" I wouldnt be a member of that gym for much longer (or, any gym, really). "
But then, someone could steal your fingerprint without the trouble of hacking some system simply by getting you to hold on to something, for example, a frosty beer or maybe even your gym card.
I am fearful regarding theft of my fingerprint or any other biometric information since I KNOW that eventually, someone will steal it from anyone who collects it from me. But then, someone could easily get my fingerprint by following me around for a little while and picking up my trash. Same with DNA for that matter.
"I beg to differ, while oil is still a significant power source, that outlet could still be powered by solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, or even nuclear power."
Sure, it COULD be, but in most cases isn't. In fact, there's a pretty solid percentage of North America that still runs on coal, while is not as bad as it used to be but still pretty dirty.
As far as nuclear power goes, I wonder what's better, relying on oil or nuclear power? My point was: The 100MPG they claimed did not take into account that they were using utility power which needs to be converted in some way and more likely than not is not solar or geothermal.
Don't be silly. Just because it's not using gas doesn't mean that it's not using oil, or some worse form of energy conversion (it's noookular). How do you think the electricity gets made when you plug it into the wall? Just because you can plug it in, doesn't mean it's better than burning gasoline.
"Only announce products when they are done and ready to ship and you avoid this sort of garbage. Everybody is speculating on just what the hold-up is. It could be that the phone is not ready or that the wireless carriers are trying to extract every last cent out of somebody else's (Apple and Motorola) hard earned work. But the point is that there is now a consumer expectation and they are complaining to Apple and Motorola saying "why can't you get your $#!t together and release the product?" when it may actually be the fault of Verizon, Cingular et. al. The problem of course is that on sales of the songs themselves, Apple's profit is next to nothing. So having other companies try and muscle in on very thin margins means 1) either somebody has to take it in the shorts or 2) we all lose. Of course if the record labels would allow more access to the music for Internet delivery, it would be treated as the commodity it really is and there would be more room for profits from higher volume, but that is another post."
But then you forget how the market reacts. You pre-announce a product, or an idea, and when it makes sense and gets buzz, your stock goes up. But when you announce you need more time, nothing bad happens. (or at least you don't lose your previous gains) So, when you need capital to do such a thing, you pre-announce. Nobody gets hurt...you'll get your iPod phone soon enough, if of course, you can spend the dollars.
While it sounds like a cool job...imagine trying to explain to your non-computer related friends and family what you do for a living. It's almost like working in one of those costumes at Disney_World...
"You see...I am an actor in an online game which was made from a movie...aw...forget it"
because MsSQL doesn't run in other operating systems than microsofts? because the other one is free and the other one isn't?
Dogshit doesn't cost one penny and is freely available but that doesn't mean you should be eating it.
Seriously though, I am all for free software but if you're going to switch to some OSS solution, you should at least pick the best tool for the job, and frankly, mySQL is not a good replacement for Microsoft SQL in an enterprise situation. Do people not know that PostgreSQL exists? Or maybe it's too hard to learn? I don't get it.
FROM THE ARTICLE: A manual migration from Microsoft SQL Server to a MySQL database running on Linux is an extremely tedious undertaking. Each step can require numerous man hours to complete. In addition, the possibility of error is high. Tread carefully.
Why are we doing this again? I am all for hating on MS but yo...Microsoft SQL to MySQL in an Enterprise??? Are you that bored? PostGreSQL would be hard enough...but at least you could keep some of the functionality. I though the purpose fully featured database servers was to keep the logic in the DB.
I have no doubt that there are false positives in DNA technology, that's not the issue. The issue is "How much of an intrusion on one's privacy is it to collect and store one's DNA for later use"
I say, not any worse than a mugshot or a fingerprint.
I view DNA as evidence just as I do finger prints. It's not a privacy deal when you leave DNA everywhere you go. No too different from a photograph...it's not as private as you may think...
You didn't read the article. It's actually more a law for Auctioneers and not buyers and sellers. In fact, I have read the law and don't see how it can apply at ALL to eBay users. I think the reason the quote was spoken was due to the law's author not knowing the impact of the law and fully understanding how eBay and eBayers do business.
Because if you use things like Magic Quotes, you should be, at least theoretically, immune to CSS/SQL injection attacks. That's part of the reason PHP exists--so you don't have to worry about that sort of thing.
I love PHP and all, in fact, I make a living with it, but it's statements like your's that make me nervous. Good code makes you immune to CSS/SQL injection. One should never rely on the language for that sort of thing. It\\\\\\'s not the the pain in the ass of striping slashes that one should concern one's self with.
Again, I love php and I make a living on it but make no mistake, it's popular because it provides a blindfold and that makes it work easy.
Personally I would rather see a Boo solution, it would more elegant than anything on the market, it it will never make it though for the same reasons PHP is so successful; which as nothing to do with being a really good product (like most success stories).
I guess that really depends on how you define a "good product"...or more to the point, from which perspective you define a good product.
I agree that the problem is not only uninformed parents, but parents that don't care AND those that don't realize what their kids are picking up on. I was watching 3 kids the other day, ages 4, 5, and third was about 7. All three were talking about how they love Halo 2 and they love going around and killing the other guys. That's not cool. Then later they were making guns out of tinkertoys and pretending to shoot each other no matter how hard I tried to get them to imagine building something else.
What makes it worse is that there are games that "Daddy plays it" but while they can't play it, they are still able to watch. Their dad's gives them high-fives when he does something good while playing Resident Evil 4. That's practically all the kids talked about, and there wasn't even a video game system in the room to get them to think about it. It's just on the forefront of their brains.
Kids soak up all sorts of information. Do we really want them to soak up blood, guts, gore, and killing?
What they desperately need are games that are rated E, but not only that they need to be GOOD games. Don't even bring in "pretty" killing without the gore. Don't enter that genre's mindset when making these games. It's not easy, I know. I don't think a lot of game companies are willing to go for that just yet when it doesn't mean immediate $$$ for them.
But to a point, it's not that these youngsters play Halo because it's a "good" game but more because of the hype and buzz around it. I mean, these kids got the game because of the buzz and hype.
It's the same with music and the banning that was going on back in the 80's. Kids don't listen to violent music because they like it as much as they listen to it because it's the cool thing to do. This is a principal that has been driving youngsters (and even old folks) for ever. Get the latest and greatest. It makes you cool.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I was under the impression that google ranks its search results based on popularity not $$. So Louie V can't buy their way to the top of the search results (Except for placed ads).
Under this impression I find it hard to believe that they could consider the results of a search to be considered part of their "product placement". That is like saying two billboards that are across the street from each other with competing brands is illegal.
Your not wrong, you just haven't read the article. The suit is for placed, bought, purchased ads. But based on the keywords...blah,blah,blah.
I'm not sure I do believe in the economy over time. This disbelief stems from a laundry list of troubles: our current, profligate deficit spending, our burgeoning population, the erosion of the middle class, continued environmental degradation, and the shortsighted under-funding of education. In the long run, I think that intelligent regulation and well-targeted social programs make for a healthier economy than the current mantras of "No taxation, withdraw regulation", and "Billions for defense, but not a penny for welfare leeches".
You have to understand though that "billions for defense" put the US in the powerful position that it now enjoys, which is one that you and I may argue about our (goverment managed) retirement fund. I will agree with you that today, Feb.2005, we are at war with a big budget problem. But as a whole, we've got it pretty good no? And if you look at the numbers over the past 100 years, you pretty much can't beat it. ( don't forget we funded the rebuilding of Europe after WW2, even after being the deciding force there )
My attitude is "Don't believe the hype" from either side. It is what it is. The reason I live here is that I belive in it. I believe the environment is good for what I want in life. I like capitalism because I think you should be able to work a little harder than your neighbor so you can have a little bit better life. That's me. If someone else doesn't believe that, great. I don't care. I'll vote and hopefully I'll get represented. This stuff always has a way of working out. In the end, I try and take care of myself as much as I can as far as the future is concerned.
You're just wrong. I can cash out my insurance policy tommorrow if I want, but more importantly, I can borrow against it today if I want. While I agree that yes, the insurance company is using my money for something else, the point remains...the money is mine. ( I should point out that I wrote the policy when I worked for Prudential,so I didn't fall into one of those fakes. ) OF COURSE the benefit amount depends on what I've paid in. There is no free money...anywhere.
Unless it's invested in your own business, you've already given up control to others. Heck, by using the government's fake dollar pyramid scheme- you've already given up control to others. Better have your money in something other than dollars, quick...
Mmmm...yeah. So maybe we shold all buy gold and silver and let it gain 2% per year. That sounds great.
The financial stability of our whole country is based on the financial stability of our whole country. Sounds crazy, and maybe it is, but yo...you have to believe in something. Who is to say that gold is going to mean a shit in twenty years. I mean...it's a piece of metal.
A note: By "control" I mean, let me decide what roulette table I place it on. I trust the ups and downs of the Stock market more than I trust the ups and downs of the government budget. I mean a couple of votes in florida can mean the difference between a couple billion in surplus and a couple trillion in the hole. The government budget is far less stable than the stock market has ever been.
In the end, you either trust the US economy or you don't.
No, that's not true- under the current plan, yes, you have the choice whether to particpate or not- but if you're under 55 you will have 3% reduced benefits REGARDLESS of if you participate or not if this is enacted. That 3% will be EITHER taken out of your profits if you choose to participate, or out of your benefits if you don't. And it will go to pay the brokerage fees to set this all up.
I would rather take my chances with making > SS even with the 3% bump. (in fact, I already am) Another thing, if you take everything you pay into SS, or have in your life (take a look at your SS statement every year), don't you think that you can do WAY better??? (even through the last tough year)
Are you saying that you are totally satisfied with SS the way it is???
Has anyone set up a Linux/Windows or other system so that you don't have to use passwords (only as a last resort of the admin howerver) but rather had a usb thumbdrive (keychain drive, whatever) so that when you plugged it in, it automatically mounted & authenticated you with a private "sub-key" that was signed by your private key with an "unlock" flag from your gpg keyring?
Or something similar. I'm looking to get rid of passwords altogether on my systems with something that's tested to work.
Any ideas if something like this works at all or anything like it that might be of some use?
But what if you have to login from jail or some exotic island.
Frankly, I'm a moron. No, really. Look at my posting history.
I am a moron, and I am surrounded by morons. What's to stop me from making stupid investment decisions with the money now under my control? A lot of people, if given total discretion about how to invest, would make decisions that would leave them with less to live on than if they'd just left the money with the risk-averse folks over at the Social Security Trust.
So the question is, what do we do when I, in a fit of moronhood, screw up my investments to the point that I will end up getting less in SS benefits than I would have under the old plan? There are two options: First, you all can let me starve in the street. This is an undesirable outcome for me and for the people I intend to start mugging for liquor money. Second, you can subsidize my stupidity by guaranteeing that I'll draw at least X in returns from the money in my private account. This is also undesirable, since it allows me to gamble even more dangerously. If I win, I win big. If I lose, the government loses.
The plan being proposed--if I understand correctly--is to spend trillions of dollars every decade, funnel that money into the stock market, and pray that it keeps going up instead of crashing magnificently. If the gamble works (I doubt it will), we get to start reducing SS payouts sometime around 2050. Meanwhile, the folks on Wall Street get paid to manage all this new money, the current stockholders get rich as the flood of new money increases demand for stock, and the government (read: "you and me") gets saddled with $15 trillion in new debt over the next forty years.
The old system--where Social Security goes "broke" in 2042--looks downright idyllic by comparison.
I hear what you are saying and in a sense I agree with you. The thing is that the "personal accounts" plan will not replace your other social security benefits. You will have the choice to defer something like 35% of your payroll tax towards your personal account, and according to Bush, the government will take measures to insure that it will safe from stockbroker misuse and overcharging as well as reletively safe from a crash 10 minutes before you retire. I am not saying that he'll be able to do that but in theory...it sounds pretty good to me.
I guess it comes down to how much you believe in the US economy over time. The last 100 years have been pretty good, even when you figure in the depression.
In addition, Bush said he will make it moron proof to make sure you can't screw yourself. If that's true [insert Bush slander here], then it sounds good to me.
You can't live on SS as it stands now anyways, can you? My grandmother still has to work to supplement her SS so how good could it be?
Wrong. Social Secuirty is an INSURANCE COMPANY, not an INVESTMENT COMPANY.
Well guess what...it's the same thing in the context of which I spoke. My life insurance policy is INSURANCE too but it's still MY MONEY. And in case you didn't know...INSURANCE companies ARE investment companies. I can borrow against it and cash it out at will. I also have total control over it.
So again, my basic point is, I would like to retain control over as much of my money as possible. If you don't fine...don't use the "personal accounts" plan. Under Bush's plan for personal accounts as I understand it, it's going to be up to you in the end...
Slashdot Mirror
" I wouldnt be a member of that gym for much longer (or, any gym, really). "
But then, someone could steal your fingerprint without the trouble of hacking some system simply by getting you to hold on to something, for example, a frosty beer or maybe even your gym card.
I am fearful regarding theft of my fingerprint or any other biometric information since I KNOW that eventually, someone will steal it from anyone who collects it from me. But then, someone could easily get my fingerprint by following me around for a little while and picking up my trash. Same with DNA for that matter.
Hydroelectric for me, don't know about you.
The original black gold. Coal.
"I beg to differ, while oil is still a significant power source, that outlet could still be powered by solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, or even nuclear power."
Sure, it COULD be, but in most cases isn't. In fact, there's a pretty solid percentage of North America that still runs on coal, while is not as bad as it used to be but still pretty dirty.
As far as nuclear power goes, I wonder what's better, relying on oil or nuclear power? My point was: The 100MPG they claimed did not take into account that they were using utility power which needs to be converted in some way and more likely than not is not solar or geothermal.
Don't be silly. Just because it's not using gas doesn't mean that it's not using oil, or some worse form of energy conversion (it's noookular). How do you think the electricity gets made when you plug it into the wall? Just because you can plug it in, doesn't mean it's better than burning gasoline.
"Only announce products when they are done and ready to ship and you avoid this sort of garbage. Everybody is speculating on just what the hold-up is. It could be that the phone is not ready or that the wireless carriers are trying to extract every last cent out of somebody else's (Apple and Motorola) hard earned work. But the point is that there is now a consumer expectation and they are complaining to Apple and Motorola saying "why can't you get your $#!t together and release the product?" when it may actually be the fault of Verizon, Cingular et. al. The problem of course is that on sales of the songs themselves, Apple's profit is next to nothing. So having other companies try and muscle in on very thin margins means 1) either somebody has to take it in the shorts or 2) we all lose. Of course if the record labels would allow more access to the music for Internet delivery, it would be treated as the commodity it really is and there would be more room for profits from higher volume, but that is another post."
But then you forget how the market reacts. You pre-announce a product, or an idea, and when it makes sense and gets buzz, your stock goes up. But when you announce you need more time, nothing bad happens. (or at least you don't lose your previous gains) So, when you need capital to do such a thing, you pre-announce. Nobody gets hurt...you'll get your iPod phone soon enough, if of course, you can spend the dollars.
While it sounds like a cool job...imagine trying to explain to your non-computer related friends and family what you do for a living. It's almost like working in one of those costumes at Disney_World...
"You see...I am an actor in an online game which was made from a movie...aw...forget it"
I always considered it a top-down kinda thing.
because MsSQL doesn't run in other operating systems than microsofts? because the other one is free and the other one isn't?
Dogshit doesn't cost one penny and is freely available but that doesn't mean you should be eating it.
Seriously though, I am all for free software but if you're going to switch to some OSS solution, you should at least pick the best tool for the job, and frankly, mySQL is not a good replacement for Microsoft SQL in an enterprise situation. Do people not know that PostgreSQL exists? Or maybe it's too hard to learn? I don't get it.
FROM THE ARTICLE:
A manual migration from Microsoft SQL Server to a MySQL database running on Linux is an extremely tedious undertaking. Each step can require numerous man hours to complete. In addition, the possibility of error is high. Tread carefully.
Why are we doing this again? I am all for hating on MS but yo...Microsoft SQL to MySQL in an Enterprise??? Are you that bored? PostGreSQL would be hard enough...but at least you could keep some of the functionality. I though the purpose fully featured database servers was to keep the logic in the DB.
I have no doubt that there are false positives in DNA technology, that's not the issue. The issue is "How much of an intrusion on one's privacy is it to collect and store one's DNA for later use"
I say, not any worse than a mugshot or a fingerprint.
I view DNA as evidence just as I do finger prints. It's not a privacy deal when you leave DNA everywhere you go. No too different from a photograph...it's not as private as you may think...
You didn't read the article. It's actually more a law for Auctioneers and not buyers and sellers. In fact, I have read the law and don't see how it can apply at ALL to eBay users. I think the reason the quote was spoken was due to the law's author not knowing the impact of the law and fully understanding how eBay and eBayers do business.
Because if you use things like Magic Quotes, you should be, at least theoretically, immune to CSS/SQL injection attacks. That's part of the reason PHP exists--so you don't have to worry about that sort of thing.
I love PHP and all, in fact, I make a living with it, but it's statements like your's that make me nervous. Good code makes you immune to CSS/SQL injection. One should never rely on the language for that sort of thing. It\\\\\\'s not the the pain in the ass of striping slashes that one should concern one's self with.
Again, I love php and I make a living on it but make no mistake, it's popular because it provides a blindfold and that makes it work easy.
Personally I would rather see a Boo solution, it would more elegant than anything on the market, it it will never make it though for the same reasons PHP is so successful; which as nothing to do with being a really good product (like most success stories).
I guess that really depends on how you define a "good product"...or more to the point, from which perspective you define a good product.
In addition, under federal law, federally licensed firearms dealers may not sell a handgun to anyone under 21 years of age.
I agree that the problem is not only uninformed parents, but parents that don't care AND those that don't realize what their kids are picking up on. I was watching 3 kids the other day, ages 4, 5, and third was about 7. All three were talking about how they love Halo 2 and they love going around and killing the other guys. That's not cool. Then later they were making guns out of tinkertoys and pretending to shoot each other no matter how hard I tried to get them to imagine building something else.
What makes it worse is that there are games that "Daddy plays it" but while they can't play it, they are still able to watch. Their dad's gives them high-fives when he does something good while playing Resident Evil 4. That's practically all the kids talked about, and there wasn't even a video game system in the room to get them to think about it. It's just on the forefront of their brains.
Kids soak up all sorts of information. Do we really want them to soak up blood, guts, gore, and killing?
What they desperately need are games that are rated E, but not only that they need to be GOOD games. Don't even bring in "pretty" killing without the gore. Don't enter that genre's mindset when making these games. It's not easy, I know. I don't think a lot of game companies are willing to go for that just yet when it doesn't mean immediate $$$ for them.
But to a point, it's not that these youngsters play Halo because it's a "good" game but more because of the hype and buzz around it. I mean, these kids got the game because of the buzz and hype.
It's the same with music and the banning that was going on back in the 80's. Kids don't listen to violent music because they like it as much as they listen to it because it's the cool thing to do. This is a principal that has been driving youngsters (and even old folks) for ever. Get the latest and greatest. It makes you cool.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I was under the impression that google ranks its search results based on popularity not $$. So Louie V can't buy their way to the top of the search results (Except for placed ads).
Under this impression I find it hard to believe that they could consider the results of a search to be considered part of their "product placement". That is like saying two billboards that are across the street from each other with competing brands is illegal.
Your not wrong, you just haven't read the article. The suit is for placed, bought, purchased ads. But based on the keywords...blah,blah,blah.
When in doubt...just read.
set up a secured server then friend. the desktop should not be used as a server. they are two mutually exclusive things.
So, you never need to access your desktop outside your home/office?
most users don't log in from elsewheres. at least, anyone that I know of doesn't *need* to. no one *needs* to.
Really? Really???
I couldn't live without logging in from "elsewheres" and I know lots of people in the same boat.
You never *think* you have to, until you do.
I'm not sure I do believe in the economy over time. This disbelief stems from a laundry list of troubles: our current, profligate deficit spending, our burgeoning population, the erosion of the middle class, continued environmental degradation, and the shortsighted under-funding of education. In the long run, I think that intelligent regulation and well-targeted social programs make for a healthier economy than the current mantras of "No taxation, withdraw regulation", and "Billions for defense, but not a penny for welfare leeches".
You have to understand though that "billions for defense" put the US in the powerful position that it now enjoys, which is one that you and I may argue about our (goverment managed) retirement fund. I will agree with you that today, Feb.2005, we are at war with a big budget problem. But as a whole, we've got it pretty good no? And if you look at the numbers over the past 100 years, you pretty much can't beat it. ( don't forget we funded the rebuilding of Europe after WW2, even after being the deciding force there )
My attitude is "Don't believe the hype" from either side. It is what it is. The reason I live here is that I belive in it. I believe the environment is good for what I want in life. I like capitalism because I think you should be able to work a little harder than your neighbor so you can have a little bit better life. That's me. If someone else doesn't believe that, great. I don't care. I'll vote and hopefully I'll get represented. This stuff always has a way of working out. In the end, I try and take care of myself as much as I can as far as the future is concerned.
You're just wrong. I can cash out my insurance policy tommorrow if I want, but more importantly, I can borrow against it today if I want. While I agree that yes, the insurance company is using my money for something else, the point remains...the money is mine. ( I should point out that I wrote the policy when I worked for Prudential,so I didn't fall into one of those fakes. ) OF COURSE the benefit amount depends on what I've paid in. There is no free money...anywhere.
Unless it's invested in your own business, you've already given up control to others. Heck, by using the government's fake dollar pyramid scheme- you've already given up control to others. Better have your money in something other than dollars, quick...
Mmmm...yeah. So maybe we shold all buy gold and silver and let it gain 2% per year. That sounds great.
The financial stability of our whole country is based on the financial stability of our whole country. Sounds crazy, and maybe it is, but yo...you have to believe in something. Who is to say that gold is going to mean a shit in twenty years. I mean...it's a piece of metal.
A note: By "control" I mean, let me decide what roulette table I place it on. I trust the ups and downs of the Stock market more than I trust the ups and downs of the government budget. I mean a couple of votes in florida can mean the difference between a couple billion in surplus and a couple trillion in the hole. The government budget is far less stable than the stock market has ever been.
In the end, you either trust the US economy or you don't.
No, that's not true- under the current plan, yes, you have the choice whether to particpate or not- but if you're under 55 you will have 3% reduced benefits REGARDLESS of if you participate or not if this is enacted. That 3% will be EITHER taken out of your profits if you choose to participate, or out of your benefits if you don't. And it will go to pay the brokerage fees to set this all up.
I would rather take my chances with making > SS even with the 3% bump. (in fact, I already am) Another thing, if you take everything you pay into SS, or have in your life (take a look at your SS statement every year), don't you think that you can do WAY better??? (even through the last tough year)
Are you saying that you are totally satisfied with SS the way it is???
Or, are you just a potshot guy?
Has anyone set up a Linux/Windows or other system so that you don't have to use passwords (only as a last resort of the admin howerver) but rather had a usb thumbdrive (keychain drive, whatever) so that when you plugged it in, it automatically mounted & authenticated you with a private "sub-key" that was signed by your private key with an "unlock" flag from your gpg keyring? Or something similar. I'm looking to get rid of passwords altogether on my systems with something that's tested to work. Any ideas if something like this works at all or anything like it that might be of some use?
But what if you have to login from jail or some exotic island.
Frankly, I'm a moron. No, really. Look at my posting history. I am a moron, and I am surrounded by morons. What's to stop me from making stupid investment decisions with the money now under my control? A lot of people, if given total discretion about how to invest, would make decisions that would leave them with less to live on than if they'd just left the money with the risk-averse folks over at the Social Security Trust. So the question is, what do we do when I, in a fit of moronhood, screw up my investments to the point that I will end up getting less in SS benefits than I would have under the old plan? There are two options: First, you all can let me starve in the street. This is an undesirable outcome for me and for the people I intend to start mugging for liquor money. Second, you can subsidize my stupidity by guaranteeing that I'll draw at least X in returns from the money in my private account. This is also undesirable, since it allows me to gamble even more dangerously. If I win, I win big. If I lose, the government loses. The plan being proposed--if I understand correctly--is to spend trillions of dollars every decade, funnel that money into the stock market, and pray that it keeps going up instead of crashing magnificently. If the gamble works (I doubt it will), we get to start reducing SS payouts sometime around 2050. Meanwhile, the folks on Wall Street get paid to manage all this new money, the current stockholders get rich as the flood of new money increases demand for stock, and the government (read: "you and me") gets saddled with $15 trillion in new debt over the next forty years. The old system--where Social Security goes "broke" in 2042--looks downright idyllic by comparison.
I hear what you are saying and in a sense I agree with you. The thing is that the "personal accounts" plan will not replace your other social security benefits. You will have the choice to defer something like 35% of your payroll tax towards your personal account, and according to Bush, the government will take measures to insure that it will safe from stockbroker misuse and overcharging as well as reletively safe from a crash 10 minutes before you retire. I am not saying that he'll be able to do that but in theory...it sounds pretty good to me.
I guess it comes down to how much you believe in the US economy over time. The last 100 years have been pretty good, even when you figure in the depression.
In addition, Bush said he will make it moron proof to make sure you can't screw yourself. If that's true [insert Bush slander here], then it sounds good to me.
You can't live on SS as it stands now anyways, can you? My grandmother still has to work to supplement her SS so how good could it be?
Wrong. Social Secuirty is an INSURANCE COMPANY, not an INVESTMENT COMPANY.
Well guess what...it's the same thing in the context of which I spoke. My life insurance policy is INSURANCE too but it's still MY MONEY. And in case you didn't know...INSURANCE companies ARE investment companies. I can borrow against it and cash it out at will. I also have total control over it.
So again, my basic point is, I would like to retain control over as much of my money as possible. If you don't fine...don't use the "personal accounts" plan. Under Bush's plan for personal accounts as I understand it, it's going to be up to you in the end...