Calling Card Online

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/cpiw.html

Click to see the Bureau of Labor Statistics Data.  They have eliminated food and gasoline from the index to keep it down, but at this moment, the base number from OCT 2008 is 212.182.

The next increase, effective Jan 1, 2012, is ( 220.024/212.182 ) =  3.695% if costs did not change from Mar to Oct.

The index  has been popping, no matter how the BLS tries to rig the calculation.  Given that the index continues to grow as it has in 2011, the likely figures are:

Jan  216.400  Actual

Feb  217.535  Actual

Mar  220.024  Actual

Apr  222…

May  224…

Jun  226…

Jul   228…

Aug  230…

Sep  232…

Oct  234.000

The SSI adjustment would then be (234.00 / 212.182 ) =  10.282 % on Jan 1, 2012.

Does anyone think that Congress will decide to cut that in half, as part of the shared sacrifice?  This is the return of self-paid funds, without interest, after tax, that are again taxed at 80% of the amount paid out.

The Obama administration and some members of Congress are calling for online privacy protections, including a “do not track” mechanism that would allow consumers to block any efforts to have their online activity tracked, …

Here is the original post:
Enterprise Security Today | Congress Weighs Online Privacy Rules

But, the strong comments from Redding came in the same week that both the White House and Congress made their most bold comments yet calling for tougher online privacy regulations in the United States.

View post:
Will Europe's Online Privacy Laws Jump the Pond to the U.S.?

White House Calling on Congress to Pass Online Privacy Law The Obama administration came out today in favor of a consumer privacy bill of rights that will.

Read the original:
White House Calling on Congress to Pass Online Privacy Law …

“He is calling me bloody Indian…. In India I am being called a bloody Indian… this has happened for the first time,” Ramdev said pointing to Congress’ Ninong Ering, who was standing near the dais where the yoga guru was sitting during …

Read more from the original source: 
Congress MP denies calling Ramdev 'Bloody Indian' | Zakhas News …

Ethanol in gasoline is one of the biggest boondoggles of our time.  It wastes farm resources for food and actually DECREASES fuel efficiency.  We had one gas station left with regular gas…no ethanol and a tank of that took us twice as far as the ethanol stuff.  It’s a failure on many levels and should be discontinued immediately.  The time is NOW for farmers to grow food for humans and animal resources and get out of the fuel business.  This will support our ailing economy and would be an immediate first step that this Congress/Administration could do ASAP!

Senate panel to put ethanol under the microscope

The Hill – The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s agenda this year includes new scrutiny of ethanol.

A spokesperson for committee Democrats said a hearing is in the offing but hasn’t been scheduled yet. Whenever it occurs, the session will highlight the ongoing Capitol Hill battle over the renewable fuel.

Ethanol is already under attack from interests ranging from environmentalists to food industry groups to oil refiners, as well as a left-right coalition of lawmakers seeking to strip tax subsidies. Opponents of expanded ethanol use include Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the Environment and Public Works Committee’s top Republican. 

Not until the Republican controlled Congress, in all their fiscal responsibility, stops the Government from wasting our tax dollars. As I write, The Republican controlled Congress is FORCING NASA to pay contractors 215 Million dollars in 2011 for a Rocket program that WAS SCRAPPED last year. 215 MILLION DOLLARS people, for parts that will NEVER BE USED. Sitting for decades collecting dust, just so some contractor can buy a new yacht (probably a contributor). Yes, very fiscally responsible all-right. It’s all over the news today, for anyone who wants to check it out. Cut vital services to millions of needy Americans, but don’t you dare take money from Corporate America. Fiscally responsible??? More like fiscally reprehensible. More Kool-aid all around. And as for a country of debt carriers in stead of aircraft carriers… Clinton borrowing money from China??? That one slipped by me. Obama borrowing from Saudi Arabia??? That one slipped by me too. Dubya??? That’s right… he’s the guy who took a 4 Billion dollar surplus and turned it into a 10 Trillion dollar deficit… by manufacturing a war and borrowing from China and Saudi Arabia, but I guess that slipped by all the neo-cons. Obama isn’t blaming Bush… THE COUNTRY is blaming Bush… QED

       Nothing will improve without job growth, to get job growth we need to raise our GDP, stop out-sourcing, and bring back made in the USA, Wall Street is in a bubble, and politicians need to stop using Wall Street and Banks as indicators of the economy. It’s just not real. Look, the banks are all better Wall Street is rising, yet people still have not regained the homes, jobs, or money they lost in the last 5-7 years. 

      Politicians keep saying, “We need to cut spending.” How about you stop bailing out every jerk off who bankrupts a Nationally Traded Company, then allow himself to give him a self a fat bonus for doing so. I keep screaming, where are the **bleep** lawyers. The young guns, who want to make a name and a reputation for themselves. Indict a couple of these Wall Street **bleep** clowns, on Fraud, racketeering, laundering, mis-leading the public, or any other statute you can find. File a couple class actions against those who negligently and erroneously gave loans to those whom they knew were ill-equipped to pay them back.

    Lobby your Congress person. Change the bankruptcy laws to pre-bush era rules. Let the Market experience true risk. I know we are hated world wide, but do we need to spend that much on “Defense.” Better safe then sorry, but talk about Mac Aurthors Military Industrial Complex. What is it… We spend like 80% on defense. How about taking 15% of that to R and D, to create the new thing that will get us off oil. Hell, put it under Defense, as they are most definitely related.

When will people make sense in Washington?

1-I would be very impressed with the congress if they were to vote no COLA for congress and the senate in any year when Soc Security recipient do not receive the same.

2-I would be more impressed if the COLA of congress and the senate were the same rate as that of Soc Sec recipients.

3-Yet another suggestion, let’s do away with the free college education extended to all of the children of congressmen and senators. This is done at the taxpayers expense and at the most expensive schools in the country. My children are graduating with mortgages in the form of student loans that were taken to get their education. Let the congressman’s children do the same and work it off in public service. 

I could find a lot of money if they let me into the government budget!!!!

Almost everyone knows that Social Security is broken, that it is not sustainable as it stands. It pays out more than it takes in, and the margins are growing.

The ‘fix’ is easy, but political suicide. It was broken on day one, but no one envisioned the demographic changes from then till now.

First, the breakdown of the system is due to the growth in life expectancy. In 1932, no one expected men to live until age 75, nor women till 85. Each about 10 years longer than in the 30′s.

Secondly, and this is both a social issue as well as economical, men continue to earn more than women, for the same job. A man will earn on average 27% more than a woman.

Thus, if we look at a ‘start’ age of 20, a man will work for approx 45 years and earn say $2.250,000 or say $50,000 on average for 45 years. A woman will only earn $1,642,500. Or a woman will only contributor 73%  of a man, yet out live him by 10 years.

Thus if we calculate their contributions at 7% (ignoring employers contribution for both) we see that a male contributes 7% of $2,250,000 or $157,500 while a woman contributes $114,940 by comparison.

Given that his contribution entitles him to a larger retirement check, say $1000 a month, she will likewise receive less, say $800.

However he will die at 75. Or after he receives  144 monthly checks, while she will receive 288 monthly checks.

His expected lifetime payout comes to $1000 X 12 X 10  or $120,000 while a woman will receive an expected $800 X 12 X 20 years or $192,000. A woman will receive  an estimated $72,000 more in cash benefits than a man, and yet contribute 27% less in a lifetime.

This does not factor in the cost of prescription drugs and other medical costs during those extra 10 years, which are the costliest 10 years.

Thus, Congress must first address the disparity in pay and insure women are paid the same as men, and

2. Recalculate the monthly retirement checks to reflect life expectancy.

That means, if women retire on average at 65 like men, their monthly checks must reflect a 20 year lifespan, and not a 10 year as men.

That’s political suicide, telling women that their monthly checks will be half that of their male counterparts, or they can’t retire until they are 75.

That is something no politician, Democrat or Republican, man or woman will discuss. But it will fix SS