Even twenty years later, still makes me laugh...
-
Welcome to the TSP Talk Forums forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, join our AutoTracker, and access many other special features. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. -
Please read our AutoTracker policy on the IFT deadline and remaining active. Thanks!
-
$ - Premium Service Content (Info) | AutoTracker Monthly Winners | Is Gmail et al, Blocking Our emails?
Find us on: Facebook & X | Posting Copyrighted Material
-
20% Off Annual Premium Subscriptions!*
Ends Jan 18... Click Here For More Information
* For new or current subscribers -
Join the TSP Talk AutoTracker: How to Get Started | Login | Main AutoTracker Page
-
The Forum works well on MOBILE devices without an app: Just go to: https://forum.tsptalk.com ...
Or you can now use TapaTalk again!
OBGibby's Account Talk
- Thread starter OBGibby
- Start date
grandma
Well-known member
today's paper had an article about insurance companies' rescission rates in this state. Misstating the weight was a biggie, tho the number of pounds off wasn't mentioned. What the article was reviewing were the number of years back the Investigators were going. A fellow thought he was covered, and then discovered because there had been a medical note 30 years ago that he was a candidate for high cholesterol, he was dropped from a policy of 20 years. He was glad to know he hadn't had any emergencies!
Anyway, I didn't get to finish the article - but did glean that where the companies feel there are `only a few' rescissions (?) a year, the numbers in actuality look much more to the laymen.....
Gumby
Active member
That is a good plan and it is working for you.....good luck.
Gibby that PIP makes me envious....maybe I'll hit a good lick some day.
Another Message Board member pointed out the discrepancy (400-500) after the poll had closed. The poll was only up for a few days. Now it won't go away!
Nice PIP, by the way.
A Message from 'Henry'
We're high earners not yet rich, and now the government wants us to pay more?
The Wall Street Journal
April 14, 2010
Michael Donahue
I'm in the 32% federal and 10% state income tax brackets. I pay a 1.2% property tax on very expensive California real estate. I am subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax. I am self-employed and subject to a 15% payroll tax on the first $100,000 in income and an 8.75% state sales tax. If I have a gain from investing, I pay a minimum of 15% federal and 10% state tax but can only write off $3,000 per year if I lose.
And now the government wants me to pay more?
As a child I mowed lawns, shoveled snow, had a paper route, sold sandwiches at school, and cut up dead trees and split them for firewood to sell during spring break. I have worked every summer since I turned 14. I took out student loans for college and worked 35 hours a week, at night, to pay for the rest.
Since I graduated in 1983, I have been in straight commission sales and have had many 60- to 70-hour work weeks. No secure salary, no big promotions, no pension—just me profiting though helping others while being subject to the swings of the economic cycle. The first 20 years were tough, but it's finally starting to pay off.
I drive a nicer car (bought used), live in a better neighborhood, have more retirement savings than many. But I am certainly not rich, and every month I find my ever increasing bills (and taxes) tend to match my income. I have more than most only because I've worked harder than most and because I am a saver. It was not easy.
Why then does the government feel so entitled to take my money and give it to others? Why should I have to carry so many people on my back? Call me cruel. I don't care. I give to whom I choose—but since so much is confiscated (and wasted in the process) I have little left I wish to give.
During the 1990 recession I could have qualified for state and federal assistance, but my wife and I managed to get by as she worked nights while we juggled our infant daughter between us. It was hard. However, it never occurred to us to take from others to subsidize our shortage. It's not our way.
Life is hard. You learn when you fail and you make changes when things hurt. Why then is the liberal agenda trying to make sure nobody feels any pain? And why does the government feel so entitled to steal from many in order to give it to others. What has happened to personal responsibility and accountability?
My patience and pocketbook are reaching the breaking point. I am not for equal outcomes regardless of effort. I'm tired of being the mule. Maybe I will quit and live on the dole for awhile. I probably even have enough health issues to join the one in seven adults categorized as disabled. I've been poor and I'm not afraid to go back.
Remember it was social mobility that made America great—the ability to earn and get ahead. If Congress continues to buy votes at the expense of social mobility we will no longer be a great nation. The truly rich will stay that way but many "Henrys" (high earners, not rich yet) like me will quit. We may be only a small percentage of the population but we pay a large portion of the taxes and employ many. If you take the incentives away you will lose Henrys.
Mr. Donahue is a financial adviser in La Jolla, California.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303828304575180330903787128.html
We're high earners not yet rich, and now the government wants us to pay more?
The Wall Street Journal
April 14, 2010
Michael Donahue
I'm in the 32% federal and 10% state income tax brackets. I pay a 1.2% property tax on very expensive California real estate. I am subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax. I am self-employed and subject to a 15% payroll tax on the first $100,000 in income and an 8.75% state sales tax. If I have a gain from investing, I pay a minimum of 15% federal and 10% state tax but can only write off $3,000 per year if I lose.
And now the government wants me to pay more?
As a child I mowed lawns, shoveled snow, had a paper route, sold sandwiches at school, and cut up dead trees and split them for firewood to sell during spring break. I have worked every summer since I turned 14. I took out student loans for college and worked 35 hours a week, at night, to pay for the rest.
Since I graduated in 1983, I have been in straight commission sales and have had many 60- to 70-hour work weeks. No secure salary, no big promotions, no pension—just me profiting though helping others while being subject to the swings of the economic cycle. The first 20 years were tough, but it's finally starting to pay off.
I drive a nicer car (bought used), live in a better neighborhood, have more retirement savings than many. But I am certainly not rich, and every month I find my ever increasing bills (and taxes) tend to match my income. I have more than most only because I've worked harder than most and because I am a saver. It was not easy.
Why then does the government feel so entitled to take my money and give it to others? Why should I have to carry so many people on my back? Call me cruel. I don't care. I give to whom I choose—but since so much is confiscated (and wasted in the process) I have little left I wish to give.
During the 1990 recession I could have qualified for state and federal assistance, but my wife and I managed to get by as she worked nights while we juggled our infant daughter between us. It was hard. However, it never occurred to us to take from others to subsidize our shortage. It's not our way.
Life is hard. You learn when you fail and you make changes when things hurt. Why then is the liberal agenda trying to make sure nobody feels any pain? And why does the government feel so entitled to steal from many in order to give it to others. What has happened to personal responsibility and accountability?
My patience and pocketbook are reaching the breaking point. I am not for equal outcomes regardless of effort. I'm tired of being the mule. Maybe I will quit and live on the dole for awhile. I probably even have enough health issues to join the one in seven adults categorized as disabled. I've been poor and I'm not afraid to go back.
Remember it was social mobility that made America great—the ability to earn and get ahead. If Congress continues to buy votes at the expense of social mobility we will no longer be a great nation. The truly rich will stay that way but many "Henrys" (high earners, not rich yet) like me will quit. We may be only a small percentage of the population but we pay a large portion of the taxes and employ many. If you take the incentives away you will lose Henrys.
Mr. Donahue is a financial adviser in La Jolla, California.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303828304575180330903787128.html
25 Reasons to Believe In This Market Rally - James Altucher, New York Post
"Many hedge-fund managers are angry.
They are short this market (betting on a fall) and have failed to outperform as equities continue their trek upwards. Many that I speak to are complaining that the fundamentals of the economy are not backing up the strength of this market.
They look at the high unemployment rate, at 9.7 percent, and problems with Greece, and suggest the rest of us are ignoring reality.
I disagree.
The data suggest that the economy is starting to surge upward. Here are 25 statistics and anecdotes that suggest that the strength in the economy is real: ..................
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/rally_believing_it_D49EqJdvdwnjU0aHSrGygJ#ixzz0lZbazboB
"Many hedge-fund managers are angry.
They are short this market (betting on a fall) and have failed to outperform as equities continue their trek upwards. Many that I speak to are complaining that the fundamentals of the economy are not backing up the strength of this market.
They look at the high unemployment rate, at 9.7 percent, and problems with Greece, and suggest the rest of us are ignoring reality.
I disagree.
The data suggest that the economy is starting to surge upward. Here are 25 statistics and anecdotes that suggest that the strength in the economy is real: ..................
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/rally_believing_it_D49EqJdvdwnjU0aHSrGygJ#ixzz0lZbazboB
grandma
Well-known member
Whoa! quite an article! - lengthy, but sure did give more than a bushel basket of information. Hopefully, other cities Will take note, and maybe even go the way of BYOM !!!
Thanx OBGibby -
According to my tsp.gov online account, my 'Personal Investment Performance' (PIP) for the twelve months ending April 30, 2010, was up 34.73%.
Previous 12 Months Ending:
May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%
Feb 28, 2010 +49.48%
Mar 31, 2010 +47.16%
Apr 30, 2010 +34.73%
Previous 12 Months Ending:
May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%
Feb 28, 2010 +49.48%
Mar 31, 2010 +47.16%
Apr 30, 2010 +34.73%
The Health Care Reform Already Costs More Than We Thought It Would
May 14 2010, 1:31 PM ET
The Atlantic
There's been a spate of bad news recently about the health care bill.
Henry Waxman canceled his War on Accounting, not because there was a sudden breakout of common sense on Capitol Hill, but because his committee's investigation revealed that companies had begun exploring whether they should drop their health insurance plans entirely--a move that would cost over $100 billion thanks to the huge new subsidies the government would have to dole out.
Meanwhile, the CBO just came out and said that the health care reform was slated to cost $115 billion more than they said it would. Why? Because they didn't have time to calculate the effects on discretionary spending such as new administrative capacity, demonstration projects, and continuation of successful short-term initiatives. As my fiance notes, Olympia Snowe's demands to slow down the process suddenly seem a lot more reasonable.
The progressive response on this, as I understand it, is threefold:
What's really worrisome, however, is that I'm unaware of any happy surprises where it turns out this thing is going to cost less than expected. It's early days, yet, of course--but it's a little too early to take rapidly mounting cost projections in stride. We haven't done anything yet, and we're somehow already at least $100 billion in the hole.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/05/the-health-care-reform-already-costs-more-than-we-thought-it-would/56752/
May 14 2010, 1:31 PM ET
The Atlantic
There's been a spate of bad news recently about the health care bill.
Henry Waxman canceled his War on Accounting, not because there was a sudden breakout of common sense on Capitol Hill, but because his committee's investigation revealed that companies had begun exploring whether they should drop their health insurance plans entirely--a move that would cost over $100 billion thanks to the huge new subsidies the government would have to dole out.
Meanwhile, the CBO just came out and said that the health care reform was slated to cost $115 billion more than they said it would. Why? Because they didn't have time to calculate the effects on discretionary spending such as new administrative capacity, demonstration projects, and continuation of successful short-term initiatives. As my fiance notes, Olympia Snowe's demands to slow down the process suddenly seem a lot more reasonable.
The progressive response on this, as I understand it, is threefold:
- We don't have to fund this stuff
- Maybe we'll cut something else to fund this stuff
- C'mon, who cares?
What's really worrisome, however, is that I'm unaware of any happy surprises where it turns out this thing is going to cost less than expected. It's early days, yet, of course--but it's a little too early to take rapidly mounting cost projections in stride. We haven't done anything yet, and we're somehow already at least $100 billion in the hole.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/05/the-health-care-reform-already-costs-more-than-we-thought-it-would/56752/
According to my tsp.gov online account, my 'Personal Investment Performance' (PIP) for the twelve months ending May 31, 2010, was up 15.22%.
Previous 12 Months Ending:
May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%
Feb 28, 2010 +49.48%
Mar 31, 2010 +47.16%
Apr 30, 2010 +34.73%
May 31, 2010 +15.22%
Previous 12 Months Ending:
May 31, 2009 -27.15%
Jun 30, 2009 -21.34%
Jul 30, 2009 -12.23%
Aug 31, 2009 -8.27%
Sep 30, 2009 +4.27%
Oct 31, 2009 +18.69%
Nov 30, 2009 +31.51%
Dec 30, 2009 +29.86%
Jan 31, 2010 +34.15%
Feb 28, 2010 +49.48%
Mar 31, 2010 +47.16%
Apr 30, 2010 +34.73%
May 31, 2010 +15.22%
