Posted on 10/19/2013 3:02:34 AM PDT by markomalley
Traditionally, letters to the editor are the vehicle for a newspaper's readers to voice their disagreement with an article appearing in the paper. The Los Angeles Times has announced that it won't print any letters from readers who differ with their positions, using climate change as an example:
Regular readers of The Times' Opinion pages will know that, among the few letters published over the last week that have blamed the Democrats for the government shutdown (a preponderance faulted House Republicans), none made the argument about Congress exempting itself from Obamacare.
Why? Simply put, this objection to the president's healthcare law is based on a falsehood, and letters that have an untrue basis (for example, ones that say there's no sign humans have caused climate change) do not get printed.
Interestingly, their insistence on conformity to the global warming theory comes at a time when the theory's proponents admit there hasn't been climate change for 15 years. In fact there are many scientists now predicting the earth is heading for an ice age.
I guess my understanding of the word “entitlement” differs from the rest of the world. To me it means I paid into the system, therefore I am ENTITLED to be paid back.
ironic that some very prominent peer reviewed scientist at well known universities could not get a letter to the editor on the topic of global warming because they apparently don’t know the scientific “ truth” like some journalist in los Angeles.
Try your calculation again, but this time skip the DCF calculation and just sum the payments. The government did not invest your money, nor did they put it in a savings account, so you should just total the payments.
You will see that your present SS payments will quickly exceed the amount you paid. SS is, indeed, an entitlement program.
Thank you for that clarification. I retired at 62, my Social Security started. I paid into it for 43 years & my wife says I won’t make it to 82 if I don’t lose some weight. Sounds like Uncle Sam comes out ahead.
Yes, I am indeed now getting my money doled back to me, my money! No guilt there, pardner.
little more than a propaganda tool, one that hates them Israeli Jews
It will take approximately 30 years for me to receive as much SS as I paid in.
So what they're saying is that if I start mailing them regular letters about how Karl Marx is a hero of all mankind, and that socialism is one of the best, most beneficial economic theories of all time, they won't get published, right? Right.
Los Angeles Times owned by Tribune Co....so this is probably with all Tribune owned papers
LA times more and more just a portable homeless shelter.
Unless you are cooking the figures, I don’t see how that can be true. You are saying that the sum of your previous payments, in nominal value, equals 360 * your current estimated SS payment? Your SS contributions are capped at just over 6% of the first $115k. I think you need to check your math.
We’ll stated.
How long before they stop accepting letters from 2A supporters who are “violence skeptics”?
It is like living in an Orwell novel.
5.56mm
If this had been set up as a simple investment plan paying compound interest, over the normal 50 year span of paying into the plan out of every paycheck — most average working people would have accumulated well into 1 to 2 million dollars.
Consider also that when you start drawing funds in your retirement, you are still gaining interest on the remaining balance.
Of course these assumptions are based on compound interest being paid on investments. That isn't happening during the current reign of king barry because the government is robbing us blind through currency manipulation.
I see that the Waco paper was owned by Cox Newspapers and was sold last year to Berkshire Hathaway.
This has been the LA Times’ policy for decades. In the 1970’s, a professor at the USC School of International Relations who was one of the foremost experts in the US on nuclear weapons and a sharp critic of liberal approaches to national defense was repeatedly turned away when he tried to get his letters published in the Times. They told him he had to “tone it down,” which he refused to do.
I like newspapers. I don't want to have to get all of my news from electronic screens. I can read only so much text on ascreen before my eyes start hurting--not a problem with newspapers.
Gee, an admission by liberals that they are both bigoted and censorial. Next, maybe they will admit to be liberals. But things will really come to a head when they admit to being socialist internationalists.
“What someone doesn’t want you to publish is journalism, all else is publicity.”
Paul Fussell
Well at least they are honest about it. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.