aka-mad4themouse
<font color="blue">Budget Board Co-Host</font>
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2004
- Messages
- 9,291
... Off-topic, but I hate that phrase: "on a fixed income". With a few exceptions (i.e., salespeople who work on commission), we're ALL on a fixed income. Some are fixed higher, some are fixed lower. My boss pays me the same thing every month -- most people's bosses do. But people use the phrase "on a fixed income" to mean on a LOW income. Rant over.
I apologize for offending you and others by using the words "fixed income." It was meant to imply those folks who have no POTENTIAL to make more money whether it be by getting an additional job, a different job, or even getting more education to earn more money. It was meant to imply folks for example like the elderly and/or the disabled that are OUT OF THE JOB MARKET. It was not meant to imply "low income." As far as I'm concerned, it could be fixed low or high or anywhere in between.
I was only going by the industry-standard definition of "fixed income" provided by Wikipedia. Wikipedia defines the words "fixed income" as - ... The term fixed income is also applied to a person's income that does not vary with each period. This can include income derived from fixed-income investments such as bonds and preferred stocks or pensions that guarantee a fixed income. When pensioners or retirees are dependent on their pension as their dominant source of income, the term "fixed income" can also carry the implication that they have relatively limited discretionary income or have little financial freedom to make large expenditures.
So, given that definition, I'd say over a period of years, a retirees income is "fixed"; his/her pension (if he/she gets one) is not going to increase! Whereas those not on what I'd call a fixed income do have the POTENTIAL for an increase - maybe not every year but over time.
I had no idea something that's used in the media day-in and day-out would be offensive to folks on a Disney board. Once again, I am so very sorry I set you off on a rant. Please accept my humblest apologies. I have certainly learned my lesson!
We have all the oil we need right under our feet but politicians prefer donations into their campaign accounts from lobbyist who don't want drilling rather than fix the problem.
I highly doubt the environmental lobby is more powerful than teh oil lobby. Otherwise we would have much better incentive programs for developing fuel efficient cars and alternative power sources like solar and wind.
Environmentalists (and their Democratic cohorts) have prevented off shore oil drilling for over twenty years. For them to beg the Saudis to increase drilling under the threat of lawsuits is asinine and then some!!!
To expect them to help us due to self-inflicted acts of stupidity which have only served to exacerbate problems within our faltering economy (with the domestic automakers among the biggest vctims) makes no sense.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress and the White House for several years and took no action either.
Our political class has chosen not to drill for oil in this country, where we have vast reserves, making us dependent on foreign oil.
I think thats a slight case of Bush-Derangement.
My dad is a Petroleum Engineer for the US government, and I know for a fact that we are drilling for oil in this country. I would rather pay more for gas today than have more of our environment destroyed so that we can drill for more oil...I agree that journalists sensationalize everything; who needs half a dozen 24 hour news channels anyway?
Due to the constant threats of lawsuits, etc from the fringe environmental groups, the GOP wasnt able to do anything.
If you truly think the problems we are experiencing now are soley due to 8 years of the GOP, then you are astonishingly misinformed. If thats what you believe, then why has the price/gallon of oil increased from around $58/barrel in January when the Democrats took over to near $128 today?
I think thats a slight case of Bush-Derangement. This has been in the making for the past 40 years.
Give me an example of where the environment has been "destroyed" by drilling.
If you truly think the problems we are experiencing now are soley due to 8 years of the GOP, then you are astonishingly misinformed. If thats what you believe, then why has the price/gallon of oil increased from around $58/barrel in January when the Democrats took over to near $128 today?
This point and this point alone needs to be broadcast 24 hours a day on all of the networks. This price increase did not happen by chance. With the rest of the world seeing the direction of our Presidential campaign, get ready to be fleeced on a lot of things in the future. They smell weakness because it's clear there is no will to defend ourselves if the GOP isn't there anymore. Sure they aren't perfect, but the alternative will be disaster.
Due to the constant threats of lawsuits, etc from the fringe environmental groups, the GOP wasnt able to do anything.
If you truly think the problems we are experiencing now are soley due to 8 years of the GOP, then you are astonishingly misinformed. If thats what you believe, then why has the price/gallon of oil increased from around $58/barrel in January when the Democrats took over to near $128 today?
I think thats a slight case of Bush-Derangement. This has been in the making for the past 40 years.
This point and this point alone needs to be broadcast 24 hours a day on all of the networks. This price increase did not happen by chance. With the rest of the world seeing the direction of our Presidential campaign, get ready to be fleeced on a lot of things in the future. They smell weakness because it's clear there is no will to defend ourselves if the GOP isn't there anymore.