Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Save Our City On Nate's Claims re 'The Boycott'
I don't like to say much about Nate, and I do not have to.
Tuesday, January 25, 2005
Pepper is In
Councilman David Pepper is officially in as a candidate for Cincinnati Mayor. He has money and business leaders on his side. A few interest points from the article.
- No mention of Tom Brinkman as at least a possible candidate for mayor? He has been listed previously as a possible candidate, but could he or his confidants popped that trial balloon?
- Pepper is dating a TV News reporter/anchor? I hope she does not report on any political coverage and I don't think I have to worry much, local TV news ranks local politics only above Pee-Wee Football scores in the level of coverage.
Ignorance
A man who thinks a sky fairy created man now spews right wing talking points about how to being the destruction of Social Security. Peter, as the rest of Social Security destruction movement does, fails to account for how his plan will add money to the trust fun to cover shortfalls, how they will pay for survivor benefits, how they will pay for disability benefits, how they will administer such a plan.
What they are not telling you is that they are doing what corporations are doing, putting all responsibility and RISK on the participant. What will people do if in 10 years we suffer another depression? That wipes out the market and with it the trust.
Peter and the money hungry idiots need to understand something that most miss; social security is an INSURANCE PROGRAM. It is not an investment plan. We have plenty of room in the IRA, 401(K) and 403(b) plans for people to make tax free investments.
This is about providing a safety net to people. Peter plays the game of trying to make people think it is an investment that can be quantified in Wall street terms. He needs to be thinking in Hartford terms. Does Peter want to let 18 year old kids opt out of Auto Insurance? I doubt it, but you never know. He may say if you are wealthy enough, then yes, because they can afford it. I guess that might be who he is looking out. The problem is that he is ignorant and that he is think about money now, and not about security in the future. Bill Gates could die a poor man. I could die richer than Bill Gates. That uncertainty is why we want to provide a safety level of income for EVERYONE to make sure they have a minimum level of income in old age. This is not about Frat boy Johnny spending his extra beer money. This is about the 20 year old shift manage at Burger King building a net to help augment their retirement.
The issue here is the get people saving in their 401(k) and IRA's. If you fear Social Security being gone in 40 years, fear not. If you still fear it, then get your ass saving. That way, as was designed, your PIA will be gravy.
[I have been working on a longer post on SSA. I will continue working on that and try and provide an outline of what BushCo is not telling you about how it plans on destroying Social Security.]
UPDATE: 1:30 PM - Where's Mine? Clarence Paige asked that rhetorically over 10 years ago as a description of what the average voter was thinking. Based on comment to many people in favor of privatizing Social Security come across as only thinking about themselves. This is what is cause the variation. If you can't think beyond yourself, then you are missing the point. We can't have a plan that fit each person trying to squeeze out a new Benz at retirement. We can't have a plan where you can opt out if you can "afford it" because that is fool hearty.
To also answer a comment who said that my car insurance comparison was flawed because you don't have to drive. True, you don't have to drive. You don't have to earn wages in this society either. If he wants to avoid SS, I suggest he win the lottery and live off the interest for the rest of his life. The minute he is dead broke at age 85, then I wonder what he is going to do?
This sounds like to me trying to make people responsible for maintain their own street or fire department or police department.
What they are not telling you is that they are doing what corporations are doing, putting all responsibility and RISK on the participant. What will people do if in 10 years we suffer another depression? That wipes out the market and with it the trust.
Peter and the money hungry idiots need to understand something that most miss; social security is an INSURANCE PROGRAM. It is not an investment plan. We have plenty of room in the IRA, 401(K) and 403(b) plans for people to make tax free investments.
This is about providing a safety net to people. Peter plays the game of trying to make people think it is an investment that can be quantified in Wall street terms. He needs to be thinking in Hartford terms. Does Peter want to let 18 year old kids opt out of Auto Insurance? I doubt it, but you never know. He may say if you are wealthy enough, then yes, because they can afford it. I guess that might be who he is looking out. The problem is that he is ignorant and that he is think about money now, and not about security in the future. Bill Gates could die a poor man. I could die richer than Bill Gates. That uncertainty is why we want to provide a safety level of income for EVERYONE to make sure they have a minimum level of income in old age. This is not about Frat boy Johnny spending his extra beer money. This is about the 20 year old shift manage at Burger King building a net to help augment their retirement.
The issue here is the get people saving in their 401(k) and IRA's. If you fear Social Security being gone in 40 years, fear not. If you still fear it, then get your ass saving. That way, as was designed, your PIA will be gravy.
[I have been working on a longer post on SSA. I will continue working on that and try and provide an outline of what BushCo is not telling you about how it plans on destroying Social Security.]
UPDATE: 1:30 PM - Where's Mine? Clarence Paige asked that rhetorically over 10 years ago as a description of what the average voter was thinking. Based on comment to many people in favor of privatizing Social Security come across as only thinking about themselves. This is what is cause the variation. If you can't think beyond yourself, then you are missing the point. We can't have a plan that fit each person trying to squeeze out a new Benz at retirement. We can't have a plan where you can opt out if you can "afford it" because that is fool hearty.
To also answer a comment who said that my car insurance comparison was flawed because you don't have to drive. True, you don't have to drive. You don't have to earn wages in this society either. If he wants to avoid SS, I suggest he win the lottery and live off the interest for the rest of his life. The minute he is dead broke at age 85, then I wonder what he is going to do?
This sounds like to me trying to make people responsible for maintain their own street or fire department or police department.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Community Web Activitsts
A great use of technology, community web sites are great, as long as people are connected to the web. The web divide is both economic and generational. Much like cable TV, there are still those who do not have cable, and not because they gave it up, because they can't afford it, mainly installing it in their homes.
Hamilton County Loves Porn!
A great column from WaPo last month showing that despite the anti-porn crusaders of CCV and Si Leis, Hamilton County consumes more porn than the average county.
[Via, you guessed it, Funnelcake]
About a year after the Utah case, a similar scenario played out in Hamilton County, Ohio, a conservative Cincinnati suburb. In 2001, under pressure from an influential local antiporn group, Citizens for Community Values, prosecutors filed obscenity charges against two local video stores for selling adult videos. The Cincinnati Enquirer launched an investigation of community standards and found that:The data comes from the Enquirer, but that seems to have not made much of an impression on the anti-porn zealots.
"Last year, more than 21,000 Hamilton County residents purchased 26,000 explicit videos from one of the nation's largest mail-order companies. A company spokeswoman described those sales as typical for a community of this size. . . . In January of this year, 182,000 Greater Cincinnati residents -- an estimated 70,000 from Hamilton County -- visited an adult Web site at least once. Nielsen - NetRatings found that 21.8 percent of all residents here who went online visited an adult site. The national average for January was 21.4 percent. In recent months, Hamilton County residents bought adult movies on pay-per-view TV at about the same rate as viewers did in other mid-sized TV markets. The numbers suggest county residents are quiet contributors to the adult industry's rapid growth. And with every purchase, they change Hamilton County's long-held notion of a community standard."
[Via, you guessed it, Funnelcake]
What Ever Happened Too: CopWatch?
Cincinnati Copwatch was touted very heavily a few years ago. They had a $13,000.00 Threshold Foundation grant. Copwatch was a group related to CONTROL(Citizens Organizing Neighborhoods To Regain Our Liberation) which is affiliated with the Nati Youth Center. The website that used to house copwatch, www.cincinnaticopwatch.org, is no longer functioning. I have so far found online only one showing of some of the footage in some type of production, but it only seems to be a 10 minute segment of a 1:48 “film.”
The group got other grants as well, for a total of around $16,300.00, including a small grant from the OTR community council. I am all in favor of independent media. What I want that media to do though is show their work. Where is this group's work? Their self proclaim job was the to watch the police and catch police brutality on videotape. It they have it, why has it not been shown? I can think of two reasons. One, is that the footage is not good. Getting close enough to tape something without quality equipment is difficult. The other reason is that they have little footage to show. That could be because limited time of staff watching the cops, or because few incidents happened that could be considered police brutality, or it could be that they are not bothering to do anything and have used the funds and equipment for other purposes. The main issue is that the group has fallen of the face of the Earth. I guess their commitment was lacking or they didn't find what they wanted to find.
The group got other grants as well, for a total of around $16,300.00, including a small grant from the OTR community council. I am all in favor of independent media. What I want that media to do though is show their work. Where is this group's work? Their self proclaim job was the to watch the police and catch police brutality on videotape. It they have it, why has it not been shown? I can think of two reasons. One, is that the footage is not good. Getting close enough to tape something without quality equipment is difficult. The other reason is that they have little footage to show. That could be because limited time of staff watching the cops, or because few incidents happened that could be considered police brutality, or it could be that they are not bothering to do anything and have used the funds and equipment for other purposes. The main issue is that the group has fallen of the face of the Earth. I guess their commitment was lacking or they didn't find what they wanted to find.
Sunday, January 23, 2005
3rd Time the Charm?
No, Councilman Chris Smitherman will not get approval of a ban of taser use on children. He is grandstanding or hoping beyond hope that Mayday Malone will change his vote from 2 weeks ago. I think you can bet on grandstanding when it comes to Smitherman. It will make for a good campaign issue to run on in the Mayor's race. Something to use against Pepper? Where does Mallory stand on the issue?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)