Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 95
  1. #26
    keep asking questions George Gervin's Afro's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Post Count
    11,409
    2003 doesn't count for 2009 contracts. It still doesn't say he is more than a regional director. I want to see where he has national power.

    So what. The job is in the same complex he works out of.

    What matters is who signed the 2009 deal.
    hey WC I don't seem to remember you being outraged when it was discovered that the Bush administration sent our guys over to fight without the proper equipment. Would that be considered ' ing the patriots?'

  2. #27
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    From one of the several articles I read:
    ‘Disasters Do Happen’

    Do ents released in the FOIA request show some signs of concern within the VA after Prudential proposed the retained-asset accounts in 1998. Lastowka, the official who allowed Prudential to introduce the Alliance Accounts, said that the insurer’s “checkbook” system wasn’t protected by the FDIC.

    “Disasters do happen,” wrote Lastowka, in an e-mail dated June 9, 1999, to Stephen Wurtz, the agency’s deputy assistant director for insurance.

    Lastowka said in his e-mail that the lack of FDIC coverage could backfire on survivors.

    “Who is responsible if Alliance goes belly up?” Lastowka asked. “I think we have to also be prepared to defend the use of the Alliance Account.”

    Lastowka also asked whether Prudential had adequately disclosed to survivors that the Alliance Accounts weren’t covered by FDIC insurance. ”Did Pru alert us to the non- FDIC fact?” he wrote to Wurtz. “Or was it in small print as the notice to beneficiaries?”

    Do ents turned over by the VA didn’t include a response from Wurtz.

    ‘Aware of Issues’

    Lastowka says his e-mail shows the decision to allow Alliance Accounts was carefully considered.

    “This e-mail demonstrates simply that the VA’s Insurance program was aware of issues that might be raised as we implemented the payment method and that we should be prepared to respond to inquiries,” Lastowka says. “We were confident that we were making a decision which would benefit survivors.”

    The FOIA do ents show that on June 10, 1998, Prudential gave a presentation to the VA. It included 10 pages of key points, saying the Alliance Accounts would benefit survivors because they would provide safety, flexibility in how and when to use their money, compe ive interest rates and customer service.

    In fine print, at the bottom of one of the pages, was this caveat: “Funds in the Alliance Account are direct obligations of The Prudential Insurance Company of America and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.”
    Please note that he "allowed" Prudential to introduce the Alliance Accounts. This does not mean he had the authority to implement it, or even advocated it. He may have been under directive to assess it. Apparently he didn't have the authority or approve of it, since the idea wasn't put into legal force till September 1, 2009.

  3. #28
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    hey WC I don't seem to remember you being outraged when it was discovered that the Bush administration sent our guys over to fight without the proper equipment. Would that be considered ' ing the patriots?'
    You forget relevant details of my arguments. Maybe you would understand if you served as long as I did.

    I will not speak of that more in this thread. Dig up an old thread with my comments if you wish to pursue that, or create a new appropriate thread.

  4. #29
    Believe. Parker2112's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Post Count
    4,495

  5. #30
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    From one of the several articles I read:


    Please note that he "allowed" Prudential to introduce the Alliance Accounts. This does not mean he had the authority to implement it, or even advocated it. He may have been under directive to assess it. Apparently he didn't have the authority or approve of it, since the idea wasn't put into legal force till September 1, 2009.
    LOL @ your mindless backpedaling. You always backstop a losing arguement with semantics. Again, he was the Director of VA Insurance. I'm pretty sure, and since he actually did "allow" Prudential to introduce the Alliance Accounts, he had the authority to do so. There is also mention of, several times, a verbal contract. Do you think he was just "allowing" himself to enter a verbal "allowance" with Prudential? Common sense would dictate that since: Lastowka was indeed the Director of VA Insurance, and he "allowed" Prudential to introduce Alliance Accounts, and he entered into a verbal "allowance" with Prudential, that he did, indeed, posess the authority and scope to do so.

    Again, stop your mindless backpedaling and constant goal post moving.
    He was the Director, period..end of sentence. I don't have access to his actual employment contract so I cannot list his actual, legally defined duties. But if I did, you would likely just pick a word and misconstrue it as well.

    2009? I don't know who signed off on that. The article doesn't say and there is nothing on the internet that I can find to answer that question. But that's ok...you already have your answers anyway..regardless of what actually occured.

  6. #31
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    You do realize that you just linked the original article that Wino posted, right?

    Several articles my ass.

  7. #32
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Thanks. I'll add that to my growing collection of non sequiturs.

  8. #33
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    2009? I don't know who signed off on that. The article doesn't say and there is nothing on the internet that I can find to answer that question. But that's ok...you already have your answers anyway..regardless of what actually occured.
    Do you agree or disagree this wasn't a legal practice until 9/1/09?

    Would you agree that who signed it matters?

  9. #34
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,321
    Do you agree or disagree this wasn't a legal practice until 9/1/09?

    Would you agree that who signed it matters?
    Go back and re-read my posts, knucklehead. My position is quite clear. Even you can understand it. *hint* It's the second post in this thread.


    And of course I agree who signed it is important/matters. Is it a pe to hang a President over, when even his Sec Def. didn't know what was happening? no.

  10. #35
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    You do realize that you just linked the original article that Wino posted, right?

    Several articles my ass.
    Yes, I linked the original. Wino linked an edited copy of the article that appeard a day later. My link has information his had deleted.

  11. #36
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Lastowka completely boned this, on virtually every level. Amazing, really.
    Hard to say. From what I read, it appears he evaluated the idea. He did raise concerns over it.
    Prudential should have it's feet held to the fire...they knew damn well this was in violation of the original contract...especially considering it was a "verbal" agreement. The families have a good case to recover the interest earned. I wish them luck.
    In would say they are legally responsible for the original 1965 agreement with 2007 amendments until claims made on or after 9/1/09.

    Other discussions other than who signed this agreement seems meaningless to me.

  12. #37
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    You forget relevant details of my arguments. Maybe you would understand if you served as long as I did.
    WC, I thought you only served one six-year tour with the Army? Am I wrong?

  13. #38
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    Do you agree or disagree this wasn't a legal practice until 9/1/09?
    Actually, wether it was legal or not starting in 1999 when it was introduced, it's still a matter being decided by the courts. Now, that somebody actually agreed to sign off on it on 2009 doesn't preclude the fact that people in the VA from 1999 until 2009 knew that Prudential was potentially running afoul of the contract and did nothing about it. Which would make them complicit in the crime, if it's determined to be so.

  14. #39
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    WC, I thought you only served one six-year tour with the Army? Am I wrong?
    Three 4 years stints. However, my third was cut short by a reduction in forces. I could have stayed in if I changed MOS'. My was replaced by contractors when the cold war ended. Oh well... they paid me $28k to get out.

  15. #40
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Actually, wether it was legal or not starting in 1999 when it was introduced, it's still a matter being decided by the courts. Now, that somebody actually agreed to sign off on it on 2009 doesn't preclude the fact that people in the VA from 1999 until 2009 knew that Prudential was potentially running afoul of the contract and did nothing about it. Which would make them complicit in the crime, if it's determined to be so.
    Would that surprise you?

  16. #41
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    Three 4 years stints. However, my third was cut short by a reduction in forces. I could have stayed in if I changed MOS'. My was replaced by contractors when the cold war ended. Oh well... they paid me $28k to get out.
    Ah, gotcha. Yeah, they pretty much haven't stopped force reduction since I've been in. Got another year to match you.

  17. #42
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    Would that surprise you?
    Nothing surprises me when it comes to corporations preying on anything at hand (including family of dead soldiers) to make a quick buck.

  18. #43
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Ah, gotcha. Yeah, they pretty much haven't stopped force reduction since I've been in. Got another year to match you.
    At least it appears they made retirement benefits better. It used to max out at 75% of base pay. My 11 years and 20 days gave me the $28k

  19. #44
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,776
    Yes, I linked the original. Wino linked an edited copy of the article that appeard a day later. My link has information his had deleted.
    Damn libs at Bloomberg chopped it.

  20. #45
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Damn libs at Bloomberg chopped it.
    I quoted information not in yours, and was accused of not reading yours... That I quoted from yours!

  21. #46
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,776
    ^^^Clear as mud, amigo. Rephrase?

  22. #47
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    ^^^Clear as mud, amigo. Rephrase?
    LOL...

    Sorry, made that one rather fast. Too many things going on right now, and my mul asking abilities failed me again.

    This was originally pertaining to this:
    You do realize that you just linked the original article that Wino posted, right?

    Several articles my ass.
    If you look at post #27, you will see that I quoted material from an article that does not include the text in the OP. My link is different than the one you used, right?

    I was accused of quoting material from your link, and not reading several articles. Even in post #44, you say Bloomberg chopped it. Would you agree I did read other links?

  23. #48
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,776
    Would you agree I did read other links?
    You found a separate link to the same material. That inescapably suggests you were unfamiliar with the OP in the first place, but whatever. I'm not in the mood for more of your hairsplitting.

  24. #49
    Cogito Ergo Sum LnGrrrR's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    22,399
    At least it appears they made retirement benefits better. It used to max out at 75% of base pay. My 11 years and 20 days gave me the $28k
    Yeah, but you have to stay in 30 for the 75%. In my career field (comm), I'm probably better off getting out at 20 and going contractor, civil service or private industry.

  25. #50
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    You found a separate link to the same material. That inescapably suggests you were unfamiliar with the OP in the first place, but whatever. I'm not in the mood for more of your hairsplitting.
    I wonder if you were splitting hairs.

    When someone quotes material without a link, I almost always look for the real link to see if the material was edited, or some deleted. I often look for other material anyway, because different news outlets report different facts about things. most cherry pick the information, and I like to see views from all perspectives.

    Did you delete the material I found?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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