nateums

So, here's a more pointed suggestion:

Here are the numbers I suggested to Eric Cantor and http://majorityleader.gov/YouCut/:

President - currently makes: $400,000 pay cut: $90,000

Vice president - currently makes: $227,300 pay cut: $85,000

Speaker of the house - currently makes:$223,500 pay cut: $90,000

Senate Majority party leader - currently makes:$193,400 pay cut: $85,000

Senate Minority party leader - currently makes:$193,400 pay cut: $85,000

House majority party leader - currently makes:$193,400 pay cut: $85,000

House minority party leader - currently makes:$193,400 pay cut: $85,000 (collectively: $425,000)

(530) Rest of congress - currently makes: $174,000 (collectively: $92,220,000) pay cut: $80,000 (collectively: $42,400,000)

Chief justice - currently makes: $223,500 pay cut: $90,000 (collectively: $270,000)

(8) Associate justices - currently makes: $213,900 (collectively: $1,711,200) pay cut: $85,000 (collectively: $680,000)

currently makes: $95,779,100.00 after pay cut: $43,775,000.00

Save

$52,004,100.00 a year

$208,016,400.00 every 4 years

$416,032,800.00 every 8 years

And that's just in Washington.

Currently there are 2.65 million (average) federal workers making $81,258 (average) costing us roughly $215,333,700,000. Now, just a mind exercise that will never happen, but pretend for a moment that we brought public employees wages and benefits IN LINE with the national average of $50,000 like the rest of us (like in Wisconsin, Indiana and everyone else they are protesting this idea), you'd save $8,283,370,000.

What could we do with $8 Trillion dollars? How quick could we turn our slow death spiral around? You can argue about right and wrong, good and bad, what we should do and what we shouldn't, but it's all semantics. The numbers don't lie. Public employment is crushing us. And I didn't even include the military or pensions, which bumps our 'promised' costs into the $100s of Trillions. http://usdebtclock.org/

Agree or disagree?

Does anyone know if there is a lot of looting or anything happening in Kennesaw, Georgia right now? I know it's flooded and that's usually a prime time for crime rates to sky rocket and Kennesaw is right outside of Atlanta, but I haven't seen anything on increased crime. Has anyone else?

I came across this a few weeks ago and have been contemplating it. I've decided that I'm for this particular idea in the arena of health care reform, but in talking to people discovered like myself, no one had heard of it despite it hitting the floor in March. Thus, I'm here to toss the idea out for everyone to consider and talk pros and cons.

Comprehensive Health Care Reform Act of 2009 - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to:

(1) revise the tax credit for the health insurance costs of a taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, and dependents to increase the amount of, and expand eligibility criteria for, such credit;

(2) permit up to $500 of unused health benefits under a health flexible spending arrangement to be carried over to a succeeding plan year or paid directly to an employee as compensation;

(3) revise the tax deduction for payments to a health savings account to eliminate the requirement for coverage under a high deductible health plan; and

(4) repeal the 7.5% threshold limitation on the tax deduction of medical and dental expenses.

Good or bad?

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

i'm curious to see what kind of ideas people have on how to reverse this debt increasing trend. this is a non-partisan question, so please don't repeat political rhetoric you heard on the news from commentators or politicians. i can flip on the news if i want to hear those worn out party lines.

please refrain from criticizing anyone or any side if you would, i'm hoping to see constructive ideas, not petty name-calling and finger pointing. thanks ahead of time.

Vote in here. This is a poll not related to any major biased news network that I can find... made by the people for the people. Come in and vote.

http://js.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quiziframe.php?poll...

The back story is a simple one you all know, someone writes a question and then finds the answer they want to hear and selects it despite how many answers to the contrary and thumbs up there are. So, for everyone who answered, I figured I'd re-post the question and let people actually vote on the answer instead of douche-baggin it and pickin the answer I want to hear.

check this out and respond to the question how you'd like, I'll be letting it go to open voting:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ag.Uv...

if it works, then we can phase out atheists, arians and melba toast next.

let the thumbs down begin.

I've read the bible, and i've asked previously about jewish and muslim apocalypse scenarios on this page... read those, now i'm curious if there is a satanic end of the world envisioning.

This is not an attack... I'm not some christian trying to incite a debate. Nor am I an atheist trying to rally the troops. I don't normally hang out on the religious forums myself, but a few of my friends do. I was browsing their questions and answers and noticed that there are a lot of atheists answering questions... questions of faith. I don't see any problem with you browsing there, but I don't understand WHY you are there. If you don't believe in religion... then, why hang out and answers religious questions?

That seems almost counter productive... hanging out in a forum designed for something you don't believe in. If you don't believe in god or buddha or santa claus or superman or whatever, why do you waste your time being purposefully rude and indignant to people who've done nothing to you and have legitimate questions about their faith?

Unless that is the only reason you are there, to try and upset people and feel good about yourself. All it seems like it's done; from an outsider perspective, is create a sort of... YA war between the believers and non-believers... but to what end exactly? The pleasure of trying to hurt people? Why ask something as derogatory as what page of the bible would you wipe your *** with? Is that REALLY necessary?

Again, this isn't an attack, only an observation and a question. I truly, honestly do not understand what it is you get from sitting on YA answers being hateful and prejudice to people. You seem more like a hate group than reasonable, down to earth people. It doesn't bother you that you've reduced yourselves to status of black panthers or the kkk or nazi germany with hateful rhetoric? Don't get me wrong, we ALL know about the crusades and failings of christians. They've even admitted those.

I know this question will more than likely get deleted, because that's what normally happens with real, honest questions on YA with a group that doesn't want their stance questioned. The irony is that, the most vile questions asked by atheists remain up because while they disagree with you, the 'believer' types allow you to speak your mind without trying to clamp it. I know to me that looks like someone treating you fairly and not getting any respect in return... so maybe you can correct me with what is really happening if I'm missing something. Thank you in advance.

the idea 'violence never solves anything' came up in the office. i argue that violence actually solves everything. i'm a non-violent person, but it seems to me that violence solved every major world conflict from the Gulf War to WWII to the Punic Wars of the Rome and Carthage. I cited the example that in a trailer park in Arkansas, a couple could be arguing over whether or not to have lima beans for dinner. with a swift punch to the eye, the man settled the problem and they were not having lima beans.

is it right? no. does it creates more problems down the road? yes... rome eventually fell, europe eventually turned on america and after iraq terrorists and extremists eventually became a bigger problem than ever... eventually that woman getting beat will either kill that hillbilly or take him to court... but it did solve the problem at hand for the time being.

it seems to me that 'peaceful' resolutions just allow the dispute to continue indiscriminately and indefinitely in a quieter fashion.

do you agree or disagree? why?

I answered a question earlier; albeit naively, about Iowa gay marriage. I don't keep up with marriage, Iowa or gay issues... so I shouldn't have answered the question... I was mistaking the California Pro 8 ruling with Iowa.

I'm sure many people are like, 'how do you mix up cali and iowa?' They're both states that I don't live in, so I don't pay much attention to them.

I'm not a very big supporter of marriage of any kind because to me, I see the stats on divorce and it seems to me like it's just a waste of money. It also seems to me if you are lucky enough to be in love with someone, why do you need to have someone give you a piece of paper as proof of your love? There's only two reasons I can think of: you're religious or you want the tax benefits. If it's not those, then you're really just arguing about a word... which is silly.

Each religion has it's own interpretation of marriage and what it entails. Most don't include same-sex marriage. That sucks, but it's freedom of religion to practice as they see fit. If they choose not to support gay marriage, then the government has no place to try and force it to do otherwise.

The second reason is tax incentives. This is where the government's role comes in... in terms of taxation, representation, medical influence, the power over property... and I get that. And in that respect, I think any couple should have those kinds of rights.

It seems to me the logical solution is change the 'marriage' to something else. Civil Union? Then, the government can allow everyone the same equalities without crossing the line of religion and state. Including for Aethiests who; for whatever reason, want to get married despite not believing in religion.

So would you be for getting rid of the word marriage and leaving it as a religious only matter allowing the state to replace the license with something just as binding but under a different name, or against it? Why?

Japan, following WWII, has retained a strictly self-defense force... but in light of North Korea's increased belligerence and China's steady rise as a regional power, Japan is doing something that haven't since their days as an imperial might and started to strengthen their military.

Do you think this is a good or bad road to go down and why?

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm just curious is the Jewish religion has an 'apocalyptic' view in their religion anywhere like Christianity. A time of judgment or whatever else you want to call it. If so, can someone post a link so I can read through it... I'm doing some research for a book.

Thanks.

"Less than a month ago, this nation reminded the world that it possessed both the will and the weapons to meet any threat to the security of free men."

do you think he knew of the pending Zombie Apocalypse in 2012 when the Mayans return to the earth?

I'm just curious... it's like everyone is trying to come up with some sort of an excuse for a handout or some reason everyone owes them something. I've listened to conversation between people who've instructed others on how to apply for certain programs and balance them so they don't have to 'work' but can continue to just receive checks from the government... i've seen people in escalades with 22" spinner rims hope in in full gucci and fubu gear and go into the unemployment office... i've listened to my cop friends talk about how they had to chase down somebody for something and while they are at the station find out they are claiming disability...

Is it legal to push legislation forward to forces people that manipulate the welfare and disability system to pay back all the money they've basically stolen from legal tax paying citizens? Is there something like that already in place?

what's your opinion of the recent leaked torture video? i'm referring to the one that is suppose to be one of the borthers of the uae president. right now, a nuclear deal is sitting on obama's desk for signature, what is the correct next step; in your opinion, for the president?

please no name calling of the president, i'm asking what YOU think he should do in response to it.

or britney spears?

I'm of course, referring to asking a bunch of faceless people who you have no idea who they are, what their credentials and experiences are for answers and guidance.

i personally think britney spears. what say you?

For example, I'm on Sprint, reaching the end of my contract, looking at upgrading to a different phone... but I'd like to keep the Palm Centro for other things... like a hiking camera, an MP3 player, a blue tooth device with my car GPS (I have an external GPS keychain piece that works with my loaded software)... if it is no longer able to connect to the Sprint 3G network, will I be able to use the other features?

I ask because I didn't go to the anti-war protests but I'm going to the Tea Parties. I haven't seen anything negative so far or threatening at any of the Tea Parties I've been to... something I see accusations about in various places... but all I saw during the anti-war protests were these sorts of images: http://www.capveterans.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/mi...

It's a serious question, I'm curious to know why things like that are excusable but the Tea Parties are not. I know I have a bias towards the Tea Parties and anything can be twisted out of context by people who are too radical in one direction or the other, but I think I'm fairly level headed and straight forward. What am I missing? I genuinely want to know.

If you say something to the effect that it's just a few hateful people, please understand that's a door that swings both ways when you're saying it.