SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Grainne who wrote (103618)5/10/2005 3:40:45 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
This doesn't seem like a big surprise:

New Poll Finds Bush Priorities Are Out of Step With Americans
By ADAM NAGOURNEY and JANET ELDER

Published: March 3, 2005

Americans say President Bush does not share the priorities of most of the country on either domestic or foreign issues, are increasingly resistant to his proposal to revamp Social Security and say they are uneasy with Mr. Bush's ability to make the right decisions about the retirement program, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.



The poll underscores just how little headway Mr. Bush has made in his effort to build popular support as his proposal for overhauling Social Security struggles to gain footing in Congress. At the same time, there has been an increase in respondents who say that efforts to restore order in Iraq are going well, even as an overwhelming number of Americans say Mr. Bush has no clear plan for getting out of Iraq.

On Social Security, 51 percent said permitting individuals to invest part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts, the centerpiece of Mr. Bush's plan, was a bad idea, even as a majority said they agreed with Mr. Bush that the program would become insolvent near the middle of the century if nothing was done. The number who thought private accounts were a bad idea jumped to 69 percent if respondents were told that the private accounts would result in a reduction in guaranteed benefits. And 45 percent said Mr. Bush's private account plan would actually weaken the economic underpinnings of the nation's retirement system.

In a sign of the political obstacles confronting the White House, a majority of those surveyed said they would support raising the amount of income subject to Social Security payroll tax above its current ceiling of $90,000, an idea floated by Mr. Bush but shot down by Republican Congressional leaders. Yet there is strong resistance to other options available to Mr. Bush and lawmakers to repair the system, in particular to raising the retirement age or making participation voluntary.

Notwithstanding Mr. Bush's argument that citizens should be given more control over their retirement savings, almost four out of five respondents said it was the government's responsibility to assure a decent standard of living for the elderly.

The poll was the first conducted by The Times and CBS News since the president's inauguration. It comes after six hectic weeks for the administration, in which Mr. Bush has witnessed successful elections in Iraq - which he hailed as validation of his decision to remove Saddam Hussein - but also the toughest period he has encountered on Capitol Hill, as he has struggled to win support for the signature proposal of his second term.

In an apparent reflection of the success of the Iraq elections, 53 percent of those surveyed said that efforts to bring order to Iraq were going very or somewhat well, up from 41 percent a month ago. That is the highest rating on that score since the capture of Mr. Hussein.

Still, 42 percent now say that Mr. Bush would have been better off trying to counter the threat of North Korea before invading Iraq, compared with 45 percent who think Mr. Bush was correct to focus first on Iraq.

More broadly, the poll suggests that Mr. Bush is in a problematic position as he enters a second term intent on pushing an extraordinarily assertive agenda through Congress.

Four months after Mr. Bush won a solid re-election over Senator John Kerry, 63 percent of respondents say the president has different priorities on domestic issues than most Americans. Asked to choose among five domestic issues facing the country, respondents rated Social Security third, behind jobs and health care. And nearly 50 percent said Democrats were more likely to make the right decisions about Social Security, compared with 31 percent who said the same thing about Republicans.

"There are so many other things that seem to me to be more critical and immediate: I think the national debt is absolutely an immediate thing to address," said Irv Packer, 66, a Missouri Republican. He added, "Another one that I'd really like to see people working on is the environment."

Lisa Delaune, 37, a student from Houston and a member of the Green Party, said in a follow-up interview, "My opinion is that the president favors big business over the health and well-being and overall stability of the entire American population."

And Mr. Bush does not appear to be much more in step with the nation on what the White House has long viewed as his strong suit: 58 percent of respondents said the White House did not share the foreign affairs priorities of most Americans.



For all that, Mr. Bush's approval rating remains unchanged, at 49 percent, from a month ago, suggesting that the disagreement with Mr. Bush's ideas has yet to take a toll on America's view of him.

The poll was conducted by telephone with 1,111 adults from Thursday through Monday. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

If Americans are ambivalent about the need for Washington to grapple with Social Security, the poll found abundant concern with the budget deficit, with much of the blame attributed to Mr. Bush. Sixty percent of respondents - including 48 percent of self-described conservatives - said they disapproved of how Mr. Bush was managing the deficit. And 90 percent of respondents described the deficit as a very or somewhat serious problem.

The focus on Social Security has, if anything, aggravated concern about the deficit. About 30 percent said that the cost of Mr. Bush's proposal to create private accounts would increase the deficit. And on another question, about 40 percent said that Mr. Bush's budget proposal, made last month, would also result in increasing the deficit, notwithstanding the deep cuts Mr. Bush proposed to try to pull back the deficit.

The poll underlines the difficulty of the task Mr. Bush faces in trying to overhaul Social Security, given that the heart of the White House strategy has been to sell the public on the need for repairing the system, in the calculation that would corral Congress behind Mr. Bush. So far, at least, the evidence suggests that campaign has not succeeded.

Indeed, the percentage of respondents who think it is a good idea to permit people to invest in private accounts is as low as it has been since the question was first asked in May 2000.

"I don't think he's listening to the people concerning Social Security," said Beverly Workman, a West Virginia Democrat who said she voted for Mr. Bush. "I think the public wants him to leave it alone."

Jim Choi, 34, an unemployed biotechnology worker from California, said: "The way the system is set up, it's not going to go bankrupt. People will get by; we all adapt."

Still, Mr. Bush's argument that the system is approaching bankruptcy - a contention disputed by Democrats and independent analysts - seems to be taking hold. Two-thirds of respondents say the system will be bankrupt by 2042 if nothing is done to repair it. Sixty-one percent said the program has worked well until now, but the next generation will need a different kind of program to assure that they receive benefits.

And 55 percent said the problems with Social Security were serious enough that they should be fixed now, compared to 35 percent who said they did not need to be addressed for another 10 or 15 years.

The elections in Iraq have contributed to some improvement in the perception of Mr. Bush's policy there, though it remains far from popular. In this poll, 50 percent of those surveyed said they disapproved of his Iraq policy, down from 55 percent a month ago, while 45 percent approved, up from 40 percent.

On North Korea, 81 percent said that that nation does indeed now have nuclear weapons, and 7 in 10 said it poses a serious threat to the United States. Still, a majority of Americans said they opposed taking pre-emptive action against North Korea if diplomatic efforts failed - a shift from before the war in Iraq, when a majority said they would support military action if diplomatic efforts failed.



To: Grainne who wrote (103618)5/10/2005 3:42:33 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
I thought this was excellent movement in the right direction for children's nutrition:

Connecticut Lawmakers Debate Strict Bill on School Nutrition



By ALISON LEIGH COWAN
Published: May 10, 2005
NEW HAVEN, May 9 - Connecticut's public schools would be banned from selling soft drinks and certain snacks during the school day under a proposal that is expected to face a final vote in the legislature in the next few days.

The proposal, the most far-reaching effort by any state to control the snacks and drinks students can buy at school, must still overcome opposition from an array of lobbyists representing the food and beverage industry, the teamsters who supply the vending machines, and school boards, including those with lucrative deals with soft drink companies.

Other states, including California and Arizona, have taken similar steps, but those states ultimately exempted high schools from the bans they imposed on soft drink sales in elementary and middle schools in the face of determined industry lobbying.

The proposal, which passed the Connecticut Senate by a 24-to-11 vote last month, would ban the sale of soft drinks at all public schools, with some exceptions for school-sponsored events on weekends and evenings. Sports drinks containing electrolytes could continue to be sold in high schools, but not until a half-hour after school ends. Under state law, schools already cannot sell coffee, tea, candy and soda during and around mealtimes.

"This would be the strongest bill in the whole country that we have seen so far in that it applies to anywhere on campus, any time, kindergarten through 12th grade, and beverages as well as snacks," said Margo Wootan, the director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington.

The proposal, known as the school nutrition bill and nicknamed "the junk food bill" by some, would also require the Department of Education in Connecticut to draw up a list of allowable snack foods available for sale in school stores, vending machines and in the parts of the cafeteria that are not serving the official school breakfast or lunch programs.

The measure would also mandate 20 minutes a day of recess for all children in kindergarten through fifth grade, an increase from the current rule that schools simply provide a break of any length of time.

So far, support for the bill has broken down heavily along party lines, with the Democrats who control the legislature generally favoring the proposal, and Republicans quarreling with it. Many credit its quick passage in the Senate to the Democratic caucus's unwillingness to break with Donald E. Williams Jr., the Senate president pro tem, who had pushed for its passage.

The battle in the House has proven harder.

Coca-Cola and Pepsi bottlers have top lobbyists arguing their case. Also speaking out against the bill has been the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education. "We don't like the bill," said Sheila McKay, a government relations specialist for the association.

She said schools were already struggling with federal mandates to improve test scores and would be hard-pressed to extend the school day to incorporate more recess without upending labor contracts. She also said her group thought it misplaced to focus only on what children drink and eat at school.

"We certainly see this as the responsibility of the parents as well," she said.

Representative Robert M. Ward, a Republican who is the House minority leader, said he shared some of those qualms. He said Republican opponents of the bill favored local control when possible. "Republicans, generally speaking, have been much more reluctant to pass school mandates and are more willing to trust local school boards," he said.

To proponents of the bill who say Connecticut has a chance to be in the lead on a central child welfare issue, Mr. Ward said, "I don't want to lead the way in being the nanny state."

Lucy Nolan, the executive director of End Hunger Connecticut, a nonprofit advocacy group that has pushed for Connecticut to ban soft drinks and junk food for three years, said that the financial impact on schools should be minimal because students would substitute other products such as milk, bottled water and fruit juice for the ones being removed from vending machines.

"Towns should not be making money off of the health and well-being of our children," Ms. Nolan said.

Besides, she added: "We're not talking about taking away the vending machines. We're talking about replacing what's in them."

Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, has not said whether she supports the legislation. The governor's spokesman, Dennis Schain, said she would have to see the final language of the bill before deciding whether or not to sign it into law.



To: Grainne who wrote (103618)5/10/2005 6:15:29 PM
From: J. C. Dithers  Respond to of 108807
 
Thanks, my arm is much better although not 100%. Surgery on the cuff was recommended but I opted against it and I'm glad I did.

you seem to subtly be equating them [homosexuals] to rapists and child molesters

Equating would be too strong. More like comparing. In the latter sense, the three groups share one thing in common, namely that their behaviors are spawned by their fantasies. I could throw serial killers into it, too, as they often keep mementos of their victims to fantasize over later.

I'm just unconvinced of what it accomplishes to "prove" that fantasies (and related behaviors) are the result of peculiarities of the brain.

Doesn't everyone have the right to pursue happiness?

I hope not, or else all four of these groups could claim that right.



To: Grainne who wrote (103618)5/10/2005 10:34:34 PM
From: ManyMoose  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807
 
The Scientific American had an article that documents how men's brains and women's differ. Turns out they are quite different. Some geographical zones in the brain are larger in women and others are larger in men. Based on that, it's not much of a stretch to think that there might be shades of gray between.

If you are the President of Yale, however, you better keep your mouth shut about it.