Live&DieBillsFootball

Sorry, what is the KRC plan for converting to private accounts? How do you continue to pay beneficiaries without social security taxes? Where does the money come from to convert? Is there some new math that I'm not aware of?

And for only a few trillion dollars, we can do this. So where does the money come from to convert? I have no problem with private accounts other than: 1. The trillions of dollars needed to convert. 2. Private accounts do nothing about the other social security programs of SSDI and payments to dependent children.

Well, the Bush "Fix it now" adds trillions of new debt and cuts benefits. You can't divert new dollars to savings accounts without further bankrupting the current program. BTW, we already have private accounts. They're called 401k plans and most people already have them.

Well, neither does the guy who dies before collecting benefits. Are you also advocating that the unpaid benefits go to a person's estate at the time of his or her death? Social Security should be a safety net not an entitlement. Does Warren Buffett really need his Social Security check each month?

Well, the Republican plan to use private accounts will add Trillions in debt and cut benefits. That's quite a solution. Bush's plan calls for 1-2% to go into a private account. For someone making $30,000/yr, that means $300-$600 annual into their private account. That would really add up to a big nest egg.

You can call it whatever you want, but social security tax has always been a "tax". Most people won't admit it, but Social Security is a welfare program. The vast majority of retirees get back much more in benefits than they ever paid into the system in taxes. Why do you think that the system is going broke? The precedents were already set when the Medicare taxable wage limit was removed and also when social security benefits became subject to income tax.

BTW, Bush's approval rating is now at 39%. I also read that his approval rating among Blacks was 2%.

Social Security crisis - Eliminate the cap on taxable wages. That would fix 75% of the problem in one fell swoop and put the looming crisis out about 50 years. This solution also doesn't create a couple of trillion dollars in new debt in order to start private accounts. This also means that the marginal Social Security tax rate on wages is the same for a million dollar salary as a $20,000 salary.

The forecast high is 53. Are you from Miami?

Miller played last year in Rochester and had more than 40 wins and played very well in preseason. Biron took the year off and didn't play at all. Looks like Lindy is going to ride Miller until he has a bad game. So far, he has been great.

If both teams pray for a victory, does God give it to the team that prays the loudest?

You're right, my hypothetical situation was absurd. But what if the Muslim coach wanted his team of mostly Christians to say a prayer to Allah before the game? My point is that most people feel a team prayer is ok as long as it is similar to their religion. I think that most Christians would like to have prayer in school as long as it is a Christian prayer. The Founding Fathers wanted a separation of Church and State back when most religions were just different flavors of Christianity. Is it no less important now that there are all kinds of religions and many different gods that people pray to. Here's another absurd hypothetical...Let's say Bush decides to become a Muslim and decides to funnel his Faith-Based Initiative dollars to Muslim charities. Would Christians have a problem with this?

Just a hypothetical...What if the coach was a Muslim and wanted the team of mostly Christians to face Mecca and pray to Allah to smite their infidel enemies and help them win the game? Would you still support the coach and his prayer?

Actually Paychex, Golisano's company, is a payroll processing company similiar to ADP. They process payroll for small, medium, and large businesses. This is very different than a "payroll cashing business". This is a company that he personally started and grew into a huge company. In addition to saving the Sabres, Golisano has donated millions to charity in Rochester including major support of Strong Memorial Hospital. Golisano had never been to a hockey game prior to buying the Sabres. Since his purchase, he has been at fixture at the HSBC arena on game night. To me, he seems like a genuine person. I'm not sure why so many people are distrustful of him. As for the Sabres salary cap...the new NHL was supposed to reduce salaries and ticket prices and help the smaller market teams compete. The Sabres made a plan of spending $28 million or so which they feel gives the team the best chance to be profitable and yet still field a competitive team. People criticize the Sabres for not signing the $7 million stars but how does spending 25% of your salary cap on one player help create team unity? I think that the Sabres have a great young team and have one of the lowest ticket prices in the league.

You're right. I wish that there was a political party that staked out the middle where most people are. The wacky right can have the Republican party, the wacky left can have the Democratic. Just a nice pragmatic party based on common sense rather than partisan bull sh--.

When I first saw Preston out there, I was hoping that he was in at center.

That had to be a painful one for the Felons. They were getting there butts kicked, then they turn the game around and are closing in on a possible win and...they fumble it away. Man, I hate those kind of losses. Hope they enjoyed losing that way today!

Well pardon me, but I didn't know that the "wacky left" had the power to do anything about a fair interpretation of the establishment clause. The only interpretations that have any meaning are the Supreme Court rulings including 2 recent ones regarding the Separation of Church and State. I didn't realize that the court consisted of a majority of "wacky left" judges. You might want to take off your tin foil hat as I don't see the "wacky left" taking over the SCOTUS anytime soon. Then on the "wacky right", we have a President who believes that God speaks to him personally, that funnels money to so-called "Faith-Based" charities and the fundamental Christians that believe that every disaster, terrorist act and change in the weather is due to God's wanting to punish Gays and fornicators. Sorry, but I see more danger in this side than from the father who wants to sue to keep his daughter from saying "Under God" when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ch 4 in Buffalo had a lot of problems. I picked it up OTA and the first part of the game was not in HD and then it switched a few times between HD and SD. Finally was in HD for the 2nd half.

The 2 finalists Let's hope he picks the right one.

Does freedom of speech extend to the word !@#$ on a t-shirt? We can't even say the word !@#$ on this board. Since you are a moderator, why don't you work on that one. I miss the F U smiley.

CNN story The shirt had a pic of Bush, Cheney, & Rice and was a take-off of "Meet the Fockers", although it used a "u" instead of a "o". Funny shirt, but I'm sure that she was tossed for the word and not for it being anti-Bush. She had the opportunity to cover it up or wear it inside out. Now she's suing. I hope that they get her for court costs when they dismiss her suit.

I wonder if Dean does that primal scream when he "hides the salami".

Most companies have an expert who reviews health care plans and tries to find the best fit for their employees in terms of price vs. plan benefits. Also, insurance companies only have to deal with one person at the company who understands the specifics of the policy. Additionally, employers withhold employee contributions and make one payment to the insurance carrier monthly to cover all employees. Under your scenario, the insurance company has to deal with each individual in regards to administering the policy and processing payments. The individual is responsible for reviewing plan choices and making a decision based on their needs. Do you feel that the average person as well as 50% that are below average can make an intelligent decision regarding the plan they need to personally buy? How long before employers decide to make things easier by withholding premiums and making payments to the companies? In this manner we come full circle, the employer administers the plan but no longer pays for it. Don't you think that employees might demand a raise if the employer no longer contributes to their medical insurance? If not, won't the employees realize that they just got screwed? I think that even the 50% that are below average would understand that they just got bent over.

Shifting the responsibility for health care from company-provided to individual responsibility will create more governmental involvement than we have now. Also, I just noticed that your presidential platform is devoid of any mention of health care or Medicaid or Medicare reform. Weren't these issues worthy of your consideration?