|
Post by whoswho on Aug 16, 2007 6:55:39 GMT -6
In my experience, the "retraining" was all lip service. I don't know if Kentucky unemployment services are just more inept than other states, but all the talk of retraining turned out to be bullshit. The only person I know who got retrained.... did not receive ANY severance pay whatsoever. He was given retraining rather than severance. After going to school for years in another field with no other financial help, his circumstances become very desperate. He was selling personal momentoes simply to buy groceries. Then, the company he was co-oping with and hoping to get full time employment with, did not pay him at all. They thought the job experience he was getting was adequate compensation. I was flabbergasted. When I co-oped, I always got paid. It wasn't big bucks, but it was a paycheck. Even if he does get re-employed, how can he ever catch up to the enormous wage loss? Total bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 15, 2007 6:55:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 9, 2007 10:59:28 GMT -6
was wondering, what if say only 20 percent of the "aware" progressive consumers, who know about the ills of outsourcing, went without buying anything made outside of the U.S. Toys are included as well as shoes. This should be tried. I know it will suck not having new shoes or wearing shoes that are barely hanging together or not buying any toys for our kids, but after doing this for a few months, with enough of an organized boycott, I believe companies profits will plunge drastically. At this point the companies could either outsource more or layoff worker here. However, I believe that with money talking in this day and age, a company like Mattell would rather have less profits but still profits as opposed to laying off the rest of it's R and D and Marketing workforce in the U.S. All that would do in this example would cause a further backlash against said company, and sales would fall further.
See, they have us by the balls of our own desires. As long as Americans retain the attitudes they have, China and Walmart will rule. I think females especially keep the spending fires burning. I also post on The Dollar Stretcher. It is surprising how oblivious women are to the problems we are facing. I am not putting women down, "I are one". But I strongly believe if the women changed their spending habits, they could literally turn the economy around.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Nov 7, 2007 8:36:30 GMT -6
Well in Kentucky yesterday, we had a 40% turnout at the polls... it was not a minor thing, we were voting for the governor....and the television news reporters seemed to be perfectly happy with that number. I think the media never acknowledge much reality, they always put on a happy face regardless of what is happening.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Mar 20, 2008 9:03:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Mar 20, 2008 8:59:27 GMT -6
making a separate post for this
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 2, 2007 12:45:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 2, 2007 12:42:06 GMT -6
It was a calculator called EDIE, and this is the closest thing I could find: www2.fdic.gov/edie/
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 2, 2007 12:36:05 GMT -6
He is unfortunate and ignorant.
Has he been living under a rock? I thought everyone knew about the FDIC limits.
The article said he is in his 70's, and I am in my 50's and did not know it until maybe two years ago, and then only because a conscienscious bank teller was gracious enough to help me.
She told me the best thing to do was to have my money in more than one account.
I found a great website that helped me understand it better. I tried to post it, but apparently the page has been moved. If I find it, I'll throw it in here.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 1, 2007 10:50:50 GMT -6
www.post-gazette.com/pg/07217/807090-28.stm?cmpid=HBEHTMLMr. Przybilinski said he never knew about the FDIC limits and that Metropolitan Savings officials assured him that his savings would be covered when he moved his money there two years ago, even though the $100,000 limit is typically posted at the teller window underneath the FDIC logo.Ouch!
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Jul 11, 2007 9:04:53 GMT -6
I was very disappointed when they did away with the HH bonds! I had purchased EE bonds for years and was planning to roll them over to the HH when I retired to provide me with some extra retirement income. Now I won't be able to do that. Thank you President Bush
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Feb 27, 2008 13:35:36 GMT -6
Sorry to say, my extreme dislike for the man prevented me from appreciating the pearls of wisdom dropping from his lips.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 10, 2007 6:09:21 GMT -6
I think all of them are in banking and economics, LOL.
That's what spawned the whole New Economy, a bunch of stoned guys sitting around a table, thinking brilliant thoughts about how to run an economy WITHOUT manufacturing jobs.
|
|
|
Welcome
May 31, 2007 11:12:22 GMT -6
Post by whoswho on May 31, 2007 11:12:22 GMT -6
Greetings! Very interesting reading here. Only have one complaint: the colors are too strong! Violent lime green and shocking pink give me a headache after reading for so long, LOL! Would you consider changing them??
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Feb 7, 2008 8:10:55 GMT -6
I wonder if this will be reflected in our tax bills, and our property taxes wlll consequently go DOWN as well? Hmmm, probably not. I am paying very high taxes on my house now, and would welcome the relief.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on May 31, 2007 10:57:21 GMT -6
When I was downsized, I found work quickly, within six weeks, in a major metropolitan area, but decided that I did not want to uproot myself at age 43. So I came home.... and finally got, after 3 years of consultant jobs or no jobs, a job that started out at more than a 50% pay cut (from $23/hr. to $11/hr.)
It takes a lot of stubbornness to resist the trend, but I consider it well worth it.
Which is easier to do, to obey the new edict, or to keep your roots in the ground? Any time there is a life disturbance (divorce, death in the family, job loss) there is an economic boon for someone else besides yourself. And many people are just heartless enough not to care about that.
My solution is to dig in.... batten down the hatches, and declare war on that idea. I have done things I would never have dreamed I would do. I cut my own hair. All my clothes are yardsale items. I accept "freebies" like used furniture no longer wanted, and give it a good polishing. Anything that I absolutely don't have to buy, I don't buy.
If anyone else has any imaginative ideas about what to do about "The New Economy", I would be interested in hearing them. It definitely wasn't fashioned with workers in mind. When your job, your livelihood, has been removed from you, it really leaves your dogpaddling.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Jan 8, 2008 9:40:59 GMT -6
Very inappropriate posting. Do you not read before you post at all?? This spam should be deleted.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Dec 27, 2007 11:53:59 GMT -6
My God, the elderly are the ones who NEED the insurance! What a brutal law! If my 87 year old mother didn't have her health insurance, she would probably be living under a bridge somewhere, or more likely, she would be dead. I can't believe anybody could be that cold and uncaring. What do they think the elderly are going to do? Or do they GIVE a damn???
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Nov 14, 2007 7:34:40 GMT -6
"How absurd! Don't the great masses of these working class, middle class and disenfranchised dolts understand that this is an entrepreneurial society where anyone -- anyone, damn it! -- could and should become rich if only they were more market savvy and industrious?" They are really, really pushing this idea with all their might. I have tried on other various websites to talk sense, but they really hang onto this one for dear life. By this convoluted reasoning, every single one of us should be wealthy... it's only our own shortcomings that have put us where we are, NOT anything that has happened to us.
There are a few monumental problems with these cold-hearted, morally bankrupt notions. Among them: the economy is mostly dependent on consumer spending; the government takes more from those who have less and gives obscenely more and more to those who have a lot. (You know these people, they're the ones that have multimillion dollar weddings and birthday parties that make caterers and florists richer but do very little for the overall economy, but so what? Right?) So sooner or later, the chickens MUST come home to roost.... and then what? When the party is over because we have reached the bottom of the barrel, what will the rationale then be?
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 18, 2007 8:39:23 GMT -6
"Poverty is increasing and tens of millions are working longer hours for lower wages."
This is a myth or worse an outright lie. The poverty rate has remained at about 15% for decades.
I am not an economic expert by any stretch of the imagination, I wouldn't even pretend to be.... I can't quote figures and statistics to back up my point, but I do know this:
My father's one salary as a mail carrier, raised five children VERY well. We always had a beautiful home, in fact he was able to afford two very nice homes in his lifetime. My mother, his widow, has been well supported on his pension, although it has not been especially lavish. His medical insurance has covered everything, she has paid very little herself, although she has been hospitalized many times.
I do not live nearly as well, and I had no children. I am very careful with my money. I don't have half the house that they did, and nobody can accuse me of living the high life. In fact, I don't have an especially good life, I just continuously dogpaddle and hope that I'm not too poor by the time I can retire.
Something has happened in this country of ours, and it not going in a positive direction. I think it does bear looking at.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 12, 2007 5:59:28 GMT -6
I used to think my mother was crazy, but now I think she is the only smart parent I know. She pulled me out of college in 1973 and put me in vocational school, because it only cost four dollars a month. Even vocational school is pricey now. I think it is a shame that education is held hostage to the degree that it is today. We really do have indebtedness entrenched in every aspect of our lives.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 3, 2007 7:47:19 GMT -6
"There's a combination of anxiety and loathing," Mr. Hart said. "There's a sense that every single one of these institutions is totally out for their own betterment, versus the public they serve." Glad to hear that I am not the only person who has felt profoundly distrustful and disillusioned.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 3, 2007 8:02:48 GMT -6
Perhaps it will not be as predictable as all that. We the Boomers ARE starting to die even now as we speak, and death will clear the decks for the younger ones. Many Boomers like me did not have kids, or had a very small family of 2 kids, so there should be quite a harvest for the young ones.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 2, 2007 7:01:22 GMT -6
Here is what has happened to my income since I was downsized. I drew the chart based on actual numbers taken from my yearly Social Security statement. The big spike is because of the addition of severance pay that year. The dotted line is my estimation of where my salary might have been if I had been allowed to retire in a normal manner. And so I am supposed to save like mad? How?
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Aug 1, 2007 12:39:28 GMT -6
Why is all the blame put on the boomers themselves? What about the effects of companies downsizing so many middle aged people?
If you're forced out of a well paying job and can only find lower paid work, is it then possible that you are gonna save as much? 1 + 1 is not equal to 5.
I didn't save as much when I was younger because I couldn't.... and then when I got to the point where I was making decent money, they axed me. You can't get blood out of a turnip.
Also we were forced from defined benefit plans to 401k's. At the time 401k's were introduced into our company, no one told us that they would be our main source of retirement. They were just considered the icing on the cake, and just kind of a nice thing to have in addition to the awesome retirement the company was already going to provide for us. So I did not contribute heavily to mine. I did not see that it was necessary.
Here is an interesting comment I read on a retirement forum:
.............it's too late for an employee who is, say, 45 years old to vote with his feet. Because he can't start over again as a 22 YO employee, and expect to get either the benefits of 401K compounding or another DB plan that maxes out after, say, 40 years. When you are forced to switch horses from a DB plan to a 401K midstream, you get hosed. They're not phasing out the plan by letting "nature take its course." Rather, they're forcing people switch mid-stream, which is highly disadvantageous. The value of a DB plan comes in its few last years, whereas the value of a 401K comes from its first few years. When you switch, you lose both ways.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Jul 20, 2007 12:56:03 GMT -6
I wonder if the big upsurge in scamming folks out of their money could be due to the systematic elimination of most of the real jobs in this country? Do people have to get money dishonestly because most of the well paid jobs have gone bye-bye?
Not trying to justify it, just trying to understand it. I think it is also a reflection of our moral rotting.
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Oct 2, 2007 12:58:47 GMT -6
It only fell into the same categories as "moving, paying bills, errands and homework" recently. Years ago, you had to have some very grievous faults to be fired. It was unheard of to be fired otherwise. There was one guy where I used to work who worked in Human Resources. He was caught selling jobs. They never did fire him or move him, he continued to work as always.
So many people are unemployed now, the cards are stacked against you for finding equivalent employment.
And I always wondered... if they can fire masses of people for nothing.... how then do they know a good employee from a bad one?
|
|
|
Post by whoswho on Jul 20, 2007 13:13:14 GMT -6
I have lived all my life (50+ years) in the eastern Kentucky/southern Ohio area, and I have never seen it as economically devastated as it is now. It has never been too healthy, but now I wonder if it possible for it to ever have an economic comeback. They might as well just bulldoze it over. What kills me is local efforts to boost the economy. They seem to think that if we make the towns attractive enough, with a few new sidewalks and street lights, that companies will say "how pretty" and want to come here. I don't think they honestly know what the heck to do, but they are blowing money on things like digital parking meters. Helloooooo, we have no jobs. They are all in China now. Or Mexico. There is no cavalry coming to save you. We are adrift and things will stay that way. When something like Walmart does come in, they are all excited over a handful of new dumdum jobs. They seem to think that it is exactly equivalent to those bunches of engineering jobs we lost.
|
|