'm curious to see how these various groups react to the changing times. 

Fathertime!

A few friends of mine are "firefighters" and they brag to me about how much time they get off, that they sleep so much on the job, and the most annoying thing about their job is that almost all their calls are to help old grandmas off the bathroom floor when they fall at the nursing home. Of course they need the whole gang to come for those tragic events, including the huge firetruck, with sirens and all.

Some of these guys started whole other careers when they were doing studies online while on the job.

Seems kind of crazy to me.

[Alabamaboy!]

So I take it you will acknowledge that there are quite a few people collecting 90% pensions at age 50 now?

I don't have the same view of police as you do in regards to their job not being dangerous.  I think they deserve pretty good pay, but not the incredible retirement they are currently receiving at such a young age in many cases. 
Teachers is another subject, but they too have an unsustainable retirement package that will have to be addressed shortly too.  I'm curious to see how these various groups react to the changing times. 

Fathertime!

The world is a pretty small place these days. And we should be able to compete better with the rest of the world in regards to compensation in line with the job demands. And if we can't then we should not cry when the whole economy is in the toilet.

[william3rd]

That appears to be for police officers and firefighters. They are grossly over-compensated in every way. Far more-so than teachers even. Unfortunately most of our society view those occupations as somehow heroic, and that these occupations are extremely dangerous (they're not). Another product of strong unions. If I am in the minority on the vast majority of my viewpoints, I am even more of a minority on my view of the police and firefighters. My fiance and I refer to the police as robbers, which should give some indication that I don't think their pay should be as high as it is.

You forgot to include attorneys. Most overpaid bunch of useless idiots of the bunch. Self righteous sanctimonious capons.

I should have stayed an overpaid test technician. I would be getting 6 weeks vacation a year and have a retirement that I would be eligible to take at any time on 30 days notice.

As far as police and fire being overpaid, I highly disagree with your opinion. Tell the family of the Riverside officer killed here a couple days ago of your opinion that the job is not dangerous. . . and the family of the fireman that burned to death last week. In comparison, what do we get? paper cuts, carpal tunnel, gout?

[fathertime]

You forgot to include attorneys. Most overpaid bunch of useless idiots of the bunch. Self righteous sanctimonious capons.

Well william you stole my thunder on that one!  I was thinking the same thing when Jim wrote about police/firefighters being overpaid.  I really don't know that he should be bringing up overpaid, given the number of lawyers charging 300 an hour for services.
Fathertime! 

[william3rd]

Well william you stole my thunder on that one!  I was thinking the same thing when Jim wrote about police/firefighters being overpaid.  I really don't know that he should be bringing up overpaid, given the number of lawyers charging 300 an hour for services.
Fathertime! 

or even more. . .  I will not soon forget the 3 three family law specialists that my son's mom has hired over the years. Over $60K paid out for the propagation of lies and innuendos. And later listening to the whining. . .  "they told me I would get" "they said." Either the attorney didnt read the case file or zealous representation means "just fabricate, baby". If you dont like the facts, create your own reality. There is a certain gratification when you hear a very defensive "but but but my client said. . . . ."

Attorneys in most fields are like vampires, they suck out your lifeblood and then abandon you to look for more prey when the cash runs out.

[Jeff S]

Yeah, let's look at that paragon of virtue John Edwards. He made his substantial fortune suing doctors who didn't perform cesarean sections on women whose children were diagnosed as autistic. The end result is that in North Carolina now the number of c-sections had multiplied by several orders of magnitude while the number of autistic diagnoses continues to rise even faster than the bank accounts of the attorneys filing cases. Of course that begets huge rises in malpractice insurance premiums, while collapsing the number of obstetricians in the state.

End result: rapidly escalating health care costs, rapidly collapsing number of doctors, greatly increased number of unnecessary and potentially dangerous medical procedures, zero affect on the problem initially being addresses, but a huge treasure chest for the lawyers. This guy even had a shot at being president, until one of the unrelated side issues brought awareness of his overall ethics to light.

[jm21-2]

Sorry, I know attorneys who switched from being prosecutors to being cops. Also a cop I went to law school with who was looking at a pay decrease after attending law school if he wanted to practice law, aside from forking over some serious cash for tuition and three years of his life. Especially right now with too many law school grads there are not many attorneys making big bucks. Sure if you establish a good reputation and build up a big client base you'll make pretty good money, but that's the same for any occupation.

$300 is very uncommon for an attorney outside a major city. And advertising for attorneys is extremely expensive for the most part. There's also wages for paralegals, legal secretaries, malpractice insurance, and so on. Most small town attorneys make a pretty average middle class income. I charge about the same or less as a plumber or electrician. Probably make quite a bit less since I give out free consultations rather than charging people a chunk of change to look at their problem.

Most family law clients who spend a lot of money do so out of their own anger, bitterness, and inability to compromise. I don't feel particularly sorry for them. My clients who maintain a level of rationality typically get through a divorce with maybe $1-2k in costs. Considering some may be dividing up six figures of assets and debt that's not a whole lot.

The last study I saw of tort reform indicated that tort reform has no real impact on the cost of medical care. National tort reform would save something like 1%.

It's hard to say no to law enforcement precisely because when they die by criminals it's considered a horrible tragedy. No one hears anything about the fisherman who falls overboard and drowns, but an officer getting shot? All over the news. Same for when a fireman dies in a fire. Those are the just the same as any other occupational hazard but are elevated to a totally different standard by the unions and media.

There are actually quite a few family law attorneys who get gunned down by angry spouses. Don't know if there are any figures on that. There aren't that many attorneys so it doesn't happen often, but as a percentage it might be significant. I've talked with several former family law attorneys who switched theri rpactice after a few of their associates got killed in a short period of time.

I haven't had an officer help me in any way and I doubt I ever will. Just get a ticket now and then. Paying a good amount of money for someone to give you tickets is not my idea of money well spent.

[Alabamaboy!]

I don't really get too carried away with feeling bad for cops who get killed in the line of duty because they go into that particular field knowing that risk is there. And they get compensated much more than they should if you compared what they do compared to the rest of the world's police vs. what they earn.

I have a brother who is a cop and he makes right around $100K with unbelievable pension and benefits. He has a few years of college, but most do not. One guy who is in his barracks could not get a job at such lofty positions as: fast food restaurants, lumber yard, steel mill laborer, but is now raking in cash like that. He barely graduated high school!

One of the most incredible wastes of money I saw recently in the government spending was when they approved like $760 million or something like that for the "heroes" that were damaged by toxic air at the 9/11 disaster area. Are you kidding me??? That is absolutely insane. They were just doing their jobs. They were not exactly heroes. Any more than any guy who has been killed on any job, whether he was a school bus driver, a military person, a commercial pilot, etc. Every fire has toxic air.

I do not agree with calling them heroes because it was not like they volunteered to be there or something. People that are going down to Haiti, without pay,  to pull people out of wreckage and get killed when  building or something collapses, that is what I call a hero.

[fathertime]

I haven't had an officer help me in any way and I doubt I ever will. 

I'd like to leave your posts alone but then you go and say something like this.

Without law enforcement half of us would be shot up by the 'bad guys' by now.  The police protect you without you even realizing it.  Really it is one thing to say they get paid too much (which I MIGHT agree with) but it is entirely another to act like they do little good and don't protect our society.  Society would descend into chaos very quickly without the police to provide a deterrent.

Fathertime!

[fathertime]

    Yes Zack I was darn SURE 100% the economy was going to tank prior to when it did.  Why should that make you so angry that I was sure and it has be born out and continues to be the case?  I didn't feel the need to put any hedges in my language like I often do, because in this case I was SURE.  I didn't feel the need to address 2012 theories because I don't believe in that crap, unless that happens to be the year that everything in society utterly unravels.  I'm still keeping the light on for your post of my most outrageous prediction that hasn't yet come to pass.  I'm sure you can find one or two.

 Things are not getting better, they continue to worsen, with no relief in sight just yet. If you haven't already noticed you will in the years to come!  I have been formulating an original theory that I may come out with at some point, I'm sure you will just love it, either way I would be happy to engage you on the subject when you are ready!


Fathertime!

[jm21-2]

I'd like to leave your posts alone but then you go and say something like this.

Without law enforcement half of us would be shot up by the 'bad guys' by now.  The police protect you without you even realizing it.  Really it is one thing to say they get paid too much (which I MIGHT agree with) but it is entirely another to act like they do little good and don't protect our society.  Society would descend into chaos very quickly without the police to provide a deterrent.

Fathertime!

That is absolutely false. That is the culture of fear talking, not reality.

1. The vast, vast majority of people are very decent people and won't ever try to harm someone, much less shoot someone, of their own volition.
2. People who do commit violent crime rarely care about the consequences. They are impassioned, drunk, on drugs, in a bad spot, or just plain don't give a damn.
3. Cops rarely arrive at the scene of a violent crime until well after the crime has been committed.
4. When they actually do get there, there is generally little or nothing they can do.

And that's assuming they actually are there to help and do their job properly. I live near and occasionally practice in a county that was rated as having the most corrupt police in the US. Not so great.

Here's a story I have about how great cops are: I get mom a restraining order against crazy husband who is violent and very clearly stated his intentions of running away with their kids if he ever got his hands on them. Order clearly states he's not to come within 500 feet of her house or the children's school and he is not to see the kids. He shows up at her door and she calls the cops. They come, see the order, tell her she's not supposed to have telephone contact with him, let him in the house, and help him gain custody of the children. He then promptly runs off. Did find him eventually, with no help from the police. Police response was "oops, sorry."

[fathertime]

That is absolutely false. That is the culture of fear talking, not reality.

1. The vast, vast majority of people are very decent people and won't ever try to harm someone, much less shoot someone, of their own volition.
2. People who do commit violent crime rarely care about the consequences. They are impassioned, drunk, on drugs, in a bad spot, or just plain don't give a damn.
3. Cops rarely arrive at the scene of a violent crime until well after the crime has been committed.
4. When they actually do get there, there is generally little or nothing they can do.

Yes yes Jim, everybody is decent and nothing bad would happen without a police force on the street.  There are probably close to a million people locked in prison right now that committed a violent act and many millions more running free, so who is going to investigate and gather these guys up and try to protect the little old ladies from them?  Who is going to protect the young ladies from being violated on the streets?   As screwed up as things may be getting, I’m not interested in having the most powerful gangs running the show here. 

You seem to have a lot of hate for the police.  I think it is because you are on the opposite side of the courtroom.  Most of us stand behind the police force.  We want the corrupt cops to be jailed but the vast majority of officers are good and we want them on the streets doing their job.

Your hometown must be Utopia to feel so optimistic about how good everybody is, but it is not at all reality.


Fathertime!

[jm21-2]

Yes yes Jim, everybody is decent and nothing bad would happen without a police force on the street.  There are probably close to a million people locked in prison right now that committed a violent act and many millions more running free, so who is going to investigate and gather these guys up and try to protect the little old ladies from them?  Who is going to protect the young ladies from being violated on the streets?   As screwed up as things may be getting, I’m not interested in having the most powerful gangs running the show here. 

You seem to have a lot of hate for the police.  I think it is because you are on the opposite side of the courtroom.  Most of us stand behind the police force.  We want the corrupt cops to be jailed but the vast majority of officers are good and we want them on the streets doing their job.

Your hometown must be Utopia to feel so optimistic about how good everybody is, but it is not at all reality.


Fathertime!

True, I have a lot of faith in people handling their own affairs. They do a pretty damn good job of it without any help from the government.

One example would be how, as far as I know, all plane hijackings have been stopped by citizens. Yet the government assures us that the only way to protect ourselves is extremely strict government searches at airports. My response would be to let people carry on the plane. Now there's deterrence.

Our criminal and prison systems are totally screwed up and we imprison more people than any other country, yet are we more safe? There are some good arguments we create more crime, particularly by having lifelong consequences for crime (such as sex offender status or a felony on your record) which make it hard or impossible to recover and live a normal life.

You would probably argue that we need traffic signals, because otherwise people would just smash right into each other. Yet in the UK they're removing traffic signals because in many cases the traffic signals cause more accidents than having none at all. Why? Because people can take care of themselves just fine.