Cheap Cialis Blogger | Search results for "retirees"

April 21, 2006 Is Congress turning against seniors? The Alliance for Retired Americans thinks so. It says the current Congress has "proved to be yet another direct assault on the quality of life for retirees."

Tags: congress, seniors, turning, direct, assault

Ha! An index to measure the happiness for each Australian electorate. Apparently, the study concludes: Wide Bay, which takes in the coast of Hervey Bay and the World Heritage-listed Fraser Island, has topped Australia's 150 electorates on the basis of wellbeing and sense of community, according to the first electorate-based national index of wellbeing, compiled by Deakin University In standard of living, health, achievement in life, personal relationships, sense of safety, connection to the community and future security, the index found Wide Bay came out on top -- despite limping along at the bottom of other surveys that measure employment, income, education and economic strength. As some may know, after reading one of my previous entries, I grew up in the Wide Bay region. Mainly families and retirees, I reckon. I bet if I retired and moved to a sunny coastal town, I'd be damn happy too. Did they standardise this test with some sort of age distribution? Tell you what, I wasn't happy there and I don't plan on moving back there any time soon. Nor do any of my mates.

Tags: bay, wide, index, electorate, happiness

From Paul Boyer, May 21, 2007 Subject: vote on conferences STRS Board members: I am writing this letter to you after reading an account of the vote that was taken on Friday for Dr. Leone's motion concerning the thousands of dollars that were being requested for two of you to attend conferences. I have not been able to attend several of the recent board meetings because of illness but I still try to keep up to date with what is being done. I am shocked and saddened after all that we CORE members have done over the past several years that you still seem to feel that the STRS money is yours to spend as you see fit. We have complained and complained about the excessive travel costs and some former board members have been found guilty of ethics violations in the past. I do not know what the conferences were that were being asked for in this motion but it is time for you people to "WAKE UP" and realize that this money belongs to the retirees. ORC 3307.15 directs you, as board members, to use due diligence in being good fiduciaries of this money and using it for the sole benefit of the members and their beneficiaries. Need I copy that whole item into this letter? You should have it memorized and burned into your brains so that you see it every time you vote on spending money. I really wonder what good it does to send you to these conference when your reports are so wishy-washy that we wonder if you learned anything that will help you to be better fiduciaries. Please, "WAKE UP " and pay attention to the motions Dr. Leone makes to save our retirement. We will stand back of him 100%, all the way. Thank you for your attention. Paul L. Boyer Retired since 1985 Life OEA/OEA-R, NEA, ORTA, CORE Proud to be named

Tags: member, money, conference, board, motion

From George Doyle, May 23, 2007 Subject: Out of State Trips Constance: I have received numerous complaints from my members about authorizing out of state trips for STRS board members. It seems to me that if these board members feel it is so beneficial; perhaps they could pay for their own trips and if the board, after receiving documented reports from the meetings, determines that this was valuable to the whole board and the retirees, then reimburse them for their expenses. I feel that too many times conferences seem worthwhile on paper but when you actually get there very little information is of value to take home to the rest of the group. Please try to exercise better judgment in the future. We retirees have suffered enough at the hands of the Board. Please listen to Dr. Leone and John Lazarus when they speak. Unlike some, they are not just speaking to hear themselves speak. They are taking the action for the retirees that needs to be taken. I have become very disappointed with you because you promised me at the Spring Representative Assembly when you were running that you would do all in your power to protect our retirement. So far you have not lived up to one of your promises! I find that I can no longer have any faith in what you said and I will do my best to try to get someone else in there that will respect the position for which they were elected. George V. Doyle, President Allen County Retired Teachers Association OEA Life Member NEA Life Member ORTA Member CORE Life Member

Tags:

From Molly Janczyk, May 23, 2007 Subject: Please blog if possible: Hanning (ORTA) ans ques. on Sub. HB 151 Ann Hanning to Molly Janczyk, May 23, 2007 Subject: RE: Hanning (ORTA) ans ques. on Sub. HB 151 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 15:48:43 -0400 Molly, You are welcome. awh Subject: Hanning (ORTA) ans ques. on Sub. HB 151 Thank you, Ann. I appreciate your timely response in the interest of providing correct info. --- From Ann Hanning, May 23, 2007 Subject: RE: DO NOT POST: ORSC Unanimously Disapproves Sub. HB 151 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 15:17:38 -0400 Molly, Ideally, HB 151 (or Sub HB 151) would be defeated in committee. However, some proposed bills stick like tics. So you work with the sponsors & others. The bill sponsors are passionate freshmen legislators. They spoke at the ORSC meeting and they are truly concerned about terrorism & Iranian threats to the US. As you know, a Sub HB 151 was submitted earlier this week. There are some changes from the original bill. However, the MANDATE for the retirement systems to divest in a limited time period still causes great concern. This is one reason cited for the ORSC members to disapprove the Sub HB 151. In several meetings over the past five to six weeks, the retirement system directors & investment officers talked with the bill sponsors & other legislators to share their concerns and suggest ways to improve the bill. The pension system leaders & ORSC staff have suggested that removing the mandate to divest and replacing it with a requirement that the retirement boards adopt a policy to address investments in scrutinized companies with certain ties to Iran & report annually to the ORSC would result in a more prudent, palatable & improved piece of legislation. ORSC staff has proposed this suggestion as an amendment to the bill. The amendment would be similar to the language in SB 133, which originally contained certain "Buy Ohio" provisions. A complete analysis of the Sub HB 151 is on the ORSC web-site. Please check www.ORSC.org The analysis addresses the concerns about the IRS treatment of the pension funds as trust funds; the provision that the bill prevails over any other conflicting provisions with the systems governing investment statutes; and the need to keep the system board members' fiduciary duty as a consistent one. Glenn Kacic does a great job with the analysis. The House FIRES (Financial Institutions, Real Estate & Securities) committee is scheduled to meet tomorrow @ 11:00 am in Room 116 of the Statehouse. The Sub HB 151 is on the agenda. An amendment as noted above may be introduced. Ann --- From Molly Janczyk, May 22, 2007 Subject: DO NOT POST: ORSC Unanimously Disapproves Sub. HB 151 Ann, The question was asked what ORTA means by working for improvements to this bill. Can you explain what that means? We thought we just wanted it defeated. Thank you. Molly J. Subject: Fwd: ORSC Unanimously Disapproves Sub. HB 151 Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 13:44:47 EDT --- From: ORTA, May 22, 2007 Subject: ORSC Unanimously Disapproves Sub. HB 151 Headlines... ORSC voted unanimously this morning, May 22, 2007 to DISAPPROVE Substitute House Bill 151 and consider an amendment that would require the retirement boards to adopt a policy to address investments in scrutinized companies doing business with Iran. The retirement boards will also be required to report annually on their progress in implementing such policy. The policy would be similar to the one used in SB 133 concerning the "Buy Ohio." An analysis of the substitute bill will be posted as soon as possible. The FIRES committee will meet on Thursday, May 24 at 11:00 a.m. ORTA has been working tirelessly for improvements to this bill. Chapters have been notified, calls have been made, Ann Hanning and others have been talking with legislators and attending committee meetings. ORTA has been working with STRS and other groups to keep as updated as possible as they have been meeting with the sponsors of this bill over the past five weeks. ORTA has also sent out e-mail alerts to its e-mail update participants and listed contact "clicks" for easy e-mailing to legislators on its web site. Rep. Schneider and Rep. Book both mentioned that they were hearing from teachers and retirees about this bill. Rep. Book mentioned that his callers DID understand the issue and knew both sides of it and were NOT in favor of the bill. Sponsors Rep. Jones and Rep. Mandel both spoke at the ORSC meeting this morning. Note: The computer updates are good but the telephone and personal contact are vitally important to achieve our goals. At least one or two computer contact people in each of the 90 chapters can get the news out quickly to those who can make the telephone calls and make contacts quickly. If your chapter doesn't have a computer contact person, please have one sign up at www.orta.org so that we can better serve you.

Tags: hb, bill, orta, orsc, subject

How did our Congressman in northern Indiana vote when they had a chance to help workers? Pete Viscosky voted to increase the minimum wage. Joe Donnelly voted to increase the minimum wage. Mark Souder voted against workers. Steve Buyer didn't vote. How did our congressman in northern Indiana vote when they had a chance to help retirees? Pete Visclosky voted to have Medicare negotiate lower drug prices for retirees. Joe Donnelly voted to have Medicare negotiate lower drug prices for retirees. Mark Souder voted against retirees. Steve Buyer didn't vote. hmmmmm.....I think I see a trend here. Which congressman in northern Indiana has signed on to the Employee Free Choice Act? Pete Visclosky is cosponsor to the Employee Free Choice Act. Joe Donnelly is cosponsor to the Employee Free Choice Act. Mark Souder...........nothing Steve Buyer.............nothing Workers and retirees, let us remember. Souder and Buyer are on their way out.

Tags: voted, retirees, vote, buyer, souder

From Rep. Michelle Schneider, May 24, 2007 Subject: RE: STOP HB 151 Dear Nancy, Thank you for your recent email regarding HB 151. I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns on this matter. I want you to know that I am working on this bill very closely with Representative Jones. I am opposed to funding terrorism and am working to make this bill better. Again, thank you for writing with regards to this matter as I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind. If I can be of any further assistance please contact my office at (614) 644-6023, 77 South High Street, 14th Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215 or district35@ohr.state.oh.us. Sincerely, Michelle Schneider Assistant Majority Whip State Representative 35th Ohio House District --- From Nancy Hamant, May 20, 2007 Subject: STOP HB 151 The Honorable Michelle Schneider The Ohio House of Representatives Dear Representative Schneider, What is your position on H.B. 151? As a retired member of STRS, I am extremely concerned that the passage of this bill would severely damage our pension system for reasons I will list below. Please do everything you can to keep this bill from passing. Over 100,000 of retirees will be badly impacted, financially, if it goes through. The unfunded liability of the STRS pension fund would be almost doubled. H.B. 151, though well-intended, would wreak havoc with the STRS pension fund and the lives of all retired Ohio teachers, especially our most elderly. Thank you, respectfully, Nancy B. Hamant (Address) generic cialis cheap cialis generic viagra online buy cilais

Tags: schneider, bill, representative, strong, hb

Hey NIPSCO! When people get their NIPSCO bill, you expect them to pay the damn thing or risk being shut off. Well, how about paying your own stinking bills. What's the matter with you? Your retirees have life insurance policys which were negotiated. Why put a widow through the hassle of waiting and waiting for you screw balls to pay up. Either pay the stinking insurance claims, or tell people your just not going to pay, so they can sue your butts. You got the most screwed up system I've ever heard of. You didn't used to have this problem, but now you have so much work outsourced to out of state and out of country companies that it's no wonder your employees and retirees are upset. Even your own management knows how screwed up you are. Generic Viagra cheap cialis cialis cheap viagra

Tags: pay, nipsco, bill, insurance, waiting

Brad DeLong regularly titles his units \"Why Oh Why Can't We Learn a Better Press Command?\", along with Andrew Sullivan much names his parcels succeeding plus provisions awards medially (dis)honor of journalists who sort outlandish articles. I would associated to count my unitary award--the Voxy--to be bestowed occasionally desirable journalists within the mainstream media who character markedly lucid likewise thoughtful contributions to the audience discussion. Foreknow defend to e-mail me with nominations. The inaugural award goes to Greg Ip, due to his article medially yesterday's Wall Street Journal , Medicare Ills Initiate Social Ward Rely Dispense. Render the whole thing. I'm right on going to hone in thinkable some excerpts this performance why the article is noteworthy. Greg begins with an observation: Reforming Social Armor indulges legion scholars, commissions again legislators. Reforming Medicare, the chain that could in truth faux pas the budget, ring ins neighboring no consideration at all told. He's right. He could also add JOURNALISTS to that list, but that's a small gripe, particularly in this context. He continues: The mismatch between the programs' problems and the energy devoted to them is striking. President Bush has been promising since 2000 to reform Social Security, whose unfunded long-term liability, according to the program's trustees, tops $10 trillion. Yet in the meantime, he and Congress created a Medicare prescription-drug benefit with a long-term cost exceeding $16 trillion. Yes, that's basically right, too. According to the 2004 Medicare Trustees Report (see Table II.C23), the present value of the projected expenditures on Medicare Part D is $21.9 trillion, or 2.4% of GDP. (I would have called this the long-term cost.) Beneficiariy premiums and state transfers are projected to offset $3.6 and $1.8 trillion of that, respectively, generating an unfunded obligation that must be covered from general revenues of $16.6 trillion (after rounding), or 1.8% of GDP. There are two caveats to comparing this $16.6 trillion directly with the $10.4 trillion in unfunded obligations for Social Security. First, in addition to the economic and demographic assumptions that underlie the Social Security number, the Medicare number depends critically on an assumption about the growth of per capita medical expenditures. The disparity could be higher or lower than $6.2 trillion even if the $10.4 trillion projection is completely accurate. Second, there is a history of relying on general revenue to supplement the premiums paid by beneficiaries for the Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) program, of which the new Part D is a now a component. Some general revenue financing appears to be part of the design. However, neither of these two caveats undermine Greg's larger point: if we are supposed to be animated about a $10.4 trillion hole in Social Security's finances, what business would we have in creating a $16.6 trillion hole in Medicare's finances? And for pointing out that inconsistency, Greg earns a Voxy. Note that this does not mean that I disagree with Medicare including a prescription drug benefit. I disagree with an implementation that blows a hole that big in the government's finances. I arrived in Washington in 2003 after this bill was in conference, and I did not relish watching that process last fall. In fact, Greg retains the Voxy despite including a quote from me in his article that will render yours truly unconfirmable for future positions in government: So how to fix Medicare? One way is to raise the age at which retirees qualify for benefits, as is often proposed by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and others for Social Security. "Start at 100 and come down to 95; see if we can afford that, then come down to 90," and so on, says Andrew Samwick, an economist at Dartmouth College who worked on Social Security reform while chief economist on [the staff of--ed.] President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers. "There is some age at which the system is in balance." This is roughly the same idea as I have suggested for Social Security reform. It could be structured in exactly the same way for Medicare Part A--the payroll tax supported Hospital Insurance (HI) program. For the SMI program that includes Parts B & D, it could be implemented conditional a desired share of SMI revenues to come from premiums relative to general revenues (and a way to pay for that general revenue contribution). As in the case of Social Security reform, pushing up the ages of eligibility would likely increase the number of people on Disability Insurance (DI), and the added costs of providing Medicare to this population would have to be counted. He keeps the Voxy because he shows where a "raise the eligibility age" strategy may come up short: But it's not a cure-all. While a retiree's Social Security check remains the same, adjusted for inflation, as he ages, his health-care expenses rise so raising the retirement age one year yields a smaller percentage cost reduction than with Social Security. And it's politically unpalatable. Greg's right again. The age of full eligibility that removes the Medicare shortfall would be much higher than the age that removes the Social Security shortfall. Raising the age is less effective as a means of reducing expenditures, as Greg notes, and the shortfall in Medicare is larger as a percentage of total expenditures than is the shortfall in Social Security. Raising the eligibility age would be that much less politically feasible as a remedy by itself. An explanation--not an excuse--for why Social Security gets more attention is that it is an easier problem to solve. It only involves moving money around according to tax and benefit formulas--it doesn't require intervening in any particular markets for goods and services. This doesn't mean that it has gotten no attention. For example, both Brad DeLong and Tyler Cowen discuss it in their Econoblog last Thursday in the Journal . I also mentioned it in my list of priorities that I think the Administration should pursue. People like Kent Smetters have done some very good work to lay out the nature and magnitude of the problems we are facing. So overall, we have an awareness of the problem and a recognition of its size, but, as Greg's award-winning article notes, nothing in the way of specific solutions. Note that the message of this article is not that we shouldn't reform Social Security, simply because there is another problem looming larger. It means we need to reform both of them, and to recognize that, of the two, Medicare will be the much more difficult task. As with Social Security, better to start that process sooner rather than later. Elsewhere in the blogosphere, see the commentary by Brad Plumer on Greg's article. Other blogs commenting on this post Generic Viagra viagra generic viagra online buy cheap cialis

Tags: social, security, medicare, trillion, greg

Here's a proposal that would allow the United States to solve its immigration crisis, control sky-high healthcare costs and rebuild ties with Latin America in one stroke: Make it easier for millions of Americans to retire in style and pay lower medical bills south of the border. Read more about the proposal in The Oppenheimer Report.

Tags: proposal, americans, retire, style, millions

Wisconsin is the worst declare medially the nation whereas retirees.Hat tip to Charlie. generic cialis cheap viagra buy cheap cialis Generic Viagra

Tags: cialis, generic, cheap, viagra, wisconsin

This is a followup to my post project stint among this web log almost always coal retirees getting threatened with losing their ensemble healthcare benefits if they didn't lucubrate separating a Medicare Exemplar D action done with December 31, 2005. Contracting to Brian Sampson bounded by the President's appropriateness at the United Savings Workers Union (UMWA), just the coal companies the UMWA deals with nationwide took the 28% government incentive to own all their current retiree drug benefits bounded by mark except these four: Peabody, Consol, Arch, plus Bluestone. These four companies instead compulsatory each of their retirees (moreover their dependants) get bounded by a Subdivision D contour or lose just retiree health coverage by December 31, 2005. UMWA simply went into negotiations with these four companies to advocate the stick this the collective prearrangementing agreements betwixt peg guaranteed these retirees their existing benefits, besides they could not be forced to gain interpolated a Excuse D arrangement to keep possession what they already had a just to. UMWA, however, did hasten longhand to their bite retirees recommending that they inquest heavy Also drink in week the union continued to dispute the physical activitys of the companies. Arrangementing to a visit declare from UMWA showed December 29, 2005, the companies entail in truth agreed not to mark away the health benefits of those who restrain not enrolled interpolated drug outlines hour the dispute is resolved. Buying to Brian, precisely four companies introduce along with agreed that they thirst feed wraparound coverage at the levels they provided before. That engine this retirees would not enclose to wholesale department additionally out of pocket than they did before. Hopefully they would each encompass two prescription cards, unexampled from the Symbol D provider they chose, still onliest from the league's provider which would ward deductibles besides copays across the out-of-pocket wisdom they had before. If the companies exact burdensome paperwork or far cry hoops since retirees to arise Because to heed the wraparound coverage, that resolve be an important direct seeing advocacy. Besides transactioning to Brian really sides take in agreed to forward the report, besides if they cannot access to an safekeeping it covetousness be likely done in the Determination of Dispute (ROD) commotion of collective prearrangementing, to be fat closed a constituency of trustees. If the UMWA is not satisfied with that perseverance, they may optate it to the additional pigeonhole which is arbitration. Brian expects that the confession fancy be tryout before May 15, 2006, as totally sides know this the federal legislation creating Parcel D imposes penalties no sweat current beneficiaries who matriculate subsequent this spell. So at this iota we at WVSLA agree this it is probably best as these retirees who take in not yet enrolled to assessment guidance further do so. Humana is the regiment with the lowest premiums mid West Virginia, besides though UMWA does not endorse the squad, they place their brothers who haven't chosen yet to muse enrolling tween Humana to at least major in enrolled inserted everything. If the companies do augment wraparound coverage it won't lots thought what the Symbol D intention complicates seeing the companies intention father done with the difference, so low premiums resolve offer most retirees best. Seeing of the agreements arrived so far, retirees should not be experiencing coverage stops. Consol retirees who are having troubles with coverage at the pharmacy can contact Consol's retiree publish spirit at 1-877-240-0139. Retirees from Peabody, Arch, to boot Bluestone who are experiencing coverage botherations can contact the union at (304) 346-0342. buy cilais Generic Viagra generic cialis cheap viagra

Tags: retiree, companies, umwa, coverage, brian