Mcgoo

I am seeking information of makers of Liquid Chip Injection Pumps for use on an Ice Cream Continious Freezer line. Most critical is a manufacturer of the actual injection head which is connected between the freezer outlet and the Fruit Feeder inlet.

If anyone out there knows of companies that still manufacture, or who fabricate such equipment, please contact me.

We constantly hear from Conservatives that Social Security and Medicare unfunded costs will bankrupt the United States. Recent reports show that Social Security will be short17% of tax revenue to pay all benefits for the next 75 years, after exahsting the treasury bonds it holds.

Medicare will be short 21% of tax revenue to pay all benefits for the next 75 years, assuming the savings from the Affordable Care Act are not lost to repeal.

While this is a large defecit - it is hardly insurmountable. Many say that massive tax increases will be required, or massive cuts in benefits. However, we are only taxing about half of the income reported in AGI's on returns.

No payroll taxes are collected on Wages and Salaries over $106,000 - which is about 45% of all wages and salaries.

No payroll taxes are collected on any type of Capital Gains - which is about 13% of all income reported.

So if we simply left the tax rates where they are, and taxed all income, not just some income - we could make SS and Medicare solvent at current benefit levels for the next 75 years.

If we do something to slow the rise in spending for Medicare - we may even be able to lower the tax rates and stay solvent - if we taxed all income.

On average - 32% of all income going to people earning over $1,000,000 is subject to NO Payroll taxes. And on average only 10% of total income is subject to SS taxes.

This is why Warren Buffet only paid 17% in Federal Taxes last year, while his Secretary paid over 30%.

The conservative right is once again taking up the chorus of a crisis in Social Security and Medicare. They say that the spending is out of control and will bankrupt the government. They say we must enact deep cuts to balance the budget and prevent disaster.

A FEW FACTS:

Social Security and Medicare are nearly 39% of the budget

FICA, the Payroll Tax that pays for SS and Medicare is 42% of income

Non-SS and Medicare spending totaled 61% of spending.

Non- FICA income was only 58% of income.

So doesn't that part of the deficit need to be addressed by the Non-SS/ Medicare portion of the budget, and not by gutting promised benefits?

Current conservative projections are that the FICA tax will be 6.7 Trillion dollars short in covering current promised benefits over the next 75 years. That is only 90 Billion dollars a year, to balance that 40% of the budget, and all the promised benefits can be paid for in full by the dedicated tax that was put in for that purpose - FICA.

If you remove the limits on income that is subject to FICA taxes, and apply it to ALL income, including investment income, which is the vast majority of the income of the rich that is currently not subject to any payroll taxes. You would increase income by about 40%, or about 350 Billion a year; easily raising the needed 90 Billion, with billions more to spare.

Apply the same tax rate to all income, investment and wages, and you would raise another 200 - 400 Billion dollars.

Making balancing the budget a possibility.

The wealthy in this country like to claim they pay more than their share of taxes, but is that really true?

If your paying your share, shouldn't you be paying the same percentage as a common worker? You may make 80 million, and I may make 80 thousand, but if you are paying your fair share, shouldn't we both be paying the same tax rate - be it 15% or 39%?

But we don't; you make most of your income from investments, which are only taxed at 15%, and I would be paying 35% on wages.

You only pay FICA taxes on the first 106,000 of your 80 million, and I pay on every penny I make.

So why again is it that you are paying your fair share?

Even Warren Buffet has commented on the fact that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary.

Let's make SS and Medicare stand on their own, with only FICA to pay for it, and make the tax changes needed, or the cuts needed to balance that portion of the budget.

Then let the rest of the budget stand on it's own, without pirating money from the FICA taxes to subsidize things that FICA is not meant to pay for. And again, either raise taxes to pay for it, or cut spending so that portion of the budget is balanced.

All the hupla about banning pseudoephedrine or making it prescription only.

Is there nothing that can be compounded with pseudoephed to make it useless as an ingredient for making meth or any other illegal drug, but still a safe product for colds?

I personlally prefer pseudoephed over it's replacement phenylephrine that is in the PE version.

SO all you chemist and others - what can be mixed into the pseudophedirine to make a good cold pill, and stop the use in making meth?

For years you have heard it - private insurance is so much more efficient, that there is no need to have a government run system. Who hasn't heard this over and over again. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SOOOO- Why is it that so many health insurance companies are asking to be exempted from the requirement to provide at least 80 cents of each premium dollar as benefits? They are saying that they can not possibly deliver health care services, with only being able to spend 20% of the premium on overhead. Can't do it - No Way - No How. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SAD - Maybe they ought to hire Medicare to run their program - Medicare, according to the Congressional Budget Office - they same guys that the Republicans and Democrats rely on to judge the cost and efficiency of government programs; reports that Medicare provides over 90 cents on the dollar - but they adjust that down to 87 cents, because Medicare does not have to mail it's own checks out, the treasury does that. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . So again, if private insurance is so efficient - why can't they beat Medicare???

I have been a loyal Choice Hotel client for years. And although I travel infrequently, I nearly always choose a Choice Hotel location, even if it is slightly more expensive than other locations in the area.

Choice has been running promotions over the last couple of years, promising a free nights stay, or a free dining gift card; if you stay two nights in a given period of time, and book through Choice Hotel.com. Twice now I have done just exactly that, and twice now I have NOT been given the promised extra points to earn the free night or gift card.

Is anyone else experiencing the same issue with Choice? This last time, they claim I booked the stay at the hotel, even though I have the confirmation letter from Choice Hotel's web site showing the confirmation and that it was booked online. When I sent them a copy of the letter, they suddenly don't answer any of my emails.

If you are having the same type of problem, please post a reply. I want to find out if I am just one unlucky smuck, or if this is a trend for them.

A recent US NEWS report on Yahoo pointed out the following:

"If all earned income above $106,800 annually were subject to Social Security contributions but did not count toward benefits, Social Security's projected deficit would be completely eliminated. If the higher income counted toward Social Security benefits, about 95 percent of the shortfall would be absolved."

What this did not factor in, was that a vast amount of income is not subject to SS taxes. Investment income, where a person can earn millions on stock deals, is not included in taxable income for SS. So multimillionaires can make millions, and pay nothing into SS.

If all income, from wages and investments, were taxed for SS in full, what would the tax rate be to make the system solvent forever?

Right now, you get to 95% by simply taxing all wages. Adding in the investment earnings, might actually produce a surplus at current tax rates.

You might be able to lower the tax rates on everyone, and still make the system solvent. You could pass the lower rates back to the people and help small business at the same time by lowering the employer's tax rate by 75% of the reduction, and the employee's by the other 25% for small businesses. And leave the rates even for larger businesses.

NET EFFECT:

Social Security is solvent and stable for ever.

Small business gets a much needed boost by lowering taxes it has to pay for employee's.

Employee's get a reduction in taxes over what they are paying now.

No need to reduce benefits or raise retirement ages to fix problem.

The rich pay more, but also get credit for the money they pay.

And yes, I know that the rich are the target of this idea. And yes I know that the rich pay most of all taxes when it comes to income tax.

But that is not true of Social Security. Since the tax is capped at $106,000 in wages, and does not even cover investment income, the richest 10% of Americans pay a very small percentage of the total taxes for Social Security.

The age old question comes to mind. Why should a guy who sits in a swank, air conditioned corner office; and makes a million dollars on the stock market - pay less in social security taxes than the garbage collector, out on the street in the hot sun, making $70,000 a year?

I have been using Adobe Photoshop Starter Edition 2.0 for years to print and store my photos.

It has always proved to be adequate for normal purposes, since I take any high quality work to the photo store to be printed on profesional equipment.

Now Adobe has discontinued the stand alone version and want me to either upgrade to a paid copy, or use an online version. I do not really want to do either.

There has to be a counter in the registry or in the program that is keeping track of how many times I have opened the program, which has not triggered the lock to keep the program from opening.

Does anyone know where this counter is, and can it be reset to allow the program to continue to run?

Or, is there a universal code to unlock the program? I know that many of these free version type programs use a single code for every user to unlock the program.

I am running Xp Pro (legal copy) on a Lenovo laptop.

Thanks to anyone who can help.

NOTE: I will report TOS violations for anyone who sends links to advertisers, comercial sites or paid programs. I want to use my current program, not buy your crap.

So why is it that when you look at a graph of the National Debt, plotted by each year, it looks like it was the Republicans that added most of the Debt to our nation?

http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

I have checked the numbers charted on this graph, and they are correct.

.

The junior Bush, ended with a debt of 1.44 Trillion for 2008.

His last budget, which Obama inherited for his first year in office, had a debt of 1.70 Trillion. Most of this was from Bush programs to save Wall Street, but some small amount was from new programs under Obama.

Republicans, up through the senior Bush, added 3.30 Trillion to the debt from 1975 - 1992.

Democrats, from 1972 - 2008, which included Carter and Clinton, added 1.89 Trillion to the debt.

Republicans, under the junior Bush, added 4.35 Trillion during his 8 years from 2001-2008.

Democrats, under Obama, even adding in those expenses inherited from the Bush bail out of Wall Street, added 1.70 Trillion to the debt in 2009.

$7,600,000,000,000 added by Republicans

$3,590,000,000,000 added by Democrats.

.

If Obama continues to spend at $1.5 Trillion a year for the next three years, he will only just barely, overtake the spending the Republicans are resonsible for since 1975.

.

.

So tell me again why it is that it is the Democrats that we should worry about spending money. Why should we put the Republicans back in charge, when they seem to spend money like drunken sailors, except when a Democrat is in the White House?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091116/ap_on_go_co/us...

In the news story on Yahoo from the AP, they are negative in the extreme as to the costs and coverage of the proposed bills in Congress. Why is every person they found to question for the article from an Atlanta suburb? That is hardly a cross section of the country.

And the comments were just so uninformed and stupid. ' I don't want to have to pay for someone elses medical if they ban exclusion of pre-existing conditions.' You are already paying for the uninsured. That is what all the naysayers seem to miss. The uninsured go to the Emergency Room when they are to sick to go any further. The cost is 10 to 100 times what it would have been to treat the condition early on, before they became so ill. The cost is absorbed by the hospital, who then factors that into the costs when your insurance company negotiates the pricing for your coverage. Most estimates are that YOU are paying about $1200 a year in added premiums and co-pays to cover the uninsured. Who thinks it would be better to have them insured in the first place, and not clog up the ER when they are deathly ill. The cost should be tghe same or less than the $1200 each of us is paying now. Just do the math. 4 of us are insured for every one that is not. 4 x $1200 = $4800; which just happens to be the average price of a policy for a single person.

What I want to know, is why you could not set up a health care, not for profit plan, which would cover anyone who does not have insurance now, and end up saving money in the long run. WE ALL are paying for the uninsured already. Our insurance companies negotiate the price for services from our doctors and hospitals. The price is based on reasonable costs, but this includes the people treated in the ER that did not have insurance and ended up much sicker in the ER than if they had seen a doctor early on. WE PAY. So if everyone had coverage, this cost would not be factored into the prices the insurance company had to pay the hospitals and doctors. This lowers their costs, which hopefully lowers our premiums. And if these people were treated in a clinic, or doctors office for their problems, instead of in the ER when they were on deaths door, then maybe WE would not have to wait as long in the ER when we needed it.

A not for profit should be able to pay the hospitals and doctors the same rate the private insurance company does, but cover 25% more people with the same money. They do not have to pay profits to the stock holders. Those instead could go to covering more people.

So why does this not make sense?

And please - For God's Sake - no diatribes and lectures about socialism and all that other crap. Explain it in plain language.

I am working on a friends laptop, which will not boot up. I removed his hard drive and placed it into my laptop as a secondary drive. The drive appeared to be in good working order, Healthy Active NTFS partition, but had no files showing on it; nothing at all.

I used one of the freeware recovery programs to view the drive, and found that the entire OS and all files are in the recycle bin.

I know there are programs to recover these files, but I do not know which is the best one to use. Does not HAVE to be free, but I know he does not have a great deal of money to spend. Which is the best program to use to restore these files from the recovery bin. OR, is there a command line function that will allow me to restore the files?

If I could get the drive to boot into windows, it would be as simple as opening the recycle bin and telling it to restore the files. But I can not get into windows on the drive, since windows itself is also in the recycle bin. Can not view the contents in Windows Explorer, getting an error message. Only the recovery program was able to view the files on the drive.

Any help would be appreciated.

How many of you are getting tired of the robotic, meaningless replies that seem to come from Yahoo, whenever you complain about an answer being deleted?

I have had a third answer deleted in the past year. And in every case, the response from Yahoo has never answered the question, "Why is this a violation?". All I have ever gotten is a spew of blanket reasons, with not a word of which one applies, or what part of my answer is causing the violation.

Are any of you having the same issue with Yahoo? If this is as wide spread as I believe it might be, then the community needs to demand that Yahoo clean up it's act, and either actually investigate, to see if a question has actually violated a standard; or stop perpetuating this farce of a system, that just blankly deletes any answer that someone complains about, be it a violation or not.

So tell me in logical plain English, why having everyone in Medicare instead of a thousand for profit private insurance plans would not work. Please give logical, factual answers, and not the crap that the talking heads on the right and left spew.

My Dad who is turning 80 is in very good health for his age. And yet when he tried to get supplemental coverage to go along with his Medicare, the lowest quote was for almost $5000 a year, with Medicare picking up 80% of the tab and the supplemental insurer only paying 20%. Logically, if they had to pay 100% of the costs after copays, they would be charging $20,000+ for the policy.

My private insurance is $12000 a year for a family of 4 on a

group policy that covers 5000 employees and their families.

It covered 100% of all expenses after copays for Rx.

Medicare paid $7200 / person last year to cover old and sick people. Private insurance paid $6800 / person to cover young healthy people. So little difference considering groups.

Please - spare me the clap trap about the big three being the only American built cars. Most of these cars are either assembled in Mexico or Canada, or are made with parts that have come from a foreign source. And the multi-national status of the big three makes me wonder what portion of each of them in actually owned by Americans, and how much is owned by foreign investors anyway.

What I want to know is if any of the other car companies, Toyota, Hyundai, Honda ... make a car that has more US made parts, and US labor in them, than the ones the big three are selling.

Please provide sources for your claims if you can.

I am seeking someone who can produce small scale runs of ice cream and package in 3 oz ice cream cups.

The run sizes would be 10 to 20 gallons. I have at least 10 runs to do. All will be different vanilla flavors for testing I am conducting.

The Mix used in all runs would have to be identical, and may need to be custom made for my needs.

The overrun in the ice cream must be identical from batch to batch, and will likely be in the 85 to 100% range.

Cups would be produced, packaged, hardend and stored for up to two weeks prior to shipping to a designated location.

If you have such capabilities, please contact me. Time frame for production is within three weeks of this posting.

thanks, Steve

I use a Swiss Ott Freezer in my business. The parts supplier I used to use has gone out of business. And the manufacturer has been purchased by an Italian Firm and no longer services the F3 model.

This machine is quite old, but it still works very well and I do not want to spend five to ten grand to replace it, just because a part is wearing out.

Does anyone out there know who may be servicing users of these ice cream machines?

Swiss Ott Freezer

CH-3360

Type F3

I need new dasher blades and scraper blades.

Please advise me on how good a surge protector is needed to adequately protect my new LCD TV.

I see units from $10 to $400 and with all kinds of ratings for protection.

The TV cost $1200 so I do not want to be cheap, but if the $400 unit offers no more protection than a $30 unit, why spend the extra money .

With the new bill coming through the Congress to allow a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, we will now hear the screams of those who oppose any sort on amnesty for those who broke our laws to get here. I have to admit that my first reaction is you should not be rewarded for breaking our laws.

However, how can you expect to make any 'reform' work if you can not get the illegal aliens to come forward and register so you know who and where they are? And what possible incentive could they have to come out of hiding if they have no chance of becoming legal?

My suggestion:

1) A 4 to 6 month period of amnesty where an illegal immigrant could come forward and register and receive a federal ID which would also be a work permit.

2) After that, instant deportation if caught without that ID in the US and a permanent ban on reentry.

3) A delayed but valid path to citizenship for all who follow our laws and pay their taxes.

4) Use their SS tax to buy them into Medicare system.