Messages

The shooter used a handgun to kill himself, he used the .223 to kill the students.  He did have two handguns on him as well as the rifle and there was a 4th weapon found in the trunk of his car which was a shotgun.

Here is a transcript of the police chiefs' statement: http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/12/24/transcript-connecticut-state-police-briefing-on-the-sandy-hook-shooting-on-dec-16-2012/

As is always the case with these events the initial news reports made quite a few mistakes such as saying the bushmaster was found in the trunk or that he had 4 handguns; the statement from the police seems fairly clear unless new evidence has come to light that I've missed.

So just to stir up some stuff I feel like bringing up the executive salaries at Hostess during the period of time between bankruptcies.  I haven't looked into it much and am generally on the side that believes the unions screwed the company and the workers over but I don't think they were alone.

It seems the CEO tripled his pay and several of the executives received rather large pay increases as well and then they turn around and ask the bakers to take a pay cut.  The CEO that got the pay raise actually quit which kind of indicates he saw the writing on the wall and took what he could get while the getting was good.

The history of bankruptcies does indicate the company wasn't being run very well and giving pay raises to the people asking the rest to take pay cuts is a slap in the face many people wouldn't tolerate even if it only amounts to a small fraction of the total debt.

I never said the system needs to be perfect, I'm happy with it being better than social security.  However if you can't answer a few challenges to the idea it does demonstrate your lack of knowledge about the topic.  If you are basing your opinion on how well the personal accounts will work on an article from Investors Business Daily that is a pretty weak stance.

So if you really believe in the system then step up and answer some of the tough questions.  We are skeptics around here are we not?  Shouldn't we be equally skeptical about an idea we think is a good idea? 

In this podcast you said "... in the 1960's we had the cheapest most accessible health care system in the world, almost everyone was covered and those that weren't were covered by free clinics and charity hospitals that were everywhere"

Please source this information.... I'm having trouble with my google-fu

As long as you mention Martha Stewart I think it should be pointed out that she was not convicted for 'Insider Trading'.  She was convicted on four counts of 'Obstructing Justice'. 

So what this means is that if they hadn't come after her for some sort of law breaking then she would not have broken any laws since she was only convicted of lying to the investigators.

So they started their witch hunt and created the situation in which the law was broken thus they caught their witch.

Well somebody has to play devils advocate here.  I haven't seen any official numbers on the personal account system in Chile.  Just some sort of vague stories about how it's so much better.  One example of one guy getting $55k with a personal account while an equivalent person under social security gets $18k does not mean the system is better overall.  Don't we have anything better than the article in Investors Business Daily?  Where did they get the 9.1% return number from?  Is this before or after expenses?  If such a system were to be implemented in the United States what things would we have to be wary of?  Could our financial services industry deal with the sudden influx of half a trillion dollars?  How long would it be before they could hire enough new people to give personal service to every person in the country?  What about these accusations:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=227x61

To be clear I personally think it would be better than our current social security plan but I would not choose to fool myself into thinking it would be perfect, especially with our government still having so many strings attached.

One further thing, the 1 to 2% return from social security you mentioned in your podcast is after inflation.  Though it does not apply to new workers and often ends up being negative in those cases.

So I posted on the Ron Paul page that the Rand interview was on and I got this response:

This guy is clearly a loon and doesn't see the sheer hypocrisy that Rand showcased in this interview. This is almost as bad as Obama supporters claiming that if you don't like him, you automatically must be an evil heinous redneck Bush supporter.

Could you link to that?  Who was it that responded to you?

I still hold out hope for Rand Paul.  It's not like he is promoting any legislation that would allow the invasions of privacy he is talking about and I've always felt it is more important what a candidate does than what that candidate says.  To get elected you have to speak in a way that caters to the majority and being on fox news I sure he knew that he can't let it seem like he would let the terrorists have all the freedom that everybody else enjoys in our country.

I'll agree that he said some stupid things but as far as what the policies he is actually promoting (that I know of) I would still prefer him over virtually any other politician today.  But we still gotta keep an eye on these guys.

[one]

Not for nothin but your links on the anti-vaccination stuff were not very helpful.  Maybe it's just me but an article of one child dying just doesn't serve as any kind of evidence to me.  I'm sure there are stories out there where a child died because of a vaccination too.  What would be more helpful is something with the total numbers of deaths from both.  Show how as the vaccination rate decreases then the illness rate increases.  Things like 'there were 76 cases of measles in the UK in 2005 and 374 cases in 2010 which happens to be a period of time when their vaccination levels dropped to eighty percent instead of the recommended ninety five percent and they ended their fourteen year streak of no measles related deaths in 2006.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/4871728.stm
http://www.hpa.org.uk/hpr/news/

Also don't be so obviously one sided.  I think normally you are very good about talking about one side of the issue then the correct side but this week it seemed you understated the opposing side of the argument.