Page 273 of 418 FirstFirst ... 173223263271272273274275283323373 ... LastLast
Results 2,721 to 2,730 of 4172

Thread: The OT thread V1

  1. #2721
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    Lol, fix apparent problems (the chopping of paint) and then it makes it worse? you are never happy are you? The ULT i will give, but since i never owned or used one, i can not comment. My L10 in my classic (bought 97), had the L10 kit installed when they came out (2001-ish) and i have maybe changed the power tube oring in 20 years. Oh yeah, not reliable in the least. And i am sure I'm not the only one with that.
    where did i say it makes "it" worse?

    did i fucking stutter?
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  2. #2722
    Quote Originally Posted by Laku View Post
    You got it at least partially wrong. Spacers(carriers) don't adjust the distance to the bolt like they do in lvl-7 (unless you meant shims?). They adjust the o-ring fit in the bolt stem to achieve as little friction as possible without making it leak.


    Thanks Laku. Yeah, when i say adjust for the carriers, it is not the distance but the sealling face on of the powertube. But what i do know is, it can turn a potential blender into a kitten.

  3. #2723
    Insider Pump Scout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin Rapids, WI, USA
    Posts
    868
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    The original mags had a spring, and then a spacer kit also to tune powertube o-ring compression.

    Somewhere, I think I still have one of those kits, NIB. Maybe.

  4. #2724
    Hebrews 13:8 going_home's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by Pump Scout View Post
    Somewhere, I think I still have one of those kits, NIB. Maybe.
    New in crushed box ?
    endeavor to persevere.......

  5. #2725
    Insider Pump Scout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin Rapids, WI, USA
    Posts
    868
    Pretty much, assuming I'd be able to find it.

  6. #2726
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    actually no, the math has been done.

    if you lift the cap on SS, it is solvent forever.
    Have a link? I suspect there is a bit of funny math there. SS would be solvent if there was generous post baby boom procreation, but there wasn't, so...

    I'm fine with the concept of investing some of SST in higher performing securities, as long as it remains guaranteed to the principal (i.e. investment not at risk)
    With one of the links I posted above even Bonds (which are super low interest and which look to be lower risk than Pay-as-you-go) there is a higher return, especially for us Gen X group who are post Baby Boomer.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  7. #2727
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Figgen just looked it up myself.

    No. Just like I thought. It kicks the can further down the line, but forever is not true, even if you tax uncapped, and provide no more benefits.

    http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/ba839.pdf

    Scenario One: Eliminate the taxable earnings
    cap entirely, but do not provide benefit credits above
    the current-law taxable maximum. According to the
    Trustees:
    ■ Over one-half (56 percent) of the shortfall would be
    eliminated after 75 years. In the long-run (infinite
    horizon), the additional taxes would cover 89 percent
    of the shortfall.
    ■ Social Security would remain solvent through
    2082.

    Scenario Two: Eliminate the taxable earnings
    cap entirely and provide benefit credits above the
    current-law taxable maximum. As a result:
    ■ Almost one-half (49 percent) of the funding shortfall
    would be eliminated after 75 years. In the long run
    (infinite horizon), the additional taxes would cover
    81 percent of the shortfall.
    ■ Social Security would remain solvent through 2067.

    Scenario Three: Tax all wages above $250,000
    at the 12.4 percent rate, but do not provide benefit
    credits for the additional taxes paid. This scenario is
    similar to President Obama’s 2008 proposal. Earnings
    between $118,500 (the current-law taxable maximum)
    and $250,000 would not be taxed, but the payroll tax
    would apply to wages above $250,000. As a result:
    ■ More than half (56 percent) of the shortfall would
    be eliminated after 75 years. In the long run (infinite
    horizon), the additional taxes would cover 82 percent
    of the shortfall.
    ■ Social Security would remain solvent through 2072.
    Conclusion. Lifting the tax cap on earnings sounds
    like a simple fix for Social Security’s funding gap. The
    scenarios considered in the Trustees Report would extent
    the date of insolvency, but none would close the gap.
    If
    any were adopted, they could discourage work by the
    most productive workers, resulting in less payroll tax
    revenue than anticipated. Moreover, they would further
    weaken the link between earnings and benefits. Other
    solutions should be considered first.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  8. #2728
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    Have a link? I suspect there is a bit of funny math there. SS would be solvent if there was generous post baby boom procreation, but there wasn't, so...
    your not looking at this properly.

    the point of social security was simple: reduce or eliminate elderly poverty. and by any measure, it worked. it worked because its a progressive tax, it is redistribution of wealth, 100%. some folks might think this evil or wrong or bad to admit, but its again, a great idea. no sense having granny die in the street because she can't get a job working anymore to remain economically viable. and again, if you want to argue that granny should die in the street because she can't get a job because shes too old and sick ... we go back to that whole republicans are fucking terrible people issue again. so go ahead, confirm my worst fears. i already think most republican policies are about forcing economically viable people to no longer exist, confirm it.

    or you can agree that granny dying in the streets is a bad thing. your choice.


    now, you raise the cap, or eliminate the SS cap. yes, it becomes more progressive, but you've fundamentally changed the equation. you no longer need X workers to support Y retirees, because the rich can support many more workers, and keep the program solvent. is it redistribution of wealth? sure. but condemning it as a bad thing to save granny from dying in the streets means your fine with granny dying in the streets.

    and you'll say "gordon, why don't people just take responsibility for there own savings?"

    well, when your living pay check to pay check to keep the heat on, you try and save for retirement. its the same foolishness as the whole taxing the poor into being richer stupidity. when your just trying to keep clothes on your kids, you can't save for retirement, telling those folks they should is ... well, we go back the whole republicans are assholes thing.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 10-26-2017 at 09:49 AM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  9. #2729
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    In addition to the false dilemma, that was one of the most grammatically abysmal posts I've read lately.


  10. #2730
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    In addition to the false dilemma, that was one of the most grammatically abysmal posts I've read lately.

    if you arn't going to use redistribution of wealth, and personal savings is impossible ... how do you stop granny from dying in the streets?

    go.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •