Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

I am taking several political science classes this semester for my minor, and one man happens to teach two of my classes. During the classes he likes to ignore essentially all that is in the book and talk about current events which he leads into the propagation of his beliefs, which seem very socialistic. While I normally am relatively quiet in classes, the things this guy says forces me to be active just to try to cut some of the bs out and at least show another view point. Also, one class is a constitution study class which all teachers need to take so he is in a sense influencing many future teachers. So onto his points.

He consistently refers to Enron and the sub prime housing collapse as failures of the "unregulated free market".

My full knowledge of the Enron fall is limited so I have not been able to challenge him on that point at all, but I was thinking this.... The accounting of public companies is regulated, if someone lies on the financial sheets they are breaking the law, thus it is not a failure of regulation, it is a crime. Much in the way that the murder of people is regulated by laws although some choose to break them? Is this a decent argument?

Then he speaks of the sub-prime lenders and how they screwed over people (he also mentioned how lenders would help people set up fake jobs to get approved for the loans). My retort to this argument is that the transaction was based on free will and that the people getting these loans should have looked into the details before getting loans they can not afford.


He also advocates the redistribution of wealth from the "capitalist who harnesses the labor of society for his gain" and wants an increase in taxes. He named off a bunch of people making 20 million+ a year and said they should be paying more, and cited that the 95,000$ ceiling on social security tax is not fair. He also advocates the creation universal health care, and criticized Bush's veto by comparing it to iraq war spending. He has also asserted that with the government managing social security there is a 1% cost of handling the money, yet if it was done privately there would be a 20-30% fee.

When he was going on his rant of the need for more programs I made the following statement, which is slightly paraphrased.

"The largest social program instituted by the gov was social security, which there are now giant predicted short falls in the future, and it is likely that everyone in this classroom will have no chance of seeing a dollar from social security, how can the government be trusted to make socialized health care viable"

I feel like he kind of dodged the answer as he said there was 5 trillion in IOUs in social security from the government because they had spent the money and then he made some comment about military spending.

I stated that that shows that we can not trust the government with holding our money in to which he went into an anecdotal story of an old friend of his who never wanted to pay social security tax, dodged it, and is now being supported by his wife who is 70 and still has to teach to support her husband. A total dodge of my question.

Like many advocating massive social programs he mentions the Scandinavian countries such as Norway and Sweden as essentially Utopian societies which we should model our social programs.

A lot from what I have read on these boards has led me to believe that it works there due to having a smaller homogenous population, but he was saying they have a large amount of immigration like the US. (Although I have heard it is very hard to immigrate there).

I'm kind of lost on an argument here other than our countries demographics makes it not viable?

I'm sorry if this post doesn't come across the best but I just can't handle this guy's massively socialist arguments be given a pulpit to speak to hundreds of students and no one at least trying to address the other side of his arguments. Any comments/criticism on the arguments I have used is appreciated and any firepower to send back my teachers way is greatly appreciated. I'd like to address his foreign policy views as well but I'll see how this goes at first. Thanks for any contributions.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

well, google Ward Churchill for starters. Professors do not have the right to just spout rhetoric and propaganda in the guise of fact, and you are well within your rights to report him to the university.

There is some student equal unbiased rights or something that came up a lot during the Ward Churchill debacle, that would be another good place to start.

However, your best bet is to fly under the radar in the class. Don't peg yourself out as a nonbeliever in class discussion, but rather an "admitted lehman" on his topics. Act like you are interested and consider his thinking valid. Write your papers toward his bias even if you don't believe it, and get a good grade while trying to get him removed.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

What is the other class he teaches? The OP has very little shot at getting the professor fired: if a professor is teaching a Poli Sci class, he may give his opinions on Poli Sci. Churchill was not fired for his radical views, but rather for plagiarism.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Ask him if he agrees with people who push their morality on others, because that's all he's doing.

He thinks it's immoral for someone with 20 million+ a year to try to make more, so he wants to stop them with the government.

Really no different from any other group trying to legislate morality.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

One reason I like Sean Hannity-

Get permission to tape the class, ask "questions" durijng class that lead him to spout his socialist drivel, mail into hannity and get national attention to the problem.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Refer to him as James Taggart when you speak to him.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

so let's get this straight, a guy who works for the government thinks government is the answer. why would you be surprised?

but I think he has a point about enron and deregulating the energy thingee.

as for social security, just run the numbers for ROI of your social security tax (include both parts, part you pay and part your employer pays), including inflation, and ask him what he thinks of the rate of return, especially given that if you die it can't be transferred.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Neither you nor the prof have a very solid understanding of Social Security. Search for threads on SS here where misunderstandings similar to yours are rebutted.

The most glaring error he makes is calling for lifting the income ceiling. Social Security already has significant wealth transfer aspects. The benefit formula is front-loaded in favor of lower wage earners compared to their contributions, but at least some recognition is given to higher contribution levels in the form of benefits, and the formula is capped at the same levels as the contributions are capped. To take the ceiling off taxes without simultaneously lifting the ceiling off the benefit formula is just another general tax in disguise.

Enron he is clearly off base on. If he truly believes the market is free and unregulated, he should have his tenure revoked, it isnt even close. Youre response at least digs at his foundations.

Likewise sub-prime. The market is far from unregulated, and the less regulation there is, the more likely deceitful practices would occur. The description of the situation as a "collapse" is a bit hyperbolic as well. Most of the echoes of sub-prime itself are already fading. The underlying weakness in the housing market is not due to sub-prime, its just part of the cycle housing has always experienced.

His numbers of 1% vs 20-30% fees for public vs private handling of SS is ludicrous, and he should be embarassed for using them.

Search for Iron81s recent thread on this which has more realistic numbers from a government study. I point out some of the inconsistencies in those numbers in the thread, but his 20-30% is so far off he truly is off in Ward Churchill territory.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
so let's get this straight, a guy who works for the government thinks government is the answer. why would you be surprised?

but I think he has a point about enron and deregulating the energy thingee.

as for social security, just run the numbers for ROI of your social security tax (include both parts, part you pay and part your employer pays), including inflation, and ask him what he thinks of the rate of return, especially given that if you die it can't be transferred.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you run those numbers and properly account for all of the benefits SS provides you'll find the ROI for lower wage earners is much higher than you think. Even for higher wage earners it is no worse than the risk free rate of return, despite the inherent transfers.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Social Security is a tough problem because it is as much a failure of changing demographics as it is government. When the program was implemented, there were many times more payers than beneficiaries. If they preserved this ratio through age increases, then there wouldn't be a problem, but only people over 75 would collect benefits.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Seether,
Where do you go to school?

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

For years I've argued that the school of business should stop it's capitalist propagandizing, but no one listens. They do not even accept the principle that they should consider the socialist viewpoint.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

That's because people in business school are preparing for the real world, not some fantasy foo foo land of marshmellows and "free" everything.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you run those numbers and properly account for all of the benefits SS provides you'll find the ROI for lower wage earners is much higher than you think. Even for higher wage earners it is no worse than the risk free rate of return, despite the inherent transfers.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you including inflation? I was under the impression that SS had a negative rate of return.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
They do not even accept the principle that they should consider the socialist viewpoint.

[/ QUOTE ]

they totally embrace it, they just call it someting else. re: SL bailout, subprime bailout.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

jumping off point

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blo..._security.html

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, the implied rate of return on my money in the Social Security system is -0.8% a year. In other words, not only is the government not paying me any interest, they are charging me to hold my money.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Also note that the analysis is all in nominal dollars, because that is the way the dollars are on my SS statement - there are not inflation escalators in the program.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
Neither you nor the prof have a very solid understanding of Social Security.

[/ QUOTE ]

This goes for at least 99% of the population. They are coerced into a system they don't even understand, and they are told a bunch of lies like the return on SS is comparable to private investment when they are two different things entirely. It's not even comparable since your SS payments are not in anyway tied to the contributions you put into it.

natedogg

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

a more formal study thingee, personally I would trust a random guy with a blog more than some rand corp. knockoff with an agenda, but it is interesting they come to roughly the same conclusions.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Soc...y/CDA98-01.cfm

[ QUOTE ]
For the low-income African-American male age 38 or younger, the news is particularly grim: He is likely to pay more into the Social Security system than he can ever expect to receive in benefits after inflation and taxes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Pretty good intro to the Enron fiasco

Enron

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

Oh, just get a hold of David Horowitz alrady.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
He consistently refers to Enron and the sub prime housing collapse as failures of the "unregulated free market".

[/ QUOTE ]
Nonsense... Bad businesses going bankrupt is a CRITICAL part of the free market. No business is guaranteed success. The strong survive and the weak businesses die. In a free market it is important that some businesses die. With the govt, currupt and competant programs survive no matter how bad they are...

[ QUOTE ]
Then he speaks of the sub-prime lenders and how they screwed over people (he also mentioned how lenders would help people set up fake jobs to get approved for the loans).

[/ QUOTE ]
I call bull**** on this.
A morgage salesman might commit fraud to get his commission but the owners of the business would NEVER knowingly allow this. Where loan money to people who can't pay it back?

[ QUOTE ]
He has also asserted that with the government managing social security there is a 1% cost of handling the money, yet if it was done privately there would be a 20-30% fee.

[/ QUOTE ]
A complete LIE. 1% ????
This man is not sane. If I had my SS money and invested myself I would do MUCH-MUCH better.

[ QUOTE ]
Like many advocating massive social programs he mentions the Scandinavian countries such as Norway and Sweden as essentially Utopian societies which we should model our social programs.

[/ QUOTE ]
These nations do better than most socialist countries. They are the exception rather than the rule...

Just regurgitate his nonsense back on a test to get a good grade then NEVER take another class from him again...

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
The OP has very little shot at getting the professor fired: if a professor is teaching a Poli Sci class, he may give his opinions on Poli Sci.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he teaches his opinions as reality instead of as his opinions and fails to provide other opinions, he should be fired. Seriously, reporters strive to be biased and fail, but the need for impartiality in a reporter is absolutely nothing compared to the need for it in a political science teacher. Of any job anywhere, these are the people who should have the most neutrality! (or at least be capable of showing other points of view)

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
For years I've argued that the school of business should stop it's capitalist propagandizing, but no one listens. They do not even accept the principle that they should consider the socialist viewpoint.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think this is remotely comparable? Business school is basically "capitalism school." Of course it's going to be biased! I'm fairly certain that this is the worst post you've ever made that I've seen.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
jumping off point

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blo..._security.html

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, the implied rate of return on my money in the Social Security system is -0.8% a year. In other words, not only is the government not paying me any interest, they are charging me to hold my money.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Also note that the analysis is all in nominal dollars, because that is the way the dollars are on my SS statement - there are not inflation escalators in the program.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats what happens if you let a non-actuary play with numbers.

If you d/l his spreadsheet you'll see that at 5% return on his and the employer contributions, he projects (including constant future salary) a total of $1.077 million including interest to his retirement age.

He also states that gives him a benefit of $7,789 a month. Assuming no inflation at all post retirement, the value of that is 7789*12*10.82 (the annuity factor at 5% interest, o inflation) = $1,011 million, so on that very conservative basis he loses a little at 5%.

However, reality is that the benefit will be paid with Cost of living adjustments, even if his salary doesnt grow. That increases the value to $1.284 million.

And that only takes into account his own benefit. If he is married and has a nonworking spouse, the benefit doubles and the value doubles to nearly $2.5 million. If his spouse worked and contributed to SS, the benefit is based on the higher wage earner, still $2.5 million. So say she earned 80% of what he did, then the value of their combined contributions totals $1.94 million, still significantly better than 5% ROR.

What about his claim of using "nominal dollars"? Well, he cant have his cake and eat it to. Rates of return on investments include an inflation premium. If there were no inflation, you couldnt earn 5%+ on your money. So if he wants to carve inflation out of the value of the Social Security investment, he has to use compare it to an inflation free rate of return. (Or he has to recognize that the buying power of his "self-saved" dollars is subject to the same inflation as the monthly benefit he's getting from SS).

It is much easier to look at someone retiring today, because it takes the future earnings and pre-retirement inflation issues out of the equation.

A worker earning $50,000 last year, which grew at 3% a year since he started working has an ROR of 5.4% if hes single, 7.8% with a non-working spouse, and somewhere in between with a working spouse earning less than he did.

His calculations also ignore childrens benefits (small value since not many collect SS with children of eligible age), and disability benefits, which does increase the value by a few percent.

Another fault in his analysis is taxation of the employer portion of the contribution. The employer is indifferent whether he pays it to the employee or the SSA, he gets the same deduction from taxed profits either way. However, if he pays it to the employee, the employee will be taxed on it. So in his calculation he overstates what he actually could have "saved" without Social Security by whatever his marginal tax rate is.

Another assumption in his calculation that isnt made clear is that he is assuming all of his contributions could have been invested in a tax free manner, since he's accumulating the contributions with full, not taxed interest.

His calculation is very typical of the lay calculations that even make their way on to legislators' desks, and they don't nearly present reality.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
He also states that gives him a benefit of $7,789 a month.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's if SS were privatized, basically? how much he get from SS?

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

also cato or whatever said a similiar thing, with all the mumbojumbo, at least for low incomeers.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

whats the max monthly for SS?

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The OP has very little shot at getting the professor fired: if a professor is teaching a Poli Sci class, he may give his opinions on Poli Sci.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he teaches his opinions as reality instead of as his opinions and fails to provide other opinions, he should be fired. Seriously, reporters strive to be biased and fail, but the need for impartiality in a reporter is absolutely nothing compared to the need for it in a political science teacher. Of any job anywhere, these are the people who should have the most neutrality! (or at least be capable of showing other points of view)

[/ QUOTE ]

Political science is one of the more fluid behavioral sciences, there are very few "right" answers so impartiality is going to be hard to come by.

By the way, others have said it but he's right on Enron, it's a failure in the market, but that happens. Nothing is perfect.

Cody

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He also states that gives him a benefit of $7,789 a month.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's if SS were privatized, basically? how much he get from SS?

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry, I misread what he said. He claims that he would only get $1,985 a month in SS benefits, however thats an anomaly caused by his misuse of "nominal dollars" for the future, but inflated dollars in the past. If you use the SS full projection estimator the monthly benefit assuming his pay grows at 3 and inflation is 2.5%, then his monthly SS benefit is about 4500 single, 9000 with spouse.

That will lower his ROR closer to the risk free rate of return. Note though that he had many years of earning at the maximum tax level. That hurts your ROR, since, as discussed earlier, there is a wealth transfer effect built into the benefit formula...high wage earners are subsidizing the "ROR" of lower wage earners.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

I don't know enough about Enron. Some of the problems may go all the way back to our government conception of a corporation. I'll let others comment on this.

Sub-prime lending is a natural result of moral hazard created by government in the first place.

First in the way the Fed runs out monetary policy to promote borrowing and spending over saving. This might take a lot of study and I guarantee your professor wouldn't understand it.

Second is our governments favoring of mortgage debt through interest tax deductions amongst a variety of other subsidies. The governement favors people who take out giant mortgages.

Third is our government has created an atmosphere were people expect to be bailed out, leading to moral hazard and a propensity to take risks. Ask about the S+L crises in the 80s, the LTCM bailout in '98, the "Greenspan put". Recentely our new Fed chief slashed rates 50bp, devauling the savings of Americans to bailout the sub-prime crowd, no doubt ensuring people will engage in the same practices next decade expecting another bailout.

Social Security is a giant ponzi scheme. The program uses the same accounting as Enron. If the government was a private entity it would have been shut down for massive fraud related to these programs.

Your professor likely advoates reduced military spending to pay for SS and Medicare. In addition to not being enough a much better question to ask is why such funds should go to SS and Medicare when they can be given back to the people through lower taxes. People can then invest that money for thier own retirement, ensuring money is actually there for thier retirement rather then being squandered by the governemnt.

Scandanavia does great because it is sitting on as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They are better run the the rest of Europe due to thier smaller size, but they suffer from many of the same demographic problems and if not for the oil they would have the same financial problems as France. France is a good example of how [censored] things would be with socialism in America.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know enough about Enron. Some of the problems may go all the way back to our government conception of a corporation. I'll let others comment on this.

Sub-prime lending is a natural result of moral hazard created by government in the first place. <font color="red"> irrelvant interjection of your own morality</font>

First in the way the Fed runs out monetary policy to promote borrowing and spending over saving. This might take a lot of study and I guarantee your professor wouldn't understand it. <font color="red"> do you? monetary policy favors moderate inflation over risk of deflation, which can promote borrowing. So what? </font>

Second is our governments favoring of mortgage debt through interest tax deductions amongst a variety of other subsidies. The governement favors people who take out giant mortgages. <font color="red">the mortgage issue itself is no different than the first issue of favoring debt over savings. if individuals cant afford a home without a mortgage deduction, they rent, and the landlord takes a deduction for his mortgage. the real import of the mortgage deduction is that it does encourage individual ownership, which in turn helps drive the economy since people naturally spend more on their own home than they would on a rental property </font>

Third is our government has created an atmosphere were people expect to be bailed out, leading to moral hazard and a propensity to take risks. Ask about the S+L crises in the 80s, the LTCM bailout in '98, the "Greenspan put". <font color="red">I dont think there is a single company that bases a single decision based on expectation of a bailout </font> Recentely our new Fed chief slashed rates 50bp, devauling the savings of Americans to bailout the sub-prime crowd, no doubt ensuring people will engage in the same practices next decade expecting another bailout. <font color="red"> how is it a bailout of the subprime crowd? be specific. why do you think that a reduction in interest rates wasnt appropriate given other economic conditions? </font>

Social Security is a giant ponzi scheme. <font color="red"> no its not</font> The program uses the same accounting as Enron. <font color="red">no it doesnt, but its irrelevant if it did. Its not the accounting system that caused Enrons failure it was greed. </font> If the government was a private entity it would have been shut down for massive fraud related to these programs. <font color="red"> no it wouldnt, because government accounting is not the same as GAAP and shouldnt be for several reasons </font>

Your professor likely advoates reduced military spending to pay for SS and Medicare. In addition to not being enough a much better question to ask is why such funds should go to SS and Medicare when they can be given back to the people through lower taxes. People can then invest that money for thier own retirement, ensuring money is actually there for thier retirement rather then being squandered by the governemnt. <font color="red"> one has nothing to do with the other, conflating them is just political rhetoric </font>

Scandanavia does great because it is sitting on as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They are better run the the rest of Europe due to thier smaller size, but they suffer from many of the same demographic problems and if not for the oil they would have the same financial problems as France. France is a good example of how [censored] things would be with socialism in America.

[/ QUOTE ] <font color="red">you got one right, congrats </font>

Lehigh should be embarassed if this the quality of thinking they turn out.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know enough about Enron. Some of the problems may go all the way back to our government conception of a corporation. I'll let others comment on this.

Sub-prime lending is a natural result of moral hazard created by government in the first place. <font color="red"> irrelvant interjection of your own morality</font>

First in the way the Fed runs out monetary policy to promote borrowing and spending over saving. This might take a lot of study and I guarantee your professor wouldn't understand it. <font color="red"> do you? monetary policy favors moderate inflation over risk of deflation, which can promote borrowing. So what? </font>

Second is our governments favoring of mortgage debt through interest tax deductions amongst a variety of other subsidies. The governement favors people who take out giant mortgages. <font color="red">the mortgage issue itself is no different than the first issue of favoring debt over savings. if individuals cant afford a home without a mortgage deduction, they rent, and the landlord takes a deduction for his mortgage. the real import of the mortgage deduction is that it does encourage individual ownership, which in turn helps drive the economy since people naturally spend more on their own home than they would on a rental property </font>

Third is our government has created an atmosphere were people expect to be bailed out, leading to moral hazard and a propensity to take risks. Ask about the S+L crises in the 80s, the LTCM bailout in '98, the "Greenspan put". <font color="red">I dont think there is a single company that bases a single decision based on expectation of a bailout </font> Recentely our new Fed chief slashed rates 50bp, devauling the savings of Americans to bailout the sub-prime crowd, no doubt ensuring people will engage in the same practices next decade expecting another bailout. <font color="red"> how is it a bailout of the subprime crowd? be specific. why do you think that a reduction in interest rates wasnt appropriate given other economic conditions? </font>

Social Security is a giant ponzi scheme. <font color="red"> no its not</font> The program uses the same accounting as Enron. <font color="red">no it doesnt, but its irrelevant if it did. Its not the accounting system that caused Enrons failure it was greed. </font> If the government was a private entity it would have been shut down for massive fraud related to these programs. <font color="red"> no it wouldnt, because government accounting is not the same as GAAP and shouldnt be for several reasons </font>

Your professor likely advoates reduced military spending to pay for SS and Medicare. In addition to not being enough a much better question to ask is why such funds should go to SS and Medicare when they can be given back to the people through lower taxes. People can then invest that money for thier own retirement, ensuring money is actually there for thier retirement rather then being squandered by the governemnt. <font color="red"> one has nothing to do with the other, conflating them is just political rhetoric </font>

Scandanavia does great because it is sitting on as much oil as Saudi Arabia. They are better run the the rest of Europe due to thier smaller size, but they suffer from many of the same demographic problems and if not for the oil they would have the same financial problems as France. France is a good example of how [censored] things would be with socialism in America.

[/ QUOTE ] <font color="red">you got one right, congrats </font>

Lehigh should be embarassed if this the quality of thinking they turn out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Odd you say that considering you don't even know what moral hazard means. quote:
him: "Sub-prime lending is a natural result of moral hazard created by government in the first place."
you: " irrelvant interjection of your own morality"

hint: He's not making a moral judgment by identifying a moral hazard. It's a specific terms that describes a specific kind of financial or public policy situation.

natedogg

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
Pretty good intro to the Enron fiasco

Enron

[/ QUOTE ]

interesting thumbnail. But wasn't the main thing with enron fraud?

synopsis:
government basically forced, via regulation, the companies to favor short term contracts over long term, while at the same time discouraging new power plant investment. so costs went up when rates they could charge were fixed.
28:30 alludes to "under the table" stuff
30:00 discusses enron accounting "fraud" allowed by government
31:00 everyinhg enron did was approved by gov regulatory
32-36 long discussion of bribery? says bribery ok?
38 says gov regs let enron have cookable or noncookable books up until almost the end (I guess at end enron cooked books in non gov reg approved manner)
39 says gov to blame cause regulators took bribes
41 says US gov cooks it own books so hypocritical
45 interesting point, enron ceo's "should have known" but gov regulators "didn't know"
-------------------
main point i guess was that government overregulation leads to bad business and corruption.


seemed more like an apology rather than an explanation.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

The other class he teaches is an introduction to foreign relations class. I am not trying to get him fired, but I would like for some of my classmates to understand that maybe they shouldn't take his words as gospel simply for the sake that he is a teacher (which I feel many do).

He happens to be Hungarian and immigrated many years ago, so I feel that his roots likely have a huge effect on his opinions.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

SS is a good question.

can I answer this. first in dollars then in inflation adjusted dollars maybe.

a guy works and pays SS from 1960-90, retires and draws benefits from 1990-2005, then dies.

how much he pay in at max rate? min rate?
how much he draw out if he paid max? min?

single?married?

in actual dollar amounts? in inflation constant dollars?

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

not sure if this is in inflation adjusted dollars.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/feature...;CL_FIRSTTIME=1

[ QUOTE ]
You can expect to pay $290,392 in Social Security taxes over your working life for retirement and survivors benefits. For those taxes, you can expect to receive $2,088 a month in Social Security retirement benefits. Your rate of return under today's Social Security is 1.03%.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Customize your data for better results by clicking on the pencil icons in the "Your Information" box.
Information Value Edit
Age: 65 Edit
Gender: Male Edit
Zip Code: — Edit
Current Earnings: $100,000 Edit
Life Expectancy: 81.00 yrs Edit
Retirement Age: 66.00 Edit

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/feature...;CL_FIRSTTIME=1

[ QUOTE ]
You can expect to pay $61,931 in Social Security taxes over your working life for retirement and survivors benefits. For those taxes, you can expect to receive $855 a month in Social Security retirement benefits. Your rate of return under today's Social Security is 3.38%.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Customize your data for better results by clicking on the pencil icons in the "Your Information" box.
Information Value Edit
Age: 65 Edit
Gender: Male Edit
Zip Code: — Edit
Current Earnings: $15,000 Edit
Life Expectancy: 81.00 yrs Edit
Retirement Age: 66.00 Edit

[/ QUOTE ]

so 15 years retirement
paid in max min
290k 61k
15 year payout max min
376k 154k

so 10 years retirement
paid in max min
290k 61k
10 year payout max min
250k 103k

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

..Zomg I went to college and they tried to show me a point of view I don't already belive in! ZONOES!! Quick, call Sean Hannity and get that kid who had to watch An Inconvenient Truth on the air with me!

[ QUOTE ]
He happens to be Hungarian and immigrated many years ago, so I feel that his roots likely have a huge effect on his opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just like yours do.

[ QUOTE ]
maybe they shouldn't take his words as gospel simply for the sake that he is a teacher (which I feel many do)

[/ QUOTE ]
If you really feel it's that important, why not just sit down with each of them and have that talk where you explain how one person can't possibly know everything.

My last PolSci class had a small hint of conservatives, a dab of liberals, a large cross section of people who really could care less what the teacher was talking about. (My teacher happened to be liberal, but he always pointed out when he was inserting his particular bias)

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
SS is a good question.

can I answer this. first in dollars then in inflation adjusted dollars maybe.

a guy works and pays SS from 1960-90, retires and draws benefits from 1990-2005, then dies.

how much he pay in at max rate? min rate?
how much he draw out if he paid max? min?

single?married?

in actual dollar amounts? in inflation constant dollars?

[/ QUOTE ]

Starts working at 20 and retires 30 years later at 50? That's some damned early retirement.

Re: Help me battle my teacher\'s indoctrination
 

[ QUOTE ]
..Zomg I went to college and they tried to show me a point of view I don't already belive in! ZONOES!! Quick, call Sean Hannity and get that kid who had to watch An Inconvenient Truth on the air with me!

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

(My teacher happened to be liberal, but he always pointed out when he was inserting his particular bias)

[/ QUOTE ]

So at the beginning of your post you seem to be defending this poor excuse for a teacher, but at the end you point out the right way to teach. Which is it? If the teacher "pointed out when he was inserting his particular bias," the OP wouldn't have posted here!