SL-Mark:

The Col: Tomorrow is the BOC Rate Statement as well as the Overnight Rate.

And in the afternoon, we have Mr Bubbles himself talking in Fairfax.

SL-Mark: BOC? don't fear the reaper

The Col: where's my million?

SL-Mark: It was destroyed before he came into power.. lax regulations on the financial market are never good. The time of the handshake being a matter of honour in business is dying.

(V): Some might argue the destruction started in 1888, others might point to more recent times, e.g. 1913, 1953 or the 1980s.

For sure Obama did not create the mess, but he is the puppet that is overseeing the demise of the US.

Remember he did promise real change. That is why he was elected. All he gives is platitudes. An iron fist with a velvet glove.

Don't know what handshakes and honour has to do with it.

SL-Mark: Realistically thinking, do you really think multi billion dollar corporations are going to hand the keys to a private citizen who just happens to capture the imagination of slightly more than 50% of those who bother to vote?

I mean really, think about it

The Col: But that's part of my point. Of course they aren't. Presidents are selected not elected.
Obama has already committed high treason against his country and reneged on all his promises. But were we surprised? Of course not, he dances to the tune of the puppet masters.

SL-Mark: I know, my comments were rhetorical

Pennsylvania voters can't afford cap and trade legislation, says Sarah Palin. And that's why they need to send Republican John Raese to the Senate.

Except that John Raese is the Republican nominee in West Virginia.

Melusine: I heard on the news this morning where France is raising retirement age to 62 and the french people aren't very happy. 12 Months ago our Govt. raised our retirement age from 65 to 67....and hardly a word was said about it. In my opinion if a person is healthy and able to do his/her job 65 is too young to retire. The Govt. here also gives an incentive to people who wish to work beyond retirement age for 5 or more years a $30,000.00 (thirty thousand dollars) payout to do so.
Why would you want to retire.?

Bernice: Yes, here workers are on strike since 9 days, the situation is difficult, there are many manifestations, and workers have blocked refineries so it becomes difficult to get petrol for the car. It's also difficult to travel because actually very few trains.
French people don't want to work after 60 because they want to live as they want, to travel, to make things they don't have time to do when they work.
The problem is also that our president Sarkozy does as he was deaf and rejects all the negotiations, even for hard jobs as building jobs.

Mélusine: Do your people get Government pensions when you retire or do you have to fund your own retirement?

Bernice: The government pays a pension but it's not very simple because people also get a particular pension scheme according to the job they had before.

Mélusine: I see :) our pensions are all the same base rate, but then it depends on how much money/property you own. you are allowed to own about $300,000.00 worth of property/cash before you get penalized I think...

Mélusine: The base rate for a single person is just over $700.00 per fortnight, and for a couple it is about $1100.00

Bernice: The minimum we have is :
for 1 person : 708,96 €uros/month (973,98 $)
for 1 couple : 1157,47 €uros/month (1590,15 $)

Bernice: We have to contribute, to work, during minimum 40 years and it will be 41 years in 2012.
And for you, how many years ?

Mélusine: we dont have to contribute anything....we pay taxes on our money is all.

Bernice: Ah yes. So, you can retire when you want ?

Mélusine: no you retire when the Govt. thinks you should LOL....at the moment it is 65 for men and about 63 for women, but that will change in 2012 when they bring in the new ages.

Bernice: 65 it's very late.

See the news about strikes in France :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11580492

SL-Mark: In olde days... a mans word/handshake was his bond, it is still reflected in the likes of the stock exchanges floor trading.

'Madoff's' would be nigh on impossible.

As for Iron Fist.. Is that the government within government Clinton went on about? The protection of the almighty gOd of the material world called profit??

Mélusine: Been seeing it on the TV... Sarkozy should of known better then to cross the French people when it comes to discussions of national matters.

(V): Impossible to discuss with him : he sees nothing, he hears nothing. It's the reason why so many people are actually on strike.

Mélusine: He's not well thought of over here. Bit to much "Maggie Thatcher" in his style!!

(V): I still have faith in the hand shake / word is bond. However I do believe people are more mistrusting of others these days.

Iron fist / velvet glove (or silk glove) is an expression describing someone who is autocratic but who has a softer exterior. So I was referring to the person.
With Bush it was easy, just an iron fist, but you knew where you stood with him.
With a velvet glove, this is a very dangerous combination, does one thing, says another.

(V): The comparison is funny.

Artful Dodger: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AJbjLfOMMSQ/SgQ2571IHII/AAAAAAAADF4/RyFeqEFP5g8/s400/untitled.bmp

I love this one…
http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/pelosi-clown.jpg

Artful Dodger: Yes, the money has to come from somewhere, and lots of people are unwilling to pay for anything. Even the true cost of the wars started under the Bush administration was simply omitted from the budget, while taxes were cut for the richest Americans. Craziness.

Insurance rates have been rising well above the rate of inflation well before Obama took office. I work in HR and it's a pain in the ass to try to bring decent plans to our employees while trying not to raise their premiums too much, and not bankrupt the company with the extra burden. It's near impossible. What's good now is that people are able to get (and keep) coverage who in the past could not.

lizrising: It really isn't a good answer though when it is said "Insurance rates have been rising well above the rate of inflation well before Obama took office" . Well this is certainly true, all renewals since this horrible plan have come to be, have jumped higher than they EVER have. My policy at work was going up steadily each year, yes. 20% maybe? THIS year, it went up 89%!!! My employer could not justify this extra cost, and now I'm stuck with an absolutely HORRIBLE policy, and even THAT one is close to 50% higher than my old half way decent policy. Our insurance agent told us quite clearly that this was the insurance companies' efforts to be "prepared" for the changes.

SHe said we were lucky to be renewing Sept 1. She said the ones that were renewing in October were going to be even WORSE.

Artful Dodger: Only 50 states? But Obama during his campaign visited 57 states and said he still had one to go!

The figures which I haven't seen yet, am sure they are far worse when then the fudges of Birth/Death Adjustments & Seasonal Labour Adjustments are taken into account. Indeed the labour changes are statistically insignificant when compared to these adjustments.

Artful Dodger: At least some progress can be made in 10 days or so. I can't wait to be a part of voting as many libs out as possible. At least we can get a little "checks n balances" in place.

Vikings: I'll make sure not to ever go to Guam now that I know it might tip over and capsize.

SL-Mark: Unfortunately certain sides of the American politburo have to cater to their bosses that to do things straight in the USA seems to be such a comical circus.

... as they say quite often these days.. follow the cash.

Artful Dodger: I thought the problem in the USA was that 'adequate' coverage was either too much for certain people.. or that the schemes had through past increases been made out of reach by price hikes above inflation!!

... "AND he bought his huge yacht overseas depriving Americans of that job. And all to save himself money."

That's a free market option, part of capitalism. You might as well ban Chinese imports and cheap migrant labour. But would Americans be happy with the prices increases resulting from such?

Artful Dodger: In our brief national history we have shot four of our presidents, worried five of them to death, impeached one and hounded another out of office. And when all else fails, we hold an election and assassinate their character.

P. J. O'Rourke

Artful Dodger: Are you taking ownership of his quote? I'm not taking ownership of the one I posted

Artful Dodger: Well, are you using his words as an expression of your feelings? or just tossing his words out there to stand on their own

Artful Dodger: I imagine there would be less unemployment if we didn't keep extending benefits.

http://wikileaks.org/

this is big news here at the moment.

Why Does U.S. Health Care Cost So Much? (Part II: Indefensible Administrative Costs)

One thing Americans do buy with this extra spending is an administrative overhead load that is huge by international standards. The McKinsey Global Institute estimated that excess spending on “health administration and insurance” accounted for as much as 21 percent of the estimated total excess spending ($477 billion in 2003). Brought forward, that 21 percent of excess spending on administration would amount to about $120 billion in 2006 and about $150 billion in 2008. It would have been more than enough to finance universal health insurance this year.

The McKinsey team estimated that about 85 percent of this excess administrative overhead can be attributed to the highly complex private health insurance system in the United States. Product design, underwriting and marketing account for about two-thirds of that total. The remaining 15 percent was attributed to public payers that are not saddled with the high cost of product design, medical underwriting and marketing, and that therefore spend a far smaller fraction of their total spending on administration.

Two studies using more detailed bilateral comparisons of two countries illustrate even more sharply the magnitude of our administrative burden relative to that in other developed countries.

One of these is an earlier McKinsey study explaining the difference in 1990 health spending in West Germany and in the United States. The researchers found that in 1990 Americans received $390 per capita less in actual health care but spent $360 more per capita on administration.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/why-does-us-health-care-cost-so-much-part-ii-indefensible-administrative-costs/