1

My friend keeps trying to get me to move to Seattle.  I keep telling her NO.  That green jobs story is just one of many reasons why.

2 Carry-over Doom Monty

I predicted the RINOs from MI would sell us out on that Supershit Committee

Too bad I canÂ’t place a flaming skull in the comment box

Article goes bla bla blaÂ…..and then

Upton, a moderate Republican, also said "tax reform is long overdue," adding that while he doesn't think raising taxes on businesses will help with job growth, he would be open to closing loopholes.

Keep in mind what the Pelosi commies consider loopholes. Be advised that when they talk about “tax reform” what they actually mean is raising taxes. And yes, if you eliminate the deduction for home mortgages and then start taxing employer provided health insurance as income you are, in fact, raising the damn tax rates on nearly every “working American”.

Nothing like a “moderate” Republican assigned to the most important committee of the decade in which it only takes one aisle-crossing SOB to kill us. Thank you crying Boner you SOB, you sold us out again. The “deal” was a sell-out, the committee members are a sell-out, and you are a worthless shit.  You make these damn worthless deals trying to gain seats in purple districts. DonÂ’t you freakin know you are creating a GD 3^rd Party?

3 Monty - There is absolutely nothing wrong with the defined-benefit pension model.

DB plans are in effect in thousands of firms in this country with no problems at all.  You simply have to fund them.. through worker contributions and/or employer contributions.

There's nothing wrong with the model.. what is wrong is not funding them, and assuming idiotically high-rates of return.

4 I'm looking forward to the 'Pardon, does your DOOM bite?'.

5 In the public sector, I'd say yes, absolutely. In the private sector? I'm not so sure, and anyway, unionism seems to be dying out of its own accord in the private sector.

It used to be illegal until JFK issued an executive order and the Dem congress approved it with an Act.

What I wonder is why no Republican as EVER made any effort to change that?

6 Even the military is finding the defined-benefit pension model to be untenable. The Pentagon is now exploring moving to a 401(k)-style defined-contribution plan. This is just more evidence that the defined-benefit plan is soon going to be extinct -- it is just not a sustainable model. I'm not sure that is such a great thing for our soldiers or the quality of troops we get in the future. 20 years in the military as an enlisted predicated on half basic pay for the rest of your life thereafter sounds good - but it is ROUGH. My brother-in-law went that route, and suffered serious physical injuries from all the marching, and has had several operations for chronic neck pain likely related to just the physical stress of the military lifestyle out in the field. Half of base pay ain't all that much, for an enlisted man, and when you get out on the cusp of 40 you find yourself middle aged and inexperienced in pretty much everything except yelling at privates to buff the floor in the barracks. You need that retirement money just to tide you over until you establish yourself in a new career. NOW they're saying they want to saddle you with a 401K type retirement just as half the country is determined to go Socialist. AND, you won't draw a dime until RETIREMENT age?? Don't be too shocked if a whole lot of soldiers in their early 20's decide to tell the people that came up with this idea to go eff themselves, and set out for the Real World to better care for their future.

7 Well folks got to go for a while. Probably will not be back until this afternoon.

8 4 I'm looking forward to the 'Pardon, does your DOOM bite?'. Posted by: garrett at August 17, 2011 08:48 AM (c+sPX) DOOM Dententia? What else can you make your DOOM do? Smoke a cigarette? Cut a banana in half??

9 I'd be willing to accept a military 401(k) plan if the military renounces the right to recall retirees to active duty. The "pension" is actually a retainer.

10 There's nothing wrong with the model

Actually, there's a lot wrong with the model.  A "defined benefit" model is, essentially, a legal ponzi scheme.  You're asking current employees to fund past employees' retirements.  Its why so many firms are abandoning them.

If the only problem is "funding them" then what's the difference between them and "defined contribution" plans- if they're not a ponzi scheme?

The fact is that business has generally been booming (even in our economic troubles) for most firms that are continuing those plans.  If something bad happens and they have to tap into their cash reserves to any great extent, there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding the retirement benefits.

The only logical retirement benefit model (if you're going to have one at all) is a defined contribution model- so I put my money in a special account, and it's that account I draw from until it's gone.

11 NOW they're saying they want to saddle you with a 401K type retirement just as half the country is determined to go Socialist.

Hey, practically everyone in the private sector is "saddled" with a 401K (or no plan at all). And many of them do jobs that are just as hard and dangerous as soldiering (or being a policeman, or a fireman).

Remember, it's not a question of who "deserves" what. It's a question of what's sustainable over the long term. That's why Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are doomed. It'd be nice if we could afford them, but we can't.

12 It's not only Yglesias who believes that printing money will solve this country's problems.  In the last few days I've heard at least five supposedly prominent financial wonks who have gushed on how great it is to have the ability to print money on demand.  West Zimbabwe here we come.

13 Geithner blew through $28billion Monday night leaving $127 billion left before Treasury hits the new debt limit. Though the actual striking of the limit is probably months off as he can re-raid the federal pensions to borrow some time.

14 12 That is useful information and its quite easy to come a croper if you are not vigilant.

Okay, seriously, will someone please explain this spam to me?  I see it here everyday, and I still don't know what "easy to come a croper" is supposed to mean.  I realize trying to translate spam is a futile effort, but come on!

15 Also, Monty: we were talking yesterday about privatized (denationalized) currency. From stuff Jefferson really said: I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

16

The "pension" is actually a retainer.

Posted by: Cobalt Shiva at August 17, 2011 08:53 AM (Il+6V)

No it is not.  And only retired officers are recallable to age 55.

17 Ooo.  Today's DOOM has an extra added doominess to it.  Me like!

18 So the armed forces loose their pensions for 401ks, but politicians, other civil 'servants', welfare queens, and the army of fraudsters will get to keep theirs.

Seems par for the course for the Obama administration. /pun intended

19 Thank you crying Boner you SOB, you sold us out again. The “deal” was a sell-out, the committee members are a sell-out, and you are a worthless shit.

Your extreme views are making it difficult for me to get Republicans elected in solid blue states. Please shut up.

20

In regards to the change in military retirement, what they are forgetting, or at least discounting, is the personnel in the military operate in a free marketplace, and they aren't stupid. The current retirement is part of the compensation package, and by replacing it in the manner describe, military personnel will be taking an 18 to 25% immediate pay cut.  This is for a job which already asks significantly more of a family than arguably any other job. Also, their pay calculations are for individuals. They arenÂ’t counting the lost opportunity cost from making my wife start her career over every two years.  We took a fifty percent pay cut moving to Gulfport, and my wife is still not working.  Also, most jobs in the military are still not directly transferrable to jobs on the outside. Why would someone (i.e. a SWO) waste their most productive years in a job which will not help get a second career, and have nothing to show for it until they are 65? Because that is what I want to doÂ… break my body and wear myself out in ultimately a dead end job and then try to start over with no safety net in my mid forties.

21 I see it here everyday, and I still don't know what "easy to come a croper" is supposed to mean.

The term is "come a cropper". See here.

22 I see it here everyday, and I still don't know what "easy to come a croper" is supposed to mean.

Basically, it means "To screw up."

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/come-a-cropper.html

23

Don't be too shocked if a whole lot of soldiers in their early 20's decide to tell the people that came up with this idea to go eff themselves, and set out for the Real World to better care for their future.

Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 08:51 AM (kUaEF)

That's exactly what will happen.

The new kids coming in the door won't know any difference so that will be their "normal."  After 3-4 rotations to the Middle East though, that 401k won't look as good as a retirement at 50% of high-3 base pay anymore.

Middling result? A constant churning of the ranks with the best leaving, and the marginal to worst staying. 

End result?  Defeat in a major war due largely to poor leadership.

24

Oh, by-the-way.  Someone is benefitting from all of the Washington spending.  Washington.

25 brb, stimulatin and motivatin

26 And many of them do jobs that are just as hard and dangerous as soldiering (or being a policeman, or a fireman). - Monty Well, I'm not sure being deployed away from family to a war zone for years at a time is really "just" as hard as being a cop or fireman, but I won't quibble over that. One thing that is objectively different about military service is that for 98% of service members, it's limited to merely 20 years. Start at age 18, have a successful career, and retire at age 38... AND THEN WHAT?? You have practically NO real marketable skills except a loud mouth with which to bark orders. Yeah, there are SOME technical people that may not be true of... but some guy that spent 20 years with the artillery? Good Luck with that. People need to remember that these pensions weren't offered out of the goodness of anybody's heart to begin with... You Get What You Pay For.

27 defined-benefit plan ... it is just not a sustainable model.

A lesson businesses had learned by the 80s.   Somebody's a slow learner.

28 Sorry, Monty--I have to disagree on the military pension issue.  The particulars of the plan being discussed will lead to crippling retention problems and, in my view, is part of an overall plan to sell another hollow force iteration as the answer to the nation's fiscal ills.  The savings that I saw were something like 250 billion over 20 years.  That does not impress me.  More leathal forces based in the U.S. with rapid global reach would--and they would be less expensive to boot.

29 Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 09:01 AM (sbV1u)

I think you unfairly discount our young men and women.  I think there will be some attrition from the policy, but you can't expect me to believe (with, perhaps, the exception of some officers) that most enlisted men who are planning on a career in the military are that hung up on the retirement benefits (many? yes. most? no).

But, then, I've never been in the military, so what do I know?

And I'm one of the ones who wishes we would provide better compensation and benefits for our men and women in uniform.

30

Monty and Allen G:  THANK YOU. 

I don't know which is more sad.  That I'm so glad to now know the mystery meaning behind the spambot, or that the world is so soaked in DOOM that this little victory will mark the highlight of my day.

Possibly Obama will trip on a curb somewhere and fall flat on his face in a cowpie?  That would turn this DOOMy frown of mine upside down for sure!

31 "Matthew Yglesias is a cretin" and looks like one, just like all the other "male" opiners on the Left.

32 I really hope the Administration keeps raising expectations for this stupid speech O's doing in September, that way his approval will drop even more.

33

Start at age 18, have a successful career, and retire at age 38... AND THEN WHAT?? You have practically NO real marketable skills except a loud mouth with which to bark orders.

I'll take massive oversimplifications for $youdon'tknowhatthehellyouraretalkingaboutcoolczech, Alex.

34

The term is "come a cropper". See here.

 

Steve Cropper is the man (and one of the secrets behind the Stax Sound)!

35

Remember, it's not a question of who "deserves" what. It's a question of what's sustainable over the long term. That's why Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are doomed. It'd be nice if we could afford them, but we can't.

No Monty, it is a question of who deserves what.

You're saying that military retirement is just another expenditure like Social Security.  I'm saying it comes with a moral dimension.  People who bleed for their country deserve a bit more consideration than people who go down to sign up for Social Security. 

I'm with Heinlein on this one.

Should pensions be reformed?  Sure, reduce the payout at 20 years slightly.  Ask for 22 years instead of 20 maybe.  But to go 401k on people who have actually put their lives on the line for the country seems a bit much.

Byt hey, I'm a moron.

 

36 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 08:57 AM (8y9MW)

Yeah, well, as we all know, Jefferson said a lot of stuff. And not all of it was Revealed Truth. We got along fine without a national currency until after the Civil War in this country -- the notion that private currencies "don't work" is refuted by our own history. (And our troubles began in earnest when we started printing unbacked funny-money rather than certificates redeemable for gold.)

Privatized currencies aren't going to solve all of our problems -- we'll still have booms, busts, inflations, deflations, and all the rest. But a competitive, asset-backed, privatized currency regime takes the limitless spending power out of the hands of the government and puts it in the hands of the free market, where it belongs. That is an unalloyed Good Thing.

37

I think there will be some attrition from the policy, but you can't expect me to believe (with, perhaps, the exception of some officers) that most enlisted men who are planning on a career in the military are that hung up on the retirement benefits (many? yes. most? no).

I spent 21 years in uniform.  I can tell you I didn't think a moment about retirement until about year 7-8. 

Then I started thinking.

Kids join initially because of pride, patriotism or testosterone, or some combination of the above.  They think longer term when they grow up a bit.

I assumed (above) that I am not too much different from my peers and the end result will be people leaving earlier once they start thinking about what 20 years actually means.  Like CoolCzech pointed out above, it's not an easy lifestyle.  When you've stepped out of a C-141 at 0200 one time too many, you start thinking, "There's got to be something else out there."

Sometimes, the pension keeps you coming back when your faith waivers.

38 The particulars of the plan being discussed will lead to crippling retention problems and, in my view, is part of an overall plan to sell another hollow force iteration as the answer to the nation's fiscal ills.

Hrm. I'll bet you a hundred bucks, payable a decade out after the implementation of a 401(k) style plan for the military, that it either does not affect retention at all or actually increases it. The same dire predictions were being made in private industry back in the 1970's and 80's, and it never came to pass. It actually led to an employment boom, and to more flexible compensation programs that gave the employees more leverage over their own money.

Believe me, if I could control my own SS investments, I would. I could make a lot better return than the crappy 2% or so the government has been returning historically.

39

RE: Miami's financial boned-ness.  Do y'all think this new scandal with the University of Miami's football program will be another nail in the coffin of that city?  Or do you expect the scandal to blow over?  I expect UMiami brings in a solid chunk of change for the city because of their football program.  If they do end up getting the "death penalty," that can't possibly spell good news for the city at large.

40 33 I'll take massive oversimplifications for $youdon'tknowhatthehellyouraretalkingaboutcoolczech, Alex. Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 17, 2011 09:05 AM (B+qrE) Yeah, I was only an army officer and my brother-in-law is only a military retiree with 20 Plus years of service that left as a Master Sergeant and after all that wound up as a "supervisor" in a meatpacking plant because all the talk of how desirable military "management experience" is in the private sector turned out to be a bunch of BS. So what the hell do I know. You on the other hand know wonder massiveoversimplications about how middle aged retirees just Leap into Wonderful Private Sector Jobs, right??

41 Not sure what the retirement rate is from the service these days. I am pretty sure that still most people who go in the service do not retire from it. And they changed it to 40% of base pay back in 86.

42

Putting government spending in perspective after the debt deal.  Watch the video.  People were ridiculed for calling the whole “epic battle” in congress just so much feigned drama.  In the end, we took it in the end – hard.  Both sides had their way with us. 

43 But to go 401k on people who have actually put their lives on the line for the country seems a bit much.

I'm not sure why 401(k) plans got such a bad rep.  Over the long term they provide much better return (on average, certainly) than Social Security.

Now, I don't know the specifics of this plan- so I can't comment on those, but my employer matches my 401(k) contribution, dollar-for-dollar, up to 6% of my salary (yes, I know this is relatively generous).  That means, for giving up 6% of my pre-tax dollars, I save 12% of my gross salary every year (Right around $7500 currently).  Even in a fairly conservative portfolio, that would leave me with something on the order of $600,000 after 20 years.  Put that in an annuity (which isn't the best, I know, but gives me stable numbers with which to work) at around 8%, and my interest is $48,000/yr.  That's certainly not high-hog, but you can live on it.  With a slightly more aggressive portfolio, I could instead have about 1.7mil after 20 years- and that is pretty good money, just on the interest.

Again, I don't know the specifics of this proposal, and it may be really crappy, but to claim that "go[ing] 401k... seems a bit much" is to claim that 401(k)s are inherently worse than a 50% pension- which is not, necessarily, the case.

44

AllenG,

I am not sure why you included a dig about officers being different from enlisted in regards to career planning based on retirement benefits, but I will answer the rest of your post. For a single person in the military, it might just be about the opportunity to serve your nation, but of the rest of us with families, you can bet your ass compensation is a big part of the equation. What do you do when you join the military straight out of high school, spend twenty years in the service, and then get out? You have no appreciable skills on the outside, a broken body, and are plain worn out. People who go to a full retirement (30 years), still have a life expectancy of about ten years. That is late fifties. The life is hard. And service members aren't dumb. You really think they will stay in just for shits and giggles?

 

45

I am pretty sure that still most people who go in the service do not retire from it.

You are exactly correct.  But I can't for the life of me rememeber the figure.  Something like 22% sticks in my head, but I can't swear to it.  I haven't worked in that area since 1995.

I am sure Defense Manpower Data Center actually has the statistics.

46

I've been reading Steyn's new book(when I have the time) and I'm more convinced now that it's over for Europe.

We've all though that the reckoning was far into the horizon, but I think it's here now for Europe.

 

 

47 But to go 401k on people who have actually put their lives on the line for the country seems a bit much.

Why do you view a 401(k) as an imposition? I can pretty much promise you that unless you're a complete dunderhead, you'll do a lot better with a 401(k) in retirement than you will with a crappy government pension. Equities may be a little flatter now than they were in the go-go years between 1965 and 1995, but they'll still return a lot better than whatever pissant rate you'll get from Uncle Sam.

48 OT: (more Perry) Kudlow gives a great defense of Perry's remarks about the Fed.

49 And when your economic model/union is about to fail, double down on the stupid!

Merkel and Sarkozy plan 'true economic government'

50 I am not sure why you included a dig about officers being different from enlisted in regards to career planning based on retirement benefits

It wasn't a dig, I was excluding them because an officer's life is somewhat different from an E-man, and their motivations are often (I would say: usually) somewhat different.

51 I haven't finished it yet, but Christine O'Donnell's new book has some pretty interesting scoobies in it.  One thing that I do take from this is that she's not the airhead she was portrayed as being, imo.

52

Equities may be a little flatter now than they were in the go-go years between 1965 and 1995, but they'll still return a lot better than whatever pissant rate you'll get from Uncle Sam.

The pensions are indexed for inflation.  So are the disability checks.

Guys who do 4 deployments in 4 years are exactly in a position to manage their retirement portfolios.

53

You on the other hand know wonder massiveoversimplications about how middle aged retirees just Leap into Wonderful Private Sector Jobs, right??

Let's go back to your original statement, shall we? 

Yeah, there are SOME technical people that may not be true of... but some guy that spent 20 years with the artillery?

See that word?  You indict the entire system based on a anecdote about your brother-in-law.  Note that I did not say that it turns out well for everyone, but to suggest that the only skills available are "barking" is, in fact, a gross oversimplification.  And if your brother-in-law didn't take advantage if in-serve education opportunities, whose fault is that?

But there again, I'm just an ex-enlisted Navy nuke, so what the hell do I know?

54

re : Seattle Green Jobs -

What a fucking joke. 

The only jobs 'Green Initiatives and Matching Grants' create are for an investigator and a lawyer to prosecute the inevitable grift.

55 It's a bait in switch, down in Miami, the mayor declared a hiring freeze, cut wages for cops and firemen, meanwhile he hired two hundred new city employees, and then 'unexpectedly' we end up with a 61 million dollar deficit

56 49 OT: (more Perry) Kudlow gives a great defense of Perry's remarks about the Fed.

Posted by: Joffen at August 17, 2011 09:15 AM (EPcuy)

Facts are giving great defense of Perry's remarks.

57 Posted by: Joffen at August 17, 2011 09:15 AM (EPcuy)

Perry did not use the "wrong words."  It was a campaign speech to his base, and no hand-wringing is going to change the fact that you just use more heated rhetoric when speaking directly to your base than you do with independents.

Moreover, he wasn't calling Bernanke a traitor (as everyone seems to be characterizing it) he was saying that printing money for political (not policy) reasons would be "almost ... treasonous."  A stance with which I absolutely agree.

58 Guys who do 4 deployments in 4 years are exactly in a position to manage their retirement portfolios.

Oh, please. I was in the Army myself (Fort Benning School for Boys) and I still have lots of friends who have done tours in both Iraq and the 'Stan. Their main complaint? Boredom.

Military life, as I'm sure you know, is 95% complete fucking tedium and 5% pants-shitting terror. If you're telling me that a grunt can't find 15 minutes to get online and check his balances, I'm going to mock you mercilessly. If those kids can find two hours a day to play XBox in the E-shed after patrol, they can find time to manage their retirement account.

59 It actually led to an employment boom, and to more flexible compensation programs that gave the employees more leverage over their own money.

That's apples and oranges, Monty. The employment boom came because businesses were running more efficiently, not because 401ks were so appealing to workers. The DoD is still a government entity and as such we can expect any savings in the transition to be immediately squandered elsewhere, not the generation of a better product.

60 Gold Market Is a ‘Bubble Poised to Burst,’ Wells Fargo Says (Bloomberg)... but not before the bad mortgage bubble that is Wells Fargo bursts

monty, what do you think of this?

61 There's nothing wrong with the model.. what is wrong is not funding them, and assuming idiotically high-rates of return.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 17, 2011 08:47 AM (UTq/I)

Defined benefit is unworkable. This should be axiomatic.

Define a benefit, then fund it with a combination of contributions from employee and employer. Okay, then what? What happens if your assumptions are way off -- in either direction? to whom do you refund the gain or charge the loss? What happens if the market falls off a cliff (yes, I know -- that sounds impossible. Let's just count on a modest 8% growth rate). Who is on the hook for the defined benefit?

62 Somehow, we should agitate on the behalf of the military that no changes to their retirement should be made before changes to congress' retirement and benefits are made.  Everyone who was ever in the military knows that enough savings could be made from waste in the military complex to pay for military benefits several times.  Not only that, but this whole thing about Washington holding itself above all of these discussions is sickening.

63 It wasn't even a month ago that I was really starting to despair about the lack of choices in the GOP race. I just can't believe how perfect Perry is. We honestly couldn't have asked for a better candidate. Anyway, I don't want to sidetrack Monty's DOOM thread. Carry on.

64

I wonder how damaging the baby boomers existence has been for this country.

I'm not bashing them, but their existence was such an outlier in American history that has warped peoples view of what is sustainable in terms of pensions, government programs/spending, taxes, etc.

Because they simply existed, the "greatest generation" could afford to lavish themselves with SS, Medicare, pensions, CBA's in the public sector, etc because there were multiple boomers to pay it off.

I think it's distorted the national psyche. Too many people point back to the 60s, 70s, 80s, and say "look it worked then, it'll work now", but it was able to work then because there were nearly 80 million boomers to support significantly less people from the previous generations.

People site previous decades as data points that big government spending and high taxes can work, but they tend to leave out the demographic data.

 

65

Posted by: Monty at August 17, 2011 09:21 AM (/0a60)

Yes, because every FOB has 24/7 internet access, and ice cream, and dancing girls.

C'mon Monty, you've deployed you know the drill. "Boring" doesn't not ipso facto equate to "ability to actively manage my investments"

66 Green job: a twist on the traditional form of fellatio in which the giver first swishes a small amount of green food coloring in her mouth. The effect -- a green phallus -- is considered frivolous but amusing.

67

Yes, because every FOB has 24/7 internet access, and ice cream, and dancing girls.

So does every boomer and fast attack on patrol, by the way.

68

>>>>>Military life, as I'm sure you know, is 95% complete fucking tedium and 5% pants-shitting terror. If you're telling me that a grunt can't find 15 minutes to get online and check his balances, I'm going to mock you mercilessly. If those kids can find two hours a day to play XBox in the E-shed after patrol, they can find time to manage their retirement account.

If the military does phase out pensions, they should at least considering hiring advisors to offer free financial advice to soldiers. I don't think dumping a bunch of 18 year old kids into the stock market without any education on economics is a good idea.

I think getting rid of pensions is inevitable, but it would be a bad idea to simply throw them into the market unprepared.

Maybe offer basic economics classes to the soldiers, because I'd bet most of them are coming right out of highschool where they aren't taught jack shit about how the economy works or stocks work.

69 Posted by: Joffen at August 17, 2011 09:24 AM (EPcuy)

How's that suppurating rectal sore doing?

70 Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 09:24 AM (sbV1u)

True, but when my brother deployed, he had the option to assign someone as his agent (basic POA?  I'm not sure).  He had his wife do that, but if he hadn't been married he could have appointed someone else (our parents, for instance).  You're not deployed the entire time you're in the military- and when you are deployed you have someone you trust take care of that for you.

71 Go ahead, keep trying to change military compensation to be more like what an office potato in a Peoria gets. 

As soon as we have a decent jobs market again, the same deep thinkers will be wondering why we have problems with recruitment and retention, and A) All these crackpot ideas will be repealed and B) The illusory savings will mostly be eaten up by the need to pay bonuses.

P.S. The problem with use a business-model for compensation is that the military cannot follow a business-model for manning.  One can go to Monster.com when one needs an accountant.  One cannot do the same when one needs a CO of a ship or a chief to run CIC.

P.P.S. Check out what a New York City Firefighter makes after they've been on the job four years.  Compare that to what a closed-loop nuke machinist's mate E-6 or E-7 makes after twenty.

P.P.P.S. Fair's got nothing to do with it.  It should, but even restricting the argument simply to cost effectiveness, screwing your military personnel always blows up in your face. And that's what all these proposals are: screwing.

72 cite*

73 One additional note about the military: when I went back into the Minnesota Guard after many years away, I had to go back down to Benning for more training. My company's CO was a young Captain who just happened to have a CPA. Our First Sergeant worked as a loan officer in his civvie job. I'm betting that there are lots of guys in the military with a financial background who'd be happy to help their grunts manage their retirement accounts.

74 Slightly o/t
Two excerpts from a newsletter for physicians

The Mayo clinic which already operates like an ACO, says it will not participate in the medicare ACO program because the requirements are to burdensome and the incentives to difficult to reach to make the effort pay off.

Along with that is the argument that ACO's allow the government to decree what health services are most effective (and least expensive) and that the government will eventually set out what doctors can and cannot provide for their individual patients.

75

If I knew how to post links, I could give you a link to a powerpoint explaining the new plan. Also, if I were to retire today at 20 year, at O-5, and then live for anouther 40 year, my current retirement is valued at 3.5 million. You forget, the retirement has COLA adjustments. A little more than a 500K 401k.

 

76

A how-to for getting un-DOOMed.  Thought provoking to say the least.

77 I don't think dumping a bunch of 18 year old kids into the stock market without any education on economics is a good idea.

I think I can agree with this statement.

78 Posted by: Ben at August 17, 2011 09:27 AM (wuv1c)

There are plenty of passively managed funds with trivial costs that are designed for long-term horizons. 40 year funds, 30 year funds, etc. This is an easily manageable issue.

79 C'mon Monty, you've deployed you know the drill. "Boring" doesn't not ipso facto equate to "ability to actively manage my investments"

You don't have to be a frigging day trader, dude. You sign on to a couple of investment options, and then you check up a few times a year to see how you're doing. It takes a few hours per annum to "manage" an account.

80

Yes, because every FOB has 24/7 internet access, and ice cream, and dancing girls.

 

As a network admin at a shitty FOB (Sharana) I can tell you any established FOB has 24/7 MWR internet and phone. Also, many have NIPR access. And after some time, a group will all chip in and get a satellite connection. So even in the middle of nowhere, there is a very good possibility of internet access. Dancing girls, not so much.

81 What about compensation for disabled Veterans, is that next on the chopping block? I despise communist libtards!!! Gig 'em Perry.

82 Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 17, 2011 09:27 AM (B+qrE)

But all of the dancing girls get pregnant halfway through the patrol.

83 A little more than a 500K 401k.

Yes, but I'm also suspecting that 12% (using my numbers, above) is rather more for an O-5 than my not-quite $7500.00 a year.  Your numbers would, then, be correspondingly higher.

84 Posted by: Likes to "do" concern trolls at August 17, 2011 09:27 AM (LH6ir) ------------ I'd like you to explain what makes you think I'm a "concern troll", please. Thanks.

85 Moreover, he wasn't calling Bernanke a traitor (as everyone seems to be characterizing it) he was saying that printing money for political (not policy) reasons would be "almost ... treasonous."  A stance with which I absolutely agree.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 09:20 AM (8y9MW)

I'd also like to point out that the g-ddamn MFM is going to characterize every word out of Perry's mouth as the most incendiary thing to ever hit the political airwaves.  It's absolutely ridiculous.  Take, for example, this story lead from Reuters:

The White House denounced Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry on Tuesday for his threatening remarks toward the head of the U.S. Federal Reserve that represented some of the most inflammatory rhetoric of the 2012 election campaign.

Yes, because the irresponsible printing of money during this economic disaster isn't destructive to the country in the least.  No no, not at all.  Meanwhile, referring to Tea Party members as "jihadists" and "terrorists" and "hostage takers" is just fine, because they... want... I dunno, responsible government or something.  Fascist douchebags!

86

Dancing girls, not so much.

 

Thank Heavens.  Dancing is for little boys!

87 "There are plenty of passively managed funds with trivial costs that are designed for long-term horizons. 40 year funds, 30 year funds, etc. This is an easily manageable issue."

Like CALPERS?

88 It's not only Yglesias who believes that printing money will solve this country's problems.  In the last few days I've heard at least five supposedly prominent financial wonks who have gushed on how great it is to have the ability to print money on demand.

Great... our country's economic policies are taken directly from Opus the Penguin: "Fibulate the Interest Rates. Renooberate the Money Markets. And Print More Dough.”

89 If we means-test social security, how do we treat a military 401k?  Does the military retiree get screwed on the back end as well as up front?

90

If theyÂ’re admitting 11, then the real number is probably ten times that.  No telling how many people were murdered as this sick, corrupt scheme went down.  If people donÂ’t go to jail over this, this country is way past saving, imo.

91 Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at August 17, 2011 09:35 AM (ijjAe)

Try to follow the discussion. I know it's difficult, but with a little practice and a dictionary you should be able to understand.

92 my step wasin the mil for 5 yra and couldn't re-up...they didn't wan't him.  I know a guy mustered out after 17 years.  Hard to stay in, if your career was less than stellar.  It's hard to stay in for the full 20! 

93

Honestly, it doesn't make much difference to me. If they make the change, I will get out shortly thereafter and do fine. Where you will be in trouble is keeping around the senior NCO's. They run our military, but generally are not setup well for a transition to the outside. They deploy... a lot. And most of their jobs do not transition well. Also, many of them are worn out by the 15 year mark or so and gutting it out to get their retirement. If you take that away, why would they say in the extra 8 to 10 years? THAT will break the back of our military.

 

94 Yeah, there are SOME technical people that may not be true of... but some guy that spent 20 years with the artillery? See that word? You indict the entire system based on a anecdote about your brother-in-law. Pardon me, but WTF are you talking about, "indict" a system?? The fact is, a field artillery grunt with 20 years experience walking up and down ridges in Korea and Germany is not exactly Mister Marketable. How the hell is acknowledging that an "indictment"? Military skills are necessary and desirable... if you run an army. I've got news for you: most companies tend not to have their own military. Even many of the completely honorable and necessary technical skills in the army don't really have a direct application in the Real World, because they involve weapons systems and very specialized military equipment and software. That's just the nature of military service. My point wasn't to "indict," it was to point out that one reason it was NECESSARY to offer military personnel those retirements BECAUSE it is so hard for many to transition to the private sector after spending 2 decades of the best years of their lives acquiring skills that often don't make it easy to get hired - especially at Age 40. We shouldn't toss aside to these people too casually... I wish people would sometimes tone down their knee jerk reactions to perceived slights and think about what others are really saying.

95 ...But ask what you can do for your country...

96 Oh, Post 95 was to Circa

97 no flash mobs today to keep it occupied?

98 Military DB pensions are the only ones I don't really mind ignoring economic reality on and funding directly from tax revenues. It's not so much a pension as just part of the cost of having an effective all-volunteer force. Alternatively, I'd also support exempting military retirees from paying income taxes and just stamping their bill PAID IN FULL.

99 Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 17, 2011 09:36 AM (9CM5J)

No, because the defined benefit will have segued into a defined contribution plan. Why would the government have any interest in the 401(k)s of its citizens?

100 Hard to stay in, if your career was less than stellar.  It's hard to stay in for the full 20!

Which has what, exactly, to do with military retirement?  Or any retirement, for that matter: even some company that will pay you 100% of your final salary for life after 20 years doesn't owe you a penny if they decide you suck (or are too expensive) and fire you before that.

101 walked passed a verizon picket line yesterday.   We got the modern day version of whistling and such that my mom describes from the 70's.  My friend got so annoyed she said "how come you are only guys" and "what are you doing on a picket line, land line phones are all but dead, why aren't you retraining yourselves to make yourselves marketable".  They stopped in their tracks and said to her "well, management is making billions and all we want is our piece of those billions".  She literally shut them down by saying "that's the 1950's model, unless you change, I can assure you, you're going to be out of a job within months."  You could see she was making them angry and we sort of pushed her along.  But this was her point of view.  She has had to take two pay cuts to keep her job.  Her health insurance went from spectacular when she first started her job to piss poor now.  Her 401K is just that, her 401K, the company no longer contributes a dime and she isn't putting much in thee either.  Most of the private sector has undergone these changes since this started.  It's clear they are losing patience with the union guys and government workers who think they have everything coming to them.

102 OMG!!!!!!!

103 Yglesias says that Bastiat's reasoning is bogus because we now live in the glorious age of printable money, whereas in Bastiat's France, only gold was money. 

But, quelle surprise, Yglesias is a fucking idiot. 

Bastiat wrote in the mid-1800s.

But France had a disastrous paper-money inflation period immediately following the Revolution. That was in the late 1700s and early 1800s. 

So, France had already experienced its job-destroying, unemployment-boosting fiat money paper-printing orgy more than 50 years before Bastiat wrote his essays on the pitfalls of fiat money paper-printing orgies.  See: http://tinyurl.com/4ynz6re.

Ergo, Matthew Yglesias is a Krugman-fellating cockwaffle.  QED.

104

Maybe a good way to solve financial problems in the military would be by reinstituting pillaging.

 

105 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 09:37 AM (kUaEF)

You have impugned the integrity of my father, who served honorably, at great risk to himself, in Frankfurt and Paris in 1953-55.

Pistols at dawn.

106

Our First Sergeant worked as a loan officer in his civvie job. I'm betting that there are lots of guys in the military with a financial background who'd be happy to help their grunts manage their retirement accounts.

I know that.  There are a lot of military folks who have little side talents like that.  It does not, however, extend to everyone in all places, at every time.  And that's the problem. 

Oh, and I can just see a 20 year-old specialist sitting in his umpteenth "madatory" portfolio management class on a Saturday morning as a Staff Sergeant who has no idea what he's doing actually reads the PowerPoint slides to him.

Yes, yes, I'm sure those portfolios will be going gangbusters in no time.

107 63 Somehow, we should agitate on the behalf of the military that no changes to their retirement should be made before changes to congress' retirement and benefits are made.  Everyone who was ever in the military knows that enough savings could be made from waste in the military complex to pay for military benefits several times.  Not only that, but this whole thing about Washington holding itself above all of these discussions is sickening.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at August 17, 2011 09:23 AM (jx2j9)

I stand by my position that every elected Washington official, and any appointees of the Executive branch, should be taxed at 95% of their income.  And since public employees are paid with public funds, that means that the 95% of legislative and executive employee salaries that are taxed are actually tax CUTS for everyone else, because that's money Washington never needs to put in its coffers. 

Also, I think every elected official (except the President and VP) should spend 50-75% of their time in office in their home district.  Senators and Representatives alike.  We've got this thing now called web conferencing.  Use that to hold your fillibustering sessions and floor debates.  Congress could convene once every quarter.  Elected officials from states within a 300 mile radius of DC would only be allowed to travel by land transport to return to the city (car, bus, tank, whatever), while those living beyond three hundred miles could use air transportation, flying coach.  They can pick up the bill for the remainder if they choose to upgrade and fly business class, first class, or via private jet. 

If you're a politician, you should be doing it because you're passionate about it.  Not because you get a six figure salary and a cherry benefits package.  Like I always say, politics is where the drama queens go who are too ugly to make it in Hollywood. 

108 Why would the government have any interest in the 401(k)s of its citizens?

Subtle.  I'm impressed.

I can't speak for Monty, but I'm not suggesting that moving from a defined benefit to a defined contribution plan is a net positive (or at least, necessarily a net positive) for our troops.  I don't expect them to like it very much.  I'm just on the side that says "We're spending too much.  Among all those other things (ObamaCare, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, foreign aid, etc.) that need to be cut are military expenses.  One way to do that, and still allow our troops to have a possibility at a decent retirement, is to move to a defined contribution retirement benefit."

109

This isnÂ’t the only time shit like this has happened.  Really, unions need to be seriously curtailed.  Under this president, they are way too enabled.

110 >>I wish people would sometimes tone down their knee jerk reactions to perceived slights and think about what others are really saying.

Really now, what is the fun in that?

111

 But this was her point of view.  She has had to take two pay cuts to keep her job. 

 

Does she have nice tits?

Would she like to make a Jackson the hard way?

 

112 This ice cream headache is really kicking my ass;  I need a vacation.

113

>>>.Yes, yes, I'm sure those portfolios will be going gangbusters in no time.

What they should do is buy a ton of stock in Ratheon, Boeing and other military stocks.

Then they should waste ammo, arty shells, missles and bombs like crazy so that the military has to continually restock their weapons, which in turn means big profits for those aforementioned defense stocks

114

Yes, but I'm also suspecting that 12% (using my numbers, above) is rather more for an O-5 than my not-quite $7500.00 a year. Your numbers would, then, be correspondingly higher.

Total compensation, yes, but pay, only a little more.  That is also assuming that is how much someone is making the entire time, instead of the last five or six years.  Also, the retirement being offered is the Thrift Savings Plan, ran by the federal government. It hasnÂ’t been doing so wellÂ… sense conception.

115

Which has what, exactly, to do with military retirement?  Or any retirement, for that matter: even some company that will pay you 100% of your final salary for life after 20 years doesn't owe you a penny if they decide you suck (or are too expensive) and fire you before that.

Allen, that's true but in many cases in the private sector you're vested at some point.  Usually 5 years.  So, if you leave at year 7, no, you don't get the gold plated pacakge, but you get something.

There is no vesting equivalent for military pensions.  You do 20 or you get nothing.

116 Verizon's unionized line workers account for less than 25% of their total number of employees. Somehow I think the union will loose. They never seem to learn that they work for their employer, hence the paychecks, not the union. Which also happens to garnish said paychecks from said employer.

I never understood what was great about paying another layer of management to protect oneself from "management".

117

Posted by: Ben at August 17, 2011 09:44 AM (wuv1c)

Ben, that did make me laugh

1 - Buy Raytheon stock

2- Shoot off Tomahawk missiles indiscrimatately

3 - Profit!  Court-martial!

118 What no Doom Kitty?

119 OT but I am shocked...SHOCKED that Super Scrunt^tm Kathleen Parker is comparing Perry to W.  Warning link to the WaPo.

http://tinyurl.com/3h9lxcv

120 Half of base pay ain't all that much, for an enlisted man, and when you get out on the cusp of 40 you find yourself middle aged and inexperienced in pretty much everything except yelling at privates to buff the floor in the barracks. You need that retirement money just to tide you over until you establish yourself in a new career. Yeah, I figured that out once I was already a "mid-careerist" and it was too late to change my MOS. Hmm, stay in for half base pay and be a complete broke-dick at age 40, while looking like I'm 60, with no legally marketable skills? Fuck that. Regarding the 401(k) option, though - how many Joes are just going to drink their contribution or stuff it in a g-string rather than filling out an allotment?

121 Yesterday I read an interesting piece about the way that the 14th amendment was added to the constitution. The article was written by a judge in Utah.

Near the end of the article he points out that the entire US is under Martial Law and has been since the end of the civil war. Most people think that the state of Martial Law ended when the federal troops of occupation were withdrawn after the civil war - but there was no official proclamation issued to rescind the state of Martial Law.  Those troops were simply replaced by "peace officers" and the state of Martial Law continued.

The judge points out that every state in the union has a statute defining the term "peace officer" and that the legal definition is: "The military police of the state". That is why the police wear uniforms and have military ranks like sergeant or captain. The fact that the US continues under martial law is why cities are legally able to issue curfews; neither common law nor civil law allows them to do so - but a state of Martial Law does.

Martial Law effectively suspends constitutional rule and institutes The Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces as the effective military ruler of the country.

The state of Martial Law is also what allows the Federal Reserve to issue fiat money; Federal Reserve notes are in effect Military Script issued in place of the coin of the realm.

And you only thought we were DOOMED.

122

Half of base pay ain't all that much, for an enlisted man, and when you get out on the cusp of 40 you find yourself middle aged and inexperienced in pretty much everything except yelling at privates to buff the floor in the barracks. You need that retirement money just to tide you over until you establish yourself in a new career.

I have a patient who retired from the miltary in 20 years as a captain. He took a full time job with GM and enlisted in the Indiana National Guard. In his only service he was called up for Desert Storm. He retired from the Guard (same rank). GM was downsizing and "bought him out", then hired him back from a leasing company at the same salary without benefits (he kept the benefits from their buyout package). When GM finally folded, he was again retired.

The man has a full Military pension, a National Guard pension, a GM buyout pension, and a leasing company pension. He's makeing more money in pension benefits than he's ever earned in his life. He's 62 and just took a job as an administrator in a trucking co. His biggest complaint: "Do you have any idea what I have to pay in taxes on all of that???"

123 106 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 09:37 AM (kUaEF) You have impugned the integrity of my father, who served honorably, at great risk to himself, in Frankfurt and Paris in 1953-55. Pistols at dawn. Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 09:41 AM (LH6ir) I'm assuming you jest, Shirley.

124 Posted by: lando034 at August 17, 2011 09:44 AM (6mCL

I never claimed to know the specifics of this plan.  It may truly suck; if so, it should be circular-filed forthwith.  I'm just saying that a 401(k) type plan is not actually inherently evil.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 09:44 AM (sbV1u)

That's more-or-less true.  The only place I ever worked with an actual retirement pension package, though, specified that you forfeited your vesting if you got fired for cause.  So, even in those companies, it's not a 100% thing.

My main point was that people who aren't going to use the retirement benefit anyway don't really have a particular dog in this hunt.

125 The Hard Way

126 I never understood what was great about paying another layer of management to protect oneself from "management".

Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at August 17, 2011 09:45 AM (ijjAe)

I think I read a comment, either on this blog or a similar one, that essentially said: "If you work indoors, you don't need a union."  I more or less agree with that, though I'd refine it to say, "If you work 85% of the time in an office setting, you don't a frelling union.  And if you're a public employee, you don't need a union, period." 

127 I wish people would sometimes tone down their knee jerk reactions to perceived slights and think about what others are really saying. Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 09:37 AM

And I wish everyone, from that stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure to deep-fried conservative politicians, would take the military out of their damned mouths.

I believe people who go into the military and serve honorably (as opposed to the friggin' Muzzie turncoat type), a voluntary act that gives them too great a chance to get killed or, at best, maimed, deserve everything a grateful -- and protected -- country can do for them.

If giving them modest (by some standards) pensions means gutting the benefits of fat-assed layabouts (Congress), traitors (the current president) and deskbound cretins (most government "workers"), so be it, and a big boo-hoo to those clueless wimps who have been skating along for years and are trying to hurt the military to cover up their own fuckups.

Does a lot of military funding need to be reformed to banish waste, greed and stupidity? Damn right it does. Do our soliders, sailors and airmen have to take it in the shorts so Osama Obama can have his million-dollar Block Bus? HELL NO!!!

128 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 09:42 AM (8y9MW)

I actually agree that moving to a defined contribution plan is the financially prudent move, and one that is not without some risk.

The military is filled with men (insert obligatory reference to chicks who serve) who serve honorably and with great distinction. It should not be sacrosanct however.

Oh, by the way, Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.

129 Regarding the 401(k) option, though - how many Joes are just going to drink their contribution or stuff it in a g-string rather than filling out an allotment? Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 09:47 AM (lbo6/) Wait. GI Joes wear g-strings now?

130 Hey, morons, it doesn't matter than Yggie is a dripping-wet thirty-year-old three-legged fuckstool, he went to Hahvahd and that makes him an authoritative voice or some shit.

131 112 But this was her point of view. She has had to take two pay cuts to keep her job. Does she have nice tits? Would she like to make a Jackson the hard way? Posted by: garrett at August 17, 2011 09:43 AM (c+sPX) It only hurts the first ten times or so. Just ask Barney Frank.

132 No telling how many people were murdered as this sick, corrupt scheme went down.  If people donÂ’t go to jail over this, this country is way past saving, imo.

But the MFM, much like the Honey Badger, don't care.

133   Among all those other things (ObamaCare, SS, Medicare, Medicaid, foreign aid, etc.) that need to be cut are military expenses.  One way to do that, and still allow our troops to have a possibility at a decent retirement, is to move to a defined contribution retirement benefit."

Yeah, maybe do some of those things first?  We already have a decent retirement, and if that decent retirement is the straw that breaks the nation's financial back, we may as well not even fucking bothering having a military. Since we obviously cannot afford it.  Better to just go back to the cadre model we used to follow and just suck it up when the first six months of next war are a total clusterfuck, I guess.

I'm sorry, but the prospect of a nice 401k, maybe, when I'm 68 is not much of a motivator to sign on for another six years of being gone all the goddamned time.

134 O/T:  Beck is playing a perry commercial.  I'm not so sure we are interested in hearing about hope again.

135 Varying values of OT:  How boned is California?  They have R.O.U.S.es.

136 #133 if it isn't about B.O., Bo the dog, or Michelle's tone arms, or bashing Republicans the MFM don't give a fuck.

137 @123: First of all, he was Officer - a different kettle of fish than an enlisted. Obviously, some will always do better than others. I don't think anyone can claim his story is "typical."

138 Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at August 17, 2011 09:35 AM (ijjAe)

Try to follow the discussion. I know it's difficult, but with a little practice and a dictionary you should be able to understand.

Coming directly from one of the vanguard of the "Don't Know How To Quote Properly" club.

Heh.  And heh again.

139 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 09:47 AM (kUaEF)

Of course!

My dad had orders for Korea when the police action ended. They sent him to Frankfurt instead, where he learned to drink good beer and curse in German. Then they sent him to Paris, where he served on a four-service post, ate good food, banged hot chicks and perfected his French. But he made PFC after 18 months! His Sgt's comment was, "don't let the power go to your head."

140

Trump nails this one.  Mentions something about miserable clusterfuckÂ… didnÂ’t catch it all.

141 @136- This capybara is believed to weigh between 100-120 lbs. 
That is one big freaking rat.

142

And it took me only two months--two months!--to conclude that America's best hope for sane technocratic governance required the elimination of the Republican Party from our political system as rapidly as possible.

You know, I'm really really getting sick of people wishing that I didn't exist.  Also, I want to know how this isn't a direct threat against me.  I'm very serious about this, this is literally eliminationist rhetoric.  Why should I presume that it is meant metaphorically or hyperbolically? 

 

 

 

143 Posted by: curious at August 17, 2011 09:54 AM (k1rwm)

I thought you were going to post those pictures? Where's the link?

144

I'm sorry, but the prospect of a nice 401k, maybe, when I'm 68 is not much of a motivator to sign on for another six years of being gone all the goddamned time

Thank you.  Spot. Fucking. On.

That's the point.

Sure, we'll save money.  But one of the few Constitutionally mandated functions of the Federal government will be gutted - or at the very least - well damaged.

I don't recall a phrase in the Constitution along the lines of "Congress shall have the power to raise a health care program and levy taxes for its execution."  But I could have just skipped over that part.  It was college and all and I was probably drunk.

Go ahead, cut SS, Medicare, and everything else.  If it still doesn't balance the books, then hit up the military.  Because if it comes to that, we're boned whether we have a military or not.

 

145 The one great equalizer in the military 401 concept for new personnel is to obtain the necessary skills desired in a few short years without intent to retire and leave with 401 intact. In the defined benefit plan, leaving prior to 20 years results in no benefit.

Additionally, if trapped in a RIF (reduction in force) in which the rules have been changed through the years, the person would leave with 401 and not just the dislocation allowance. 

Therefore, I would predict a large turnover in personnel, and especially in the Combat Arms where the skill sets are not readily transferable.

Posted by: Fish the Impaler

 

This isn't a bad idea, especially if the plan is portable after EOS, and has tax advantages.

My other thought is that if this can be considered by our betters for the m,ilitary, then we can certainly apply it to SS. My take on our debt issue is that if we treat entitlement beneficiaries half as badly as we do the military, then we can reduce our debt.

146 P.S. As currently proposed, the 401k thingie for the military would vest pretty early.

I've seen another proposal for retaining the defined benefits plan, having it kick in at age 68, but vesting on a pro-rated basis pretty early.

147 hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope,hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope......

148 Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at August 17, 2011 09:56 AM (jx2j9)

How awesome would it be for a conservative (Trump isn't really one, but that's okay) to go on TV and say, "Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure."

149 Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at August 17, 2011 09:54 AM (uehxp)

Oh, please explain the finer points of the rules regarding quotations. Will you be reading from the AOSHQ style book?

150 I think the peoples (us) contribution to the plan should be a couple of points higher, that the maximum contribution limit should be 20K-ish and that the catch-up number should also be higher, say maybe 10K. Additionally, upon retirement, the participants plan should remain in effect with the exception of the employer contribution percentage, if that retiree decides to go into the private sector. Give us 8, 10, 20+ years of your life and we will show you the love in small, green, ways.

151 After reading the Seattle green jobs story, I have only three questions - what the fuck are "social justice", "economic justice", and "social equity"?

152 "...banged hot chicks and perfected his French. " Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 09:55 AM (LH6ir) Ahhh, a Cunning Linguist, eh?

153 Eliminationist rhetoric is so leftwing nazi.(D)

154 Posted by: Waterhouse at August 17, 2011 09:59 AM (Ya0IT)

I'll take "Oxymorons" for 1000, Alex.

155 hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope, hope......

Posted by: phoenixgirl

 

I think you're doing it wrong. Try more lotion.

156

After reading the Seattle green jobs story, I have only three questions - what the fuck are "social justice", "economic justice", and "social equity"?

Code words for "I'm taking more of your money"

157 #143 the lefties always think that their shitty ideas wouldn't fail if it weren't for people of differing opinions being around to criticize. You see it isn't they shitty ideas that don't work which are the problem, it's the people that happen to notice this and point it out. Everything would be awesome if only the whole world turned a blind eye. Kind of like legalizing all criminal activity and then proudly declaring that we are now a crime free society!

158

After reading the Seattle green jobs story, I have only three questions - what the fuck are "social justice", "economic justice", and "social equity"?

MOAR FAIR

159 152, Communism, Communism, and Communism.

160

Just in case anyone was in any doubt, our Administration is in the process of throwing another ally under the bus.

U.S. sale of fighter jets to Taiwan unlikely - sources

(Reuters) - A U.S. sale of 66 new Lockheed Martin F-16 C/D fighter jets to Taiwan appears unlikely to go through, people familiar with the matter said on Monday, although they cautioned that no final decision has been reached.

Taiwan has repeatedly asked Washington to agree to sell it the advanced F-16 fighter jets, citing the need to counter the growing military strength of China, which views the island as a breakaway province.

China cut off ties with the U.S. military for most of last year to protest an American arms package for Taiwan. While other deals were possible, sources following the issue said they believed Washington would probably opt against the sale of new F-16s.

"If the Obama administration goes this way, as expected, then it's a political decision," said Rupert Hammond-Chambers, president of the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council, which supports the sale of new fighter jets to Taiwan...

More at the Reuters link.  H/T Weasel Zippers.

161 It's why the left loves Newspeak. Eliminating the language to describe the problem, eliminates the problem in their book. Hard to acknowledge what exists, but can't be described as so.

162

Code words for "I'm taking more of your money"

Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 10:01 AM (sbV1u)

And giving it to people who hate you.

163 140, I bet your Dad was fun to have a beer with.

164 Your doom isn't helping my investment strategy.

When is the crash coming?

165

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 10:02 AM (LH6ir)

Or people who have an abundance of melanin.

166

We, and this country may be DOOMed, but we, because of what is being done on our behalf, are f—ked.  And here is one small reason why.  Why would they have to hide this?

167 Posted by: Oldsailor's poet at August 17, 2011 10:02 AM (ZDUD4)

He still is!

168 117 Verizon's unionized line workers account for less than 25% of their total number of employees. Somehow I think the union will lose.

National Labor Relations Board.... ask Boeing

169 Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 10:03 AM (sbV1u)

Obama has done a very good job in that respect. It's becoming the same thing.

170 Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 09:58 AM (8y9MW)

Way awesome.

171

Why would they have to hide this?

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at August 17, 2011 10:04 AM (jx2j9)

To ask the question is to answer it.

Snatch the pebble from my hand, Grasshopper.

172

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 10:02 AM (LH6ir)

Or people who have an abundance of melanin.

Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 10:03 AM (sbV1u)

But you repeat yourself (at least in Philly...)

173 Good for Kudlow, but I disagree that Perry's characterizations of the potential actions of the Fed as "almost treacherous" was over the line.  I don't think we should concede that point. 

I was always taught that there's a vast difference between hating what a person does and hating the person.  It seems to me, Perry stayed on the correct side of that line.  He didn't call Bernanke a traitor (or a terrorist!), he said those actions would be traitorous. 

174

Posted by: MWR, proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit at August 17, 2011 10:01 AM (4df7R)

Bet the Chi-Coms upped their time-table for taking Taiwan, especially as the Party Leadership (the more sane ones) see the crash coming. 

175 Posted by: Sean Bannion at August 17, 2011 09:57 AM (sbV1u)

Like I've said- if this specific proposal sucks, then this specific proposal sucks.

However, I'm willing to bet that a (fairly generous) plan would balance the books fairly easily.  Highlights of such a plan might be:

1) 1 : 1 dollar matching to 3% of salary 1 : 2 dollar matching for the next 3 % (that is, if I put in 6%, the govt chips in 4.5% for a total of 10.5% of my salary going into a 401(k)- not fantastic, but better than average, now).

2) Instant vesting of interest, fully vested on employer (govt) contribution after 5 years

3) No age limit on withdrawals- subject to Federal Law (I think there are laws about how 401(k)s can be accessed).

4) Full portable (subject to vesting rules, above).

Now, that's not a perfect plan, but it's more generous than many businesses offer, now.  Further, it would be able to bridge that "gap" between ending your service and gaining a more marketable skill, if necessary.

Especially over 20 years, it just doesn't take that much to fund a livable retirement- if you'll actually do it.

176 Can you stop with the pussy pictures? It's way too early.

177 You say that like it's a bad thing, cracka!

178 Posted by: The Robot Devil at August 17, 2011 10:04 AM (136wp)

I hope they lose their shirts, and not just because I hate unions. They backed up traffic last week on Rte. 17 for miles. Fucking cocksuckers. Do they think that delaying me is going to make me more disposed to supporting their outrageous demands for more pay, fluffers at every break, and nine weeks of vacation?

179

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 09:48 AM (LH6ir)

Again, what you are overlooking is this would amount to an 18-25% pay cut, more closer you are to retirement. Would you stay at your job if your pay was cut by this amount? I stay in the military because I am proud of and like what I do, but being out of the US 7 of the last 8 years, currently sitting on my sixth deployment (this one ten months), staring down the barrel of a 13 month IA six months after returning to homeport, and not really getting to see my daughter until she turns three, makes the other side of the fence look pretty green. Go ahead; cut my compensation by a quarter. Just be prepared to pay out the ass in a few years to retain the few who remain. People who CAN do my job donÂ’t just come off the street. The Navy has spent 12 years and millions of dollars training and developing me and my peers. Also, in my case, what I have done IS transferable to the outside.  What really pisses me off is what this means for those senior NCOÂ’s who work for me. The estimated savings is 254.1 billion over 20 years, or 2% of the current military budget over the same time period.  We canÂ’t find this somewhere else? Not worth gutting the experience in the military. This policy is extremely short sighted.

 

180 Hey prettypolishgirl, I'm sure you're familiar with kielbasa. How would you feel about some Cajun sausage?

181 what the fuck are "social justice", "economic justice", and "social equity"?

Politically sanctioned extortion from productive citizens by unproductive grievance mongering groups.

If you're a life long multi-generational welfare recipient apparently you're disadvantaged and get to shake down hardworking people for even more money, especially if you live in an urban area. Especially if Democrats are in charge.

182

It must be the end times, look what is happening in NJ:

http://tinyurl.com/44dzf34

New Jersey registered voters are split on what they think of Christie, with 47 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving. ThatÂ’s slightly better for Christie than a June Quinnipiac poll, when 44 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved.

Obama’s approval ratings have suffered, with 52 percent of voters disapproving and 44 percent approving — down from a positive 50 percent to 46 percent in June.

183

Now, that's not a perfect plan, but it's more generous than many businesses offer, now.

I think where you and I part ways is in your phrase above.

The military isn't just another "business."  That's why I argue there is a moral dimension here that is not found in other areas of government.

However, I stipulate that when national security is contracted out to Blackwater (or whatever they call themelves these days) your plan makes perfect sense.

184 162 It's why the left loves Newspeak. Eliminating the language to describe the problem, eliminates the problem in their book. Hard to acknowledge what exists, but can't be described as so.

Posted by: Blue Falcon in Boston at August 17, 2011 10:02 AM (ijjAe)

"He who determines the definitions decides the debate."

One of my dickhead liberal college professors liked to say that, and of course he was absolutely correct.  I just happened to know that he was a liberal dickhead and that HE wanted HIS definitions to decide the debate.  Sadly, many of my mush-brained fellow classmates were perfectly happy to allow that to go unchallenged.  But then, these were the same mush-brained fellow classmates who were too stupid to understand the basic premise that "correlation does not equal causality."  The amount of times we got tested on that simple, basic, easy premise because everyone else in the damn class kept failing was unreal.

185 181,

Mmmmm boudain, just bought a fresh batch homemade by the coonass down the street.

186 177 Can you stop with the pussy pictures? It's way too early. Posted by: Marcus at August 17, 2011 10:06 AM (CHrmZ) Would you prefer a shot of Katie Couric's pollipy colon?

187 I'm sure you're familiar with kielbasa.

I assumed the "polish" was in reference to knobs, rather than an Eastern European country.

188 179 Posted by: The Robot Devil at August 17, 2011 10:04 AM (136wp)

I hope they lose their shirts, and not just because I hate unions. They backed up traffic last week on Rte. 17 for miles. Fucking cocksuckers. Do they think that delaying me is going to make me more disposed to supporting their outrageous demands for more pay, fluffers at every break, and nine weeks of vacation?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 10:07 AM (LH6ir)

Yep, try to get any work done in a Central Office controlled by these jerks and it's like going to Emperor.

189 Colon polyps enhance anal sex!!

190

Bet the Chi-Coms upped their time-table for taking Taiwan, especially as the Party Leadership (the more sane ones) see the crash coming. 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at August 17, 2011 10:06 AM (9hSKh)

And we must bend our knee to the wishes of our Chinese overlords.

191 181 Hey prettypolishgirl,

I'm sure you're familiar with kielbasa.

How would you feel about some Cajun sausage?

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 10:08 AM (lbo6/)

What's the matter did the local Applebee's have to close?

192 I assumed the "polish" was in reference to knobs, rather than an Eastern European country.

Posted by: Waterhouse at August 17, 2011 10:10 AM (Ya0IT)

No, it's the country.

Although we like how you think.  You're a true Moron.

193
Hey!

You damn kids keep off of my DOOM!

194 I'm starting to think Monty might be a bit of a pessimist.

195 That's why I argue there is a moral dimension here that is not found in other areas of government.

I'm not discounting that, I just think that "moral dimension" is a very, very slippery slope to go down- especially when we're staring DOOM! in the face.

Also, I probably wouldn't do anything like this for anyone who is already in the military.  It would be a strictly "going-forward" thing.  Unlike what I'd do to SS (which would be phased in), because there's just no good, just (note that I didn't say "fair") way to make those changes for anyone who is already in the military.

196 177 Can you stop with the pussy pictures? It's way too early.

Listen, if people want to post pictures of Obama, they can. It's a free country...

197

...note that I didn't say "fair"

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 10:13 AM (8y9MW)

About the only thing I remember from high school is my American History teacher saying (in response to some jackhole), "You won't faind the word 'fair' anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.  Go ahead look for it, I'll wait."

198 "sane technocratic governance" - thats almost a Goodwin Law violation

199

New Jersey registered voters are split on what they think of Christie, with 47 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving. ThatÂ’s slightly better for Christie than a June Quinnipiac poll, when 44 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved.

Obama’s approval ratings have suffered, with 52 percent of voters disapproving and 44 percent approving — down from a positive 50 percent to 46 percent in June.

So were like a purple state now or something ? Who would have thought all it would have taken was a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure to pull that one off ?

 

200 Perry- Look bad but feel good, why you must be a vagina!

Odumbass- Watch your mouth you mean man, sob.

201 @ Grunt, That's good stuff. One of the few things I like about South Louisiana is that you can find better sausage, boudin and andouille in just about any gas station than you can in gourmet butcher shops up north. Gonna have to make my own if I want some up here.

202 I'm not a big fan of 401ks. The plans my wife and I have severly limit you choices of where to invest. I would have loved to buy some gold with mine, but you can't. I have also lost faith in wall street. Not necessarily the companies, but the Government meddling that has made the whole system into a house of cards.

203

Bet the Chi-Coms upped their time-table for taking Taiwan, especially as the Party Leadership (the more sane ones) see the crash coming. 

Meh, if they forgive out debt....is Taiwan worth 2-3 trillion dollars to us?

Or if they invade Taiwan, it would give us a convenient excuse to declare all debt held by china to be null and void

204 Gold Market Is a ‘Bubble Poised to Burst,’ Wells Fargo Says (Bloomberg)... but not before the bad mortgage bubble that is Wells Fargo bursts

monty, what do you think of this?

I'm not sure. Gold sure doesn't seem like it's in a bubble -- its appreciation is not a spike as it would be in a bubble, but a slow, steady rise. I think it's overbought, but that doesn't mean it's in a bubble. It may correct back down to, say, $1600 or so; but it's going to trend higher, not lower, until we get our financial house in order.

Which is my way of saying: you gots to take your chances. Going long gold is a way of going short the USD, and I'm all for shorting the USD until someone in the government starts getting a fucking clue.

205 202,

Yeah I buy all my meat (chicken, pork and beef) from this guys butcher shop and it's 3 generations of his family that owns it, even his youngest son has a shrimp boat where I buy all my shrimp, very inexpensive too.

206 Posted by: lando034 at August 17, 2011 10:07 AM (6mCL

You make a ridiculous assumption; that moving from defined benefit to defined contribution will automatically decrease your benefits by " 18-25%." I have no idea where this number is coming from, but it makes no sense.

Making military pensions market driven just makes financial sense. Nobody is suggesting that we immediately gut the pension program. Move to defined contribution over a generation. That will be painless.

207 Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at August 17, 2011 10:20 AM (mmY9T)

Have I ever mentioned that I'm quite jealous of your culinary options?

208 205 Gold Market Is a ‘Bubble Poised to Burst,’ Wells Fargo Says (Bloomberg)... but not before the bad mortgage bubble that is Wells Fargo bursts

monty, what do you think of this?

I'm not sure. Gold sure doesn't seem like it's in a bubble -- its appreciation is not a spike as it would be in a bubble, but a slow, steady rise. I think it's overbought, but that doesn't mean it's in a bubble. It may correct back down to, say, $1600 or so; but it's going to trend higher, not lower, until we get our financial house in order.

Which is my way of saying: you gots to take your chances. Going long gold is a way of going short the USD, and I'm all for shorting the USD until someone in the government starts getting a fucking clue.

Posted by: Monty at August 17, 2011 10:20 AM (/0a60)

One additional note. Gold prices have climb exponentially in the last month. Have to be careful about that. Also, it's become uncoupled from silver prices. Makes one wonder if silver is a forewarning for gold.

209

One of the few things I like about South Louisiana is that you can find better sausage, boudin and andouille in just about any gas station than you can in gourmet butcher shops up north.

 

Tasso Ham. 

Why can't you find it anywhere but the bayou?

210 2 Carry-over Doom Monty

I predicted the RINOs from MI would sell us out on that Supershit Committee

Too bad I canÂ’t place a flaming skull in the comment box

Article goes bla bla blaÂ…..and then

Upton, a moderate Republican, also said "tax reform is long overdue," adding that while he doesn't think raising taxes on businesses will help with job growth, he would be open to closing loopholes.

Keep in mind what the Pelosi commies consider loopholes. Be advised that when they talk about “tax reform” what they actually mean is raising taxes. And yes, if you eliminate the deduction for home mortgages and then start taxing employer provided health insurance as income you are, in fact, raising the damn tax rates on nearly every “working American”.

Since you "asked" me, Vic, the baseline means that they still can't raise rates. They can close loopholes, though, which I have always said. Also, Chairman Camp means flatter rates when they talk about tax reform, which he usually mention first. Not as sure about Chairman Upton, though, since they don't quote more of his remarks and I'd have to listen to the entirety of is remarks. But it still remains unlikely that a grand bargain will result from this. These committees rarely achieve anything significant and a sequestration so easily overridden shouldn't really make that much of an impact.

211 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 10:17 AM (lbo6/)

Whereabouts is "up here," for you? There are a few great places in my neck of the woods.

212 @180 What you said.

I'm one of those NCOs you mentioned, and my skillset is sort of transferable..if I wanted to be a merchant mariner and...stay gone all the damned time.  That pays pretty well, but the ensuing divorce would probably eat up the difference-anyways, that's my problem, not yours.

In any event, there is something all of you are overlooking:  None of this shit happens to anyone currently in the service.  It applies only to those who sign on after the changes are enacted.  You green eyeshades types are gonna have to wait twenty fucking years before you see dime one of your projected savings.  You'll be paying the increased costs for recruiting and retention (i.e., big fucking bonuses, which are great if you are deployed in a tax-free zone) tomorrow.  Does this still sound like a good deal, or is this maybe another case of fucking up one of the few government programs that works pretty well and actually does something worth doing?

And what are the odds this is anything more than a circle jerk?  Ever hear of REDUX?  How many servicemembers actually retired under that plan?  Not that many, and the those that did  got a pot of money up front at their 15 year point-thanks to subsequent changes made to the original plan.

P.S. You will not be getting back that money you spent on recruiting and retention.

213 @ Grunt,

That's good stuff. One of the few things I like about South Louisiana is that you can find better sausage, boudin and andouille in just about any gas station than you can in gourmet butcher shops up north.

Gonna have to make my own if I want some up here.

Posted by: Empire of Jeff

 

Is there any place down there that would ship?

214 I'm with Sean on the defined benefit pensions for veterans. We've had them in one form or another since 1776. That's more than... Fifty years! It is a unique form of service and deserves unique benefits. Should congressional, judicial and executive pensions be eliminated or shifted to defined-contribution plans? Postal workers? State and municipal employees? Umm... FUCK. YES. The military? No.

215 Whereabouts is "up here," for you? There are a few great places in my neck of the woods. Ontario.

216 215, My concearn about 401k's stems from seeing (and having seen) too many people in their late 50s with little more than two- or three hundred thousand dollars in their 401k plans. Their dreams of retiring with their near $60k income are out the window as they struggle to figure out if (not when) they can retire. They thought they were doing well. But thatÂ’s only because no one told them differently. And with their 401k, they have no options. I feel the very same way, you always know when Congress is trying to screw other people. They don't apply those rules to themselves.

217 Making military pensions market driven just makes financial sense. Nobody is suggesting that we immediately gut the pension program. Move to defined contribution over a generation. That will be painless.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 10:23 AM (LH6ir)

Um, that's exactly what we are suggesting. And, contrary to your blithe assertions, it will not be painless.  Throw in the proposed changes to Tricare and the commissary, and tell me again why I should stick around past my first enlistment when I can get out and use my G.I. Bill?  Tell me again why I should choose a rate (that the the Navy needs, btw) that does not offer the immediate prospect of moving into a civilian job with the same skill set.  Tell me why I should volunteer for that extra sea duty assignment when I am up for shore duty.

Keep adding perverse incentives to the system and see where you are in twenty years.  It will not be so painless as you might suppose.

218 What about widow's pensions? My father died of a service related injury and my mother is receiving a pension that could in no way be replaced by a 401k plan.

219 In 2010, there were 1,917,242 *total* military retirees receiving retirement pay. Total obligations were $50B. Twice that amount went out in SSDI benefits in 2010. $58B went out in EITC in 2010. If every little bit counts, then let's start clawing back from the deadweight, deadbeat freeloaders first.

220 We've had them in one form or another since 1776. That's more than... Fifty years! Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 10:32 AM (lbo6/) Why Yes, yes it is!!

221 Picture it: All the Wall Street suits drooling over hundreds of millions of dollars in military pension money. I bet the great big checks will be rolling into the Campaigns if they can pull this off.

222

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at August 17, 2011 10:23 AM (LH6ir)

It is at least worth 18-25% of your total compensation if you retire after 20 years. It is fifty percent of the average of your highest three years, paid until you die. If you retire at 40 and then live into your eighties, factor in COLA increases, and the total payout is a large chunk of money. Why do you think they want to get rid of it? Just to piss people off?

223 Heh living in the original homeland of Cajuns and you can't get any boudin. Suck it Canuck!

224 Monty,

You should have linked to the WSJ article: Warren Buffet's Tax Dodge.

Barney Kilgore, the man who made the Wall Street Journal into a national publication, was once asked why so many rich people favored higher taxes. That's easy, he replied. They already have their money.

That insight is worth recalling amid the latest political duet from President Obama and Warren Buffett demanding higher taxes on "millionaires and billionaires." Mr. Buffett is repeating his now familiar argument this week, coinciding with Mr. Obama's Midwestern road trip on the economy. Since the media are treating Mr. Buffett as a tax oracle, let's take a closer look at some of the billionaire's intellectual tax dodges.

I don't know if it's behind the paywall, but I can post the entire article if anyone wants.

225 Ontario? Damn disregard my last insult.

226

Oh, please explain the finer points of the rules regarding quotations. Will you be reading from the AOSHQ style book?

Alrighty, fully caffeinated, ready for work, etc.  It's going to be a bright and glorious day.

That said, let's peel the layers of this onion back carefully and we'll assume from the beginning that perhaps I'm doing something wrong (unaware of a feature) or both my browsers (IE and Firefox) are broken.

So, is there a feature in yours that links you directly back to the timestamp w/o having to search back through the thread to find it?

227 "I'd also like to point out that the g-ddamn MFM is going to characterize every word out of Perry's mouth as the most incendiary thing to ever hit the political airwaves." If Perry calls Obama a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure, I'll have an erection lasting more than four hours.

228 What Monty and AllenG fail to grasp is this:

Military people are asked to spend the most productive years of their lives making a very crappy salary.  A 401(k) based on a crappy salary is a crappy retirement. 

AllenG - if a person in the military could make your $100k plus salary and have dollar for dollar match from day one, then I am sure they would love to go for it.  But, do you have any idea how much less than that they make?  Apparently not, because you wouldn't make such asinine comparisons.

Monty - I'll take that bet of yours.. change over to a 401(k) and watch the long-term military become non-existent except for officers.

229 228, Hey, welcome to Palinista world, take a seat and enjoy the show.

230 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 10:35 AM (lbo6/)

"Up here" doesn't mean "ass-end of the universe."

That's a food wasteland.

231 @231 Not opening for me, but, yeah, now that you mention it, I do recall something along those lines.

232 Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at August 17, 2011 10:44 AM (PMGbu)

I thought you were being a smart-ass. If not....

I guess you could copy the number of the comment. Then when you click on it the screen will jump to that comment. But that seems unwieldy.

233 How much would it suck to be engaged in a firefight in Afghanistan and be wondering whether you should drop your M-4 to run to the computer and reallocate your portfolio when the market's tanking?

Seriously, folks. This is a concern that servicemen shouldn't have. The country should have their backs on this one.

234

Chi-Town Jerry at August 17, 2011 10:48 AM (f9c2L),

      Why officers?

235

Um, that's exactly what we are suggesting. And, contrary to your blithe assertions, it will not be painless.  Throw in the proposed changes to Tricare and the commissary, and tell me again why I should stick around past my first enlistment when I can get out and use my G.I. Bill?  Tell me again why I should choose a rate (that the the Navy needs, btw) that does not offer the immediate prospect of moving into a civilian job with the same skill set.  Tell me why I should volunteer for that extra sea duty assignment when I am up for shore duty.

Keep adding perverse incentives to the system and see where you are in twenty years.  It will not be so painless as you might suppose.

Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth

 

Several people have already pointed out that certain MOS do not lend themselves to later civilian employment. We used to consdier public sector employment as being lower pay, but that was ameliorated by its job security, steadiness, and benefits.

The military are seeing cuts, the multiple deployments, which started under Clinton (remember the peace dividend?) and now attacks on benefits. If it is perverse that public sector jobs retain their job security and now have higher pay and benefits than the private sector, then it is equally perverse that we go the opposite way and make the military still worse than the private sector.

I still think that this, and all other options need to be considered; our debt issue is that dire. But I also agre that if we can consider this, we should first abolish all public sector unions and reform SS.

236 Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 17, 2011 10:48 AM (f9c2L)

Ummm... do your math again.  X * .12 does not equal $7500 when X = 100,000.  I do make a pretty good salary- I'll admit it.  However, the point is that you don't actually have to put all that much money into a well run (okay- that's the hard part) investment portfolio to make good money over 20 years.

And, I'm sorry, if someone gets in the military as Private and never goes past the rank of Sergeant, why should I be too concerned about his retirement?  Yes, he's doing a very dangerous, very necessary job that limits his post-military skills (sometimes, anyway).  But that's why there is a GI bill, and there are a ton of schools that have special programs just for military (especially deployed military) personnel to help them get degrees while they're still in the military.  There are lots of dirty, dangerous, necessary jobs which- if you stay in them for 20+ years, leave you with few, or no, other marketable skills.  If you stay in a low-paying portion of that industry, should I subsidize your retirement, too?

I love our military, and I'm not excited about the prospect of changing their benefits.  What you're overlooking is that, if well funded and well managed (again, a couple of big ifs, I'll admit) it's the people at the low end of the scale who actually benefit most from defined contribution plans.

I know, for instance, that a married E-3 doesn't make a ton of money on his own, but he get various allowances that help make things up.  My wife's ex was an E-3 in the Air Force (stationed at Dyess AFB in Abilene).  When they were together, they could have (if he'd been less stupid) lived relatively comfortably on his salary and allowances alone.  Asking new enlisted members to fund a retirement account really shouldn't be beyond the pale.

237 Military people are asked to spend the most productive years of their lives making a very crappy salary.  A 401(k) based on a crappy salary is a crappy retirement.

Look, no one has higher respect for military folks than me. I was a grunt myself. But it is a volunteer force. If you join the Army to get rich, you're an idiot. (In fact, if you join the Army to get decent pay, you're an idiot.) When you join the military, you are making certain trade-offs. The draft is over -- no one is forcing you to do it.

Look: I'm all for supporting veterans. If you're wounded in the line of duty, you should get free healthcare for life. No exceptions. If you're killed in action, your family should receive a death benefit. But to continue to insist that a crappy government pension is adequate payment for 20 years of military service is just silly. A 401(k) style plan is yours, and you can take it with you if you only choose to serve 5 or 10 years. It will pay off better in retirement. It is an asset that you can use as collateral for loans, or leave to your heirs.

Yes, it does require more involvement on the part of the individual, but how is that so bad? If you can't be bothered to plan for your own retirement, whose fault is that? You don't have to be a rocket-scientist to figure out a 401(k), people: you generally have "aggressive", "less aggressive", or "risk-averse" portfolios, and you pick one. Your contributions come directly out of your paycheck (pre-tax). You can check in on it every couple of months or so to see how you're doing and adjust the contributions if you wish.

I just don't understand the love for a crappy Uncle Sugar pension. It's a lousy "thank you" for years of hard service, in my opinion, and I'm surprised to see people defending it. (That and the fact that you only get it if you do your 20. Guys who serve just as honorably but get out after 10 years get nothing. Doesn't their service matter just as much?)

238 Second try: http://tiny.cc/84tai

239 I can't speak to all the branches, but let's look at the likelihood of making the Navy a career in to days environment.
And let's look at just the Enlisted side for a moment.

With the various programs in the Delayed Entry Program (DEP), it is probable that at completion of Boot Camp, a person will make E-2 right away.
And it is very likely that they will be advanced directly to E-3 on graduation.
That by itself is not bad money for a recent High School graduate, due to the fact that everything from room to board is provided to them. And in all honesty, there are several other expenses that a recent graduate from High School, just starting out on their own would face that a junior Enlisted won't have to face.
No need for a vehicle to get to and from work.
No vehicle insurance costs.
No cost to outfit your first apartment, as you either can live onboard, or in barracks.
No concerns for health care costs.
Minimal clothing costs.

For a young man or woman just starting out, it's not bad.

Now, let's look at the career aspect for a minute.
Advancements from E-4 to E-6 are based on a combination of performance evaluations, and tests that are given twice a year (March and  September).
These, for the most part are your only opportunities to advance another pay grade. And for each Advancement Cycle, for each paygrade, in each particular specialty (Rate, or MOS for non Navy types) there is a specific cap on the percentage of candidates who may be advanced. Usually, for the lower pay grades, the advancement opportunities are reasonably high, and if you are a good performer, with a fair knowledge of your specialty, there is a good chance of being advanced another pay grade. However, by the time you are competing for E-6, the percentages really start to drop much lower. For some specialties, it may be as low as 15% of those competing, being able to advance. At this point, another hurdle is starting to come into play. This is known as High Year Tenure. A Navy E-5 must make E-6 before they reach 14 years of service, or they are released from active duty.
Now comes the real Hurdle. In the Navy, making E-7 (Chief Petty Officer) is based on taking the E-7 exam, and if you score high enough, your record is reviewed for advancement by the CPO Selection Board held only once a year.
And in some cases, the advancement percentage is as low as 10 people being selected this exam cycle from the entire Navy wide community for that specialty.

And if you reach the 20 year mark as an E-6, without being selected for E-7, you're out, granted you're out with 50% of E-6 over 20 year pay, but you're done.

Once you make E-7, the advancement opportunities really start to drop off sharply, as usually, by law, only 3% of the Enlisted ranks can be a combination of E-8 and E-9, with E-9 being the highest Enlisted pay grade. And it works out usually that only 1% of the Enlisted ranks consist of Master Chief Petty Officers (E-9). And only an E-9 is allowed to remain on active duty up to 30 years of service, where you then receive 75% of base pay as your retirement pay.

Is 75% of base pay a good retirement? Sure it is, if you have also been setting aside additional income for retirement. But statistically, only 1% of those who remain on active Duty will see that size retirement check. And of course, at that point, you have been in the business for 30 years, with all the baggage, aches, pains and so on that come with doing that type of activity for 30 years. And on top of it, your staring age 50 right in the face as you retire.

But for the most part, a huge percentage of retirees consist of E-6 with 20 years drawing 50% of base pay.

Who knows what the changes to retirement policies will be, but I suspect that the cost will as usual, rest on the shoulders of the mid level retirees.

240

Obviously, some will always do better than others. I don't think anyone can claim his story is "typical."

Didn't say, or mean to imply, that it was a typical story. He enlisted, got promoted and was sent to OCS. The guy just had his act together.

241 I just don't understand the love for a crappy Uncle Sugar pension. It's a lousy "thank you" for years of hard service, in my opinion, and I'm surprised to see people defending it. (That and the fact that you only get it if you do your 20. Guys who serve just as honorably but get out after 10 years get nothing. Doesn't their service matter just as much?)

Posted by: Monty

 

I think that my last post attempted to answer this. Other public employees get as good or better pensions without doing nearly what the average service member does (multiple foreign deployments). Yes, in both cases they're voluntary. We need to eliminate ALL government defined benefit pensions. Starting with those in DC is an excellent way to start.

242

Posted by: MrScribbler at August 17, 2011 09:48 AM (YjjrR)

 

Amen.  Well said.  Military service is the single most vital service rendered to the State.  Assurance of a modest stipend in old age is a small price to pay.  And getting smaller, as the force is steadily reduced.  It's certainly a more prudent investment than SS could ever be.

I do not care if a serviceman is a loutish pig and unfit for police society - he's done a job, or been willing to do it, that is supremely critical.  Killing the enemies of the US or disuading them from attacking us.  Military pensions will not bankrupt the state, but even if they could, I'm of the view that the guys who served should be the last ones to starve.

243

AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 17, 2011 10:59 AM (8y9MW)

   Once again, it is about total compensation. The current retirement is a huge lure. Cut it, and why not just do the shitty job on the outside and see your family every day, if the compensation is the same. Also, in the military, it is almost impossible for your spouse to hold a steady job, which constitutes significant lost opportunity costs.  

244
Flying around and dropping bombs turned out to not be a marketable skill.


If I had been in charge of my investments I would have been unemployable and broke, too.

245

Accidentally posted in the other thread.

If the government kills the current retirement system, a lot of guys are not going to stick around.  Yeah, defined benefits from age 40 is more expensive than 401(k)s, but it's necessary.  Not so much with the officer corps, but definately with the enlisted ranks.

246 I guess you could copy the number of the comment. Then when you click on it the screen will jump to that comment. But that seems unwieldy.

Precisely the problem...

247 That's a food wasteland. Tell me aboot it. And polynikes, You're off the Protected Rolls. How ya like them apples, you filthy swampback?

248 (Emphasis mine.) Pity. A man I thought was an honest advocate for opinions I disagree with turns out to be the same kind of spiteful, uncritical ideologue that Krugman is. The mistake was mine for seeing something that was never there, I guess.

One of ZH's bloggers calls DeLong "Krugman's Fluffer". He's a hack who can't cut it outside of Berkeley and only gets national influence because he's the first in line to polish Krugman's knob

When I read his piece of shit article telling us how California was not only doing great but would lead the rest of the country into a new permaboom era, I knew anything he said would come with a laugh track

249 Posted by: Additional Blond Agent at August 17, 2011 11:14 AM (PMGbu)

You do realize that this blog is running on software cannibalized from a marching band newsgroup from 1996?

250 Other than hazardous duty pay, the military is paid according to rank, not job skill. Let's compare two Sailors, a Boatswains mate and a Hull Maintenance Tech. Both have important jobs. However, the cost of their training is vastly different. Also, their future earnings in civilian life, vastly different. What if the HMT is Nuke Components certified, a 4956 for you that know. How do you keep him? He is worth well into six figures in civilian life. You want to treat the military like civilians? Do you want to pay them differently? That retirement is the great equalizer when it comes to retaining high skilled positions. This 401k thing is a complicated can of worms.

251

Monty at August 17, 2011 10:59 AM

Then offer people a choice. Legacy plan or Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). By the way, it isn’t a 401K plan being purposed, it is TSP. You can currently contribute to TSP (regretfully I did before I got married), and the performance has been underwhelming. It is very restrictive, and like all other things done be the government, underperforming. The current retirement isn’t “crappy”. It is fifty percent of the high three year average for life, and scales up with inflation. For someone who retires today and lives for other 40 years it is worth roughly 3.5 million dollars. Also, it is payable immediately, instead of in your 60’s.

Which leads me to my main point: It is an all volunteer force, nobody is making me do it, and if they change the retirement to the purposed plan, I WILL NOT be alone in getting out shortly thereafter.

As for the people getting out at 10 years? That is their choice based on their circumstances and calculations. If it isnÂ’t their choice, they get involuntary separation allowance. The retirement isnÂ’t just a thank you to a service member; it is also a valuable tool to keep experienced people in for their most productive years.

252 Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 11:15 AM (lbo6/)

If you have never made your own sausage, don't be intimidated. It's far, far easier than it seems.

253 I've never been intimidated by sausage. Wait! Don't hit pos-

254 I've never been intimidated by sausage.



Wait! Don't hit pos-

Posted by: Empire of Jeff

 

Ah, doesn't this bring back memories.

Thank goodness for the preview function.

255 For someone who retires today and lives for other 40 years it is worth roughly 3.5 million dollars.

That's why they're going broke. You can't continue to take out so much more than you paid in. It's unsustainable.

256 Monty: "But it is a volunteer force."

Exactly, it is a volunteer force, and those of us who volunteered and did twenty years are telling you this is not panacea you think it is.  You get what you pay for.  Keep introducing perverse incentives and see what you get.

After twenty years of being gone all the damned time, I was happy to have my crappy Uncle Sugar pension which, along with the money I put away in mutual funds, paid the rent and kept the lights on until we started bringing money into the house with an actual civilian job, which, if you haven't noticed, takes a bit longer to acquire sometimes in the current economic climate. 

I'll take security now over potentially more money forty fucking years from now, thanks.

"Guys who serve just as honorably but get out after 10 years get nothing. Doesn't their service matter just as much?)"

 Actually, they could just go do ten years in the Navy Reserve, then they could get their big payoff at age 68 (or maybe 62, I forget) which is the only appropriate age for military retirees to get jack shit apparently.

You'd think that if the guys directly affected were in favor of one of two ways of doing things, you'd sort of maybe defer to them a little bit.  That's what you'd think.  Instead of trying to sell them on this notion that somehow not only would the government save a ton of money, but THEY would be better off as well.   Yeah, because these things always work out just like that.

Let's look at the current realities and proposals and their potential effect on retention:

New G.I. Bill; Hey let's jack up TriCare premiums; Commissaries? Cancel that mess; portable 401ks.

Add in our fubared shipbuilding program which=fewer platforms=more deployments (and don't even mention the IAs you catch on shore duty) and I have to ask: Who the fuck sticks around except the retards who max out at E-5 or the occasional saint?

As you say, it is a volunteer military.  for now.  Good luck keeping it that way once the job market improves.  Good luck realizing your budget savings when you have to jack up bonuses to sign people up and keep them in.

It is as if some of you just slept right through the 1990s.

257

Tasso Ham. 

Why can't you find it anywhere but the bayou?

Because the flavor is about 1 half a step from spoiled ham. It's really wonderful if it's done correctly and the flavor is unlike anything else. There are no substitutions and I personally love it. But if the curing isn't done right, or it's allowed to spoil at all, it's absolutely the worst! So the rest of the world fries up some salt cured Pancetta and thinks it's wonderful "because it's european". *urp*

258 That's why they're going broke. You can't continue to take out so much more than you paid in. It's unsustainable.

Posted by: Monty at August 17, 2011 11:28 AM (/0a60) 

'Cuse me?  "Paid" in.  How do you define "paid?"

259

That's why they're going broke. You can't continue to take out so much more than you paid in. It's unsustainable.

With all due respect, it isnÂ’t SS, it is military retirement. The pool is much smaller. It cost the federal government $50 billion a year currently. Or about 2% of the military budget. Or about nothing when compare to the deficit. "They" (otherwise known as the federal government) is not going broke from military retirement. What happened to fixing the big three programs, NOT mandated in the Constitution?

260 221 We've had them in one form or another since 1776. That's more than...

Fifty years!

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 17, 2011 10:32 AM (lbo6/)

Why Yes, yes it is!!

Posted by: CoolCzech at August 17, 2011 10:39 AM (kUaEF)

It's right around a hundred years, wingnutz. 

261 'Cuse me?  "Paid" in.  How do you define "paid?"

The military must set aside a given amount to cover pensions, and this is usually done on an actuarial basis. And like most actuaries, the military planners underestimated the burden the defined-benefits regime would place on their budget -- hence they didn't "pay in" enough to cover the ultimate debt. This is the downfall of nearly every defined benefit plan I've ever heard of, public or private. We suck at predicting the future, and we tend to assume the rosiest scenario will come to pass.

The military doesn't just have one big pot of money that they dip in to in order to cover costs, you know. Military salaries and benefits are different than, say, funding for weapons systems. You can't just take from one and give to the other when you run short.

262

That's why they're going broke. You can't continue to take out so much more than you paid in. It's unsustainable.

With all due respect, it isnÂ’t SS, it is military retirement. The pool is much smaller. It cost the federal government $50 billion a year currently. Or about 2% of the military budget. Or about nothing when compare to the deficit. "They" (otherwise known as the federal government) is not going broke from military retirement. What happened to fixing the big three programs, NOT mandated in the Constitution?

Posted by: lando034

 

Because the list of people who will take the hit is much smaller, and they get to petend that they're making cuts. Add to that the fact that they've been screwing with military ballots for years and you end up with the three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch. The people who will like this the most are the same as those in the Clinton administration who didn't mind stop loss orders and multiple deployments; they don't like the military at best. At worst, they are scoring a twofer.

263 What happened to fixing the big three programs, NOT mandated in the Constitution?

The same thing that's happening to you -- they'll insist that their benefits are a God-given right, a moral necessity, a sacred contract. That's the problem. Everyone is always in favor of reforms, as long as the reforms fall on someone else.

Look, I was in the infantry. I'm not talking out of my ass. I understand your arguments, but I've also seen it from the civvie side. Defined-benefit plans are obsolete. They don't work, and they end up imposing costs on the provider that spiral completely out of control.

264 The military doesn't just have one big pot of money that they dip in to in order to cover costs, you know. Military salaries and benefits are different than, say, funding for weapons systems. You can't just take from one and give to the other when you run short.

Posted by: Monty at August 17, 2011 11:40 AM (/0a60)

If only we had a system where we could elect people who could write budgets and allocate money every year.  So, essentially, the military would have many smaller pots of money that could be adjusted based on the actual requirements.  Too bad we do not have anything like that. 

No, I guess it's better to pretend the U.S. Navy is an insurance company.  I knew I should have went for my Expeditionary  Actuarial pin instead of Surface Warfare.

265 We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, insure a sane technocratic governance do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

FIFY

266 ... a community organizing group focused on the environment and social justice ...

AKA, a "gimme, gimme" group.

267 "The same thing that's happening to you -- they'll insist that their benefits are a God-given right, a moral necessity, a sacred contract. That's the problem. Everyone is always in favor of reforms, as long as the reforms fall on someone else."

Right.  And someone else is always the military, as you know very well.  So, would you kindly please stop trying to tell us that getting fucked again is just great as long as we use the right kind of lube?

It's odd to see that some conservatives are so willing to just cede defense spending in return for no sacrifice whatsoever anywhere else.  If one thing ought to be a sacred cow, it ought to be veterans.

You know, since we already gave at the office, as it were.

268

The same thing that's happening to you -- they'll insist that their benefits are a God-given right, a moral necessity, a sacred contract. That's the problem. Everyone is always in favor of reforms, as long as the reforms fall on someone else.

Look, I was in the infantry. I'm not talking out of my ass. I understand your arguments, but I've also seen it from the civvie side. Defined-benefit plans are obsolete. They don't work, and they end up imposing costs on the provider that spiral completely out of control.

Not the same. SS, Medicare, and Medicaid recipients donÂ’t defend the nation. Those benefits are not a compensation package for which they do their jobs.  The current retirement is an incredibly good deal, but it is also a reason to stay in the military. Unlike them, I and others will walk away and be fine.  The only group of people who fall into your example would be current military retirees.  I currently hope they donÂ’t change the retirement for them.  Once again, this is compensation for a job I am currently doing, and can stop doing if the compensation is not greater than the reasons to stop doing it.

269 @270 Let me rephrase that: It's odd that some conservatives don't apply the same skepticism to defense cuts as they do to the "taxes now, spending cuts later-promise, pinky swear" kabuki dances, since they are essentially the same thing.

As is the canard that "we can always find waste and fraud to cut in the defense budget," since apparently we cannot, unless defines military pensions and other benefits as waste and fraud.

I don't see any proposals or plans to cut this pervasive waste and fraud. Hint: One obvious place to start is with the annual September spending orgy so the command doesn't see its budget cut the following year (if you didn't spend it, you obviously don't need it, apparently).

No, let's just pick that low-hanging fruit from the manning and acquisition trees.  We'll worry about the entirely predictable consequences later, at which time we will wave our flags, affix our bumper stickers, and act all morally outraged over the neglect of our military.

Seriously, some of you really did sleep through the 1990s, didn't you?

270

Alright, I have to go to bed. It is getting late here in Vietnam; six months into a ten month deployment. I really wish you would research this a little more Monty. All the information is readily available. It would be cheaper for the nation in the short term, but the current proposal is not an equable trade and is NOT best for the service men and women or the nation in the long term. I just get tired of trying to explain things like this to the troops. Look up Perform to Serve. Look at the current promotion rates. Track the watered down benefits over time. You know the worst part of my job? Not the deployments, not the time away from family, not going to Afghanistan and getting shot at, or the miserable hours. The worst part is have these young men and women give everything thing they have and want to make the military a career, but watch them slowly loss their benefits, face PTS, hit high year tenure, struggle with the BS PC regulations with the resulting zero defect promotion policies, and have their relationships dissolve because they spend all their time gone. And now you are going to cut their retirement, one of the main reasons they stay in past the first few enlistments? Why would anyone make the military a career? You didn't, and that was before the recent few delightful years. What is the end state you see in which we are both fiscally sound and militarily strong? Or are those goals incompatible?

271 What is the end state you see in which we are both fiscally sound and militarily strong? Or are those goals incompatible?

That remains to be seen, doesn't it? It depends largely on what we perceive our role in the world to be. Do we wish to continue as a quasi-imperial force with garrisons in hundreds of foreign lands? Do we wish to move to a sensor/monitoring force (largely robotic) that contains enemies rather than engaging them directly? Do we wish to have a "foot soldier" force for land-based engagements? A larger blue-water navy? A dedicated air/space wing? How much balance between combat arms and support? Do we maintain current optempo or scale back to rebuild our force? How does that impact our long-term strategic direction? Do we continue to enhance our nuclear deterrent? Everything costs money, and the US already spends more on defense than the rest of the world combined. We could do that when we were flush; we simply can't do it now that we are broke.

Who is the main enemy? China? Islamists? Russia? Some combination? What is the correct force posture and size, not only now but ten, twenty years from now?

272 By the way the GS rating government pensions have been 401K based for a number of years. It is only the fat cats in congress, the judiciary and the executive branch that get the big bucks on retirement.

The GS retirement system used to be similar to the military - a percentage of base pay - no longer.

My college roommate back in the 1960s once mentioned in passing how much his father was going to get from the CIA as retirement. When he did I instantly knew his dad was a GS-18; the civilian equivalent of a four star general in the army. He was head of CIA operations in Europe. (Both my roommate and his father have passed away - so I am not outing anyone.)

273 When my husband was an enlisted nuke back in the early-mid 80's, he got several bonuses for re-enlisting...it was worth the money to the military because it cost a lot to educate him, and they didn't want to lose him. The bonuses were given to him while he was in less than 10 years, so it's wrong to say those in less than 20 get nothing. There are bonus opportunities. And unless I'm mistaken, it seems to me that the argument some are making is that since not every military member stays in for 20 years, it's not fair that those who do make it a career get to have a pension. In fact, the report even used the word, "fair", in their assessment of military pensions. Good grief, military members make a conscious decision as to how long they serve! It's an incentive, and a powerful one. Many times during my husband's 23 year career, it helped to make our decision to stay in, when everything else was telling us to go. Being both enlisted and officer, I can say that I agree it is even more valuable for enlisted personnel to get that pension, though IMO, we've all EARNED our pensions...

274 Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of miserable failure.

275 Excellent blog, thanks for the share. I'll be a regular viewer.

276

Lets do the same for the Congress and politician.  I mean if the troops deserve this why not our politicians.

 

Obama is a miserable pile of shit.

277 I'll give Delong this. It's refreshing to see a left come out and admit that he hates democracy. Good for him.

278 "A left" should be, "a lefty."