.
September 8th, 2010
06:00 PM ET

What's the right age to retire?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The French are not happy with their government's plan to raise the retirement age from 60 to 62.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/07/21/art.social.security.jpg caption=""]
More than a million people in 220 French cities took to the streets yesterday protesting - with strikers disrupting trains, planes, hospitals and mail delivery.

Yet French President Nicolas Sarkozy is vowing to push ahead with the overhaul of the country's pension system. You see, France and many other European countries have come to the realization that if they don't do something about their troubled fiscal situations now - they risk winding up in the same boat as Greece.

But don't tell that to the French union workers, who are a bit dramatic about the idea of working until 62.

One sign in Paris showed a raised middle finger with the following message: "Greetings from people who will die on the job."

The French government is telling them things could be worse. Other European countries are thinking about raising the retirement age to 67 or 68. And here in the U.S. the retirement age is gradually going up to 67.

Meanwhile as the French complain about working until 62, a growing number of Americans are working into their 90s and even 100s.

Experts on aging say a daily job can help alleviate boredom, improve physical health and provide older people with a schedule. Some of them are working to supplement their retirement savings or to give extra money for their families

AARP says by 2012 almost one-fifth of the workforce will be older than 55, and baby boomers will likely keep working beyond the traditional retirement age of 65.

Here’s my question to you: What’s the right age to retire?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Social Security
September 8th, 2010
05:00 PM ET

Mistake to raise taxes on so-called wealthy?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

President Obama is making it perfectly clear. He wants the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire. By his definition, "wealthy" translates as couples making more than $250,000 a year or individuals making more than $200,000.

Speaking in Cleveland earlier today - the president said the country can not afford the $700 billion price tag associated with these tax cuts over the next 10 years. He says tax rates for the wealthy should go back to what they were under President Clinton.

However, Mr. Obama does want the tax cuts to be made permanent for middle class Americans, or those making less than $250,000.

Of course, given the shaky economy and the president's sagging poll numbers - it's not clear he will get what he wants here.

Critics suggest that letting the Bush tax cuts expire, even only for the wealthy, could be "a blow to a very fragile economy." Some Republicans want a permanent extension of all the Bush tax cuts. And Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner was out today ahead of the president's speech calling for a two-year freeze of all tax rates.

So what do most Americans think? A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll shows 51 percent of those surveyed say the tax cuts should be continued only for families making less than $250,000. 31 percent say they should be continued for all Americans, and 18 percent say the tax cuts should expire for all Americans.

Here’s my question to you: In our weakened economy, is it a mistake to raise taxes on the so-called wealthy?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Tax Hike • Taxes
September 7th, 2010
06:00 PM ET

Pres. Obama's economic plan too little too late?

ALT TEXT

President Obama is pictured yesterday in a speech about the economy at the Milwaukee Laborfest in which he unveiled plans to spend at least $50 billion to expand and renew roads, railways and airports in a bid to fire up economic growth. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

As Recovery Summer draws to a close and all the polls are suggesting the Democrats are about to suffer a crushing defeat in the midterm elections, President Obama has decided now is the time to roll out a new economic plan.

Some Democrats are worried it's all too little, too late.

The president wants to spend up to $350 billion in new stimulus money to jump-start the shaky economy.

There's a $200 billion tax cut for businesses to buy new equipment in the next year and a $100 billion permanent extension of the business tax credit for research and development.

Plus, there's a $50 billion infrastructure plan to try and create jobs in the long term. This would include rebuilding 150,000 miles of roads, 4,000 miles of rails and 150 miles of airport runways.

But officials acknowledge that no new jobs will actually be created until 2011.

All told, this $350 billion would total nearly half the size of the initial stimulus plan passed when President Obama first took office. And of course at the moment there is no money available to pay for any of this.

It's highly unlikely any of this will get through Congress. They come back from their summer break next week and will be in session for less than a month before heading out of town - again - for the midterm elections.

Meanwhile - Americans aren't feeling much recovery when it comes to the economy

A new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll shows 81 percent rate economic conditions as poor, only 18 percent say they're good. About half of the country says conditions have not improved in the last two years.

Here’s my question to you: Is President Obama's latest economic plan too little too late?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Economy • President Barack Obama
September 7th, 2010
05:00 PM ET

Florida church's 9/11 Quran burning a good idea?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

General David Petraeus - the top commander in Afghanistan - is condemning a Florida church's plan to burn Qurans on September 11.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/07/art.quran.jpg caption=""]
Petraeus says the burning of Islam's holy books could endanger American troops overseas - and the overall effort in Afghanistan. There are about 120,000 U.S. and NATO troops fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Petraeus says even the rumor that the Quran burning might happen has sparked protests in the Muslim world. Hundreds of Afghans demonstrated yesterday in Kabul, chanting "Death to America" and calling on the U.S. to withdraw its troops. Thousands of Indonesians gathered outside the U.S. embassy in Jakarta over the weekend. Protesters say Quran burning is an insult to Muslims all around the world.

Meanwhile - the pastor of Dove World Outreach Church in Gainesville, Florida, tells CNN his congregation plans to go through with it.

Terry Jones says they've "firmly" made up their minds but are praying about what they're about to do. Jones says the congregation knows this is an offensive action, but says he's offended when Muslims burn the American flag or the Bible. He claims the church's message is not one of hate and not meant for moderate Muslims, but rather a warning to radical Muslims.

Lots of people think this is a bad idea. The U.S. embassy in Kabul says that the U.S. government condemns the "offensive messages" and disrespect against Islam.

And various religious groups are also opposing the Quran burning. The National Association of Evangelicals is calling on the church to cancel the event. And Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Hindu leaders in Gainesville have organized a so-called Gathering for Peace the night before the scheduled burning.

Here’s my question to you: A Florida church is planning to burn Qurans on September 11 as a warning to Muslim extremists. Is this a good idea?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Uncategorized
September 2nd, 2010
04:40 PM ET

Why have voters fallen out of love with the Democrats?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

When it comes to the midterm elections, the question now seems to be: "Just how bloody will things get for the Democrats?"
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/02/art.dnc.jpg caption="A file photo from the 2008 Democratic National Convention."]
Each day brings more bad news. And here's the latest: a new USA Today/Gallup Poll shows Americans think Republicans in Congress will do a better job than Democrats in handling seven out of nine key issues.

They include: terrorism, immigration, federal spending, the economy, Afghanistan, jobs and corruption in government. The two parties are essentially tied on health care; and the only issue where Democrats score higher is the environment. Not exactly what's going to bring people to the polls this November.

Republicans need to win 39 seats in order to win control of the House - and some experts are predicting they could win as many as 51. Some even think Democratic control of the Senate is at risk - but that's more of a long shot.

And it's not just about Congress. Democrats are at risk of losing the governorships of some states that usually lean left, like Michigan and Pennsylvania, and maybe even President Obama's home state of Illinois.

So with Democrats poised to get a beating in 60 days, and with everybody saying: "It's the economy, Stupid" - the president has chosen this time to give another go at peace in the Middle East.

A noble cause, for sure. But for decades, American presidents have tried and failed. A column in the Daily Beast called "The Peace Talks Charade" suggests the situation is in the same place it was three years ago under President Bush. And neither the Israelis nor Palestinians have the confidence in Mr. Obama's ability to broker a deal.

Here’s my question to you: Why have voters fallen out of love with the Democrats?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: Democratic Race • Democrats • Election Process • Elections
September 2nd, 2010
04:30 PM ET

What's the biggest complaint about your job?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

For those Americans who are lucky enough to have a job, stress is their biggest complaint about their work.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/02/art.coworkers.jpg caption=""]
A new Gallup poll shows that a majority of U.S. workers are completely satisfied with many parts of their job - including their relations with coworkers, the flexibility of their hours, their boss or immediate supervisor - and the amount of work that's required of them.

They are least satisfied with stress, followed by their pay, retirement plan, health insurance benefits and their chances for promotion.

The poll also shows 48 percent of workers are completely satisfied with their jobs. That's similar to satisfaction ratings in the past several years, despite the onset of the global financial crisis.

What's more - job satisfaction is higher now than it was a decade ago. Workers appear to be more satisfied with several aspects of their job than they were in 2001.

Experts suggest this means either employers have become more generous - or maybe employees have become more grateful to have a job or easier to please, since the economy took a turn for the worse.

Meanwhile - the national unemployment rate stands at 9.5 percent; and underemployment is estimated at about double that. Stay tuned for the monthly jobs report tomorrow morning. You can be sure it will be gone over with a fine-tooth comb for any signs that businesses are starting to hire.

Here’s my question to you: What's the biggest complaint about your job?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: Uncategorized
September 1st, 2010
04:18 PM ET

What exactly did U.S. gain by going to war in Iraq?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Despite President Obama's speech last night, the war in Iraq is not over.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/09/01/art.obama.speech.jpg caption=""]
In a somber address from the Oval Office, the president thanked the troops and formally ended America's combat role in Iraq after seven years.

Mr. Obama said the U.S. "has paid a huge price." And we have: including the lives of more than 4,400 troops, another 35,000-plus wounded, and a cost of more than $700 billion.

But even after all this - our commitment is not through. There are still 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq for support and training. They're set to be there through next year, and sadly more of them will likely die.

In many ways, Iraq is still a mess. The country is wracked with violence and political instability. They haven't been able to form a government five months after recent elections. And they regularly suffer from shortages of things like electricity and water.

Meanwhile - George W. Bush's closest ally when it came to Iraq, Tony Blair, is out with his memoir containing emotional passages on the war.

The former British Prime Minister admits that the U.S. and britain didn't anticipate "the nightmare that unfolded" after Saddam Hussein was toppled, or the role Iran and al Qaeda would play. Blair writes he has shed many tears over the loss of life, yet "I can't regret the decision to go to war." Blair says he's devoting "a large part of the life left to me" to Middle East peace.

The thing about the war in Iraq is it seems nearly impossible to put your finger on what exactly was accomplished. The population remains divided and likely will be for centuries to come. Of course there's all that oil.

Here’s my question to you: What exactly did the U.S. gain by going to war in Iraq?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: Iraq • War in Iraq
September 1st, 2010
04:15 PM ET

How many lawsuits should fed. govt. file against Arizona over immigration issues?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The federal government is filing yet another lawsuit against Arizona when it comes to the heated issue of immigration.

This time the Justice Department is going after a Phoenix-area community college system. The feds say the school discriminated against almost 250 non-citizens by making them show extra immigration paperwork before being hired.

Officials say this violates an anti-discrimination provision in a federal law.

This latest lawsuit comes less than two months after the Justice Department sued Arizona over its tough new immigration law. A federal judge has put on hold the most controversial parts of that law - including the requirement for police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop if they think that person may be in the country illegally.

In the meantime, the State Department has decided to include Arizona's new law in a human rights report to the United Nations. The U.S. included its legal challenge to the Arizona law as one way the federal government is protecting human rights.

Say what?

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was outraged - and rightfully so. She's demanding the reference be dropped. Governor Brewer says it's "downright offensive" that a state law would be included in the report to the U.N.

And there's more: The Justice Department is also investigating Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona for possible civil rights abuses. Sheriff Arpaio is known for being tough on immigration enforcement. Unlike our federal government.

Here’s my question to you: How many lawsuits should the federal government file against Arizona over immigration issues?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: Immigration
newer posts »