bills_fan

I agree. Any plan should require the homeowner to return any equity to the government above the refi amount + the homeowner's down payment (if any existed). I understand about the whole moral hazard thing but if we don't address the root of the problem, falling home values, we will continue to spiral further down. Moral hazard is a great concept...until you have to bite the bullet. Letting LEH fail showed the gov't won't bail everyone out....until LEH failing forced the gov't to bail everyone out, or lose the whole system. I think Hank wishes he had a mulligan on that one.

They had me at the first two, but the social conservatism is what will eventually destroy the party. The libertarian-wing doesn't want to hear about it and many blatantly disregard it. Give me small government, states rights, yes, national security (but intelligently, not buy every new shiny toy) and social liberalism....sign me up.

Really pleasantly suprised he acknowledged this question. I don't think too many Bills fans would not acknowledge that TD did lay the foundation for the current team. The guys still on the roster who were a product of the TD era are as follows: Kelsey/Schobel/Denney/Crowell/McGee/Evans/Peters/Lindell/Moorman/Parrish/Reed I think that it would be an inetresting conversation with Mort on this... TD's four main faults, IMHO, and the reason he was fired is as follows: 1- Inability to pick coaches. TD interviewed Jauron and Mularkey after GW was fired. RW was interested in Jauron, TD sold him on Meathead. This after the Greggo fiasco. TD should have gone with the experienced hand. 2- Going for the splashy move rather than the better choice. Se McGahee, Willis. Eric Steinbach was the pick there. 3- Negelecting the lines. After the MW bust (no fault there), the lines were neglected and our team was a paper tiger. Gotta build the lines, even if it does not generate much press. Letting Reuben Brown and Pat Williams go was inexcusable. 4- Control syndrome - TD was Captain Queeg at the end. Having critical (but not profane) signs yanked away from fans during games showed how far he had lost it. He also did not foster a cooperative atmosphere around OBD. I would characterize Mort's description of "rudderless" as unfair. The 98 and 99 Bills were very good teams. The 2000 team was 8-8, in cap hell, and we needed to rebuild. But the organization was a sound organization.

I agree with this completely. The GOP was always a tenuous coalition of neo-cons, social conservatives and libertarian fiscal conservatives. This coalition has broken down. The neo-cons ran the show, the social conservatives lost the fight they really wanted to win (US Supreme Court) and the libertarian fiscal conservatives have been abused due to spending and the erosion of personal liberties. What could bring it back? Not sure if it will ever come back, it was always an unholy alliance. Personally, I'd love to see a 3rd party made up of the libertarian fiscal conservatives and center-right Dems. Leave everyone else in the dust. Not sure that will happen though.

Dane Looker of the Rams may disagree with you after he met McKelvin. But I agree with your point, we need to get more aggressive.

Just being a fan and looking ahead a bit...if we finish the next two games at 6-3, that has the potential to be 10-3 very quickly. After we travel to NE, we host CLE, @KC, host SF and play the Fins in Tor (where I expect we will win). If we ended the year only winning 1 out of our last 3 games (@NYJ, @Den, NE), I could see the division being ours at 11-5. Thats the advantage of a 5-1 start, not doing all kind of crazy scenarios for us to get in every week.

We may be talking further.

Meaning a whole life policy, paying an annuity over time. That annuity is tax free?

Never thought of that, great idea. Unfortunately, I don't qualify for the Roth. The traditional IRA does not permit tax-free withdrawals right? Just tax free growth?

So how many people are showing up to your place as migrant fruit pickers? Went to a theme party last Saturday...theme was 1970s NYC - Come like you are going to Studio 54 in its heyday. Some very cool costumes.

You have two concepts here...the Estate Tax and capital gains tax. As to the capital gains tax. Warren Buffet derives ALL of his income from capital gains (which are taxed at 15%). His secretary pays taxes at oridinary income levels (anywhere from 30-36%). Now, of course, you need the capital to actually have enough money to live off the capital gains. For Buffet, not a problem. Most of the rest of us...not so easy. Finally, look a little deeper. In order to acquire enough money to live off capital gains, you first had to earn it (in most instances). Therefore, you already had to pay the ordinary income tax on that money. What was left, you invested, presumably wisely, and now pay an additional 15% on it (which Obama plans to make 20-25%).

I don't think the question ever was "Should Warren Buffet pay more taxes?" The question was in setting thresholds. Does $250k qualify as "rich?" Not in NYC it doesn't. It barely qualifies as upper middle class. But, in Bumblefukistan, USA, I'm sure $250k does make you very well off. Point was always that Obama's threshold was far too low for what he was saying. Not too many would have balked if Obama said he wanted to raise the top rate on thoise making $1 million or more a year. EVen in 2008, tehre aren't that many people making that. Setting it far lower, at $250k, is what the whole Joe the Plumber phemonanon is about...guy works hard, just gets a piece of living better and now this guy wants to Spread the wealth...that makes people angry. It has nothing to do wiith Aristocracy vs. Meritocracy. If it did, the level would be at $1 million or more.

Sure, don't doubt that. But he was implying the creditors (banks) rated the securities AAA, when, in fact, it was the agencies that did the rating. For a fee, of course. And never botehred to look at the underlying mortgages or even question them.

No, the ratings agencies gave them the rating. Loathsome entities that they are.

I do like the Plus One idea, take the top 4 teams, use the current major bowls and rotate. Yes, you will have arguments about who is in that top 4, but less than who is in the top 2. The system has worked ok the last couple of years, but remember undefeated Auburn a couple years back, or having to watch Oklahoma get pounded by USC when LSU-USC was the game everyone wanted to see? Plus One deals with that problem pretty nicely.

True, but I think that, given my age/horizon, I'd rather be in a fully funded 401(k) before a Roth right now and piggyback off any legislative, populist reforms the boomers may push through in the neext 15 years. You and I don't like being forced to take RMDs, neither will the boomers. And they ahve the legislative clout to push through politicians that protect their interests. Once the cash is gone, as in a Roth, you won't get it back. But if its still there, as in a 401(k), you may get to keep more of it. Of course, after a 401(k) is fully funded, a Roth is great idea.

Funny, you say that. About a decade ago, I was walking around Vegas with a buddy and we saw an older casino that was closed down (can't remeber which one) but still in seemingly decent shape. We both remarked that a great business idea would be a casino that catered to gays/lesbians...plenty of discretionary income.

This is a very good read on the history of this. Thanks.

Now is that even a challenge? Good for some easy laughs on a Monday morning, but c'mon, its barely sporting.

You know, I'd rather wait to pay the taxes. Given the boomer retirements and dependency on 401(k)s, I could see a populist movement over the next decade to reduce the rates you are taxed to capital gains rather than ordinary income. That has always been my contention why a 401(k) was a superior investment option to a Roth, and should be maxed before even considering a Roth.

I thought you were talking about the impending currency crisis in Europe...the bursting of the emerging credit market bubble (much bigger than US housing). The real other shoe... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment...s-meltdown.html

I like your ideas, but if anything, distribution age will be raised...keep people working longer. Lover the Children's Roth idea...how about a $5k limit?

Thanks beerball, I plan to do a little celebrating!

Thank you. You are right.

I'm speechless.....that is such an incredibly bad !@#$ing idea and they haven't even won yet? What a disaster this country will be in 4 years.