Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
Wild guess, you don't have health insurance provided by the ACA? (Obamacare)
I could use my "mandated" health insurance money on hookers and booze but no !
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Wild guess, you don't have health insurance provided by the ACA? (Obamacare)
I actually do, thanks for asking. And, I don't get any subsidies, either.
I was a lot happier before my insurance rate doubled.
Is nice to know the government thinks they know best though !
Is nice to know the government thinks they know best though !
No subsidies?! That must be pricey.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Quote:
The Senate passed a Republican-authored budget plan early on Friday that seeks $5.1 trillion in domestic spending cuts over 10 years while boosting military funding.
The 52-46 vote on the non-binding budget resolution put Congress on a path to complete its first full budget in six years. It came at the end of a marathon 18-hour session that saw approval of dozens of amendments ranging from Iran sanctions to carbon emissions and immigration policies.
Two Republican senators who are running or considering running for president, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, voted against their party's budget plan, which is similar to one passed by House Republicans on Wednesday.
In addition to aiming to eliminate deficits within 10 years, both documents seek to ease the path for a repeal or replacement of President Barack Obama's signature health care reform law.
But differences between the two documents still need to be worked out and a combined budget passed next month by both chambers. Doing so would allow Republicans to invoke parliamentary rules to repeal "Obamacare" with a simple majority in the Senate rather than a tough-to-achieve 60 vote threshold.
Under the convoluted U.S. spending process, the budgets do not become law, but influence government agency funding bills later in the year. They also showcase the fiscal vision for Republicans, who now control both Houses of Congress for the first time since 2006 and are eager to demonstrate their ability to govern.
"This balanced budget is an important first step to help Washington live within its means, just like hardworking families have to do every day," said Republican Senate Budget Chairman Mike Enzi.
He added that once a final budget is passed lawmakers would begin to work to find alternate savings that would allow them to ease statutory budget caps on military and domestic programs.
The Senate budget seeks to eliminate U.S. deficits by 2025 without raising taxes through deep cuts to social safety net programs, investments in transportation and education and other domestic programs.
At the same time, it proposes to boost defense spending by adding about $38 billion to an off-budget war funding account, and offers core Pentagon budget increases in subsequent years.
More than 50 non-binding amendments were considered on Thursday and Friday in an open "vote-a-rama" process that allowed senators to promote pet causes or try to force opposition members into votes that may be used in campaign ads.
Republicans passed a symbolic roll-back of the Obama administration's carbon emissions rules for power plants, while a Democratic proposal to recognize climate change risks for the military won approval.
Another Democratic amendment to let all Americans earn paid sick leave passed with a surprisingly strong 61 votes, with support from 14 Republicans. The Senate also voted unanimously to make it easier to reimpose sanctions if Iran violates any nuclear deal.
The 52-46 vote on the non-binding budget resolution put Congress on a path to complete its first full budget in six years. It came at the end of a marathon 18-hour session that saw approval of dozens of amendments ranging from Iran sanctions to carbon emissions and immigration policies.
Two Republican senators who are running or considering running for president, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, voted against their party's budget plan, which is similar to one passed by House Republicans on Wednesday.
In addition to aiming to eliminate deficits within 10 years, both documents seek to ease the path for a repeal or replacement of President Barack Obama's signature health care reform law.
But differences between the two documents still need to be worked out and a combined budget passed next month by both chambers. Doing so would allow Republicans to invoke parliamentary rules to repeal "Obamacare" with a simple majority in the Senate rather than a tough-to-achieve 60 vote threshold.
Under the convoluted U.S. spending process, the budgets do not become law, but influence government agency funding bills later in the year. They also showcase the fiscal vision for Republicans, who now control both Houses of Congress for the first time since 2006 and are eager to demonstrate their ability to govern.
"This balanced budget is an important first step to help Washington live within its means, just like hardworking families have to do every day," said Republican Senate Budget Chairman Mike Enzi.
He added that once a final budget is passed lawmakers would begin to work to find alternate savings that would allow them to ease statutory budget caps on military and domestic programs.
The Senate budget seeks to eliminate U.S. deficits by 2025 without raising taxes through deep cuts to social safety net programs, investments in transportation and education and other domestic programs.
At the same time, it proposes to boost defense spending by adding about $38 billion to an off-budget war funding account, and offers core Pentagon budget increases in subsequent years.
More than 50 non-binding amendments were considered on Thursday and Friday in an open "vote-a-rama" process that allowed senators to promote pet causes or try to force opposition members into votes that may be used in campaign ads.
Republicans passed a symbolic roll-back of the Obama administration's carbon emissions rules for power plants, while a Democratic proposal to recognize climate change risks for the military won approval.
Another Democratic amendment to let all Americans earn paid sick leave passed with a surprisingly strong 61 votes, with support from 14 Republicans. The Senate also voted unanimously to make it easier to reimpose sanctions if Iran violates any nuclear deal.
Quote:
The White House is sending the message to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that the Republican budget he just passed will be rejected by President Obama unless serious changes are made.
*** it raise taxes so I can get my free community college. I'm 20 credits away from a Art history degree!
I haven't been paying attention to Obama there is about 3 more weeks of that airplane crash we have to get through !
I haven't been paying attention to Obama there is about 3 more weeks of that airplane crash we have to get through !
I'm watching "new" episodes of the Simpsons I'm trying to like it.
[+]
Something so dumb it probably should have been put on Huff post.
I have stretch marks and I wear a bikini. I have a belly that's permanently flabby from carrying three giant babies and I wear a bikini. My belly button is saggy... (which is something I didn't even know was possible before!!) and I wear a bikini. I wear a bikini because I'm proud of this body and every mark on it. Those marks prove that I was blessed enough to carry my babies and that flabby tummy means I worked hard to lose what weight I could. I wear a bikini because the only man who's opinion matters knows what I went through to look this way. That same man says he's never seen anything sexier than my body, marks and all. They aren't scars ladies, they're stripes and you've earned them. Flaunt that body with pride!
http://www.today.com/parents/mom-flaunts-flab-stretch-marks-viral-bikini-photo-2D80567590
I have stretch marks and I wear a bikini. I have a belly that's permanently flabby from carrying three giant babies and I wear a bikini. My belly button is saggy... (which is something I didn't even know was possible before!!) and I wear a bikini. I wear a bikini because I'm proud of this body and every mark on it. Those marks prove that I was blessed enough to carry my babies and that flabby tummy means I worked hard to lose what weight I could. I wear a bikini because the only man who's opinion matters knows what I went through to look this way. That same man says he's never seen anything sexier than my body, marks and all. They aren't scars ladies, they're stripes and you've earned them. Flaunt that body with pride!
http://www.today.com/parents/mom-flaunts-flab-stretch-marks-viral-bikini-photo-2D80567590
Its a dishonest budget, they repeal Obamacare but keep the money generated by Obamacare. How does that work? Anyways, if it actually makes it out of reconciliation, it will be vetoed in 1 second. This is just the GOP pandering to its base, the bipartisan doc fix counted as work, this does not.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
No subsidies?! That must be pricey.
Cheaper than the insurance that was provided by my previous employer, and it's a good policy, with low deductibles and very few co-pays. I've noticed most people who are very against ACA have never even been to their state's exchange.
Quote:
"While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department," Gowdy said.
A little bit of good news:
Forget the Fed, this is Wall Street's big worry
Quote:
You might think the timing of the Federal Reserve’s move to raise interest rates is the biggest concern on Wall Street these days. But maybe not. Maybe it’s Elizabeth Warren.
Reuters reports some of the biggest financial firms on the Street are so infuriated by Warren’s anti-bank crusade that they are considering withholding political donations to Democratic Senators in protest. Reuters says representatives of Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs (GS) and Bank of America (BAC) have met to discuss how they might be able to get Democrats to tone down their rhetoric. And while there’s no coordinated plan to cut off funding, the idea has been raised in one-on-one conversations among banking officials.
This comes as no surprise to Yahoo Finance Editor in Chief Andy Serwer.
“She is their enemy, no question about it,” he says. “I was just at one of these large Wall Street banks, talking to a senior official, and unprompted he brought up Elizabeth Warren’s name. And he was really concerned that she really had drawing power because of the polarization of American politics.”
Warren has said she won’t run for President in 2016, although there is a draft effort by some in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. But Yahoo Finance Senior Columnist Michel Santoli says the banks’ concern is not about Warren winning elections, it’s whether or not she can influence the country’s mindset about them.
Reuters reports some of the biggest financial firms on the Street are so infuriated by Warren’s anti-bank crusade that they are considering withholding political donations to Democratic Senators in protest. Reuters says representatives of Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs (GS) and Bank of America (BAC) have met to discuss how they might be able to get Democrats to tone down their rhetoric. And while there’s no coordinated plan to cut off funding, the idea has been raised in one-on-one conversations among banking officials.
This comes as no surprise to Yahoo Finance Editor in Chief Andy Serwer.
“She is their enemy, no question about it,” he says. “I was just at one of these large Wall Street banks, talking to a senior official, and unprompted he brought up Elizabeth Warren’s name. And he was really concerned that she really had drawing power because of the polarization of American politics.”
Warren has said she won’t run for President in 2016, although there is a draft effort by some in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. But Yahoo Finance Senior Columnist Michel Santoli says the banks’ concern is not about Warren winning elections, it’s whether or not she can influence the country’s mindset about them.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Quote:
"While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department," Gowdy said.
[+]
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
A little bit of good news:
Forget the Fed, this is Wall Street's big worry
Quote:
You might think the timing of the Federal Reserve’s move to raise interest rates is the biggest concern on Wall Street these days. But maybe not. Maybe it’s Elizabeth Warren.
Reuters reports some of the biggest financial firms on the Street are so infuriated by Warren’s anti-bank crusade that they are considering withholding political donations to Democratic Senators in protest. Reuters says representatives of Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs (GS) and Bank of America (BAC) have met to discuss how they might be able to get Democrats to tone down their rhetoric. And while there’s no coordinated plan to cut off funding, the idea has been raised in one-on-one conversations among banking officials.
This comes as no surprise to Yahoo Finance Editor in Chief Andy Serwer.
“She is their enemy, no question about it,” he says. “I was just at one of these large Wall Street banks, talking to a senior official, and unprompted he brought up Elizabeth Warren’s name. And he was really concerned that she really had drawing power because of the polarization of American politics.”
Warren has said she won’t run for President in 2016, although there is a draft effort by some in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. But Yahoo Finance Senior Columnist Michel Santoli says the banks’ concern is not about Warren winning elections, it’s whether or not she can influence the country’s mindset about them.
Reuters reports some of the biggest financial firms on the Street are so infuriated by Warren’s anti-bank crusade that they are considering withholding political donations to Democratic Senators in protest. Reuters says representatives of Citigroup (C), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Goldman Sachs (GS) and Bank of America (BAC) have met to discuss how they might be able to get Democrats to tone down their rhetoric. And while there’s no coordinated plan to cut off funding, the idea has been raised in one-on-one conversations among banking officials.
This comes as no surprise to Yahoo Finance Editor in Chief Andy Serwer.
“She is their enemy, no question about it,” he says. “I was just at one of these large Wall Street banks, talking to a senior official, and unprompted he brought up Elizabeth Warren’s name. And he was really concerned that she really had drawing power because of the polarization of American politics.”
Warren has said she won’t run for President in 2016, although there is a draft effort by some in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. But Yahoo Finance Senior Columnist Michel Santoli says the banks’ concern is not about Warren winning elections, it’s whether or not she can influence the country’s mindset about them.
How else did you think we got Dodd/Frank legislation? Government's role in the 2008 financial crisis is ignored, public's role in the 2008 financial crisis is dismissed, so let's put all of the blame on one group of people, and let the other perpetrators have a pass on their bad behavior.
Saudis invading Yemen. Sounds legit.
Meanwhile supporting Iran in Syria and support the fight against them in Yemen. Three cheers for hypocrisy!
Meanwhile supporting Iran in Syria and support the fight against them in Yemen. Three cheers for hypocrisy!
[+]
The Indiana law that 'fell off the stupid tree' CNBC
Opening paragraph:
Let's be 100-percent clear: Indiana's brand new Religious Freedom Law is a measure that fell off the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down. And I say that as not only a conservative, but a religious conservative.
Opening paragraph:
Quote:
Let's be 100-percent clear: Indiana's brand new Religious Freedom Law is a measure that fell off the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down. And I say that as not only a conservative, but a religious conservative.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
Saudis invading Yemen. Sounds legit.
Meanwhile supporting Iran in Syria and support the fight against them in Yemen. Three cheers for hypocrisy!
Meanwhile supporting Iran in Syria and support the fight against them in Yemen. Three cheers for hypocrisy!
We must protect the oils !
[+]
I've been to Saudi Arabia it's quite warm and pleasant !
The tourists have ruined Riyahd though...
The tourists have ruined Riyahd though...
NBC news time!
Retirement Crisis: The Great 401(k) Experiment Has Failed for Many Americans
Quote:
ou need to know this number: $18,433. That's the median amount in a 401(k) savings account, according to a recent report by the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Almost 40 percent of employees have less than $10,000, even as the proportion of companies offering alternatives like defined benefit pensions continues to drop.
Older workers do tend to have more savings. At Vanguard, for example, the median for savers aged 55 to 64 in 2013 was $76,381. But even at that level, millions of workers nearing retirement are on track to leave the workforce with savings that do not even approach what they will need for health care, let alone daily living. Not surprisingly, retirement is now Americans' top financial worry, according to a recent Gallup poll.
To be sure, tax-advantaged 401(k) plans have provided a means for millions of retirement savers to build a nest egg. More than three-quarters of employers use such defined contribution plans as the main retirement income plan option for employees, and the vast majority of them offer matching contribution programs, which further enhance employees' ability to accumulate wealth.
But shifting the responsibility for growing retirement income from employers to individuals has proved problematic for many American workers, particularly in the face of wage stagnation and a lack of investment expertise. For them, the grand 401(k) experiment has been a failure.
"In America, when we had disability and defined benefit plans, you actually had an equality of retirement period. Now the rich can retire and workers have to work until they die," said Teresa Ghilarducci, a labor economist at the New School for Social Research who has proposed eliminating the tax breaks for 401(k)s and using the money saved to create government-run retirement plans.
A historical accident?
It wasn't supposed to work out this way.
The 401(k) account came into being quietly, as a clause in the Revenue Act of 1978. The clause said employees could choose to defer some compensation until retirement, and they would not be taxed until that time. (Companies had long offered deferred compensation arrangements, but employers and the IRS had been going back and forth about their tax treatment.)
"401(k)s were never designed as the nation's primary retirement system," said Anthony Webb, a research economist at the Center for Retirement Research. "They came to be that as a historical accident."
Older workers do tend to have more savings. At Vanguard, for example, the median for savers aged 55 to 64 in 2013 was $76,381. But even at that level, millions of workers nearing retirement are on track to leave the workforce with savings that do not even approach what they will need for health care, let alone daily living. Not surprisingly, retirement is now Americans' top financial worry, according to a recent Gallup poll.
To be sure, tax-advantaged 401(k) plans have provided a means for millions of retirement savers to build a nest egg. More than three-quarters of employers use such defined contribution plans as the main retirement income plan option for employees, and the vast majority of them offer matching contribution programs, which further enhance employees' ability to accumulate wealth.
But shifting the responsibility for growing retirement income from employers to individuals has proved problematic for many American workers, particularly in the face of wage stagnation and a lack of investment expertise. For them, the grand 401(k) experiment has been a failure.
"In America, when we had disability and defined benefit plans, you actually had an equality of retirement period. Now the rich can retire and workers have to work until they die," said Teresa Ghilarducci, a labor economist at the New School for Social Research who has proposed eliminating the tax breaks for 401(k)s and using the money saved to create government-run retirement plans.
A historical accident?
It wasn't supposed to work out this way.
The 401(k) account came into being quietly, as a clause in the Revenue Act of 1978. The clause said employees could choose to defer some compensation until retirement, and they would not be taxed until that time. (Companies had long offered deferred compensation arrangements, but employers and the IRS had been going back and forth about their tax treatment.)
"401(k)s were never designed as the nation's primary retirement system," said Anthony Webb, a research economist at the Center for Retirement Research. "They came to be that as a historical accident."
My retirement plan is buying lottery tickets !
YouTube Video Placeholder
Who's afraid of Elizabeth Warren: No one
Not sure what the article is about so I'll save you the 3 minutes it would take to read it !
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/whos-afraid-of-elizabeth-warren-116471.html?hp=t2_r
Not sure what the article is about so I'll save you the 3 minutes it would take to read it !
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/whos-afraid-of-elizabeth-warren-116471.html?hp=t2_r
fonewear said: »
Who's afraid of Elizabeth Warren: No one
Not sure what the article is about so I'll save you the 3 minutes it would take to read it !
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/whos-afraid-of-elizabeth-warren-116471.html?hp=t2_r
Not sure what the article is about so I'll save you the 3 minutes it would take to read it !
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/whos-afraid-of-elizabeth-warren-116471.html?hp=t2_r
Clinton though...
[+]
Leviathan.Chaosx said: »
What would she know about rocking !
This will end well...
Arab leaders agree joint military force
Quote:
Arab leaders agreed on Sunday to form a joint military force after a summit dominated by a Saudi-led offensive on Shiite rebels in Yemen and the threat from Islamist extremism.
Arab representatives will meet over the next month to study the creation of the force and present their findings to defence ministers within four months, according to the resolution adopted by the leaders.
"Assuming the great responsibility imposed by the great challenges facing our Arab nation and threatening its capabilities, the Arab leaders had decided to agree on the principle of a joint Arab military force," Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi told the summit in the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh.
The decision was mostly aimed at fighting jihadists who have overrun swathes of Iraq and Syria and secured a foothold in Libya, Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi said ahead of the summit.
On Sunday, Arabi told the meeting the region was threatened by a "destructive" force that threatened "ethnic and religious diversity", in an apparent reference to the Islamic State group.
"What is important is that today there is an important decision, in light of the tumult afflicting the Arab world," he said.
Egypt had pushed for the creation of the rapid response force to fight militants, and the matter gained urgency this week after Saudi Arabia and Arab allies launched air strikes on Huthi rebels in Yemen.
Arabi, reading a statement at the conclusion of the summit, said on Sunday the offensive would continue until the Huthis withdraw from regions they have overrun and surrender their weapons.
Several Arab states including Egypt are taking part in the military campaign, which Saudi King Salman said on Saturday would continue until the Yemeni people "enjoy security".
- 'Months to create' -
Yemeni President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi at the start of the summit called for the offensive to end only when the Huthis "surrender", calling the rebel leader an Iranian "puppet".
However, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the leaders to find a peaceful resolution in Yemen.
"It is my fervent hope that at this Arab League summit, leaders will lay down clear guidelines to peacefully resolve the crisis in Yemen," he said.
James Dorsey, a Middle East analyst with the Singapore-based S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said that despite support for a joint-Arab force, "it would still take months to create and then operate on an ad-hoc basis.
"I don't think we will get an integrated command anytime soon, as no Arab leader would cede control of any part of their army anytime soon," he said.
"Today we will have a formal declaration that would be negotiated every time during action."
Sisi said in a recent interview that the proposal for a joint force was welcomed especially by Jordan, which might take part alongside Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
Aaron Reese, deputy research director at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War, said "each of these countries would bring a different capability.
"The Jordanians are well known for their special forces capability... the Egyptians of course have the most manpower and bases close to Libya."
Before Egyptian air strikes in February targeting the IS in Libya, the United Arab Emirates, which shares Cairo's antipathy towards Islamists, had reportedly used Egyptian bases to launch its own air strikes there.
Cairo had sought UN backing for intervention in Libya, dismissing attempted peace talks between the rival governments in its violence-plagued North African neighbour as ineffective.
Arab representatives will meet over the next month to study the creation of the force and present their findings to defence ministers within four months, according to the resolution adopted by the leaders.
"Assuming the great responsibility imposed by the great challenges facing our Arab nation and threatening its capabilities, the Arab leaders had decided to agree on the principle of a joint Arab military force," Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi told the summit in the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh.
The decision was mostly aimed at fighting jihadists who have overrun swathes of Iraq and Syria and secured a foothold in Libya, Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi said ahead of the summit.
On Sunday, Arabi told the meeting the region was threatened by a "destructive" force that threatened "ethnic and religious diversity", in an apparent reference to the Islamic State group.
"What is important is that today there is an important decision, in light of the tumult afflicting the Arab world," he said.
Egypt had pushed for the creation of the rapid response force to fight militants, and the matter gained urgency this week after Saudi Arabia and Arab allies launched air strikes on Huthi rebels in Yemen.
Arabi, reading a statement at the conclusion of the summit, said on Sunday the offensive would continue until the Huthis withdraw from regions they have overrun and surrender their weapons.
Several Arab states including Egypt are taking part in the military campaign, which Saudi King Salman said on Saturday would continue until the Yemeni people "enjoy security".
- 'Months to create' -
Yemeni President Abedrabbo Mansour Hadi at the start of the summit called for the offensive to end only when the Huthis "surrender", calling the rebel leader an Iranian "puppet".
However, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the leaders to find a peaceful resolution in Yemen.
"It is my fervent hope that at this Arab League summit, leaders will lay down clear guidelines to peacefully resolve the crisis in Yemen," he said.
James Dorsey, a Middle East analyst with the Singapore-based S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said that despite support for a joint-Arab force, "it would still take months to create and then operate on an ad-hoc basis.
"I don't think we will get an integrated command anytime soon, as no Arab leader would cede control of any part of their army anytime soon," he said.
"Today we will have a formal declaration that would be negotiated every time during action."
Sisi said in a recent interview that the proposal for a joint force was welcomed especially by Jordan, which might take part alongside Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
Aaron Reese, deputy research director at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War, said "each of these countries would bring a different capability.
"The Jordanians are well known for their special forces capability... the Egyptians of course have the most manpower and bases close to Libya."
Before Egyptian air strikes in February targeting the IS in Libya, the United Arab Emirates, which shares Cairo's antipathy towards Islamists, had reportedly used Egyptian bases to launch its own air strikes there.
Cairo had sought UN backing for intervention in Libya, dismissing attempted peace talks between the rival governments in its violence-plagued North African neighbour as ineffective.
To summarize the Middle East:
YouTube Video Placeholder
Anyone that uses a self stick I know a bridge that is lonely !
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.