Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]




    So, what happened to this bill when we had a repub in office for 8 years? or with a repub majority? Seems like it would have made it in somehow, no?</P>


    [/quote]

    I think he's talking about the Privatizing Health Care bill which was under Bush...Democratic House/Senate never got passed...Obama was Democratic House/Senate for most of his first term as well....plus he would have out right vetoed that bill.
    [/quote]</P>


    Thats not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a proposal to allow people voluntarily to have 10% of their SS payments go into a private fund. If my memory is right, it started under Clinton. But I could be wrong about the timing. Point is that you need 60 senators to do it.</P>
    Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

    Comment


    • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



      [quote user="dezzzR"][quote user="JPizzack"]I would agree 100% to that....IF we didnt have to pay into Social Security.
      I'm already in a high tax bracket. How much of my actual income am I supposed to live on? I already lose 39% in taxes, SSand deductions (some of which I myself choose to like life insurance, my medical insurances, 401k etc.). If i keep increasing my contributions (which btw, are not guaranteed growth), I can't really afford to live anything other than a paycheck to paycheck lifestyle.
      Now, most regular bank/CU IRAs are guaranteed/insured. but 1) interest rates are absolute **** right now, and B) youre either taxed up front (roth) or at withdrawal(traditional).
      So how do middle and midlowclass effectively plan for retirement? And god forbid you have kids! lol[/quote]Rich or poor, giving the gov 40% of what you make is ludicrous!
      [/quote]</P>


      lmao...learn to read dezz...i said i dont see 40% of my income because of taxes, SS, AND my own personal deductions like medical benefits, life insurance, and my 401k.</P>
      Oderint Dum Metuant

      It's too bad, I'm too good....

      Comment


      • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

        [quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="byron"][quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="Morehead State"]


        The Repulicans offered a bill several years ago that would give a tax payer the option of having a part of their SS tax put in a fund that would be invested in safe funds. These accounts would be the property of the taxpayer and could be willed. They can't be confiscated by the government for any reason.</P>


        The Democratic response was that the GOP wanted to throw old people in the street. You have just proposed the exact same program. There is hope for you.</P>


        [/quote]

        I remember that, I was so disappointed, I thought that bill was a step in the right direction, but Democratic fear mongering killed it


        [/quote] It all boils down to the two parties coming/working together to come up with plan "good plan"/laws that will work for the people they serve ....there has to be compromise and such for that to happen.... Its to left and right and its killing this country because the will to work together just isn't there ....the people of this country need these ****s tostop playing politics and get thisthing straightened up....[/quote]</P>


        The "compromise" the Dems want will still bankrupt the country. Just may take a year or two longer.</P>


        The reality is that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy between the parties. It has been enhanced by the horrible condition of our fiscal house. There has to be a fight about this.</P>


        Entitlements must be completely overhauled, but the Dems are only willing to nip around the edges.</P>


        The basic disagreement is that the GOP doesn't think the government (in other words taxpayers)should be in the business of giving money to people who don't need it. The Dems do. The GOP wants a safety net for those who need it but not a cradle to grave entitlement society as the Dems want.</P>


        As I said, this is worth fighting for.</P>[/quote] you what I'm in over my head here,I don't care about philosophies "no disrespect meant here" and sure there should be a fight, no good policy would come without one ...just get it done ...get going in the right direction and tweak things as you go make it better don't let it grow into a monstrous pig....There is no excuse for letting SS getting out of hand the way it is now ...they should have been tweaking that thing since it conception...whatever I bow out..

        Comment


        • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



          I remember being 17, and having no grasp of the economy or politics...just trying to finish school and go to college....and all this talk about "What will be done with the social security surplus??" and even abck then thinking to myself "oh god, if they are discussing this, we're already ****ed, arent we..."</P>


          let that **** be, it's not yours!!</P>
          Oderint Dum Metuant

          It's too bad, I'm too good....

          Comment


          • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

            [quote user="Morehead State"][quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]




            So, what happened to this bill when we had a repub in office for 8 years? or with a repub majority? Seems like it would have made it in somehow, no?</p>


            [/quote]

            I think he's talking about the Privatizing Health Care bill which was under Bush...Democratic House/Senate never got passed...Obama was Democratic House/Senate for most of his first term as well....plus he would have out right vetoed that bill.
            [/quote]</p>


            Thats not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a proposal to allow people voluntarily to have 10% of their SS payments go into a private fund. If my memory is right, it started under Clinton. But I could be wrong about the timing. Point is that you need 60 senators to do it.</p>[/quote]

            Oh, well then I don't remember that I was definetly thinking about when Bush pushed for privatizing it during his second term, I wasn't as interested in politics during Clinton unfortunately, I think Bush admitted that his biggest mistake during his time as president was his inability to privatize SS.

            Comment


            • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

              [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


              no i know exactly how it works...
              but like daven said...i consider that money lost..but if i could keep what is taken from here on out, and maintain retirement myself....i totally could/ would</P>[/quote]

              the problem is, because the government spent the surplus (which they weren't supposed to do) there is nothing there besides what we put in pizz, If we stop paying now...Byron won't collect...

              it's a ****ty situation...it was never supposed to get to that point.
              [/quote] thats right.... they need to fix it, make it work...it will keep thousands working at good paying jobs and everybody will have some SS love in the end .....

              Comment


              • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                never get involved with money and family
                https://www.facebook.com/groups/TheeBloodSport/

                Comment


                • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                  [quote user="byron"][quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


                  no i know exactly how it works...
                  but like daven said...i consider that money lost..but if i could keep what is taken from here on out, and maintain retirement myself....i totally could/ would</p>[/quote]

                  the problem is, because the government spent the surplus (which they weren't supposed to do) there is nothing there besides what we put in pizz, If we stop paying now...Byron won't collect...

                  it's a ****ty situation...it was never supposed to get to that point.
                  [/quote] thats right.... they need to fix it, make it work...it will keep thousands working at good paying jobs and everybody will have some SS love in the end .....[/quote]

                  It's kinda too late I think Byron...It needed to be fixed like 30 years ago.

                  when it started 17 workers payed for 1 retiree, it's like 4 workers per retiree now and estimated to be 2 to 1 by 2030.

                  it's pretty much unfixable at this point...I want to opt out, I'm sorry the government stole your money byron...but I'm not ok with letting them steal mine too

                  Comment


                  • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



                    ugh...it's the worst...
                    As good intentioned as it may have been at it's start(well, besdies the whole IOU free $ for the gov't part), social security cant really go away without totally screwing over someone currently collecting. At this point youd wish you could jsut scrap the whole thing, but there's just not enoug left to leave people.....because well...i dont know how to put this lightly....you dont know when theyre goign to die &gt;.&lt;</P>
                    Oderint Dum Metuant

                    It's too bad, I'm too good....

                    Comment


                    • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                      This seems like a cool site that details the pro's/con's to privatizing SS.

                      http://socialsecurity.procon.org/

                      Comment


                      • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



                        [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]never get involved with money and family
                        [/quote]</P>


                        Sorry Matt.</P>


                        You try to do right and **** happens. Its the old expression."no good deed goes unpunished".</P>


                        Anyway, whats important is that you continue to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.</P>
                        Admit nothing. Deny everything. Make counter accusations.

                        Comment


                        • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



                          Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
                          Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

                          The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</P>


                          http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</P>


                          it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</P>
                          Oderint Dum Metuant

                          It's too bad, I'm too good....

                          Comment


                          • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                            [quote user="Morehead State"]


                            [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]never get involved with money and family
                            [/quote]</P>


                            Sorry Matt.</P>


                            You try to do right and **** happens. Its the old expression."no good deed goes unpunished".</P>


                            Anyway, whats important is that you continue to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.</P>


                            [/quote]</P>


                            yea, I hope everything is good with him. Family problems always get more dicey than problems with co-workers and friends.
                            Good luck with everything man</P>
                            Oderint Dum Metuant

                            It's too bad, I'm too good....

                            Comment


                            • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                              [quote user="JPizzack"]

                              Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
                              Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

                              The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</p>


                              http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</p>


                              it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</p>[/quote]

                              he seems to be putting A LOT of faith into this "Hyper-geometry" ....he knows a lot about it, more then me...but who says "Hyper-geometry" can translate into humans going in to a voting booth...

                              here's a point, most Ron Paul supporters are more enthusiastic then Romney supporters...they get to the poles first...so yeah Paul always starts high ends lower...the opposite can be said of Romney...since he's the "establishment" candidate he gets the "base" the people who just go out to vote when they get out of work...they aren't amped up and waiting on line...so he starts slow and finishes strong.

                              IF you assume this "hyper-geometry" is applicable then yes, it looks like Paul's votes are getting siphoned over to Romney in many cases, but I don't think you can base an entire conspiracy theory behind one mathematical formula that you can't even prove is applicable.


                              Boosh! someone already answered him...it's way more complex and informative then what I said...but it's pretty much the same thing..no one said hyper-geometry is applicable to votes.

                              <div class="usertext-body"><div class="md">

                              <font color="#0000FF">I am hijacking this comment so that people will see the rough-and-ready explanation I just spent an hour working on.</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Okay, here is my attempt at an explanation for why your premise (and
                              therefore conclusion) is basically flawed. If you care, I have a BS in
                              Finance, and I am currently in my second semester of an MS Finance
                              program. At this level, finance is at least 75% statistics and
                              calculus.</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Hypergeometric distribution information</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Problem 1 - Nonrandom Variables First of all, note
                              that for the hypergeometric distribution to be applicable, the value of
                              the variables must be random. In the red/blue ball example, the
                              variables are truly random: we are equally likely to pull a red as a
                              blue, and the chance of pulling a red ball does not influence what the
                              next ball will be. This is a stark contrast to this voting data. The
                              most obvious reason why the votes are not random is that we know in advance
                              that certain candidates are going to receive the majority of votes. If
                              Romney won 35%, Santorum won 35%, and Gingrich and Paul each got 15%,
                              then we know the probability of a vote going to a certain candidate, and
                              it is not random. </font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Further, I would argue that when a particular vote goes to a
                              candidate, that candidate is more likely to receive the next vote.
                              Consider that Paul campaigns almost exclusively in certain districts
                              where he has the best chances of winning (districts that often include
                              college campuses). In these areas, we expect him to perform much better
                              than average, and in areas where he has not campaigned we would expect
                              him to do more poorly. Once again, the variables are not random, so a hypergeometric function cannot be used. </font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Problem 2 - There is a simple, logical explanation for the data This is actually related to the first problem, because the heart of the issue still that the variables are not random and so a hypergeometric function cannot be used
                              The explanation is this - you chose to organize your data roughly from
                              least-to-most urban, and Romney tends to perform better in more urban
                              areas. This explains why he always "benefits" in the largest districts.</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Please also note that these issues are why Ron Paul seems to be the
                              "victim" of "fraud". Your model is assuming that the votes are random,
                              and that each candidate should receive an even % of the vote. However,
                              we know in advance (from polling) that Romney will win about 35% of the
                              vote and Paul will win about 15% (or whatever, please stay with me
                              here). So it should not surprise us that the model gives Romney a very
                              remote chance of getting to 35% because the model thinks that, if the
                              election were conducted 100 times, he would receive an average of 25%.
                              This flawed model also overestimates Paul's chances of performing well,
                              because it thinks he deserves an equal share of a random vote, instead
                              of a smaller share of a nonrandom vote.</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">TL;DR The variables (votes) are not random,
                              and so a Hypergeometric function cannot be used to analyze the data.
                              The premise is flawed, so the conclusion is useless.
                              </font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">Also, think for a moment what you are suggesting - huge election
                              fraud that has been going on for years. This data has been analyzed and
                              analyzed again from Berkeley to MIT to Cambridge - if there was fraud
                              that statistical analysis could reveal, then some academic would have
                              published a paper years ago.</font></p>



                              <font color="#0000FF">edit: Several people have pointed out that the Hypergeometric model
                              could be tailored to fit data where each data point has a known percent
                              of the total data. (That is, 70 blue balls and 30 red balls, instead of
                              50/50.) Simply put, you guys are right, but I believe that this model
                              was clearly set up for even probabilities. However, even if that
                              problem were resolved, the votes are still not independent of each
                              other, so the model cannot be used. I look forward to
                              Drunken_Economist's write up.</font></p>


                              </p>

                              <font color="#0000FF"><font color="#000000">Pretty much it's like using algebra to solve a problem with someones grammar you might be able to find some sort of coincidence if you look hard enough...but algebra and grammar have nothing to do with each other so it doesn't really prove anything. </font>
                              </font></p>
                              </div>
                              </div>

                              Comment


                              • Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

                                [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


                                Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
                                Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

                                The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</P>


                                http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</P>


                                it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</P>


                                [/quote]

                                he seems to be putting A LOT of faith into this "Hypergeometry" ....he knows a lot about it, more then me...but who says "Hypergeometry" can translate into humans going in to a voting booth...

                                here's a point, most Ron Paul supporters are more enthusiastic then Romney supporters...they get to the poles first...so yeah Paul always starts high ends lower...the opposite can be said of Romney...since he's the "establishment" candidate he gets the "base" the people who just go out to vote when they get out of work...they aren't amped up and waiting on line...so he starts slow and finishes strong.

                                IF you assume this "hypergeometry" is applicable then yes, it looks like Paul's votes are getting siphoned over to Romney in many cases, but I don't think you can base an entire conspiracy theory behind one mathematical formula that you can't even prove is applicable.
                                [/quote]</P>


                                well that all may be the case, but I think the most interesting point of it all was the whole end result numbers. Where, for some reason, as they get toward the end counting, Romney's reported numbers increase at a rate that defies percentages and probability.
                                oh well...just thought it was interesting.</P>
                                Oderint Dum Metuant

                                It's too bad, I'm too good....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X