oly wrote:
On Feb 6, 7:09 pm, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 6, 2:40 pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Bruce Remick wrote:
"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 6, 10:09 am, "Bruce Remick" wrote:
"oly" wrote in message
...
On Feb 5, 6:53 pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com
wrote:
Michael Benveniste wrote:
"stonej" wrote:
http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/...cle&ArticleId=...
Quoting from that article:
When all this is sorted out in the years ahead, will future
collectors say that we were falling down on our basic job as
collectors, which is to collect and to preserve all coin
issues?
I'm tentatively willing to accept those job requirements and
duties. Now let's discuss compensation. Who's paying me and
how much?
No one you say? Then I don't have a "basic job of collecting,"
so I can't be falling down on the job.
I think one would be very hard pressed to find collectors of the
past whose
primo motivation was to preserve coins so that you and I could
own them in
2009. In fact, it is because few actually did preserve coins that
makes collecting them such an adventure today. Sounds as if
somebody with nothing
to say had a deadline to meet and column inches to fill.
James- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It wasn't his prime motivation, but Virgil Brand apparently
preserved a great deal of material that was considered dross in
his day, but which is decent today (especially barrels of Civil
War tokens and Confederate notes).
oly
Or one might say he hoarded them so his contemporaries couldn't
enjoy them.
Like we're supposed to bite the bullet so our grandchildren will
have it easy.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You certainly have a bizarre point of view. If our financial system
holds together (a very very big if) your grandchildren will be
slaves to the bankers and Chinese bondholders, all so you can get
a cushy federal pension today.
-----------------
I'm expecting my grandchildren to be a lot smarter than me (one
already is) and will have technological resources that we haven't
imagined yet. For me to sacrifice so they can have nothing but
carefree times is not high on my priority list. I doubt my
grandchildren will be "slaves" to anyone or anything, unless they
feel they will have everything handed to them. I worked hard for my
"cushy federal pension" and I can laugh now at many of my private
sector friends who would let me know they were making more than me
but now find themselves looking for financial aid or advice, or a
job.
Someday we old flatulences will have to get together, pool our
resources, and see if we can find a bottle of cheap beer to share,
while away a lazy Saturday afternoon on a bench in the shade of a
public park, ogling the hotties, talking about the good old days,
and kvetching about the younger generation. Maybe Jud can join us?
I hear he can afford a bottle all to himself if he saves up for a
couple of weeks.
James the Impecunious Retiree- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Bruce has often enough displayed the "I've got mine, Jack" mentality
here on RCC. Mon vieux, I would hardly say the you subscribe to the
"sauve qui peut" and "let the devil take the hindmost" attitude that
Bruce often displays.
oly
__________________
Proud of it. I did get mine-- the old fashioned way. Proud of that,
too.
No more than I needed to get by comfortably, but I worked for it.
Made do with the bare minimum when I had to, and kept my affairs in
order so I never had to be a burden to anyone else. The opportunity
is still there for anyone who cares to go that route.
You're right. I don't share your exaggerated view that the economic
sky is falling, our children will be slaves to the Chinese, and it's
up to us to save them (the children) now or they will be doomed.
They will adapt to whatever they're faced with just like past
generations have done and any adversity will make them stronger in
the long run. And I'll gladly take that offer of a cheap beer with
Dr. J under that shade tree in the park, protected from any pieces
of sky. No French necessaire either.
Bruce
'ex-Junior Alliance Francais president, which never quite made it to
the subversive organizations list'- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Might I remind you that all the pensions related to the government
(including Social Security) are actuarially unsound, and that after
you have recieved the pension just a very few years, that you have
recieved MORE than your contributions and any earnings could have
possibly amounted to? At that point, your pension just becomes part
of the debt being left to future taxpayers and that indeed you are
adding to the burden of present and future generations.
Maybe you are just recieving what you were promised, but it was all a
lie from the get-go. Senior Welfare. If you don't see that, you are
intellectually dishonest.
Speaking again only for myself, yes, I was aware of all of this, and have,
in fact, now drawn out more than I put in.
But oly, you're blaming Bruce (and, by proxy, me, which is why I am jumping
in here) for being part of the problem. These pension plans were not our
idea. They were forced upon us by law. Your beef, then, is with the
government, not with Bruce or me. Write your Congressmen. Make sure you
pick Congressmen who are not in line for pensions or lifetime health
benefits themselves. Ditto for ex-Flatlander Governors.
The expression "Senior Welfare" is a thinly-veiled phrase of contempt. You
may be hale and hearty now, but what will be your station if that should
abruptly change? Is it time to decide that seniors are expendable? "Let
'em die, and if in agony and poverty, all the better" has already been used,
I believe back in the 30th century B.C.E. At least that's as far back as I
was able to trace it.
Dagnabbit, oly, you'd better be nice to us, because Bruce, Jud, and I were
thinking of inviting you to join us on that park bench. I'd even let you
use my binoculars (they're image-stabilizing, in case you shake a bit) from
time to time and share part of my liquid allotment.
James the Burden