Page 3 of 6
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:31 pm
by Can't Never Tried
elliott70 wrote:Can't Never Tried wrote:Wild4hockey wrote: The company my wife works for already does this, if you don't enroll on your own within the first 60 days of employment they enroll you and withold 6% of earnings and match it as well. I am sure you can see the logic in that.
Are you kidding me??
At what point can an employer force you into a 401K??
Of course most probably know that the owners have to go by the 1/3 - 2/3 rule.
The top 1/3 earners can't contibute more to the plan then the bottom 2/3 this prevents it from being a tax shelter, however if your employees are forced to participate this automatically brings up the bottom 2/3.
I would question the legality of that?
Don't get me wrong 401k is a great plan....but again forced?? what if you say no? do they fire you??
This is legal.
Huh??? your telling me my boss can make me be in a savings program where he is going to deduct $'s from my earnings to something I may choose not to do???
I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure we'll hear from some... I can't believe that.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:41 pm
by Govs93
Can't Never Tried wrote:elliott70 wrote:Can't Never Tried wrote:
Are you kidding me??
At what point can an employer force you into a 401K??
Of course most probably know that the owners have to go by the 1/3 - 2/3 rule.
The top 1/3 earners can't contibute more to the plan then the bottom 2/3 this prevents it from being a tax shelter, however if your employees are forced to participate this automatically brings up the bottom 2/3.
I would question the legality of that?
Don't get me wrong 401k is a great plan....but again forced?? what if you say no? do they fire you??
This is legal.
Huh??? your telling me my boss can make me be in a savings program where he is going to deduct $'s from my earnings to something I may choose not to do???
I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure we'll hear from some... I can't believe that.
It's becoming the
norm actually. It happens all over the country - my wife's company has the same opt-out policy. They legally have to disclose it immediately though (I don't know the exact timeframe - not sure if it's at the time an offer is made, first day on the job, etc.).
Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:43 pm
by TTpuckster
Why is it that y'all keep ignoring the fact that with conservative republican presidents, the good ole USA continues to reach higher and higher deficit spending and the national debt goes out of site.
Where is the fiscal responsibility?
Let's keep the likes of Bush in and continue to spend more than we have, while the rich get richer on our tax money.
GOOD PLAN.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:55 pm
by tomASS
Let's get to the biggest reason why this program should not go forward or even be considered.
It is government based and once established it will never go away, will become a monster to manage (thus mismanaged), will always be digging deeper and deeper into all of our pockets because the government now has a new manner to collect money, is another layer upon a broken social security system, and finally there is no certainty that the money will be any better protected than the funds in social security.
Other questions- what control does the individual have over how the money is invested?
This is not, nor should be, the function of our federal government but comes down to the fundamental difference bewteen how conservatives and liberals view what those functions of government should be.
Also don't get me going on additional estate tax to begin with - taxing on value that has already been taxed how many times?? I assure you I'm on the poorer side of the conservative party but grew up that if it was worth having it was worth earning.
Maybe it would be better for Hillary to sell to those she wants to help a Self- Help Investment DVD on how to make money in the commodities market.
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:08 pm
by east hockey
TTpuckster wrote:Why is it that y'all keep ignoring the fact that with conservative republican presidents, the good ole USA continues to reach higher and higher deficit spending and the national debt goes out of site.
Where is the fiscal responsibility?
Let's keep the likes of Bush in and continue to spend more than we have, while the rich get richer on our tax money.
GOOD PLAN.
Wait a minute, TT, you're missing the point of the Republicants:
1. Spending on defense so we can kill "terrorists" (never mind the innocent Iraqis we're killing, surely they're all terrorists in the making)....good.
2. Spending on education and welfare...bad.
Get with the program!
Lee
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:18 pm
by Can't Never Tried
Govs93 wrote:Can't Never Tried wrote:elliott70 wrote:
This is legal.
Huh??? your telling me my boss can make me be in a savings program where he is going to deduct $'s from my earnings to something I may choose not to do???
I'm not a lawyer but I'm sure we'll hear from some... I can't believe that.
It's becoming the
norm actually. It happens all over the country - my wife's company has the same opt-out policy. They legally have to disclose it immediately though (I don't know the exact timeframe - not sure if it's at the time an offer is made, first day on the job, etc.).
OK that's fine and also different then saying it's legal to require you to participate.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:21 pm
by elliott70
There are emplyers that have mandatory participation.
You are advised at the time of job offer.
You can opt out temporarily for financial difficulty reasons.
It has been upheld.
If you do not like the job offer, do not accept it.
It is not sprung on someone after teh fact.
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:45 pm
by tomASS
east hockey wrote:
Wait a minute, TT, you're missing the point of the Republicants:
1. Spending on defense so we can kill "terrorists" (never mind the innocent Iraqis we're killing, surely they're all terrorists in the making)....good.
2. Spending on education and welfare...bad.
Your point on #1 is more complex than you have minimized it to, but the over 500,000 bodies of innocent Iraqis they have discovered in mass graves from Saddam's reign should be overlooked by the world and by us?
Not to mention the gas warefare he used on the Kurds
not to mention the suicide bombers, that are cowards to begin with, since they are intentionally killing more innocent Iraqi citizens in one month than our actions have done so since we entered the country.
There is good in the world and there is evil in the world. You can not negotiate with evil. It has to be destroyed.
Forget the weapons of mass destruction - Saddam and his son's had to be removed. The plan didn't take into account the vacuum that was going to develop. That is where the shame is.
point 2 - education spending does not get to the kids and the competent teachers - goes to administrators, "programs" and structures. But let's keep throwing money at the "problem"
and welfare is another blog topic, but the biggest problem is it does little to get people off welfare
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:50 pm
by BIAFP
tomASS wrote:east hockey wrote:
Wait a minute, TT, you're missing the point of the Republicants:
1. Spending on defense so we can kill "terrorists" (never mind the innocent Iraqis we're killing, surely they're all terrorists in the making)....good.
2. Spending on education and welfare...bad.
Your point on #1 is more complex than you have minimized it to, but the over 500,000 bodies of innocent Iraqis they have discovered in mass graves from Saddam's reign should be overlooked by the world and by us?
Not to mention the gas warefare he used on the Kurds
not to mention the suicide bombers, that are cowards to begin with, since they are intentionally killing more innocent Iraqi citizens in one month than our actions have done so since we entered the country.
There is good in the world and there is evil in the world. You can not negotiate with evil. It has to be destroyed.
Forget the weapons of mass destruction - Saddam and his son's had to be removed. The plan didn't take into account the vacuum that was going to develop. That is where the shame is.
point 2 - education spending does not get to the kids and the competent teachers - goes to administrators, "programs" and structures. But let's keep throwing money at the "problem"
and welfare is another blog topic, but the biggest problem is it does little to get people off welfare
Don't waste your time Tom..........the pinheaded liberal sheep don't want to be confused with the facts. It is easier to just criticize everything and do nothing
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:07 pm
by TTpuckster
east hockey wrote:TTpuckster wrote:Why is it that y'all keep ignoring the fact that with conservative republican presidents, the good ole USA continues to reach higher and higher deficit spending and the national debt goes out of site.
Where is the fiscal responsibility?
Let's keep the likes of Bush in and continue to spend more than we have, while the rich get richer on our tax money.
GOOD PLAN.
Wait a minute, TT, you're missing the point of the Republicants:
1. Spending on defense so we can kill "terrorists" (never mind the innocent Iraqis we're killing, surely they're all terrorists in the making)....good.
2. Spending on education and welfare...bad.
Get with the program!
Lee
Those are good points Lee.
But again, why are the republicants, as you call them, avoiding my question.
From Reagan to Jr. nobody has done more to increase national debt.
How can you live a life of spending more than you take in?
And don't give me the answer that all administrations have done this, because nobody has done it as well as these two presidentio's.
In fact, until Bush took over, we were actually reducing the national DEBT.
Not reducing annual deficit spending, mind you, as Mr. Jr. likes to laud about.
How much does that national debt cost us in taxes every year.
And then he reduces the tax rate for the Rich!
Who is really raising taxes????
And by the way, speaking from a child, (the last of 6 = good catholic family), whose father left right after I was born.
My mother worked two low paying jobs her entire life, and worked very hard but received no health benefits, and certainly no option for retirement benefits.
What was she supposed to do about retirement?
I agree that having our government handle such things is not a good idea, but let's hear some good ideas from you right wingers who obviously do not care about some of our poorer masses.
C'mon PB.
Where are you?
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:14 pm
by BIAFP
[quote="TTpuckster"]
And by the way, speaking from a child, (the last of 6 = good catholic family), whose father left right after I was born.
"You can't be both Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:21 pm
by TTpuckster
BIAFP wrote:TTpuckster wrote:
And by the way, speaking from a child, (the last of 6 = good catholic family), whose father left right after I was born.
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Gosh BIAF, thanks for letting me know the rules!!!
And, of course, as usual, you and your other RW cronies are avoiding the question.
Typical.
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:26 pm
by BIAFP
TTpuckster wrote:
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Right, you can't support the murder of innocent unborn children and be a christian. Is this a surprise to you?
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:29 pm
by AngusYoung
[quote="tomASS"]
There is good in the world and there is evil in the world. You can not negotiate with evil. It has to be destroyed.
Forget the weapons of mass destruction - Saddam and his son's had to be removed. The plan didn't take into account the vacuum that was going to develop. That is where the shame is.
So, why stop with Iraq. Using that reasoning, let's roll on through North Korea, China, Russia and everywhere else we do not approve of. C'mon, this war had little to do with "saving" the Iraqi's and had much more to do with strategic stronghold.
AY
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:33 pm
by AngusYoung
BIAFP wrote:TTpuckster wrote:
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Right, you can't support the murder of innocent unborn children and be a christian. Is this a surprise to you?
I love the stance on this issue by pro-life folks: we'll do anything we can to protect you until you are born, but after that, we could give a damn about what happens to you. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If life is so precious to you, why are you so callous about what happens to these "innocent unborn children" after they are born? A bit of a double standard, is it not?
AY
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:35 pm
by TTpuckster
BIAFP wrote:TTpuckster wrote:
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Right, you can't support the murder of innocent unborn children and be a christian. Is this a surprise to you?
Still avoiding the National Debt question BIAF.
Are you sure your not AKA as PB.
And, again, what was my mother supposed to do about retirement?
Is your mind really that limited?
I guess if you voted for Jr., it probably is.
I'll pray for you.
I'll ask Him to connect the links to get your synapsis connections going so that you can start using that thing inside of your skull.
Hope you don't go in to shock!!
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:42 pm
by Govs93
BIAFP wrote:TTpuckster wrote:
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Right, you can't support the murder of innocent unborn children and be a christian. Is this a surprise to you?
You're clueless about your own frontrunner?! Read
this. Care to guess his religion? Here's a hint:
Rudy's going to hell and BIAFP is either hypocritical or completely unaware (or both).
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:54 pm
by Can't Never Tried
elliott70 wrote:If you do not like the job offer, do not accept it.
Why the heck is it even a part of employment consideration?
No offense to you elliott but how stupid is that.... "well your qualifications are good and we'd really like to have you come aboard, but because you have expressed that you won't participate in our mandatory 401k we can't hire you"
????
Kind of falls out of the old equal opportunity thing huh! almost discriminary !
If that's taking place I would be concerned that it is being used as a tax shelter for the upper 1/3 of the participants. found the loop hole maybe?
I will do some more checking on this as I think it's ridiculus.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:01 pm
by packerboy
Hey puckster, debt can be a good thing,
Reagan brought the Commies down and broke up the USSR. Now his protege Bush is kickin butt over in the desert.
Carter didnt have the guts to deal with anything, neither did Clinton, who was too busy with Monica.
Bush has to deal with 911 and Reagan had to crush the Soviet Union.
Its not cheap to do.
The biggest debt we ever had was after WWII(in proportion to GNP).
If we didnt icurr that debt to beat the Axis we wouldnt exist today so we could freely express our views ...so long as its OK with Mitch and Lee.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:08 pm
by elliott70
Can't Never Tried wrote:elliott70 wrote:If you do not like the job offer, do not accept it.
Why the heck is it even a part of employment consideration?
No offense to you elliott but how stupid is that.... "well your qualifications are good and we'd really like to have you come aboard, but because you have expressed that you won't participate in our mandatory 401k we can't hire you"
????
Kind of falls out of the old equal opportunity thing huh! almost discriminary !
If that's taking place I would be concerned that it is being used as a tax shelter for the upper 1/3 of the participants. found the loop hole maybe?
I will do some more checking on this as I think it's ridiculus.
When I first heard it at a seminar, I thought, 'They can't do that'
But they did, they do.
And for most it is just a plus because the ones that I know are doing it, pay big time.
I am not sure if these companies are on the good or evil side.
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:12 pm
by east hockey
packerboy wrote:Hey puckster, debt can be a good thing,
Reagan brought the Commies down and broke up the USSR. Now his protege Bush is kickin butt over in the desert.
Carter didnt have the guts to deal with anything, neither did Clinton, who was too busy with Monica.
Bush has to deal with 911 and Reagan had to crush the Soviet Union.
Its not cheap to do.
The biggest debt we ever had was after WWII(in proportion to GNP).
If we didnt icurr that debt to beat the Axis we wouldnt exist today so we could freely express our views ...so long as its OK with Mitch and Lee.
Funniest.Post.Ever.
Lee
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:18 pm
by elliott70
Govs & TT
Although not a Catholic, I will pray for you two.
Abortion is not right.
And do not be hypocritical by trying to spin it any other way.
Right wingers do not care about kids....
That's rhetoric to steer things away from the truth. (Best D is a good O, sort of thing).
Some of us conservatives get a little loud and obnoxious, but 'right is right'.
Abortion is not about women's rights. It is about women's responsibilities. Just as paying child support is a responsibility.
War is never 'right', but at times it becomes a necessity.
And if you have not learned by now, John Lennon's 'Give Peace a Chance' was just a song. Peace is just a concept (albeit a glorious one), but if you endorse abortion, you endorse a violent act, which evloves to more violence, which evolves to war.
Give peace a chance - stop abortions.
Re: Deficit and Debt
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:44 pm
by BIAFP
AngusYoung wrote:BIAFP wrote:TTpuckster wrote:
"You can't be Catholic(christian) and Liberal" Abortion 101
I can't?
Right, you can't support the murder of innocent unborn children and be a christian. Is this a surprise to you?
I love the stance on this issue by pro-life folks: we'll do anything we can to protect you until you are born, but after that, we could give a damn about what happens to you. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If life is so precious to you, why are you so callous about what happens to these "innocent unborn children" after they are born? A bit of a double standard, is it not?
AY
A one week old child (without parents) has a much better chance of seeing 5, 10,15 or 70 than an innocent fetus murdered in the womb! Argue that Pinheads
The most important issue (National Defense).
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:59 pm
by Knowlzee
To our site administrator,....what good are social programs, educational programs, welfare programs,......if we are eliminated from the face of this earth? Do you remember September 11, 2001?
Do you really think this was an isolated incident by one guy (Bin Laden), who was able to talk a few others into flying planes into our buildings, just for the fun of it? Or could it be that MANY people, in many countries (including our own) truly hate us, and our way of life,.....and would like to see us eliminated from this earth.
Could it be that the incident on September 11, was the culmination of many, many years (at least since Carter in the 70's) of ignoring a group of people that hate us?
Do you really think that one hit to our buildings and people will be enough,....or would they like to do it again?
Thank God most people in this country have figured this out, and support our President and our National Defense.
Can we really afford to risk a second attack on this country,.....just so the remainder of the few who have already forgotten what happened on September 11, 2001 can get back on board,......or do we continue to fight (and defeat) those that hate us, in Iraq?
Again, thank God we have a president that realizes the seriousness of this situation. Will the next leader that we elect, realize the importance of this situation? Lets pray that he does.
Duluth may not be the next place of attack,.....but it may be third.
Should we risk it?
Re: The most important issue (National Defense).
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:01 pm
by BIAFP
Knowlzee wrote:To our site administrator,....what good are social programs, educational programs, welfare programs,......if we are eliminated from the face of this earth? Do you remember September 11, 2001?
Do you really think this was an isolated incident by one guy (Bin Laden), who was able to talk a few others into flying planes into our buildings, just for the fun of it? Or could it be that MANY people, in many countries (including our own) truly hate us, and our way of life,.....and would like to see us eliminated from this earth.
Could it be that the incident on September 11, was the culmination of many, many years (at least since Carter in the 70's) of ignoring a group of people that hate us?
Do you really think that one hit to our buildings and people will be enough,....or would they like to do it again?
Thank God most people in this country have figured this out, and support our President and our National Defense.
Can we really afford to risk a second attack on this country,.....just so the remainder of the few who have already forgotten what happened on September 11, 2001 can get back on board,......or do we continue to fight (and defeat) those that hate us, in Iraq?
Again, thank God we have a president that realizes the seriousness of this situation. Will the next leader that we elect, realize the importance of this situation? Lets pray that he does.
Duluth may not be the next place of attack,.....but it may be third.
Should we risk it?
THANK YOU! Fortunately our military protects all of us......even the pantywaist, spineless left.