Kathy Y. Wilson is never an easy read, and her latest column is also foggy. I guess her weekly column Your Negro Tour Guide is done. I assume, but can't quite discern that she will continue to write for CityBeat, but not with the Race handcuffs. That I think is great. I like her writing, but the limits of race issues often left the same themes and same rhetoric. For her career I think it is best.
Unless I missed something cryptic, which is very possible, I think she is staying with CityBeat. If I missed something and she is not, someone please set me straight.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Ghiz Not Running
Stephanie Dunlap has a story on Leslie Ghiz which reports two issues: Ghiz will likely not run and Sam Malone was behind the snub to Ghiz. What I hope is just her public face, Leslie still defended the Party. She is a fool to stay in the local GOP. She should not believe that only Malone wanted her out. If the local GOP wanted to be fair and not let one person control them, then should have done something. Instead, they let the anti-homosexual bigot Sam Malone keep her off council. This has the CCV written all over it.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Me Blog Good
I am pleased that Cincinnati is well above the average in an intelligence ranking of cities. I hope this is just the actual city and not the Metro Area.
El Cometa del Risque
A woman in a Chicken suit. You would think you would see that fairly very often, but for me last night it was a first. Yesterday at Drinking Liberally the Chicken suit was not the highlight, but still fun. It was not a young chick either, so I can say that the experience, which from afar, was not as exhilarating as a man like myself might wish for.
The rest of the night was almost as enjoyable. Since several bloggers where there, the issue of blogging came up and specifically on stuff to write about. I of course did not take any notes, so I can't really regale anyone with the many great stories folks told or interesting topics that were suggested as blog fodder.
The raging debate I kept having in my head was whether "Junkie Barista" would make a better name for a rock band or the title of a new Yoga position.
I can't get one image out of head though. It has to do with the topic brought up about a hypothetical columnist sorting through a box of sex toys. It is something I think everyone would find disturbing, if it were true. You might be surprised to know Funnel Cake was not responsible for such an image.
The rest of the night was almost as enjoyable. Since several bloggers where there, the issue of blogging came up and specifically on stuff to write about. I of course did not take any notes, so I can't really regale anyone with the many great stories folks told or interesting topics that were suggested as blog fodder.
The raging debate I kept having in my head was whether "Junkie Barista" would make a better name for a rock band or the title of a new Yoga position.
I can't get one image out of head though. It has to do with the topic brought up about a hypothetical columnist sorting through a box of sex toys. It is something I think everyone would find disturbing, if it were true. You might be surprised to know Funnel Cake was not responsible for such an image.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)