marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Letter - Walla Walla School District wireless network complete

I'm not sure what you're getting at? You obviously don't like my opinions, and like you said I can't even spell. Why not just ignore my comments? Also, this string was basically over until you brought it up again.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Letter - Voting is a right and responsibility

Granted, with a Roth you may be able to not count withdraws as taxable imcome, but Roth IRAs are not "free" you still pay taxes upfront, and depending on the investment return over the lifetime of the account you could actually lose more money by paying the taxes upfront.

This is why I say retirement planning is as unique as a person's personality. That said, knowledge on the subject is extreemly important.

As time goes on the government will need to milk more and more money from the middle-class. One way to loot them is going to be through their retirement accounts since most middle-class people don't have a lot of financial assets outside of their retirement accounts.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Letter - Voting is a right and responsibility

Okay someone saves one million dollars and is 65. I yield to the fact someone may say to themselves "I'm going to live to be a hundred," and takes out $28,000 a year. But wonder they think maybe they'll only live to be 80 and they decide to take out $67,000 a year. They're screwed and won't get the exemption.

Then there's the issue of what you make with the $1,000,000 while you are retired? Wonder you are making a good return and you are actually adding to your next egg in retirement. So maybe you want to withdraw even more money. Screwed again.

And I realize making money with your money especially in a so-called risk free account is very hard with banks paying 0 interest. And I know you may make more money in stocks, but is it worth the risk?

Another issue: some savers/investors may want to pass money on to someone, but many people may also want to spend all their savings before they die. Die broke. For those people they need to understand that they can lose other "means tested" benefits if they draw out too much and may not be able to spend all their money before passing on.

And then there's the issue: someone may have additional pension money on top of Social Security, meaning the person may not be able to withdraw much from their personal savings depending on how much they will get from other sources of income.

Bottom line there are numerous individual possibilities, but the one sure thing is that saving extra money for retirement isn't a win, win situation like it was for the Greatest Generation who did not have to plan for so much "means testing" in retirement.

Granted, most baby boomers are not knowledgeable on what "means testing" even is, but I'm sure they will learn about it rapidly when they actually retire.

One final point. I already have heard someone get burned with Obamacare since it is a "means tested" program.

The first year the 56 year old retiree got cheap insurance. The retiree decided in 2014 that they wanted to go on a luxury cruise, they earned it, they made sacrifices when they were young, and took out an additional $30,000. Unfortunately, this year they have to pay an extra $800 a month for health insurance because their income was too high to get the lower cost insurance. And the withdraw they made that pushed them over the limit could just as easily been for an emergency, meaning they would not of even had a choice.

"Means testing" another government invention that screws responsible citizens.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Editorial: Plan to rebuild Memorial Pool is excellent

The editorial says, "Even with fees, the city government — taxpayers — will likely have to add $100,000 a year to subsidize the operation of the facility."

Then asks the question, "Isn’t that exactly why we have government?"

No that's not exactly why we have government. The government's job is not to provide luxuries. Government's job is to provide essential services that are not practical for the private sector to handle.

Readers can decide, is it the government's job to provide a luxury like a $5 million pool with additional costs of $100,000 per year?

The editorial goes on, "We need government to provide police and fire services, pick up trash and maintain public parks."

Two of the editorial's examples are lousy examples.

Yes, we need government to provide police and fire. But, to pick up trash and maintain public parks, you're kidding, right?

For the first two years in my new home a private company handled my garbage pickup. The city decided a couple of years ago they were going to start doing it, even though I was completely satisfied with the private company, I was forced to use the city's services. So no, I did not need the government to pick up my trash.

There are at least 20 private landscaping services in Walla Walla that could maintain our public parks and it wouldn't cost the taxpayers as much.

Again, readers can decide. The only people who can pick up the trash and maintain parks is the government? There's no private waste management in the area? There are no private landscapers in WW who could do the job and are willing to do the job at a reduced cost to taxpayers?

It won't be long before someone is going to claim that we need government to take care of business after going to the restroom.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Letter - Voting is a right and responsibility

You learn something new everyday. "The Walla Walla County Assessor’s Office advises that if you are receiving a Senior Citizen’s Real Estate Tax Exemption, the pool levy will not impact your taxes." So there's a senior citizens real estate tax exception? No doubt it's based on income.

Anyone who is young should take some advice from grown ups: Don't save anything for retirement, splurge, spend money while you're young, live it up.

Oh, but what about money for retirement?

Simple, live off the government. If you have no savings at retirement you will not have to pay property taxes, you'll get free health care with no premiums, food stamps, supplemental security income on top of Social Security. You won't have to worry about paying any new taxes for new bonds that the government comes up with. What a deal.

I'm not suggesting you will live like a king, but you may as well live it up while you are young, don't make any sacrifices, and the worst that can happen 50 years later is you get the government to pay all your bills.

The title of this editorial is "voting is a right and responsibility." This country doesn't have a clue anymore on what the word responsible means. This country continues to propagate punishing those who are responsible citizens and rewarding those who aren't.

For anyone out there who does live off the government, more and more people are getting on your bandwagon. If you want to keep getting all that free money, maybe you should vote no. You may have a vested interest in slowing government growth down so you can keep those free checks coming in longer. Do you really want to give up some of your free money to someone else in the future?


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Editorial: Obama’s plan for free college isn’t really free


Obama needs to produce good paying, full-time jobs with good benefits for his so-called free college plan. I'm simply saying what's a college education without a good job.

ColiChi, I stand corrected, now I see why you highly recommend a college education with regards to Obama's progressive education plan, I get it now➡️

Sorry about the delay, like you said I'm friend.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Editorial: Obama’s plan for free college isn’t really free


The main point with getting a college education is to get a good paying, full time job with good benefits. Right now there's not enough of those kinds of jobs to support the current college grads. There's a bottleneck already.


marketinsider 4 months, 1 week ago on Editorial: Obama’s plan for free college isn’t really free

I must challenge fatherof5's quote, "Obama has shrunk the deficit faster than any president since WWII," since it's such a joke.

From the U.S. Treasury's website. For fatherof5, that's the U.S.

To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives. Date Dollar Amount

09/30/2014 17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75

09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49

I'll do the math for you:

1/2009 when Obama took over the national debt was $10.6 trillion. By the end of the fiscal year 9/2009, Obama deficit $1.3 trillion.

Fiscal year 2010 Obama deficit $1.6 trillion.

Fiscal year 2011 Obama deficit $1.2 trillion.

Fiscal year 2012 Obama deficit $1.2 trillion.

Fiscal year 2013 Obama deficit just under $700 billion.

Fiscal year 2014 Obama deficit $1.1 trillion.

Deficit numbers reported by the media are regurgitated numbers from the CBO. The CBO excludes certain items called emergency funding as to intentionally make the deficit look smaller. However, the U.S. Treasury simply reports the total national debt. To find the true deficit you need to do a little math.

During the Obama administration, so far, Obama has borrowed $7 trillion. That's more than the first 42 presidents borrowed combined.

Yes, the accounting tricks may work for a few more years, but after that who knows? I'm glad I'm old. Once the young figure out what's been left them: huge debt and huge government obligations, no telling what they'll do?


marketinsider 4 months, 2 weeks ago on Letter - Walla Walla School District wireless network complete

I went back to the editorial, I wanted to make sure that the author really didn't give any credit to the taxpayers.

I found that to be true. However, I don't think it was an accident that he did say he appreciated "the vision and support of 21st century learning from the district’s administrative cabinet and School Board members."

Mr. Baker knows who butters his bread.

Unfortunately, the people paying for the upgrade is rapidly shrinking, which is my concern.

If government continues to grow, right now it's 40% of GDP and that's when the economy is growing, pretty soon government spending is going to be more than the private sector.

The government may want to consider that if pensions are going to be paid out for the next 30 years, government spending better slow down.

Furthermore, you only have to glance at the BLS data to know that young adult taxpayers are paying less and less because there are fewer and fewer good paying jobs. That means as everyday passes, the tax revenues will shrink, and they will fall off a cliff when the next recession hits.

School boards and city councils may be the most important thing to Mr. Baker now, but I'm betting that as time goes on he will learn that the taxpayers are much more of an issue.

Taxpayers are already being squeezed to death by government, there's not much more you can squeeze out of them as the bonds for schools and pools are getting harder and harder to pass even during so-called good economic times.

This editorial shows that government has no problem giving credit to school boards and city councils when they really should be giving credit to the ever shrinking pool of taxpayers.


marketinsider 4 months, 2 weeks ago on Letter - Walla Walla School District wireless network complete

That's how it works.

What I challenged in the editorial was the "good news" issue (this was brought up by fatherof5). Using Barracuda's example which was in the context of "happy" I would say the contractor was happy, and the person who paid the contractor was indifferent. Since the contractor made extra money off their bid, they are happy, since the person paying still had to pay $25 (as they should the bid was a contract), they are just indifferent, they may be happy if they are relieved that the job was done and done correctly. I also would say most likely, the contractor wouldn't tell anyone he made an extra 5.

Bottom line is the editorial wants to give extra credit for just doing the job correctly and on budget. For me that should be the standard. If money was saved and returned to taxpayers (if the contractor just kept the money that's fine, it was a contract) or if the job included some extra stuff free to taxpayers, or any other positive news, then yes that's something to be proud of and is newsworthy to the taxpayers.

Fatherof5 I believe he stated that he had no "sources" so he couldn't opine on the question does the government or private sector go over budget more often.

In my personal experiences I'm always hearing that some government job went over budget. But most private jobs I've done on either end, the job was done within budget at least as far as the transfer of money goes, the amout transferred was the agreed price (in WW 50 years ago all that was necessary was a handshake). Even when I mowed lawns, topped onions, or kept score at the Bowlaway, the transferred amount of money when the job was finished was the accepted bid amount. No over budget crap.

I believe the government consistently goes over budget because they are paying the extra money with someone else's money. I also believe when government just does their jobs they like extra credit.

And from the editorial I thought it was interesting that the person who payed for the work, made the wireless upgrade possible, the shrinking number of "net" taxpayers was not mentioned at all.