Retirement Savings Discussed : Do It Now or Else

What the bottom line here is, although not stated as such, start saving now when your young or accept the consequences later. Believe Social Security is doomed. Take control of your own life now as you will find out later, no one else will or should they.

How to Not Outlive Your Money
Source: Sharon Epperson, "How to Not Outlive Your Money: Don't Wing It On Your 401(k)," CNBC, August 27,
September 4, 2013

Without a plan for retirement, many people say they just plan to "wing it." Surveys show many workers feel overwhelmed by day-to-day financial pressures, worried about paying monthly expenses and job security. While they may participate in their company's 401(k) plan or another workplace retirement plan, many workers don't know what to invest in or how much to save. As a result, they're not saving enough, says CNBC.

• A new analysis released by Fidelity found the average 401(k) balance was $80,600 at the end of June, up nearly 11 percent from the same quarter a year ago.
• For steady savers who were continuously employed in a workplace plan for the past decade, the average balance rose to $211,800, nearly 19 percent higher than a year ago.
• But for many, that's still not enough money to ensure a secure retirement. Not when, according to Fidelity, the average 65-year-old couple retiring today will spend about $220,000 on health care costs alone.

Figuring out how much money you may need in retirement income is an important factor in determining how much you need to save now. Assume you want to retire at age 67 and may live until your 93rd birthday. Fidelity took a look at how much 401(k) investors at various ages would need to save for every $1,000 they'll need to generate in retirement income to make their money last, assuming a 5.5 percent annual return and not taking taxes into account. Here's what the analysis showed:

• A 25 year old just starting to save would only need put away about $160 each month to generate $1,000 in monthly retirement income.
• Start saving at age 35 and you'll need to contribute almost $270 a month to generate the same income.
• For every $1,000 in monthly income, a 45 year old just beginning to save for retirement would have to put away nearly $500 every month.
• A 55 year old just starting to build a nest egg would have to make monthly contributions of $1,154 for every $1,000 in monthly retirement income -- that's double the amount of a 45 year old and more than seven times the sum that a 25 year old would need to stash away.

 

Wages Falling - Jobs Gone - Families Leery

Elections have consequences - one would have thought the voting public would have enough sense to see how their jobs are being effected by the socialist network now dealing out walking orders to everyone in business.

But apparently this isn't the case, a huge majority of the hard working  peoples that now still have a job are so intent on keeping it, given millions losing their jobs, they haven't taken the time to lift their collective heads to see this government is taking their job away with over regulation and an agenda of social diversity that makes the working class the 'enemy of the state'.

According to the progressive socialist liberal Democrats, it is the moral obligation of those that are capable of producing a product or service to make sure all those that can't perform similar tasks being compensated with some of the wages of those that are contributing to the betterment of society in general.
 
A great leader from history, from a far away place, used this phrase as his founding edict for control, said, " Each according to his ability and each according to his needs" Sound familiar? It should, that philosophy is used by the progressive socialist today as a means to an end. That is total control of life in America by an elite few, and I'm sure you have heard this as well, 'by any means necessary'.

I wonder how this came to be? Did the voting public understand what they were doing when they voted the second time for self destruction? Why is ignorance of the law no excuse in court, but when it comes to ignorance of our elected leaders true agenda, it seems to be acceptable. It's so much easier to accept a bad situation rather then deal with it now if isn't an immediate threat. Remember the frog in the pot of water with no flame under it, but when the flame was added - - - !

American Wages Remain Low
Source: Neil Shah, "Stagnant Wages Are Crimping Economic Growth," Wall Street Journal, August 25, 2013.
August 29, 2013

Americans are spending enough to keep the economy rolling, but don't expect them to splurge unless their paychecks start to grow. Four years into the economic recovery, U.S. workers' pay still isn't even keeping up with inflation. Labor Department data show the average hourly pay for a nongovernment, non-supervisory worker, adjusted for price increases, declined to $8.77 last month from $8.85 at the end of the recession in June 2009, says the Wall Street Journal.
Stagnant wages erode the spending power of consumers. That means it is harder for them to make purchases ranging from refrigerators to restaurant meals that account for most of the nation's economic growth.

Economists blame three factors:

• Economic growth remains sluggish, advancing at a seasonally adjusted annual pace of less than 2 percent for three straight quarters -- below the prerecession average of 3.5 percent. That effectively has put a lid on inflation, which has been near or below the 2 percent level the Federal Reserve considers healthy for the economy.
• Businesses are changing how they manage payrolls. Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco in a recent paper said that, in the past, companies cut wages when the economy struggled and raised them amid expansions. But in the past three recessions since 1986 (and especially the 2007-2009 downturn) companies minimized wage cuts and instead let workers go to keep remaining workers happy.
• Globalization continues to pressure wages. Thanks to new technologies, Americans are increasingly competing with workers worldwide. According to Boston Consulting Group, there will be only a roughly 10 percent cost difference between the United States and China in making products such as machinery, furniture and plastics by 2015.

Besides not feeling confident enough to demand higher wages, employees also are wary of going out and looking for better jobs. Only 1.6 percent of employed Americans quit their jobs in June, below the roughly 2 percent to 2.2 percent prerecession level. People tend to quit jobs more readily when they are confident they will find a new one that's equal or better.

 

EPA Regulations Renders Congress Toothless

That this administration is doing what ever it can through regulation, rather then by rule of law, says they are doing something that is harmful, criminal, and they don't want that it to become public information.

Given the Obama boot licking press will not say a word about the EPA driving new regulation on top of the old ones they just put into place a few years ago to crush the coal industry and now the gas industry due to the 'fracking' operations, it just makes very clear what the agenda of the progressive socialist is, make life as difficult as possible by limiting the options that are available to industry and the individual by forcing up the cost of energy that will effect all areas of life, the cost of food and gas, leaving only the all powerful government as the only remaining option for survival.

Innovation and success will be a thing of the past. Dependence and poverty the new norm. Welcome to the new progressive socialist liberal Democrat party agenda. Everyone will be so happy. In the next election cycle, vote for more Democrats, their for the people.

Obama Bypassing Congress on Environmental Regulations
Source: Julian Hattem and Ben Goad, "Obama Bypassing Congress on Climate," The Hill, August 26, 2013.
September 3, 2013

The success of President Obama's second-term climate agenda hinges on a set of regulations now in the works at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). His plan to combat global warming through new emissions standards and a shift toward increased renewable energy faces serious opposition from business groups and Congress is steeling for battle. But if the regulations survive the attacks -- and subsequent legal challenges -- they could amount to one of the president's most consequential initiatives, says The Hill.

The centerpiece of Obama's push is a set of regulations to limit greenhouse gas pollution from new and existing power plants, the source of about 40 percent of carbon emissions.

• Obama announced the steps in June, as part of a wide-ranging plan to counter the effects of global warming at a time when legislative efforts lack traction in Congress.
• Republicans and industry groups contend the rules will raise prices on home energy bills and at the gas pump, and warn the coal country could be put out of business.
• They're also upset that the administration is sidestepping Congress.

In September, the administration is expected to unveil a revised set of draft emissions standards for new power plants.

• The EPA is working on additional standards for existing plants, to be proposed next June and finalized the following year.
• That second round is likely to be more difficult. Energy companies are expected to be especially vocal about their opposition to the rule, and regulators at the EPA will have technical challenges in reducing emissions from plants now in operation.

Power companies and industry groups have flocked to the White House to meet with administration officials and try to influence the final language of the rule for new plants.

• The regulations for existing plants are certain to attract similar pressure. Opponents of the plan are hopeful that new EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy will be more receptive to concerns about the plan than her predecessor, Lisa Jackson.
• But supporters of the climate push say they're confident that the transition to McCarthy would not slow their momentum.

Federal rules, especially major ones, take years to finalize. Even if the rule for existing power plants is completed as expected, which is far from guaranteed, states will not need to submit their implementation plans until 2016. By then, Obama will be out of the White House.
 

Afghanistan Rich In Minerals : Let the Hate Begin

This is starting to sound a lot like Iraq where the progressive left socialists liberal Democrats were screaming that Bush attacked that country just for the oil. Just watch, it won't be long before the sign waving lunatics will be marching in the streets and hate filled speeches will denounce America entrance into Afghanistan as a prelude to stealing it's wealth for the 'fat cat Republicans'. That it's Mr Obama's war will be given a pass. He did his best to end it.

Bush, Cheney and Halliburton. It's only a matter of time.

Afghanistan: The Saudi Arabia of Lithium
Source: Alan W. Dowd, "Afghanistan's Rare Earth Element Bonanza," The American, August 13, 2013.
September 3, 2013

After more than a decade of war and nation building, members of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan are heading for the exits. Although what the ISAF will leave behind is better than what was there in 2001, Afghanistan remains a battered land. However, the resources Afghanistan's land holds (copper, cobalt, iron, barite, sulfur, lead, silver, zinc, niobium, and 1.4 million metric tons of rare earth elements) may be a silver lining, says Alan W. Dowd, a senior fellow with the Fraser Institute.

U.S. agencies estimate Afghanistan's mineral deposits to be worth upwards of $1 trillion. In fact, a classified Pentagon memo called Afghanistan the "Saudi Arabia of lithium." (Although lithium is technically not a rare earth element, it serves some of the same purposes.)

• Of course, the fact that Afghanistan is rich in minerals is not necessarily new information. The Soviets identified mineral deposits in Afghanistan during their decade-long occupation.
• What is new is the volume and precision of mineral-related information.
• Afghanistan has been mapped using what is known as "broad-scale hyper-spectral data" -- highly precise technologies deployed by aircraft that, in effect, allow U.S. military and geological experts to peer beneath Afghanistan's skin and paint a picture of its vast mineral wealth.
• According to Jim Bullion, who heads a Pentagon task force on postwar development, these maps reveal that Afghanistan could "become a world leader in the minerals sector."

There's another set of factors at work today that were not present during the Soviet period: rare earth elements are in high demand, the dependability of the rare earth elements supply chain is in question, and Afghanistan's mineral wealth may be able to help knit the country back together after decades of war. But simply having a rich mineral endowment doesn't mean that Afghanistan is poised to tap it quickly. Challenges abound.

• Afghanistan can be part of the long term solution to the rare earth elements supply problem. However, building a rare earth mining system from scratch in one of the world's most broken countries will not happen overnight.
• Corruption remains a challenge, stability and security exist only in pockets, and the ingredients that encourage foreign investment -- the rule of law, human capital and infrastructure -- are in short supply.
• For instance, political dysfunction is plaguing efforts to build rail lines considered crucial to transporting Afghanistan's mineral wealth.

 

Motivation Drives Students to Succeed No Matter Income Status

I believe no matter the income statues of a student, a high achieving student will do well, just from the statement alone, that they are high achieving means they will succeed no matter where they find education. Truly motivated individuals will succeed in where ever they set their hand to.

High-Achieving Low-Income Students Lack College Information
Source: Caroline Hoxby and Sarah Turner, "Expanding College Opportunities," Education Next, August 2013.
September 3, 2013

Ask any high school student in a well-heeled suburban community around the United States the best strategy for applying to college and chances are you'll hear something like this: apply to several schools, mostly with students whose grades and test scores are similar to your own. But be sure to include one or two "safeties" at which admission is all but guaranteed and a couple of "reaches." And data on the colleges to which high-achieving, high-income students apply and that they attend suggest that they are paying attention.

The situation for low-income students appears to be quite different, say Caroline Hoxby, professor of economics at Stanford University, and Sarah Turner, professor of economics and education at the University of Virginia.

The vast majority of even very high achieving students from low-income families do not apply to a single selective college or university. In other words, having worked hard in high school to prepare themselves well for college, they do not even apply to the colleges whose curriculum is most geared toward students with their level of preparation. This is particularly puzzling because there are good reasons why many of these students should attend more-selective colleges.

• First, they are likely to succeed if they do. The high-achieving, low-income students who do apply are admitted, enroll, progress and graduate at the same rates as high-income students with equivalent test scores and grades.
• Second, taking into account financial aid, low-income students generally face lower net costs at selective institutions than at the far less-selective institutions with fewer resources that most of them attend.

One potential explanation for this pattern of behavior is that high-achieving, low-income students do not have access to good information about college quality and costs.

• These students are dispersed throughout the country and are often the only high-achieving student or one of just a few such students in their school.
• Thus, their high school counselor is unlikely to have much expertise regarding selective colleges and likely to be focused on other issues. Nor are recruiting visits to their high school or community likely to be cost-effective for college admissions staff.
• Moreover, it is often the case that neither parents nor other trusted adults are able to fill the deficit in information about college quality and costs for high-achieving low-income students.
• In short, traditional information channels may bypass high-achieving, low-income students, even if a counselor conscientiously does everything that he or she can for these students.

 

CIA Applicants (1 in 5) Found to Be Terrorists

This is interesting in that one never thinks about how our enemies operate and what they do to further their agendas. If they do this to the CIA, why not the IRS, DOJ or even the HLS?

When one considers how our government is operating today, it seems that a lot of terrorists have already been hired and they are doing their worst to our country.

CIA finds 1 in 5 flagged job applicants come from Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda
(Washington Times)

An estimated one-fifth of a subset of all applicants for Central Intelligence Agency positions had significant ties to the terror groups Hamas, Hezbollah and al Qaeda, a newly released document from NSA leaker Edward Snowden’s collection revealed Monday.
The document — released by Mr. Snowden as part of his National Security Agency intelligence dump — said the terrorist groups worked hard to infiltrate America’s top security agencies. CIA officials uncovered thousands of applicants, roughly one in five of a subset, with “significant terrorist and/or hostile intelligence connections,” the document states, as Ynet News reported.

---

PHOTOS: Eye-popping excuses in American political scandals

---

The specifics of those ties were not revealed, but the groups most often cited as attempting to infiltrate the U.S. intelligence network were al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah.
The NSA, in response, launched investigations into 4,000 instances of suspected abnormal staff activity, Ynet News said. Those investigations included the tracking of employee keystrokes on agency computers and the recording of document downloads.
“Over the last several years, a small subset of CIA’s total job applicants were flagged due to various problems or issues,” one unnamed agency official said, as Ynet News reported. “During this period, one in five of that small subset was found to have significant connections to hostile intelligence services and-or terrorist groups.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/2/cia-finds-1-5-job-applicants-hail-hamas-hezbollah-/#ixzz2dq8lnhWP
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Mr Obama Ponders Questions and Answers : The Politcs of Spin

I wonder what he is thinking? I wonder if it has anything to do with Rush Limbaugh and FOX news? I wonder if it has anything to do with Republicans in Congress or the TEA party members that are standing up for the Constitution? Maybe it's the TEA party itself that he is thinking about.

 But maybe it's more basic than all those other things, maybe it's just the American people that he is considers his biggest problem. But in reality it can't be that as he has already turned so many into dependent drones with many more to come. Maybe he's thinking 'how do I extract myself from having to take responsibility for all of  the catastrophic problems that I have caused in this country and around the world?' How does he blame the problems on the Republicans? 'It really shouldn't be a problem with the press more then willing to lie for me, no matter how outrageously corrupt my action are. They're always ready to lick my boots just to get close to me. How cool is that?' It seems to be a puzzle just who Mr Obama is, what is his motivation and what more can he do to completely and "fundamentally" change this country into a socialist nightmare or worse to atone for the wrongs done to his father by the British aristocracy in Kenya? Remember his actions in returning the bust of Winston Churchill to the British embassy or sending tapes of his speeches to the queen on her birthday? Maybe it's just this country and how it was founded that brings out the worst in him. Maybe by destroying the country and then thinking he can rebuild it to be more in line with other socialist regimes where a few rule the many is his motivation.? That all of these states have failed is of no consequence. Maybe it's that destroying this country is harder then he thought it would be and rebuilding it in a way he had dreamed he could hasn't materialized and has him very frustrated?  'Why are the people opposed to my grand ideas for everyone to be more like everyone else? No more conflict between the haves and the have nots. Taking from the productive and giving to the unproductive -what's wrong with that?' Maybe he's thinking how he can make those individuals less willing to take a stand for their ideas? Maybe he can use the IRS, FBI, EPA, NSA, HHS and the DOJ to make their lives a little more complicated? But maybe I'm making this to complicated - maybe he's thinking why that drive from the tee on the 16th hole was headed perfectly and then hooked off to the right at the last second?  Questions - questions. Where are the answers?  

Palin Drubs Mr Obama on Syria - Again!

Sarah has a way of making a statement about a situation that you can believe is the truth. She is no 'come lately' person to politics and  our countries heritage. She's one of us. What she says comes from the heart.

Given what Mr Obama say mostly comes from Saul Alinsky's far left progressive socialists that hates this country as it was founded. It's little wonder Palin's has such a huge following and growing.

It's about who do you trust to do the right thing, not Mr Obama's politics of power and control.


WND News -
Sarah Palin Jumps Into Syria Dispute

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is condemning President Obama’s decision to wage war in Syria, despite White House claims of documented proof President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people.

      

Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate in 2008, unloads on Obama in a Facebook post titled: “Let Allah sort it out.”

“Bottom line is that this is about President Obama saving political face because of his ‘red line’ promise regarding chemical weapons,” Palin wrote.

Palin argues the U.S. has “no clear mission in Syria” and Obama has not yet laid out a persuasive case for American military intervention amid a “centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime.” “If our invasion of Iraq wasn’t enough of a deterrent to stop evil men from using chemical weapons on their own people, why do we think this will be?” asked Palin.

She blasts Obama’s plan to “punish evil acts in the form of a telegraphed air strike’ and says the president’s war plan “has given Assad enough of a heads-up that he’s reportedly already placing human shields at targeted sites.” Palin also questions what the ultimate American goal in Syria would be.
“So we’re bombing Syria because Syria is bombing Syria? And I’m the idiot?” Palin asked. “President Obama wants America involved in Syria’s civil war pitting the antagonistic Assad regime against equally antagonistic Al Qaeda affiliated rebels. But he’s not quite sure which side is doing what, what the ultimate end game is, or even whose side we should be on.”
Thousands of Palin’s Facebook followers weighed in on her comments. Among the responses:

• “Why does it look like Obama is always on the side of the radical Islamist?”

• “She lives in America, and she is free to speak, even if Ozombies don’t like it!”

• “Right on! The slaughter is horrific, but it is not our civil war.”

• “There is no one in the political arena that is as real and as dead on as Sarah Palin. I love Ted Cruz, but he can’t reach those that Sarah Palin can. She ‘IS’ America. I love this woman like I loved Reagan.”

Palin’s Facebook posts were published prior to Obama’s Rose Garden speech Saturday afternoon in which he announced he will wait for congressional authorization to punish Syria for a chemical-weapons attack, even though he has decided a military strike is needed.
“I’m confident we can hold the Assad regime accountable for their use of chemical weapons, deter this kind of behavior, and degrade their capacity to carry it out,” said Obama.
The president also announced U.S. military forces are positioned in the region to strike at his command.

Soon after the president made those remarks, House Republican leaders announced that they would take up Obama’s request after returning to Washington Sept. 9. Senate Democrats say they will begin to hold hearings and ask for more briefings from the administration this week, with an eye to holding a final vote sometime next week. That puts the House and Senate on the same timetable.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said prospects for approval in the Democrat-controlled Senate were good, but that there was a better-than-even chance the Republican-led House of Representatives would say no.
“I think all of the bad things you can imagine are all more likely if we get involved in the Syrian civil war,” Paul said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., said he doesn’t think Congress would approve such an authorization.
“I don’t think they will,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.” “It may sound real easy when people like Secretary Kerry say that it’s going to be quick and we’re going to go in and send a few cruise missiles, wash our hands and go home. It doesn’t work that way.”

After he concluded his remarks Saturday, Obama ignored a question from the press about whether he would move forward if Congress did not authorize a strike.

“As I said before,” Palin concluded, “if we are dangerously uncertain of the outcome and are led into war by a Commander-in-chief who can’t recognize that this conflict is pitting Islamic extremists against an authoritarian regime with both sides shouting ‘Allah Akbar’ at each other, then let Allah sort it out.”

Choice Is An Option? - Linus & Lucy

Here is another example of how the liberal mind works, or maybe doesn't function according to the laws of nature.

Liberalism Debated : Linus and Lucy

This is a good illustration of the liberal mind, and why one of the definition of liberalism, 'it's impossible to defend liberalism by relational debate.'

The liberal Democrat is genetically different then that of a normal person. There is nothing that can be said or presented as proof that they can accept that shows their agenda is wrong. Nothing. Ever.

There are exception, of course, but they are few and far between. Little wonder our country is being destroyed with the liberal Democrats in power.