how the feds can fix everything

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
news:s189k.1148$sM4.413@newsfe17.phx...
>
>
> It tells me something that has nothing to do with psychobabble.

Dick ............. STFU ! .................... or get back on_track.

It tells me
> that if a worker knows that they have COPD or diabetes or anything else
> seriously wrong with them they may as well work as long as they can drag
> themselves to work rather than risk going belly up copaying for their own
> medical care.

HUH ???????????????????????

> In fewer words, sick people cannot afford to retire.

HUH
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

And if
> a person spent 30 years consuming booze and ciggie butts and made
> themselves sick over it they may not be able to retire on the nest egg
> side. It is sort of a Darwin thing.

I'm a big believer in Darwinian theory as well. What puzzles me, ....... is
"how did u survive the natural selection process" ??


>

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"Rod's work news" <rod.gramlich@ualberta.ca> wrote in message
news:g43420$jsj$1@tabloid.srv.ualberta.ca...
>
> "RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
> news:s189k.1148$sM4.413@newsfe17.phx...
>>
>>
>> It tells me something that has nothing to do with psychobabble.
>
> Dick ............. STFU ! .................... or get back on track.
>
> It tells me
>> that if a worker knows that they have COPD or diabetes or anything else
>> seriously wrong with them they may as well work as long as they can drag
>> themselves to work rather than risk going belly up copaying for their own
>> medical care.
>
> HUH ???????????????????????
>
>> In fewer words, sick people cannot afford to retire.
>
> HUH
> ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>
> And if
>> a person spent 30 years consuming booze and ciggie butts and made
>> themselves sick over it they may not be able to retire on the nest egg
>> side. It is sort of a Darwin thing.
>
> I'm a big believer in Darwinian theory as well. What puzzles me, .......
> is "how did u survive the natural selection process" ??
>
>
>>
>
>

You only think you understand what Darwin was trying to say. His theories
of natural selection had to do with an entire species, not one individual of
that species. We have sort of twisted that to suggest that each individual
is so unique that they are either fit or unfit to survive. No individual
survives. Some species survive for a very long time. Something like a
crocodile has been around the same for epochs and eons of time even though
Mr. Crocodile is not a very appealing chap.

But it terms of politeness I suppose it is better to bring up Charles Darwin
than to say "the best part of you ran down your daddie's left leg" which
they used to say as an insult. Pretty much means the same thing anyhow.
Not that I would ever say that about you because I can tell just from this
chat room that you are superior being.

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
news:oD99k.6160$to3.5481@newsfe15.phx...
>
>>
>
> You only think you understand what Darwin was trying to say. His theories
> of natural selection had to do with an entire species, not one individual
> of that species.

WRONG !!!!!!!!! The process of natural selection, by design, eliminates the
unfit.

We have sort of twisted that to suggest that each individual
> is so unique that they are either fit or unfit to survive.

And that is precisely the case

No individual
> survives. Some species survive for a very long time.

For ANY species to evolve, manifest, establish etc., ................ SOME
of the mutated individuals MUST SURVIVE and reproduce

Something like a
> crocodile has been around the same for epochs and eons of time even though
> Mr. Crocodile is not a very appealing chap.
>
> But it terms of politeness I suppose it is better to bring up Charles
> Darwin than to say "the best part of you ran down your daddie's left leg"
> which they used to say as an insult.

Yes ............. but what was left of that milky river was (genetically)
identical to the part that contributed. It is the process of RE_combination
that yields variety.

Pretty much means the same thing anyhow.
> Not that I would ever say that about you because I can tell just from this
> chat room that you are superior being.

Dick, don't underestimate yourself.
>

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"Rod's work news" <rod.gramlich@ualberta.ca> wrote in message
news:g43d99$mv9$1@tabloid.srv.ualberta.ca...
>
> "RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
> news:oD99k.6160$to3.5481@newsfe15.phx...
>>
>>>
>>
>> You only think you understand what Darwin was trying to say. His
>> theories of natural selection had to do with an entire species, not one
>> individual of that species.
>
> WRONG !!!!!!!!! The process of natural selection, by design, eliminates
> the unfit.
>
> We have sort of twisted that to suggest that each individual
>> is so unique that they are either fit or unfit to survive.
>
> And that is precisely the case
>
> No individual
>> survives. Some species survive for a very long time.
>
> For ANY species to evolve, manifest, establish etc., ................ SOME
> of the mutated individuals MUST SURVIVE and reproduce
>
> Something like a
>> crocodile has been around the same for epochs and eons of time even
>> though Mr. Crocodile is not a very appealing chap.
>>
>> But it terms of politeness I suppose it is better to bring up Charles
>> Darwin than to say "the best part of you ran down your daddie's left leg"
>> which they used to say as an insult.
>
> Yes ............. but what was left of that milky river was (genetically)
> identical to the part that contributed. It is the process of
> RE combination that yields variety.
>
> Pretty much means the same thing anyhow.
>> Not that I would ever say that about you because I can tell just from
>> this chat room that you are superior being.
>
> Dick, don't underestimate yourself.
>>
>
>

You are still wrong. Darwin did care a whit about the individual and its
decision making process or how the decisions worked out. He wrote about
entire species.

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
news:cRb9k.3965$I76.2273@newsfe11.phx...
>
>
> You are still wrong.

> Darwin did care a whit about the individual and its decision making
> process or how the decisions worked out. He wrote about entire species.

huh ?????? that's contradictory. He wrote about evolution ........... i.e.
new species arising from survival of mutant individuals and their subsequent
breeding.

ok .............. just to get you up to speed. Darwin did not buy into the
ark theory. He believed that NEW SPECIES essentially RESULT from successful
reproduction of surviving genetic mutants (i.e. survival of the fittest, ...
iow, Natural Selection) - and that all descendant's, if you like, have
common ancestry, and that genetic variation is resonsible for the onset of
new/different species

(Hint: the ark just wasn't big enough for all insect species - let alone the
long forgotten dinosaurs)

Now ... no pun intended ...... but this is a stock car forum, and we're
getting off the beaten track




>

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
news:1hO8k.5699$_T7.3321@newsfe08.phx...
>>
>> > Then the feds can do more useful things with the money that has been
>> > earmarked for this giveaway than to just give it away to people who
>> > should
>> > be working.
>>
Well, here's one of the alternatives (yup ....... let's keep them 62 yr.
olds working so we can free up funding for this)

Reuters
Published: Thursday, June 26, 2008
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate on Thursday approved $161.8 billion in new
funds to continue fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the next
year, without timetables for withdrawing combat troops.

The House of Representatives passed an identical bill last week. President
George W. Bush is expected to promptly sign the measure into law once he
receives it from Congress.

The Senate's 92-6 vote to pass the war-funding bill marked a victory for
Bush, who has vigorously opposed any move by Congress to impose timetables
for ending the Iraq war, now in its sixth year.

Democrats, who are the majority party in Congress, repeatedly had tried to
set such dates, most recently with a House vote in May calling for troop
withdrawals to be completed by December 31, 2009.
The new war money could last through mid-2009, well past Bush's departure
from office on Jan. 20.

With this legislation, Democrats can claim victory in winning passage of a
significant expansion of veterans' education benefits and domestic
unemployment benefits.

The new money for combat in Iraq and Afghanistan puts the war tab since late
2001 at more than $800 billion, with most of that money going to Iraq.

Congress did attach two conditions on the funds, related to the war in Iraq.
It prohibited the construction of permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq and
required Baghdad to match, dollar-for-dollar, U.S. reconstruction aid.

Now that Congress has passed the final war-funding bill of Bush's
presidency, debate of the Iraq war and how to end it moves to the
presidential campaigns being waged by Democrat Barack Obama and Republican
John McCain.

Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans get a huge new benefit with this
legislation: A significant expansion of college tuition payments by the
government at a cost of about $63 billion over 11 years.

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"Nancy2" <nancy-dooley@uiowa.edu> wrote in message
news:8920cee2-6290-4c70-a4a3-6892f499ee06@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups,com ...
On Jun 26, 6:09 am, "Sandy, THT" <sandrabrown_...@hotmail,com > wrote:
> On Jun 26, 4:26 am, "RickyBobby" <nasca...@cox,net > wrote:
>

And, RB, for your information, many people who want to retire at 62 or
65 and collect Social Security, as they are entitled to, have already
paid into it for 40 years or so.

Bobby has this bass_akwards as well. This is (albeit not black & white) an
example of something free (because what the FEDS tooketh, they are simply
giving back) - unlike his energy from wind, water and soil examples.

Of course, there are many others who
collect it who don't need it - including some of my former employers,
who already take home a couple hundred thousand a year in retirement
benefits from private plans, and STILL collect Social Security. I
think that is a travesty, regardless of how long they've been
earning. Don't get me started.... ;-)

N.

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"Rod's SHAW" <rod.gram@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:WqO8k.52537$gc5.16628@pd7urf2no...
>
> "Nancy2" <nancy-dooley@uiowa.edu> wrote in message
> news:8920cee2-6290-4c70-a4a3-6892f499ee06@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups,com ...
> On Jun 26, 6:09 am, "Sandy, THT" <sandrabrown ...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>> On Jun 26, 4:26 am, "RickyBobby" <nasca...@cox,net > wrote:
>>
>
> And, RB, for your information, many people who want to retire at 62 or
> 65 and collect Social Security, as they are entitled to, have already
> paid into it for 40 years or so.
>
> Bobby has this bass akwards as well. This is (albeit not black & white) an
> example of something free (because what the FEDS tooketh, they are simply
> giving back) - unlike his energy from wind, water and soil examples.
>
>

But the feds do not have some huge untapped pool of hundred of billions for
these welfare programs. They already spent it and the only way they can
issue checks is by printing more money and running the country even deeper
into debt.

I am just patriotic enough not to dare suggest cutting back a nickel on
programs for the WWII generation. But these Boomers are going to run up a
ruinous tab if they retire at the silly age of 62. And you know darn well
that most of them who retire at the comical age of 62 either do not need the
SS check or they will be working in the under-the-table economy.

Re: how the feds can fix everything


"RickyBobby" <nascar42@cox,net > wrote in message
news:_BO8k.1114$sM4.124@newsfe17.phx...
>
>
> But the feds do not have some huge untapped pool of hundred of billions
> for these welfare programs.

Bobby .......... that's "ACCORDING TO THE FEDS" !!!!!!! They took the money,
should be accountable for those monies, .. and should have those monies
available for re_payment in pensions.

They already spent it and the only way they can
> issue checks is by printing more money and running the country even deeper
> into debt.

See above ! They must be held accountable. Taking those monies and using
them to fuel F-18's just ain't gonna fly.
>
> I am just patriotic enough not to dare suggest cutting back a nickel on
> programs for the WWII generation. But these Boomers are going to run up a
> ruinous tab if they retire at the silly age of 62.

No .... no more of a tab than if they retire at 65

And you know darn well
> that most of them who retire at the comical age of 62 either do not need
> the SS check or they will be working in the under-the-table economy.

true, for the most part

>