I want to start a new political Party

[amdx]

I want to start a new political Party.

I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.

I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.

Ya, I think I like American entitlement Party.

The purpose of my new party is to fight for my entitlements.

If we don't organize now we could end up like Greece, where the
government is trying to reduce entitlements, with some success, we need
to start fighting this now!

The American Entitlement Party Platform:

We believe the American poor and middle class have no security when they
have to work and provide for their own food, housing and retirement.

We believe every American deserves a secure, healthy, and dignified
retirement. America's seniors have earned their Medicare and Social
Security.

We believe the American poor and middle class can and should be
supported by the wealthy, after all if we the poor and middle class
didn't spend all our money they wouldn't be wealthy.

We believe accessible, free, high quality health care is part of the
American promise, that Americans should have the security that comes
with good health care, and that no one should go broke because they get
sick.

In a vibrant economy a personal cell phone is necessary for a person to
prosper, thus a cell phone should be provided to all who ask for one.

We believe the poor and middle class should be provided with vouchers to
cover 50% of any rent and/or mortgage payment. We also have a right to
an income tax deduction for mortgage interest, just like the wealthy.

The new EBT system is good, we just want it expanded to anyone earning
less than $100,000.
And make it illegal to call it foodstamps, that is degrading!

It should not be illegal to resell my EBT card, it is my card after all.

***********************
These are a few ideas I have about the platform for the new American
Entitlement Party.

Please give my your suggestions about what you think needs to be in the
platform.

Now be realistic, we can't ask for free make up, wigs or tattoo removal.
Scratch that tattoo removal is ok.

Any Ideas you might have about this new political party and how to save
our Entitlements are appreciated.

Remember the wealthy will try to take away what should be ours.
Mikek

[Lord Valve]

Fuck, your party already won the last election - what more do you want?

Lord Valve
American - so far

[amdx]

Please Lord,
Do you have any ideas for my party?
I think they might try to limit my entitlements somehow, we need to
start now, before it's to late. They tax SS checks, that must stop.
I earned it! Just cause the country is broke don't blame me.
Mikek

[amdx]

When we want an electric wheelchair it should not cost me any money.

I worked and earned it, the rich wouldn't be rich if the poor and middle
class didn't spend all their money.
Mikek

[hamilton]

On 11/10/2012 12:05 PM, amdx wrote:
> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>

> I'm thinking "Americans for Privileges", or American Privileged Party.
>
> Ya, I think I like American Privileged Party.
>
> The purpose of my new party is to fight for my Privileges.
>
> If we don't organize now we could end up like Russia, where the
> government is trying to reduce Privileges, with some success, we need

> to start fighting this now!
>

> The American Privileged Party Platform:
>
> We believe the American Rich and well heeled have no security when they
> have to work to provide for their own food, housing and retirement.
>
> We believe the American wealthy deserves a secure, healthy, and dignified
> Privileged life style. America's wealthy have earned their Medicare and Social
> Security.
>
> We believe the American Rich and well heeled can and should be
> supported by the middle class, after all if we the Rich and well heeled
> spent all our money, we wouldn't be wealthy.
>
> We believe the Rich and well heeled should be provided with vouchers to
> cover 50% of any tax payments. We also have a right to
> an income tax deduction for investment interest, just like our wealthy for-bearers.

>
> ***********************
> These are a few ideas I have about the platform for the new American

> Privileged Party.
>
> Remember the wealthy, they are wealthy.
> Mikek

Looks good too me !!







;-D

[John Larkin]

Why mess with politics? Designing electronics is far more fun. More
moral, too.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

[amdx]

You're crashing my party, it's my party and I'll cry if I want too!
Mikek
PS. I almost missed it! I reread several times;

Remember the wealthy, they are wealthy.

Did I write that ? That's good!
Then I went back further and further. :-)

[dagmarg...@yahoo.com]

On Nov 10, 4:32 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

It's frightfully boring, and boringly frightful.

> Designing electronics is far more fun. More
> moral, too.

Agreed. But, to dust off an old Greek guy,
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be
ruled by evil men." --Plato

"Why be ruled by evil men when I could be ruled by a hot chick?,"
quoth me to a blushing candi-babe. (She won.)

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

[Bill Sloman]

But you are ruled by greedy men (who strike me as distinctly evil -
though they may not realise, any more than you do, that the policies
that they are advocating work to their own disadvantage, as well as
seriously disadvantaging everybody with less money than they have).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

As satire goes, this is pretty pathetic, and exceedingly unoriginal.
James Arthur has been making the same kinds of fatuous claims about
socialism for years now.

Admittedly, he's got such an extreme case of political tunnel vision
that he may believe the twaddle he posts, but your content is pretty
much exactly his.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[amdx]

Bill you might be able to help, do you have any planks to add to my
platform? I'm just looking for ideas that I can mull over, ideas that
might sway 30% of my followers, we can manipulate, buy or lie to get the
other 20%. I need planks, thanks, Mikek

[Bill Sloman]

Actually, you need a better understand of what is going on. I've just
read Jonathan Israel's "Democratic Enlightenment"

http://www.amazon.com/Democratic-Enlightenment-Philosophy-Revolution-1750-1790/dp/019954820X

which does cover the basics in fair detail, though you might need to
read bit more to pick up the detail of Spinoza's contribution to what
was going on then - and is still going on now.

To get a grip on modern socialism - which is all post-1790, though it
is clearly based on the Radical Enlightenment - you will need to read
more widely. Will Hutton's "The World We're In" could be a good place
to start.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/World-Were-Will-Hutton/dp/0349114714

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:
>
> Bill you might be able to help, do you have any planks to add to my
> platform? I'm just looking for ideas that I can mull over, ideas that
> might sway 30% of my followers, we can manipulate, buy or lie to get the
> other 20%. I need planks, thanks, Mikek

You'd be lucky to get sawdust from BS.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:05:52 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:

>I want to start a new political Party.

Yawn... Take a number and stand in line:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_third_party_and_independent_presidential_candidates,_2012>

>I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.

Yawn 2.0... It's been done in UK.
<http://socialwelfareunion.org>
A Union Of Welfare Campaigners Fighting To
Defend The Welfare State In The United Kingdom
And Raise Awareness Of Its Importance.
While not exactly a political party, it would be easy enough to hire a
few professional candidates to run for office. It could probably be
cloned effectively in the USA.

> Ya, I think I like American Entitlement Party.

The GUM (great unwashed masses) clamoring for more government handouts
don't have enough money to buy an election. What you probably want is
the "Corporate Welfare Party".

What's missing is a party slogan. In the past, there's been "a
chicken in every pot", "the new deal", "the great society", "tax
simplification", etc. However, the recent candidates have not and
memorable slogans. You're party can easily fill the slogan gap. I
suggest something like "tax until it hurts", "deficit reduction
through spending", "after us insolvency", or "the end is near".

To gain attention, don't forget to inscribe the platform in poetry:
<http://www.everypoet.com/stump/default.htm>
<http://www.everypoet.com/absurdities/index.htm>


--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[amdx]

On 11/10/2012 11:37 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:05:52 -0600, amdx <am...@knology.net> wrote:
>
>> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> Yawn... Take a number and stand in line:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_third_party_and_independent_presidential_candidates,_2012>
>
>> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>
> Yawn 2.0... It's been done in UK.
> <http://socialwelfareunion.org>
> A Union Of Welfare Campaigners Fighting To
> Defend The Welfare State In The United Kingdom
> And Raise Awareness Of Its Importance.
> While not exactly a political party, it would be easy enough to hire a
> few professional candidates to run for office. It could probably be
> cloned effectively in the USA.
>
>> Ya, I think I like American Entitlement Party.
>
> The GUM (great unwashed masses) clamoring for more government handouts
> don't have enough money to buy an election.


>What you probably want is the "Corporate Welfare Party".

Well, I'm not for giving taxpayer money to corporations,
on the other hand I think taxing corporations is just hiding
the taxes that individuals pay, because we all know the customer
pays all corporate taxes.
Mikek

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 00:57:06 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

There's no need to be for or against anything. You just need to
assemble the correct combination of dogma, advocacy, promises, lies,
FUD, distortions, endorsements, and policy to get elected. Once
elected, you can break your promises and you can do whatever is
convenient. For example, Obama's broken promises list:
<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/>

However, you're correct about taxes. Corporations don't pay taxes.
They just pass them on to consumers.

Maybe resurrect the Apathy Party or 2008?
<https://www.google.com/search?q=apathetic+party&tbm=isch>
The only problem is that none of its members bother to vote.

[dagmarg...@yahoo.com]

On Nov 11, 12:37 am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:

> The GUM (great unwashed masses) clamoring for more government handouts
> don't have enough money to buy an election.  What you probably want is
> the "Corporate Welfare Party".

Of course they do. They just proved it.

> What's missing is a party slogan.

We've got plenty to work with:

"Yes we can [take it]"
"[our] Fair share [of yours]"
"Forward [downward]"
"Millionaires and billionaires [i.e., you]"
"War on women"
"Money for nothing, chicks for free"
"O-ba-ma-phone!"

> In the past, there's been "a
> chicken in every pot", "the new deal", "the great society", "tax
> simplification", etc.  However, the recent candidates have not and
> memorable slogans.  You're party can easily fill the slogan gap.  I
> suggest something like "tax until it hurts", "deficit reduction
> through spending", "after us insolvency", or "the end is near".

Su casa es mi casa?

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

[Gib Bogle]

On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:
> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>
> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.

Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
effectively a moderate Republican. You are still trying to fight
against an invented enemy. You see where that got the Republicans?

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 11, 11:54 pm, dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Nov 11, 12:37 am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
> > The GUM (great unwashed masses) clamoring for more government handouts
> > don't have enough money to buy an election.  What you probably want is
> > the "Corporate Welfare Party".
>
> Of course they do.  They just proved it.

James is a little out of touch with reality. The GUM of the USA has
just rejected the "Corporate Welfare Party", presumably figuring that
corporations were already getting more government handouts than they
should, at the expense of the great unwashed, who can't even afford
hot water any more.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[amdx]

Satire?
We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
paid for! They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
to cut spending.
The way society has progressed every American deserves free food,
shelter and a cellphone, the rich can afford to pay for it. I might even
add a plank that we cannot survive in American society without a car.
The government should be buy us a car if we can't afford it.
You keep watching, there will be a cut in SS payments, they will say
something like, during 2011 you got a 30% cut in the amount you paid
into SS so, we can't continue to pay out the amount we used to.
Mikek

[Jeff Liebermann]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Perhaps some details on American style
politics might be helpful.

The GUM (Great Unwashed Masses) tends to vote for whichever party will
support a free lunch or welfare lifestyle. Given the opportunity, the
GUM will always vote themselves a free lunch, tax break, or bonus.

Both parties provided the usual creative plans for financing the free
lunch and welfare programs. The Democrats itemized how they plan to
tax the rich. However, the Republicans could only offer a
restructuring of deductions and tax breaks, while refusing to even
consider a change in the tax rate, and not bothering to be very
specific as to which income classes this would apply.

The GUM may be dense, greedy, clueless, stupid, and dirty, but they
can smell money at great distances and see through even the most
Byzantine government finance plans. They smelled a probable betrayal
and voted for the candidate most likely to deliver. This has great
appeal to the immigrant, illegal alien, welfare opportunist,
votes-for-sale, and rent-a-voter groups. Unfortunately, I'll shortly
be 65 and am slowly morphing from a tax payer into a professional
recipient. The metamorphosis will be complete in about a year, after
which I plan to live off the tax revenues provided by those still
working and paying. Since the USA has a growing senior population
(baby boomers) on social security, the preference for the party that
offers maximum benefits is understandable. The Republicans promised a
combination of disassembling Social Security and imaginative
financing. The Democrats delivered severe dilution by adding about 22
million recipients that have never paid into the system, and promised
more of the same in the future. Given the choice between two obvious
evils, the Democrats seemed slightly less evil.

Please note that both parties subscribe the principles of Corporate
Welfare, the Republicans only more so. The Republicans believe in
redistributing the wealth in the direction of large corporations in
exchange for campaign funding. Eventually, the money will trickle
down to the GUM. The Democrats believe in redistributing the wealth
towards big government bureaucracies, which act as a proxy for the
large corporations. With luck, some of this wealth may actually be
used for voter approved worthy programs, but is more likely to
absorbed by entitlements and inefficiencies.

Remember, we have the best government that money can buy.


"Popular Wrench Fights a Chinese Rival"
<http://finance.yahoo.com/news/popular-wrench-fights-chinese-rival-004542621.html?page=all>
The company that makes the Max Axess wrench [the Chinese clone]
and other tools for Craftsman, the Apex Tool Group, is being
acquired by Bain Capital, the company founded by Mitt Romney,
in a $1.6 billion deal.

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:58:00 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

[snip]

>Unfortunately, I'll shortly
>be 65 and am slowly morphing from a tax payer into a professional
>recipient. The metamorphosis will be complete in about a year, after
>which I plan to live off the tax revenues provided by those still
>working and paying. Since the USA has a growing senior population
>(baby boomers) on social security, the preference for the party that
>offers maximum benefits is understandable.

[snip]

I just received a notice in the mail that my Social Security Benefit
will be increasing because I have continued to work and pay into the
system :-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[cameo]

On 11/11/2012 3:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> ... I'll shortly

> be 65 and am slowly morphing from a tax payer into a professional
> recipient. The metamorphosis will be complete in about a year, after
> which I plan to live off the tax revenues provided by those still
> working and paying.

Jeff, your finely honed cynicism is appreciated but allow to add some
information to the above from somebody who just recently made the same
metamorphosis.

It's probably needless to say that most of us seniors paid all or a good
portion into the SS fund from which we are receiving that pension. In
fact, though we were taxed on the paid-in contributions, we are taxed on
it again when we receiving it. Luckily not on the full 100%, just on the
80%. That is supposed to be because we only contributed half of the SS
deductions. The other half was paid by the employer. But still, we are
paying taxes on it, just as we pay on other pensions, such as company
pensions and 401K distributions. This is hardly leeching on the
government, as opposed to the GUM crowd that gets stuff without
contributions.

> Please note that both parties subscribe the principles of Corporate
> Welfare, the Republicans only more so.

I think here again you are a bit sloppy in comparing corporate welfare
with GUM welfare. A true corporate welfare is what Obama did with
Solindra, for instance, giving taxpayer money to the company without
that company contributing first to the Treasury. Giving tax cuts to
corporations is not the same thing because you just allow them to keep
more of the money they earned in the first place. It's like a mugger,
after taking your valet has a change of heart and lets you keep a few
dollars for the bus fare to get you home.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:14:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-Th...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>I just received a notice in the mail that my Social Security Benefit
>will be increasing because I have continued to work and pay into the
>system :-)
> ...Jim Thompson

On behalf of the other social security recipients and myself, I thank
you for your ummm... contribution. Keep up the good work and keep
those tax payments coming.

<http://www.socialsecurity.gov/retire2/whileworking.htm>
$14,640 limit for 2012. Anything over that, half gets deducted from
your Social Security payments.

Drivel: Because I wasn't born in the USA, I was required to present
my naturalization documents, passports, name changes, SSI card,
licenses, etc papers in person to the local Social Security office.
Upon arrival, I was directed to an impressive looking machine that
vaguely resembled an ATM. The touch screen offered two choices
"English" and "Spanish". I chose "English" causing the machine to
immediately vomit a certificate assigning me the number 51. It
proclaimed that I would be duly served when my number was called. The
wonders of modern electronic technology. I resisted the temptation to
press the other button to see what would happen.

The office furnishings included a security guard at the entry door. As
soon as I sat down, he immediately approached me, with his hand on his
gun. I guessed that he was able to deduce my intention to personally
bankrupt the US government social security system, but that wasn't the
problem. I always carry a black Mini-Maglite LED flashlight on my
belt in a black leather holster. From under my jacket, it looked very
much like the barrel of a gun. I carefully removed my flashlight for
his inspection, but that was insufficient to calm the guard. He asked
if I had any other weapons. I gave him my pocket knife, pocket
screwdriver, tuning tool, PDA stylus, and paper clip collection
(useful for resetting wireless routers). The guard was about to
recite a verse from the scared book of Federal rules and regulations
when I was rescued by the a synthesized voice calling number 51.

After a the clerk copied and rubber stamped literally everything I
dragged to the office, I approached the guard at the doorway and
demanded my weapons be returned. Once again, with his hand on his
gun, he carefully returned my flashlight, pocket knife, screwdriver,
tuning tool, PDA stylus, and paper clips. I asked if one of the paper
clips was missing. When he looked into the basket for the missing
paper clip, I made my escape.

Action item: Paint the Mini-Maglite pink.

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:
> >> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> >> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>
> >> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>
> > Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
> > effectively a moderate Republican.  You are still trying to fight
> > against an invented enemy.  You see where that got the Republicans?
>
>   Satire?
>   We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
> paid for!

What exactly? The roads you use to drive to work? The education that
makes you useful at work?

> They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
> to cut spending.

You are and you do. The US has been running a huge balanace of
payments deficit since Regan was president, basically to pay for the
oil you import, and you need to import less oil.

>    The way society has progressed every American deserves free food,
> shelter and a cellphone,

Fine satirical point, but scarcely original. "A chicken in every pot"
goes back a long way.

> the rich can afford to pay for it.

Probably not, at least not for any length of time.

> I might even add a plank that we cannot survive in American society without a car.

Depending on what you mean by "survive".

> The government should buy us a car if we can't afford it.

A decrepit second hand clunker. I was driving a 12-year-old car until
just before we left the Netherlands, when I sold it for 500 euro
($636). It might have been old, but it was extremely reliable and
reasonably quick.

>    You keep watching, there will be a cut in SS payments, they will say
> something like, during 2011 you got a 30% cut in the amount you paid
> into SS so, we can't continue to pay out the amount we used to.

Getting excited about what the government might do is bad for your
blood pressure. If James Arthur is anything to go by, it can rapidly
destroy your brain - I think the technical term is "micro-strokes".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transient_ischemic_attack

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 12, 11:39 am, cameo <ca...@unreal.invalid> wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 3:58 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

>
> > Please note that both parties subscribe the principles of Corporate
> > Welfare, the Republicans only more so.
>
> I think here again you are a bit sloppy in comparing corporate welfare
> with GUM welfare. A true corporate welfare is what Obama did with
> Solindra,

It doesn't seem to be Obama as much as the Department of Energy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra

" as early as August 2009, an aide to then-White House Chief of Staff
Rahm Emanuel had asked a Department of Energy official if he could
discuss any concerns among the investment community about Solyndra but
that the official dismissed the idea that Solyndra had financial
problems."

> for instance, giving taxpayer money to the company without
> that company contributing first to the Treasury. Giving tax cuts to
> corporations is not the same thing because you just allow them to keep
> more of the money they earned in the first place. It's like a mugger,
> after taking your valet has a change of heart and lets you keep a few
> dollars for the bus fare to get you home.

Not a particularly apt comparison. Corporations make money by
operating in a society that has paid out a lot to set up the infra-
structure that lets them work, and to educate the employees that they
hire. Collecting corporate tax is more like charging rent for these
facilities than mugging the corporation, and giving individual tax
cuts to particular corporations is just loading more of the rent onto
corporations who haven't lobbied hared enough for their own loop-
holes.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[boB]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:39:09 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

>On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
>> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:
>> >> I want to start a new political Party.
>>
>> >> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>>
>> >> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>>
>> > Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
>> > effectively a moderate Republican.  You are still trying to fight
>> > against an invented enemy.  You see where that got the Republicans?
>>
>>   Satire?
>>   We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
>> paid for!
>
>What exactly? The roads you use to drive to work? The education that
>makes you useful at work?
>
>> They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
>> to cut spending.
>
>You are and you do. The US has been running a huge balanace of
>payments deficit since Regan was president, basically to pay for the
>oil you import, and you need to import less oil.

We need to import most of our oil until they run out...
THEN we can start using our oil. Use theirs up first.


boB

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 12, 10:02 pm, boB wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:39:09 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
> >On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> >> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:
> >> >> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> >> >> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>
> >> >> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>
> >> > Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
> >> > effectively a moderate Republican. You are still trying to fight
> >> > against an invented enemy. You see where that got the Republicans?
>
> >> Satire?
> >> We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
> >> paid for!
>
> >What exactly? The roads you use to drive to work? The education that
> >makes you useful at work?
>
> >> They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
> >> to cut spending.
>

> >You are and you do. The US has been running a huge balance of

> >payments deficit since Regan was president, basically to pay for the
> >oil you import, and you need to import less oil.
>
> We need to import most of our oil until they run out...
> THEN we can start using our oil.   Use theirs up first.

Tough. You ran out of money long before they ran out of oil.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:11:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:14:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
><To-Email-Use-Th...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
>>I just received a notice in the mail that my Social Security Benefit
>>will be increasing because I have continued to work and pay into the
>>system :-)
>> ...Jim Thompson
>
>On behalf of the other social security recipients and myself, I thank
>you for your ummm... contribution. Keep up the good work and keep
>those tax payments coming.
>
><http://www.socialsecurity.gov/retire2/whileworking.htm>
>$14,640 limit for 2012. Anything over that, half gets deducted from
>your Social Security payments.

You missed this...

"Starting with the month you reach full retirement age, you can get
your benefits with no limit on your earnings."

What does happen though is an IRS mechanism that taxes some of my
"benefits" when my (net taxable) income goes above some magical
number.

I didn't have to go in, but my wife did. When I took her there I saw
no guards... it was just a bunch of cubicles. But this is Phoenix, we
don't act like NY or Californica ;-)

[amdx]

On 11/12/2012 9:37 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:11:37 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:14:42 -0700, Jim Thompson
>> <To-Email-Use-Th...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I just received a notice in the mail that my Social Security Benefit
>>> will be increasing because I have continued to work and pay into the
>>> system :-)
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
>> On behalf of the other social security recipients and myself, I thank
>> you for your ummm... contribution. Keep up the good work and keep
>> those tax payments coming.
>>
>> <http://www.socialsecurity.gov/retire2/whileworking.htm>
>> $14,640 limit for 2012. Anything over that, half gets deducted from
>> your Social Security payments.
>
> You missed this...
>
> "Starting with the month you reach full retirement age, you can get
> your benefits with no limit on your earnings."
>


> What does happen though is an IRS mechanism that taxes some of my
> "benefits" when my (net taxable) income goes above some magical
> number.

Well that's good if you can afford wine, you can afford to buy my
cellphone!
You earned it, I deserve it.
Mikek

[Jim Thompson]

You have it bass-ackwards. You youngsters have to cough it up to pay
for my wine habit >:-}

[amdx]

Ya, and I suppose you think that the mortgage deduction is not welfare
for the middle class and rich.
Just because you pay less taxes to the fed rather than just getting a
check from the feds, makes it not welfare?
Mikek

[amdx]

Bill, what's going on here, I thought you would be my commie pinko
supporter. Instead you keep countering all my entitlement ideas.
Now jump back on the wagon and give me some planks for my platform.
I hope those rich people can see that they should be buying my High
Blood pressure medicine, so I can live long enough to collect all the SS
that is owed to me.
Mikek

[amdx]

The oil rich countries are rich, the should give oil to the poor and
middleclass.
If the government runs out of money they should just print more to cover
entitlement spending, after all, only the rich have assets that will
lose value by inflation. The rich have enough money so it doesn't matter.
Mikek

[amdx]

You just think you deserve everything you have worked hard for!
Typical rich person thinking, you think if you work hard live frugally
and save for your future you can retire comfortably. And it's this same
attitude that keeps you working and producing even in retirement. It's
obvious to me, you just want to take a job from away from a poor person.
You seem to think that just cause others don't work hard, spend every
dime and never think about the future that you don't need to spread your
wealth.
Mikek

[amdx]

>>>
>>>> What does happen though is an IRS mechanism that taxes some of my
>>>> "benefits" when my (net taxable) income goes above some magical
>>>> number.
>>>
>>> Well that's good if you can afford wine, you can afford to buy my
>>> cellphone!
>>> You earned it, I deserve it.
>>> Mikek
>>
>> You have it bass-ackwards. You youngsters have to cough it up to pay
>> for my wine habit >:-}
>>
>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
> You just think you deserve everything you have worked hard for!
> Typical rich person thinking, you think if you work hard live frugally
> and save for your future you can retire comfortably. And it's this same
> attitude that keeps you working and producing even in retirement. It's
> obvious to me, you just want to take a job from away from a poor person.
> You seem to think that just cause others don't work hard, spend every
> dime and never think about the future that you don't need to spread your
> wealth.
> Mikek

Sheesh, I just ran across this quote,

"Most of us may lament the fact that so many more people are today
dependent on food stamps and other government subsidies. But dependency
usually translates into votes for whoever is handing out the benefits,
so an economic disaster can be a political bonanza, as it was for
Franklin D. Roosevelt. Don’t count Obama out in 2012."

How cynical!

Check out this guys wild thinking,
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280393/spreading-wealth-thomas-sowell#
Mikek

[John Larkin]

The rich are smart enough to have assets that track, or even
appreciate, with inflation. And smart enough to buy those assets with
loans that are in fixed dollars, loans that diminish in value with
inflation. Companies raise their prices to track inflation, often
getting ahead of their cost curve.

Little people with some savings, pensions, IRAs, and bills to pay,
food to buy, gas and electricity and tuition to pay for, will be hurt
by government printing money.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:37:52 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-Th...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:

>><http://www.socialsecurity.gov/retire2/whileworking.htm>
>>$14,640 limit for 2012. Anything over that, half gets deducted from
>>your Social Security payments.
>
>You missed this...
>
>"Starting with the month you reach full retirement age, you can get
>your benefits with no limit on your earnings."
>
>What does happen though is an IRS mechanism that taxes some of my
>"benefits" when my (net taxable) income goes above some magical
>number.

Thanks. I can see I'll need to do some more reading if I'm going to
"work the system".

>I didn't have to go in, but my wife did. When I took her there I saw
>no guards... it was just a bunch of cubicles. But this is Phoenix, we
>don't act like NY or Californica ;-)

The Social Security Administration believes in preparation:
<http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/04/us/social-security-bullets/index.html>
<http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ssabullets.asp>
That's about 600 rounds per SSA agent which is about right for two
years of training and qualification. I'm having difficulties
visualizing a mob of retirees assaulting the SSA offices, but it's
possible. Still, it makes a good conspiracy theory.

Then there's North Carolina:
"North Carolina Man Sentenced to 10 years in Prison for Assaulting SSA
Security Guard"
<http://oig.ssa.gov/audits-and-investigations/investigations/north-carolina-man-sentenced-10-years-prison-assaulting-ssa>
Note that the "Management Issue" for the assault is to "Improve
Customer Service" which methinks is somewhat of an understatement.
<http://oig.ssa.gov/audits-and-investigations/investigations>
Also note the choice of fonts, kerning, and colors on the SSA OIG web
pile, which seem to be designed to produce difficult reading for
anyone with impaired eyesight.

I dunno about Arizona being all that docile:
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/10/baja-arizona-state_n_859954.html>
Baja Arizona? Maybe we just give Arizona back to Mexico?

[amdx]

See! Rich people think, again.
Always trying to preserve what you worked and saved for.
Mikek

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:10:33 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

[snip]

>
>I dunno about Arizona being all that docile:
><http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/10/baja-arizona-state_n_859954.html>
>Baja Arizona? Maybe we just give Arizona back to Mexico?

Lot of leftist nutcases down that way... clustered around UofA. But
Paul Babeu, was re-elected Sheriff of Pinal County, so I think it's
only "noise".

[John Larkin]

And government looks out for itself.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:51:26 -0800, John Larkin
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>Little people with some savings, pensions, IRAs, and bills to pay,
>food to buy, gas and electricity and tuition to pay for, will be hurt
>by government printing money.

Yep. There's another problem. Inflation and printing money (same
thing) tend to elevate the incomes of the working classes. This
brings them into target range for measures that were originally
intended to "tax the rich". AMT (alternative minimum tax) is an
example. It was originally designed to screw a handfull of wealthy
tax avoiders. Thanks to inflation, it now affects many "little
people" that sell their homes and businesses without the benefits of a
balancing portfolio of tax losers. It happened to me when I sold a
rental house. AMT is also effectively permanent, as it now generates
considerable tax revenue for the government:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax>

[amdx]

On 11/12/2012 11:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:51:26 -0800, John Larkin
> <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>> Little people with some savings, pensions, IRAs, and bills to pay,
>> food to buy, gas and electricity and tuition to pay for, will be hurt
>> by government printing money.
>
> Yep. There's another problem. Inflation and printing money (same
> thing) tend to elevate the incomes of the working classes. This
> brings them into target range for measures that were originally
> intended to "tax the rich". AMT (alternative minimum tax) is an
> example. It was originally designed to screw a handfull of wealthy
> tax avoiders. Thanks to inflation, it now affects many "little
> people" that sell their homes and businesses without the benefits of a
> balancing portfolio of tax losers. It happened to me when I sold a
> rental house. AMT is also effectively permanent, as it now generates
> considerable tax revenue for the government:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax>
>
>

Don't worry, the rich and their accountants will find a way to avoid
those taxes.
How about that Romney paying a 14% tax rate.
And the middle class guy paying 18%.
So what if Romney paid taxes of $4,000,000 and
the middle class guy only paid $8,100.
If Romney wanted fairness he had a his chance to earn less!
Mikek

[amdx]

Ya'll need to start adding some planks to the American Entitlement
Party Platform, if you don't I could move on to somewhere a little more
political, like rec.boats! I hesitate though,
they're very liberal over there.
Mikek

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 16:36:26 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

>On Nov 11, 10:58 am, dagmargoodb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Nov 10, 4:32 pm, John Larkin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

>> > On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 13:05:52 -0600, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
>> > >I want to start a new political Party.
>>
>> > >I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>>
>> > >I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>>

>> > >Ya, I think I like American entitlement Party.
>>
>> > >The purpose of my new party is to fight for my entitlements.
>>
>> > >If we don't organize now we could end up like Greece, where the
>> > >government is trying to reduce entitlements, with some success, we need
>> > >to start fighting this now!
>>
>> > >The American Entitlement Party Platform:
>>
>> > >We believe the American poor and middle class have no security when they
>> > >have to work and provide for their own food, housing and retirement.
>>
>> > >We believe every American deserves a secure, healthy, and dignified
>> > >retirement. America's seniors have earned their Medicare and Social
>> > >Security.
>>
>> > >We believe the American poor and middle class  can and should be
>> > >supported by the wealthy, after all if we the poor and middle class
>> > >didn't spend all our money they wouldn't be wealthy.
>>
>> > >We believe accessible, free, high quality health care is part of the
>> > >American promise, that Americans should have the security that comes
>> > >with good health care, and that no one should go broke because they get
>> > >sick.
>>
>> > >In a vibrant economy a personal cell phone is necessary for a person to
>> > >prosper, thus a cell phone should be provided to all who ask for one.
>>
>> > >We believe the poor and middle class should be provided with vouchers to
>> > >cover 50% of any rent and/or mortgage payment. We also have a right to
>> > >an income tax deduction for mortgage interest, just like the wealthy.
>>
>> > >The new EBT system is good, we just want it expanded to anyone earning
>> > >less than $100,000.
>> > >And make it illegal to call it foodstamps, that is degrading!
>>
>> > >It should not be illegal to resell my EBT card, it is my card after all.
>>
>> > >***********************
>> > >These are a few ideas I have about the platform for the new American
>> > >Entitlement Party.
>>
>> > >Please give my your suggestions about what you think needs to be in the
>> > >platform.
>>
>> > >Now be realistic, we can't ask for free make up, wigs or tattoo removal.
>> > >Scratch that tattoo removal is ok.
>>
>> > >Any Ideas you might have about this new political party and how to save
>> > >our Entitlements are appreciated.
>>
>> > >Remember the wealthy will try to take away what should be ours.
>> > >                                                                Mikek
>>
>> > Why mess with politics?
>>
>> It's frightfully boring, and boringly frightful.
>>
>> > Designing electronics is far more fun. More
>> > moral, too.
>>
>> Agreed. But, to dust off an old Greek guy,
>>   "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be
>> ruled by evil men." --Plato
>>
>> "Why be ruled by evil men when I could be ruled by a hot chick?,"
>> quoth me to a blushing candi-babe.  (She won.)
>
>But you are ruled by greedy men (who strike me as distinctly evil -
>though they may not realise, any more than you do, that the policies
>that they are advocating work to their own disadvantage, as well as
>seriously disadvantaging everybody with less money than they have).

I don't think that the USA has ever had a billionaire President, or
member of Congress, or a billionaire governor (Arnold S might be
close.) Putin is a billionaire, as are most of the upper level of the
Chinese government, as was that guy in Italy.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom laser drivers and controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

[k...@att.bizzz]

Bloomberg is "just" a mayor but he's up there. John Corizine is up
there, too, particularly if you include the money he stole from his
clients.

[k...@att.bizzz]

Like FDR, don't count him out in 2016, either. In fact, also like
FDR, don't count him out until he's dead.

> How cynical!
>
> Check out this guys wild thinking,
>http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280393/spreading-wealth-thomas-sowell#

He's just an Oreo.

[k...@att.bizzz]

Certainly! Allowing you to keep your money is an expense to the
government.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
> The Social Security Administration believes in preparation:
> <http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/04/us/social-security-bullets/index.html>
> <http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ssabullets.asp>
> That's about 600 rounds per SSA agent which is about right for two
> years of training and qualification. I'm having difficulties
> visualizing a mob of retirees assaulting the SSA offices, but it's
> possible. Still, it makes a good conspiracy theory.

They wiped out the Ocala office with a flood. No 'fire' needed...

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:

>
> If Romney wanted fairness he had a his chance to earn less!

He's work 230 Million. If hadn't sold Bain, he would be worth over 2
Billion. Isn't that enough for you?

Have you ever passed up 1.75 Billion in income, to work for free?

[John Larkin]

Americans seem to get really rich, then run for political office. Most
other countries reverse the order.

[Jeff Liebermann]

There are other differences. Americans and most Europeans believe
that bribes are immoral, while commissions are perfectly acceptable.
Never mind that the only difference between a bribe and a commission
is when it's paid. In the middle east, where bribes are the norm, one
is considered a fool for risking one's profit by accepting a post-paid
commission.

That also extends to political office holders. In the US, the office
holder does not accept gratuities while in office. Instead, he
enriches his friends and supporters. Once out of office, they are
expected to make his life easy with expensive presents, well paying
jobs, cheap stock, and zero payment loans. On other countries, the
office holders steal everything that isn't tied down, and run for
their lives once out of office as their former friends and supporters
charge them with various immoral and illegal acts.

[amdx]

I'll review my notes and get back to you on that.
Mikek

[k...@att.bizzz]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:13:10 -0800, John Larkin

Clinton and Obama weren't rich before they ran for politics. Neither
is wanting for their next arugula sandwich. You can aspire to sex,
money, or power. If you achieve #3, the other two are automatic.

[k...@att.bizzz]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:33:15 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:13:10 -0800, John Larkin
><jla...@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
>>Americans seem to get really rich, then run for political office. Most
>>other countries reverse the order.
>
>There are other differences. Americans and most Europeans believe
>that bribes are immoral, while commissions are perfectly acceptable.
>Never mind that the only difference between a bribe and a commission
>is when it's paid. In the middle east, where bribes are the norm, one
>is considered a fool for risking one's profit by accepting a post-paid
>commission.

The difference is the quid pro quo. If one is contingent on the
other, it's in bad form to get caught.

>That also extends to political office holders. In the US, the office
>holder does not accept gratuities while in office. Instead, he
>enriches his friends and supporters. Once out of office, they are
>expected to make his life easy with expensive presents, well paying
>jobs, cheap stock, and zero payment loans.

Or write a book, while in office.

>On other countries, the
>office holders steal everything that isn't tied down, and run for
>their lives once out of office as their former friends and supporters
>charge them with various immoral and illegal acts.

It's a hard (and short) life when they can't find a country that will
give the asylum. Gotta get out of Dodge when the gettin's good.

[k...@att.bizzz]

I certainly don't think I could take that pay cut.

[boB]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:29:33 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

>On Nov 12, 10:02 pm, boB wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:39:09 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> >On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:

>> >> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:
>> >> >> I want to start a new political Party.
>>
>> >> >> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>>
>> >> >> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>>

>> >> > Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
>> >> > effectively a moderate Republican. You are still trying to fight
>> >> > against an invented enemy. You see where that got the Republicans?
>>
>> >> Satire?
>> >> We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
>> >> paid for!
>>
>> >What exactly? The roads you use to drive to work? The education that
>> >makes you useful at work?
>>
>> >> They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
>> >> to cut spending.
>>

>> >You are and you do. The US has been running a huge balance of

>> >payments deficit since Regan was president, basically to pay for the
>> >oil you import, and you need to import less oil.
>>

>> We need to import most of our oil until they run out...
>> THEN we can start using our oil.   Use theirs up first.
>
>Tough. You ran out of money long before they ran out of oil.

Then how come we are still importing oil ??

[Jim Thompson]

So we can burn that witch Slowman at the stake ?:-)

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jeorge would have multiple heart attacks for leaving that money on the
table. :(

[Jamie]

Just print more money!... Isn't what they have been doing for the
last 4 years?

Young society thinks that is how it's done! A large percentage of them
actually believe it! They also don't believe in working for their keep,
that's too old fashion, out of date.

The free ride will soon be ending.

Jamie

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 13, 7:57 am, John Larkin <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com>
wrote:

Silvio Belusconi ( $5.9 billion)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi

He used his money, and his dominant position in Italy's media
companies, to get - and hold onto - political power.

Putin's probably nowhere near being a billionaire. "Figures released
during the legislative election of 2007 put Putin's wealth at
approximately 3.7 million rubles ($150,000) in bank accounts, a
private 77.4-square-meter (833 sq ft) apartment in Saint Petersburg,
260 shares of Bank Saint Petersburg (with a December 2007 market price
$5.36 per share[329]) and two 1960s-era Volga M21 cars that he
inherited from his father and does not register for on-road use."

He certainly lives like a billionaire, but so does Obama, and for
pretty much the same reason.

Speculations about the wealth of top level of the Chinese
administration are just that. If any of them were indiscreet enough to
make their depredations so obvious that Western journalists could nail
them, they'd probably be promptly shot for bringing the party into
discredit.

When I said that the US was ruled by greedy men, I didn't intend to
imply that your congress-men and administration were all that well
off, but rather that they were particularly attentive to the needs and
desires of the seriously wealthy, to pretty much everybody else's
disadvantage. I'm not arguing that the US is worse run than any other
effective oligarchy, merely that it is not - in fact - a democracy,
and would be better run if the interests whole of the population were
being taken into account.

--
Bill Slooman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 13, 11:13 am, John Larkin <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com>

That was exactly what Silvio Belusconi did in Italy - he used his
wealth to fund a (rather profitable) political career. Very American,
right down to the mafia connections

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 13, 12:16 pm, boB wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:29:33 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

You are borrowing money from China, and paying it out to Saudi Arabia.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 13, 12:45 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-

My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
> On 12 Nov 2012 19:16:03 -0600, boB wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:29:33 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman

> ><bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>
> >>On Nov 12, 10:02 pm, boB wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:39:09 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
> >>> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
> >>> >On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> >>> >> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:

<snip>

> >>> We need to import most of our oil until they run out...
> >>> THEN we can start using our oil. Use theirs up first.
>
> >>Tough. You ran out of money long before they ran out of oil.
>
> >Then how come we are still importing oil ??
>
> So we can burn that witch Slowman at the stake ?:-)

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson scores again. For a start, I'm
not a witch nor even a warlock, and even Jim should have enough to
know that I've never even pretended to magical powers.

And nobody seems to have needed oil to burn witches - the traditional
approach relied on wood.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 13, 3:18 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:

> On 11/11/2012 9:39 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
> > On Nov 12, 8:53 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> >> On 11/11/2012 2:40 PM, Gib Bogle wrote:> On 11/11/2012 8:05 a.m., amdx wrote:

> >>>> I want to start a new political Party.
>
> >>>> I haven't decided on a name yet, I'm open to suggestions.
>
> >>>> I'm thinking "Americans for Entitlements", or American Entitlement Party.
>
> >>> Your attempt at satire founders on the simple fact that Obama is
> >>> effectively a moderate Republican.  You are still trying to fight
> >>> against an invented enemy.  You see where that got the Republicans?
>
> >>    Satire?
> >>    We need to stop those in power from taking away what we earned and
> >> paid for!
>
> > What exactly? The roads you use to drive to work? The education that
> > makes you useful at work?
>
> >> They're going to keep saying we are broke and suggest we need
> >> to cut spending.
>

> > You are and you do. The US has been running a huge balanace of

> > payments deficit since Regan was president, basically to pay for the
> > oil you import, and you need to import less oil.
>

> >>     The way society has progressed every American deserves free food,
> >> shelter and a cellphone,
>
> > Fine satirical point, but scarcely original. "A chicken in every pot"
> > goes back a long way.
>
> >> the rich can afford to pay for it.
>
> > Probably not, at least not for any length of time.
>
> >> I might even add a plank that we cannot survive in American society without a car.
>
> > Depending on what you mean by "survive".
>
> >> The government should buy us a car if we can't afford it.
>
> > A decrepit second hand clunker. I was driving a 12-year-old car until
> > just before we left the Netherlands, when I sold it for 500 euro
> > ($636). It might have been old, but it was extremely reliable and
> > reasonably quick.
>
> >>     You keep watching, there will be a cut in SS payments, they will say
> >> something like, during 2011 you got a 30% cut in the amount you paid
> >> into SS so, we can't continue to pay out the amount we used to.
>
> > Getting excited about what the government might do is bad for your
> > blood pressure. If James Arthur is anything to go by, it can rapidly
> > destroy your brain - I think the technical term is "micro-strokes".
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transient_ischemic_attack
>

>    Bill, what's going on here, I thought you would be my commie pinko
> supporter. Instead you keep countering all my entitlement ideas.

There you go. Just because I'm to the left of James Arthur, Jim
Thompson and John
Larkin doesn't make me a commie pinko - there's a whole mass of left-
wingers out there to whom I look as right-wing as Jim Yanick looks to
you.

And we aren't even talking about left-wingers who'd buy your NationaI
Entitlement Party - they'd correctly see it as a right-wingers idea of
what a seriously left wing party would look like, while even the most
egalitarian of left-winger isn't going to propose anything that
doesn't make some kind of economic sense. Their kind of stupid has
everybody working for food and housing - from each according to their
capabilities, to each according to their needs, relying on idealism
and indoctrination for motivation, rather than any tincture of greed
or desire for social distinction.

> Now jump back on the wagon and give me some planks for my platform.

Now that has the authentic far-left flavour ...

>    I hope those rich people can see that they should be buying my High
> Blood pressure medicine, so I can live long enough to collect all the SS
> that is owed to me.

They are more likely to take the attitude that if you keep on getting
your high blood pressure medicine you can keep on working for a living
(and raising their profits) when without it you'd probably have a
disabling stroke and become and expensive dependent on society,
cutting into their profits.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[UltimatePatriot]

On 12 Nov 2012 05:02:01 -0600, boB wrote:


>
>We need to import most of our oil until they run out...
>THEN we can start using our oil. Use theirs up first.
>
>

>boB
>
We have already been doing that for decades, dumbshit.

[Michael A. Terrell]

boB wrote:

>
> Bill Sloman wrote:
> >
> >Tough. You ran out of money long before they ran out of oil.
>
> Then how come we are still importing oil ??

They said on the news this morning that the US will be the largest
producer of oil by the end of this decade.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Jim Thompson wrote:
>
> So we can burn that witch Slowman at the stake ?:-)

No can do! The EPA prohibits burning toxic waste.

[amdx]

>
>> Now jump back on the wagon and give me some planks for my platform.
>
> Now that has the authentic far-left flavour ...
>
>> I hope those rich people can see that they should be buying my High
>> Blood pressure medicine, so I can live long enough to collect all the SS
>> that is owed to me.
>
> They are more likely to take the attitude that if you keep on getting
> your high blood pressure medicine you can keep on working for a living
> (and raising their profits) when without it you'd probably have a
> disabling stroke and become and expensive dependent on society,
> cutting into their profits.
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney
>

Hi Bill,
You make make me feel wanted! :-)

I started Meds for high blood pressure about 6 weeks ago.
The med I was given isn't working, I averaged 14 systolic measurements
before meds and 14 systolic measurements and the difference was a
lowering of 0.7% or in the noise. Need to go back with more graphs for
the doc.
Mikek

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:33:59 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

Just now, while slugging down coffee... 122/69

I think BPH medications cured my HBP

[Joe Chisolm]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:49:01 -0600, amdx wrote:
[snip]

>
> Sheesh, I just ran across this quote,
>
> "Most of us may lament the fact that so many more people are today
> dependent on food stamps and other government subsidies. But dependency
> usually translates into votes for whoever is handing out the benefits,
> so an economic disaster can be a political bonanza, as it was for
> Franklin D. Roosevelt. Don’t count Obama out in 2012."
>

> How cynical!
>
> Check out this guys wild thinking,
> http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280393/spreading-wealth-thomas-
sowell#

> Mikek

I kind of like the saying that goes something along the lines of
"The USDA is actively encouraging people to sign up for food stamps and
other handouts while the Parks Service warns people not to give
food (handouts) to the animals because they will become
dependent on the hand outs and not learn how to take care of
themselves."

Progressives will complain about outsourcing jobs but will gladly
outsource their day to day life decisions to a unknown bureaucrat.

--
Chisolm
The Great Nation of Texas

[amdx]

That reminds me of when feeding dolphins was outlawed here in Florida.
I was sure we would have a government program to feed the starving dolphins.

Mikek

[amdx]

I thought I was on to a cure for a day when I took some calcium and
the next day my BP was 126/74, but then it went back up the next test to
135/74. Another time I walked the 1/2 mile to the supermarket and when I
checked it read 128/74, maybe the walk was good.

I'm sure we'll find something to bring mine down, AVE about 137/77.
That not extremely high, but I have heart disease in my family.
My doc's philosophy seems to be, not to make you live long, but to
keep you healthy as long as you live.
Now about those new planks.
Mikek

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:58:13 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>On 11/13/2012 9:26 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:

[snip]

>>>
>>> I started Meds for high blood pressure about 6 weeks ago.
>>> The med I was given isn't working, I averaged 14 systolic measurements
>>> before meds and 14 systolic measurements and the difference was a
>>> lowering of 0.7% or in the noise. Need to go back with more graphs for
>>> the doc.
>>> Mikek
>>
>> Just now, while slugging down coffee... 122/69
>>
>> I think BPH medications cured my HBP
>>
>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
> I thought I was on to a cure for a day when I took some calcium and
>the next day my BP was 126/74, but then it went back up the next test to
>135/74. Another time I walked the 1/2 mile to the supermarket and when I
>checked it read 128/74, maybe the walk was good.
>
> I'm sure we'll find something to bring mine down, AVE about 137/77.
>That not extremely high, but I have heart disease in my family.
> My doc's philosophy seems to be, not to make you live long, but to
>keep you healthy as long as you live.
> Now about those new planks.
> Mikek

Fortunately I'm allergic to anything sulfonamide-based, thus I'm not
subject to exposure to all those modern "miracle" drugs with their
wild advertising claims and then 10 minutes of reciting the side
effects ;-)

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 02:44:51 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>They said on the news this morning that the US will be the largest
>producer of oil by the end of this decade.

That's going to take some work, unless that quote is by an individual
country. The US is currently in 3rd place, behind Saudi Arabia and
Russia. It wouldn't take much for the US to pump its way to the top.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production>
However, if you compare US production against that of the entire
middle east or OPEC, it's not going to happen:
OPEC 33.3 million barrels per day.
US 9.6 million barrels per day.

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:30:30 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 02:44:51 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>They said on the news this morning that the US will be the largest
>>producer of oil by the end of this decade.
>
>That's going to take some work, unless that quote is by an individual
>country. The US is currently in 3rd place, behind Saudi Arabia and
>Russia. It wouldn't take much for the US to pump its way to the top.
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production>
>However, if you compare US production against that of the entire
>middle east or OPEC, it's not going to happen:
> OPEC 33.3 million barrels per day.
> US 9.6 million barrels per day.

It doesn't matter. It'll all be shipped overseas, or Obama will
figure out a way to stop it altogether.

[Joe Chisolm]

There - you have another plank for your party's platform. We must not
let poor dolphins and other creatures starve. Pet entitlement. Why
should I have to forgo some smokes and beer to buy pet food. Rich
people get to buy pet food. They can help buy my pet food.

--

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 14, 2:58 am, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net> wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 9:26 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:33:59 -0600, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net>

This is usually a tendency to deposit cholesterol on the insides of
your arteries - particularly the coronary arteries around the heart.
Statins work well to reduce this deposition.

My father, my mothers brother and my younger brother all had coronary
artery problems - treated by by-pass operations on my father and my
brother. I was put on statins some ten years ago, and when I was
checked out for this kind of problem before my aortic valve
replacement, only had a partial blockage (30%) in one coronary artery,
which didn't worry anybody, so they seem to work.

>   My doc's philosophy seems to be, not to make you live long, but to
> keep you healthy as long as you live.

Not only healthy, but also productive ...

>    Now about those new planks.

Some of the original ones are pretty rotten ..

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 14, 4:42 am, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-

Web-Site.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:30:30 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 02:44:51 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> ><mike.terr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >>They said on the news this morning that the US will be the largest
> >>producer of oil by the end of this decade.
>
> >That's going to take some work, unless that quote is by an individual
> >country.  The US is currently in 3rd place, behind Saudi Arabia and
> >Russia.  It wouldn't take much for the US to pump its way to the top.
> ><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production>
> >However, if you compare US production against that of the entire
> >middle east or OPEC, it's not going to happen:
> >  OPEC  33.3 million barrels per day.
> >  US     9.6 million barrels per day.
>
> It doesn't matter.  It'll all be shipped overseas,

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson at his best.

> or Obama will figure out a way to stop it altogether.

Why? Bad as burning oil is for injecting CO2 into the atmosphere,
burning coal is worse. If Obama wanted to be quixotic about
anthropogenic global warming, he'd still go for the coal plants first.

In fact the only practical strategy seems to be to concentrate on
getting the cost per kilowatt of sustainably generated electricity
down below that of electricity generated by burning fossil carbon. You
can then rely on the market to shut down the sources of expensive
power, and the car manufacturers to make electric cars attractive as
well as cheap to run.

It won't take all that much of hike in oil and coal prices to do this,
and sustainable power has still got a couple of factors of ten in
installed capacity to go - each usually figured to halve the capital
cost per kilowatt. It's going to happen sometime in the next decade or
so - hopefully before we've kicked the planet into a new, warmer
equilibrium with all the disruption that would cause.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

This is the usual right-wing twaddle. People don't like having to
depend on food stamps and other handouts to stay alive precisely
because it restricts their freedom of choice. If they can get the same
standard of living by working at some crummy ill-paid job, they will
almost always take the job.

There are exceptions, but they tend to be people with psychological
problems that aren't florid enough to persuade anybody to pay what it
costs to institutionalise them, but none the less disabling.

Right wing journalists are very good at finding them and interviewing
them. The "deserving" poor aren't anywhere near as interesting.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[amdx]

I'm still waiting for your input on the planks, I don't recall seeing
any.

I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
positive!

> Not only healthy, but also productive ...

hmm... I've got a couple of herniated discs, when I told the doc I'm
trying to hang on just another 2-1/2 years before quitting work, he
didn't want to hear that, told me I was to young and energetic.
He also sent me up with a back surgeon.
In the last two months my back pain has lessened, but my sciatica is
worse. It has swung that way a couple times. It's been 31 months since
the back problems started.
Mikek

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 14, 11:10 am, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net> wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 4:46 PM,BillSlomanwrote:

>    I'm still waiting for your input on the planks, I don't recall seeing
> any.

I told you that I thought that your platform was merely an unoriginal
and inept satire. why would I want to contribute to something that was
basically intended to be funny, but doesn't get to first base.

> I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
> positive!
>
>  > Not only healthy, but also productive ...
>
>   hmm... I've got a couple of herniated discs, when I told the doc I'm
> trying to hang on just another 2-1/2 years before quitting work, he
> didn't want to hear that, told me I was to young and energetic.
>   He also sent me up with a back surgeon.

I was lucky. When one of my intervertebral disks popped, and squirted
cartilage all around my spinal column - you should have seen the MRI
scan - six weeks of bed rest were enough for it to sort itself out. By
the time the British NHS got around to offering me a back operation,
some six months later, I didn't need it.

US surgeons don't like conservative treatment - it doesn't make them
any money. The Cochrane collaboration was rather more positive. The
evidence seemed to say that operations didn't do any better than bed
rest.

> In the last two months my back pain has lessened, but my sciatica is
> worse. It has swung that way a couple times. It's been 31 months since
> the back problems started.

First get the MRI scan and then let the back surgeon tell you what
he'd like to do, and the odds that it will do what he hopes, as well
as the odds that it will screw you up royally - incontinence is one of
the side effects of things going really wrong.

I was in my late forties when my back played up - like my father and
my uncle. If it happens later in life, the vertebrae can be crumbling
as well, which is much nastier.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:10:42 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
wrote:

>I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
>positive!

I was on Lovostatin since early 2001 when I had a triple bypass
operation for clogged plumbing. After about 9 years of chugging
statins and getting good LDL/HDL/etc numbers on the blood tests, I
found that my chronic muscle back aches were due to the statins. The
cardiologist switched me to Simvastatin, which was a disaster. The
muscle pains moved from the back to the upper arms. After taking
Simvastain for only 9 days, it took 6 months for the arm pains to go
away. Withdrawal from Lovostatin took about 18 months. No more
statins for me.

There's some question as to the effectiveness of statins at preventing
heart attacks. If you want to jump into the controversy, start here:
<http://www.thegreatcholesterolcon.com>
<http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/colpo.pdf>
I'm undecided and my cardiologist thinks I'm insane, but methinks many
of the points made by the author are worth considering.

[Jim Thompson]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:16:39 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:10:42 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
>wrote:
>
>>I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
>>positive!
>
>I was on Lovostatin since early 2001 when I had a triple bypass
>operation for clogged plumbing. After about 9 years of chugging
>statins and getting good LDL/HDL/etc numbers on the blood tests, I
>found that my chronic muscle back aches were due to the statins. The
>cardiologist switched me to Simvastatin, which was a disaster. The
>muscle pains moved from the back to the upper arms. After taking
>Simvastain for only 9 days, it took 6 months for the arm pains to go
>away. Withdrawal from Lovostatin took about 18 months. No more
>statins for me.

I had the same issues... Statins and my body don't get along.

>
>There's some question as to the effectiveness of statins at preventing
>heart attacks. If you want to jump into the controversy, start here:
><http://www.thegreatcholesterolcon.com>
><http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/colpo.pdf>
>I'm undecided and my cardiologist thinks I'm insane, but methinks many
>of the points made by the author are worth considering.

Though I haven't taken Statins for 14+ years (*), my cholesterol is
only mildly high. And my BP is outstanding, 112/69, after two cups of
coffee this morning ;-)

(*) Mild heart attack in July, 1998, fixed with a stent.

[John Larkin]

So, what crummy ill-paying jobs have you taken lately?

>There are exceptions, but they tend to be people with psychological
>problems that aren't florid enough to persuade anybody to pay what it
>costs to institutionalise them, but none the less disabling.

Oh. That explains it.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation

[amdx]

That is not what I see where I'm at. I feel that most people I see
that are on foodstamps/welfare have no thoughts of getting ahead. They
get their foodstamps and by steaks for supper, my freedom is limited
because I have to buy my own food and think about how the purchase
affects my family finances. They have about 45 free hours to do as they
please, because they don't work. I work 55 to 65 hrs a week, that
severely limits my freedom.
There are plenty that say why should I waste 40 and work 40 hrs a week
when I can get the same standard of living on welfare.
Obviously there are exceptions to what I see, but if you subsidize
bums, you get more bums. Yes I use the term bum and not homeless.
Yes I'm a bit jaded, I've had my business in a location for 12 years
and this is what I have been exposed to.
Oh, s... I think I just blew my cover!
Planks, I need planks for my platform.

Mikek
Founder: Americans for Entitlement Party

[amdx]

You're just another right wing nut, without any empathy for the poor
and middleclass!

>>
>> I'm still waiting for your input on the planks, I don't recall seeing
>> any.
>
> I told you that I thought that your platform was merely an unoriginal
> and inept satire. why would I want to contribute to something that was
> basically intended to be funny, but doesn't get to first base.
>
>> I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
>> positive!
>>
>> > Not only healthy, but also productive ...
>>
>> hmm... I've got a couple of herniated discs, when I told the doc I'm
>> trying to hang on just another 2-1/2 years before quitting work, he
>> didn't want to hear that, told me I was to young and energetic.
>> He also sent me up with a back surgeon.
>
> I was lucky. When one of my intervertebral disks popped, and squirted
> cartilage all around my spinal column - you should have seen the MRI
> scan - six weeks of bed rest were enough for it to sort itself out. By
> the time the British NHS got around to offering me a back operation,
> some six months later, I didn't need it.
>

I've been waiting, I've always got over any of my ailments with time.
2-1/2 years is getting to be a long time. I didn't get to stop working,
I'm self employed, and my job involves lifting everyday.

> US surgeons don't like conservative treatment - it doesn't make them
> any money. The Cochrane collaboration was rather more positive. The
> evidence seemed to say that operations didn't do any better than bed
> rest.

The surgeon I'm going to see is known to be very conservative, we'll
see what he has to say.

>
>> In the last two months my back pain has lessened, but my sciatica is
>> worse. It has swung that way a couple times. It's been 31 months since
>> the back problems started.
>
> First get the MRI scan and then let the back surgeon tell you what
> he'd like to do, and the odds that it will do what he hopes, as well
> as the odds that it will screw you up royally - incontinence is one of
> the side effects of things going really wrong.
>

Again, the surgeon I'm going to see is known to be very
conservative, we'll see what he has to say.

> I was in my late forties when my back played up - like my father and
> my uncle. If it happens later in life, the vertebrae can be crumbling
> as well, which is much nastier.

I'm 57, and my mother had crumbling vertebrae. Not the term they used,
compression fractures, I think that was the term.
Mikek

[amdx]

On 11/14/2012 11:16 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:10:42 -0600, amdx <am...@knologynotthis.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
>> positive!
>
> I was on Lovostatin since early 2001 when I had a triple bypass
> operation for clogged plumbing. After about 9 years of chugging
> statins and getting good LDL/HDL/etc numbers on the blood tests, I
> found that my chronic muscle back aches were due to the statins. The
> cardiologist switched me to Simvastatin, which was a disaster. The
> muscle pains moved from the back to the upper arms. After taking
> Simvastain for only 9 days, it took 6 months for the arm pains to go
> away. Withdrawal from Lovostatin took about 18 months. No more
> statins for me.
>
> There's some question as to the effectiveness of statins at preventing
> heart attacks. If you want to jump into the controversy, start here:
> <http://www.thegreatcholesterolcon.com>
> <http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/colpo.pdf>
> I'm undecided and my cardiologist thinks I'm insane, but methinks many
> of the points made by the author are worth considering.
>
>

Yes, I have seen the argument, I'm not have any of the muscle
problems. I'm on Prevastatin. It is tough to know what to do.
Mike

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 15, 6:42 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 8:28 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
> > On Nov 14, 11:10 am, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net> wrote:
> >> On 11/13/2012 4:46 PM,BillSlomanwrote:
> >>> On Nov 14, 2:58 am, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net> wrote:
> >>>> On 11/13/2012 9:26 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:33:59 -0600, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net>
> >>>>> wrote:

<snip>

> >>>>      Now about those new planks.
>
> >>> Some of the original ones are pretty rotten ..
>
>    You're just another right wing nut, without any empathy for the poor
> and middle class!

What makes you think that? As an insult it would be hurtful, if
anybody was likely to take you seriously, and as satire it lacks any
element of plausibility.

Sounds promising.

> >> In the last two months my back pain has lessened, but my sciatica is
> >> worse. It has swung that way a couple times. It's been 31 months since
> >> the back problems started.
>
> > First get the MRI scan and then let the back surgeon tell you what
> > he'd like to do, and the odds that it will do what he hopes, as well
> > as the odds that it will screw you up royally - incontinence is one of
> > the side effects of things going really wrong.
>
>     Again, the surgeon I'm going to see is known to be very
> conservative, we'll see what he has to say.
>
> > I was in my late forties when my back played up - like my father and
> > my uncle. If it happens later in life, the vertebrae can be crumbling
> > as well, which is much nastier.
>
>   I'm 57, and my mother had crumbling vertebrae. Not the term they used,
> compression fractures, I think that was the term.

Good luck. I wonder if they can reinforce crumbling vertebrae with
titanium inserts these days? The chunk of titanium sitting in my jaw
is doing exactly what it was intended to do, and has been there for a
few years now.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 15, 4:16 am, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:10:42 -0600, amdx <a...@knologynotthis.net>

> wrote:
>
> >I've been on statins for about 3 years, I hope they're doing something,
> >positive!
>
> I was on Lovostatin since early 2001 when I had a triple bypass
> operation for clogged plumbing.  After about 9 years of chugging
> statins and getting good LDL/HDL/etc numbers on the blood tests, I
> found that my chronic muscle back aches were due to the statins.  The
> cardiologist switched me to Simvastatin, which was a disaster.  The
> muscle pains moved from the back to the upper arms.  After taking
> Simvastain for only 9 days, it took 6 months for the arm pains to go
> away.  Withdrawal from Lovostatin took about 18 months.  No more
> statins for me.
>
> There's some question as to the effectiveness of statins at preventing
> heart attacks.  If you want to jump into the controversy, start here:
> <http://www.thegreatcholesterolcon.com>
> <http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/colpo.pdf>
> I'm undecided and my cardiologist thinks I'm insane, but methinks many
> of the points made by the author are worth considering.

Individual differences are a bitch. Simvastatin works fine for me and
lots of other people.

DNA sequencing is now cheap enough to be worth considering as a
precautionary measure. There isn't a huge database of which variations
in the genome do what, but data is accumulating.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 15, 5:17 am, John Larkin <jlar...@highlandtechnology.com>
wrote:

None. I'd get turned away as "over-qualified" when I went for stuff
that wasn't actually high-tech.

> >There are exceptions, but they tend to be people with psychological
> >problems that aren't florid enough to persuade anybody to pay what it
> >costs to institutionalise them, but none the less disabling.
>
> Oh. That explains it.

It's an explanation that you like. As with many explanations that you
like, it hasn't much relationship with reality. I spent some forty
years - first as a graduate student, then as an engineer,
collaborating with a variety of colleagues, and there's no evidence
that I've lost the knack. That I can't - or won't - feed you with the
diet of undiluted approval which you seem to crave isn't exactly
evidence of a psychopathic personality.

And inflated idea of of your own worth is - of course - one of the
symptoms of a psychopathic personality, and one that makes them more
likely to strive to be the top dog in any organisation they are
involved with.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Bill Sloman]

On Nov 15, 6:30 am, amdx <a...@knology.net> wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 5:38 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
> > On Nov 14, 2:27 am, Joe Chisolm <jchiso...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:49:01 -0600, amdx wrote:
>
> >> [snip]
>
> >>> Sheesh, I just ran across this quote,
>
> >>> "Most of us may lament the fact that so many more people are today
> >>> dependent on food stamps and other government subsidies. But dependency
> >>> usually translates into votes for whoever is handing out the benefits,
> >>> so an economic disaster can be a political bonanza, as it was for
> >>> Franklin D. Roosevelt. Don t count Obama out in 2012."
>
> >>>    How cynical!
>
> >>>    Check out this guys wild thinking,
> >>>http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/280393/spreading-wealth-thomas-
> >> sowell#
> >>>
>

> >> I kind of like the saying that goes something along the lines of
> >> "The USDA is actively encouraging people to sign up for food stamps and
> >> other handouts while the Parks Service warns people not to give
> >> food (handouts) to the animals because they will become
> >> dependent on the hand outs and not learn how to take care of
> >> themselves."
>
> >> Progressives will complain about outsourcing jobs but will gladly
> >> outsource their day to day life decisions to a unknown bureaucrat.
>
> > This is the usual right-wing twaddle. People don't like having to
> > depend on food stamps and other handouts to stay alive precisely
> > because it restricts their freedom of choice. If they can get the same
> > standard of living by working at some crummy ill-paid job, they will
> > almost always take the job.
>
>   That is not what I see where I'm at. I feel that most people I see
> that are on foodstamps/welfare have no thoughts of getting ahead. They
> get their foodstamps and by steaks for supper, my freedom is limited
> because I have to buy my own food and think about how the purchase
> affects my family finances. They have about 45 free hours to do as they
> please, because they don't work. I work 55 to 65 hrs a week, that
> severely limits my freedom.
>   There are plenty that say why should I waste 40 and work 40 hrs a week
> when I can get the same standard of living on welfare.
>   Obviously there are exceptions to what I see, but if you subsidize
> bums, you get more bums.

Obviously. Social security is designed to support people who are
temporarily down on their luck, rather than bums, but no system is
perfect. It's cheaper than proper psychiatric care, so quite a few
societies, seem to be happy to let social security cover them rather
than doing anything positive about providing environments where the
psychiatric problems would be less crippling, and the people with
these problems could do something constructive.

> Yes I use the term bum and not homeless.
>    Yes I'm a bit jaded, I've had my business in a location for 12 years
> and this is what I have been exposed to.
>   Oh, s... I think I just blew my cover!
> Planks, I need planks for my platform.

You need planks for a platform that would tackle real problems, rather
than satirising the approach that might - if probably managed and
funded - solve some of those problems.

<snipped my earlier comment>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Michael A. Terrell]

amdx wrote:

> Planks, I need planks for my platform.

<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_gVe56iUjJEg/SNk5eGC5UnI/AAAAAAAACek/0q_jh0IxGQ0/s400/014.JPG>

[amdx]

Well, I hope I don't have any compression fractures, she has female
and in her 70's before this presented itself. I would hope for some high
tech glue for the vertebrae repair.
I'm sure my job lifting coolers of ice and shrimp is what damaged my
back, I've modified my work areas as much as possible, which is not a
lot, but some help. Now the problem is my 4'7" wife is covering for me
and I don't want her to end up like me.
Odd thing is, I recall in 2008 when she cut back and had me doing a lot
more lifting, it didn't take long before I developed problems. I'm sure
there was already some damage, and I just made it worse.
Anyway, I'm to the point in life where, there seems to be a lot of
talk about medical problems, that's not what I want to do. :-)
I like the phrase "gettin old ain't for sissies"
Mikek

[amdx]

I ran across this (RE: high tech glue) while looking for info about
compression fractures.
(injection of a cement polymer into the fractured vertebral body)

In the past, treatment options for lumbar fractures were quite limited,
with bracing and rest prescribed most often. While many patients
improved with this regimen, some did not and were left with chronic,
disabling pain. Suh and Lyles found that vertebral compression fractures
were associated with significant performance impairments in physical,
functional, and psychosocial domains in older women.[1] However, medical
and surgical options are now available that can relieve the severe pain
and disability from these fractures.
Recent studies

In a study of 55 patients with vertebral compression fracture, Rapan et
al investigated changes in pain intensity following vertebroplasty
(injection of a cement polymer into the fractured vertebral body; see
Other Treatment). Treatment was administered to a total of 28 thoracic
and 57 lumbar vertebrae; patients in the study had sustained vertebral
fractures from spinal metastases or osteoporosis.

Prior to surgery, the patients' average pain score on the Visual Analog
Scale (VAS) was 8.36, while 24 hours postsurgery it had fallen to an
average of 2.23. At 3-month follow-up, the reduction in the VAS score
remained nearly the same. Among the study's patients, 1 serious
complication, paraparesis resulting from cement leakage into the spinal
canal, occurred. The authors concluded that in patients with vertebral
compression fracture who undergo vertebroplasty, the degree of pain
reduction that occurs by 24 hours postsurgery predicts the intensity of
pain patients will be experiencing 3 months later.[2]

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/309615-overview

Mikek

[John Larkin]

Yup, you won't even try. That makes you under-qualified. Or lazy. Or
sacred. Or something.

>
>> >There are exceptions, but they tend to be people with psychological
>> >problems that aren't florid enough to persuade anybody to pay what it
>> >costs to institutionalise them, but none the less disabling.
>>
>> Oh. That explains it.
>
>It's an explanation that you like. As with many explanations that you
>like, it hasn't much relationship with reality. I spent some forty
>years - first as a graduate student, then as an engineer,
>collaborating with a variety of colleagues, and there's no evidence
>that I've lost the knack. That I can't - or won't - feed you with the
>diet of undiluted approval which you seem to crave isn't exactly
>evidence of a psychopathic personality.
>
>And inflated idea of of your own worth is - of course - one of the
>symptoms of a psychopathic personality, and one that makes them more
>likely to strive to be the top dog in any organisation they are
>involved with.

I had two people come into my office today and tell me what to do. It
would have been three, but R is off Wednesdays. I wish people would
leave me alone so I can design circuits.

I did get to design a PFG pulse symmetry zoomer box this week, good
down to a few PPM, but that only took half a day.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators

Custom timing and laser controllers

Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links

VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

[John Larkin]

They can't find work because they are over-qualified.

[Joe Chisolm]

The data would indicate you are incorrect in your
statements.

Almost 51% of the American voting collective chose the
status quo. High unemployment, larger and larger numbers
of people demanding their fellow citizens take care of them.
Mr. Obama's campaign was all about class warfare - one
group of our fellow citizens was not giving enough of their
stuff to the other citizens who want their stuff. There
was nothing in the winning party's platform about getting
people off welfare. They even have gone so far as to make it
easier to be dependent on your fellow citizen and not have
to work.

EBT cards are like cash. There is no loss of freedom.
You can buy gas with your EBT, you can buy a pizza with
your EBT. Hell in some states you can go out to dinner at
a restaurant and pay with your EBT. You get a free cell
phone, you get assistance with your electric bill. Soon
you will get free cable and internet. You get housing
vouchers. You still have hard cash to buy $300 sneakers.
You have money for a nice new tat or some weed.
How? Because gas, food, housing, electric, phone all paid for,
or mostly paid for, by your fellow citizen. Shit, I see
them in the grocery store. I drive a 15 yr old pickup, they
drive a new car. How? because I pay for their food and
other stuff.

If your assertion about food stamps was correct, the 47+ million
people on food stamps would have voted differently.
The voters chose to be dependent on their fellow citizens
and people of these and other countries, (holdings in
billions as of Aug 2012)

Mainland China 1153.6
Japan 1121.5
Brazil 253.9
Switzerland 202.2
Taiwan 198.0
United Kingdom 153.6
Russia 153.3
Belgium 142.6
Hong Kong 139.6
Luxembourg 131.4

We owe the Netherlands $US 26B (up 5B since the first of the year). We
would pay you back in vastly inflated dollars but in the Chicago style
let's call it "protection money". We'll be by to collect more soon,
Michelle needs a vacation.

As the chorus line of "my EBT" goes
"all ya gotta do is f#@k and 9 months later you in the
big bucks".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzspsovNvII

[k...@att.bizzz]

That's Slowman.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:37:50 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:

>DNA sequencing is now cheap enough to be worth considering as a
>precautionary measure. There isn't a huge database of which variations
>in the genome do what, but data is accumulating.

Careful of what you wish for. You may get more than what you're
expecting.

DNA sequencing is potentially a nightmare if it become popular among
employers. If your genetic profile shows a tendency towards any one
of a growing list of assorted diseases, maladies, or psychological
issues, you stand a good chance of becoming unemployable. The
tendency towards applied eugenics is unavoidable. I really don't want
to know if I have some percentage chance of developing something in my
lifetime. It's very difficult to repair one's genetic makeup as it
unlikely that one can do anything about it. (Choose your parents
wisely.)

Genes for susceptibility to violence lurk in the brain
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1458834/>