February 23, 2013
— DrewM Unemployment has been around 8% (officially, it's higher) for 4 years. While private sector workers lost their jobs the size of the federal civilian workforce has grown under Obama.
Now that the pain (relatively slight) is hitting the bureaucrats, hold on a minute, now we have a crisis!
Union leaders cannot stop the furloughs or determine who in each agency must take them. They say their best option is to soften the pain of unpaid days, which could slash federal pay by up to 20 percent this fiscal year. They are demanding that employees be able to choose when to take days off and volunteer for more to help financially strapped colleagues. They want guarantees that no one will be penalized when work does not get done and assurances that managers cannot choose favorites to spare.“Many of you will be missing eight, 10, 20 days of work,” Alex Bastani, president of Local 12 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), told a standing-room-only crowd of 400 Labor Department employees Thursday at a lunchtime town hall on sequestration.
...
The cuts may not last for long if Congress reaches a spending agreement by the next fiscal deadline on March 27, when the stopgap budget funding government operations runs out. But what many civil servants and political appointees thought was unimaginable now seems inevitable.
“The imminence of it is what’s scaring me,” Louise Leonard Campbell, an economist for the Bureau of Labor Statistics, said Thursday as she left the meeting. “I’m a single mom. My son has health issues. This is just snowballing.”
As they listened to Bastani on the stage of the auditorium of the Frances Perkins Building, employees were conscious of the irony that they are facing some of the same labor conditions they work to improve for the rest of the nationÂ’s workforce.
“We are just living from one paycheck to another, and this could be really bad for us,” said Jorge Figueroa of Silver Spring, who works in quality control for the unemployment insurance division. He has four children, two in college. “I am telling you, this is going to be very stressful.”
God only knows how America will survive without BLS economists and unemployment quality assurance workers on the job for a few less days a year. We all know it's jobs like that which make America great.
Yes these are personal tragedies for sure. They are also exactly what people who pay taxes to fund these positions have been facing for 4 long years. Well not exactly. It's not as if these people are losing their jobs or their insurance benefits. No, they are going to have to do without up to 22 days worth of pay. A hardship to be sure but nothing compared to losing a job that isn't coming back and trying to find a new one in the Obama economy.
The GOP shouldn't be running away from sequester and blaming Obama, they should be apologizing to the American people that this is the best they can do. They should be begging for forgiveness that when all is said and done, the federal workforce, which used to be known as, "a multitude of New Offices, and "swarms of Officers" who harassed "people, and eat out their substance" (Stuff Jefferson Actually Said, Vol I, Abridged), will still be as large as it was when this started.
Honestly, it's not right that these people have to take a pay cut. They should quit their job and get a job in the private sector. If they can find one in the Obama economy.
Posted by: DrewM at
08:47 AM
| Comments (351)
Post contains 613 words, total size 4 kb.
Please acknowledge that some of us who will be hurt by this aren't complaining, and in fact, support the sequester.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 08:50 AM (6TB1Z)
I have some news for you. There are no temporary jobs on the outside. Thank your current boss.
Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 08:51 AM (53z96)
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at February 23, 2013 08:52 AM (ADnWI)
fast forward to 2007 and getting out of the Marines, I have done nothing but wait tables, work for myself and my wife and eventually go back to school because this economy sucks and its near impossible to re-enter a decent industry - I finish law school in May, I am going to continue to work my ass off, and be annoyed at any public sector person that complains to me about not getting a raise etc etc - try no having a decent job
buncha cry babies
Posted by: seaniep at February 23, 2013 08:53 AM (mHol2)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 08:54 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Stuff Jeremiah Wright Said, Vol IV at February 23, 2013 08:55 AM (Q9qpj)
I took a 100% pay cut 5 years ago.
*thump thump thump*
Nope, the needle on my Give-a-Shit-Ometer still hasn't moved.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 23, 2013 08:55 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: Albie Damned at February 23, 2013 08:55 AM (448H4)
Posted by: garrett at February 23, 2013 08:56 AM (fjiXQ)
Posted by: Mr Historian at February 23, 2013 08:56 AM (t96uI)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 08:57 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Albie Damned at February 23, 2013 08:57 AM (448H4)
Posted by: The littl shyning man at February 23, 2013 08:58 AM (ndp2I)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:00 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Evil Bob's Left Testie at February 23, 2013 09:00 AM (GrtrJ)
Posted by: GIJared at February 23, 2013 09:00 AM (1nngQ)
Posted by: John P. Squibob at February 23, 2013 09:01 AM (kqqGm)
I've been on straight commission for 25 years. Left a good salaried job with company car, strong bonus, and good bennies in order to see if I could carve out a bigger slice for myself, and did. Been very tough these last 4 years, but i wouldn't change a thing.
Many in what I call "institutionalized" salaried positions would do well to learn what it's like to only be able to eat what they can shoot.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 23, 2013 09:02 AM (4Mv1T)
It was all phony BS which they then blamed the GOP and Newt and the press had a field day.
Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 09:02 AM (53z96)
Posted by: Stuff Jeremiah Wright Said, Vol IV at February 23, 2013 09:03 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: VADM(Red) Cuthbert Collingwood (Mentioned In Dispatches) at February 23, 2013 09:03 AM (p4U6S)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 09:04 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Country Singer at February 23, 2013 09:04 AM (CgcOa)
The cuts are small and it is up to the sole discretion of Obama who will be sent home. For example, if they cut the consultants at the FAA the entire sequester mess would be solved with NO other layoffs.
Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 09:04 AM (53z96)
Fuck, this country is stupid. Nobody can follow this sequestration shit, it would take more than two seconds to understand.
Democracy, the rule of the mob. Get used to it, because it isn't going anywhere.
Posted by: Aaron at February 23, 2013 09:05 AM (Tlix5)
And fuck the government workers' unions. Those things shouldn't exist anyway.
Posted by: Palandine[/i] at February 23, 2013 09:05 AM (g7D8V)
Posted by: discontinuity at February 23, 2013 09:05 AM (tLn51)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 23, 2013 09:06 AM (9H+iJ)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:07 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: zsasz at February 23, 2013 09:07 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: huerfano at February 23, 2013 09:08 AM (bAGA/)
Posted by: GS13S3Inconvienienced at February 23, 2013 09:08 AM (APeDT)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 23, 2013 09:09 AM (9H+iJ)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 09:10 AM (/b8+5)
Obama says will have to shut down airports. The FAA’s budget for “consultants” is larger than all of the sequester.
http://is.gd/6nP5Me
Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 09:10 AM (53z96)
Posted by: Public Sector Union Employees local # Fuck You at February 23, 2013 09:11 AM (R18D0)
This is such utter bullshit. Crisis my ass.
Posted by: huerfano at February 23, 2013 01:08 PM (bAGA/)
----------
Well, there is a 'crisis', and it's too good to waste. So Owebama's demogogue mode will kick into high dudgeon.
Posted by: RickZ at February 23, 2013 09:11 AM (CPKp2)
Treason isn't the right word for it but, it's close. They are threatening to abandon some national security functions.
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 01:07 PM (piMMO)
Extortion?
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 23, 2013 09:11 AM (IDSI7)
I would NEVER suck on the government teat (besides, um, being paid by the taxpayer), but I've seen DC area govies bitch because they won't be able to draw unemployment because they can't take all 22 furlough days in a row--you have to take one a week. Well, duh--if the goal (at least on paper) is to save money, they're not going to set it up so you can get unemployment.
People in DC live way beyond their means--the bitching is going to be epic when the sequester begins. Just keep getting the word out that this was the tyrant's bright idea.
Posted by: Palandine[/i] at February 23, 2013 09:12 AM (g7D8V)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:12 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Fed Up. at February 23, 2013 09:13 AM (WnjLc)
Posted by: Dang at February 23, 2013 09:13 AM (R18D0)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 09:13 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:13 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Yip at February 23, 2013 09:14 AM (/jHWN)
Thanks. I think about them as well. However, there is a line between wanting to solve a problem (overspending) and just plain wishing ill on people, many of whom are fine, hardworking folks who do necessary jobs. Lots of people here are looking for vengeance, not solutions, but solutions are what we need.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 09:14 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: matteus at February 23, 2013 09:14 AM (negY9)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 01:13 PM (piMMO)
With the sad eyes
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:15 AM (FIDMq)
LOLZ! Like that even exists!
Posted by: Dang at February 23, 2013 09:15 AM (R18D0)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 23, 2013 09:15 AM (9H+iJ)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at February 23, 2013 09:16 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:16 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: nip at February 23, 2013 09:16 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: matteus at February 23, 2013 09:17 AM (negY9)
Welcome to Obama's America, fuckstick. Now (and I've always wanted to say this to a government employee) GET IN LINE!
Posted by: Dang at February 23, 2013 09:17 AM (R18D0)
Posted by: Tuna at February 23, 2013 09:19 AM (M/TDA)
Posted by: Schwalbe262 at February 23, 2013 09:21 AM (IxGUR)
The scumbags of DC are wasting (not investing--codeword for waste) billions per day.
Heh, "investment." I'd like to see some green-eyeshade-types do a little ROI stuff on that claim.
It definitely wouldn't have a plus sign after it.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 23, 2013 09:21 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: Truman North poops on cute at February 23, 2013 09:22 AM (I2LwF)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 09:22 AM (/b8+5)
Nicely timed. You describe me, except for the young part. I'd like to hire some young postdocs to take over when I retire, but can't because of the freeze and budget cuts. It's actually harder than you might think for them to get other jobs right now, at least the ones they'd like, but they will eventually get jobs. And that will be more good people who won't be available to bolster the country's defense, not to mention the kid starting college and pondering whether or not to go into the sciences and concluding that it isn't worth it.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 09:22 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: occam at February 23, 2013 09:22 AM (AYGyt)
Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 12:51 PM (53z96)
Eh? I'm one of those DoD goons who will likely be having 22 Fridays free during this fiscal year (oh, the humanity) but I was thinking of seeking side gigs doing web development or something--perhaps through a pimp--to make up for reduction in income. It's been a long time since my indoctrination/soul extraction so I don't recall a prohibition upon other part-time employment per se. There are, certainly, ethical or opsec concerns with certain employers.
Posted by: Sandra Fluke's hi-cap assault diaphragm at February 23, 2013 09:22 AM (7xeJQ)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:23 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:23 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:23 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: andycanuck at February 23, 2013 09:24 AM (ORGYc)
"Zoo Death Panels are assessing each animal with a eye to head size ratio. Animals with larger eyes are going first. A waiver has been issued to reptiles. Baby animals that are nursing will be euthanized in their mother's arms, talons, or whatever, on live television, again - and I can't stress this enough, unless Republicans do something." -Leo Tard, The Peoples Protector of All Things Governmenty
Posted by: Dang at February 23, 2013 09:24 AM (R18D0)
North Korea on Sunday warned the top U.S. military commander stationed in South Korea that his forces would "meet a miserable destruction" if they go ahead with scheduled military drills with South Korean troops,..
They wouldn't have pulled this shit on Reagan.
***
I will write a strongly worded memo that will tear through North Korea like Jenjizz Conn.
Posted by: Secretary of State John Kerry at February 23, 2013 09:25 AM (VlXYw)
I wish I could say that won't be so, but for at least a part of the Feds, you are absolutely correct.
I don't think anyone is looking for vengeance.
**Turn Washington DC into Detroit. The utterly debauched, corrupt madhouse that is DC deserves that and more.**
The thing speaks for itself.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 09:25 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:26 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: WalrusRex at February 23, 2013 09:28 AM (VlXYw)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:29 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 01:26 PM
Your expectations are too high.
Posted by: huerfano at February 23, 2013 09:29 AM (bAGA/)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 09:29 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: WalrusRex at February 23, 2013 01:28 PM (VlXYw)
Have you seen the quality of gov't workers these days?....no thanks(no offense to moron gov't workers, your work is above and beyond I'm sure.)
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:30 AM (FIDMq)
Lots of people here are looking for vengeance, not solutions, but solutions are what we need.
We all know what the solutions are. The problem is, we hire politicians to solve them and they aren't interested in doing that. What they do is cause problems.
They promise one thing on the campaign trail, then enter office and do the exact opposite of what they promised. They don't give one shit about the country or the people in it, they're only out to increase their power over us.
After having my future destroyed by these vermin, I'm all for these leeches getting a little pain in their lives. If we had a robust economy with a diversity of jobs, we wouldn't be discussing this. Show me one political animal that's done one thing to even try to achieve this goal.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 23, 2013 09:30 AM (+z4pE)
And my new voter card arrived in the mail yesterday. I am a newly minted "unaffiliated voter".
I know many here disagree with this tact, but my wagon just got officially unhitched from the GOP. I'm a free agent now. For whatever good that will do. I don't know how else to send a message.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 23, 2013 09:30 AM (4Mv1T)
For more than 2 years now, every couple of months we get called into an all hands meeting and told "Be prepared for serious budget cuts and pain." Then you prepare, and then at the 11th hour the politicians kick the can down the road another couple of months.
It's a little like being on death row--they give you a date and then strap you down to the table and put the needle in, then at the last minute you get a stay and get taken back to your cell. But you're still going to get it at some point, so it's no real comfort. These cuts are coming--just do them already and stop screwing with people's lives every few months.
I have no hope that this won't be like the previous times--if they don't cobble together some joke of a solution by next Friday, they'll do it before the sequester goes into effect in April. And then we get to repeat this in a couple of months.
Posted by: Palandine[/i] at February 23, 2013 09:31 AM (g7D8V)
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 01:26 PM
Your expectations are too high.
Sometimes a half a shit is better than no shit. Especially if you haven't shit in a day or two.
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 23, 2013 09:31 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: huerfano at February 23, 2013 01:29 PM (bAGA/)
I know...they will get their usual buddies on to play the aw shucks part. Burn Baby Burn!
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:31 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Bly, Azof, UK at February 23, 2013 09:32 AM (7v5Ct)
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at February 23, 2013 01:31 PM (wR+pz)
Sounds like fiber is needed
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:33 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: Harrison Bergeron at February 23, 2013 09:33 AM (JQuNB)
Why would they start getting penalized over not getting their work done when they haven't ever been?
I thought they gave government employees bonuses for being lazy.
Posted by: Ashley Judd's Puffy Scamper, formerly MrCaniac at February 23, 2013 09:33 AM (Zd/NW)
Agreed.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Dang at February 23, 2013 01:13 PM (R18D0)
All forms of weasels get to live.
Posted by: Tami[/i] at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Tuna at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (M/TDA)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: andycanuck at February 23, 2013 01:24 PM
A funlough, not a furlough? They'll have more time to spend with the family, reading, working in the yard, golfing, going to the beach. Just imagine the possibilities!
Posted by: huerfano at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (bAGA/)
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 01:14 PM (6TB1Z)
It's not vengeance, it's shoving back as hard as possible that there is something special and untouchable about paychecks that come from the Federal government.
Guess what? That paycheck that you are getting is funded in part by the money that is taken from my paycheck every week at the threat of a gun being put to my head and the trigger pulled if I do not pay it. So not only am I earning my money, I'm earning yours as well. I'm sorry, but, as your employer, guess what? We're out of money. This is the very start of the steps that need to be taken to fix that.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at February 23, 2013 09:34 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:35 AM (piMMO)
10 Share the wealth, share the pain.
This is good, PurpAv.
Catchy.
A slogan...to hit back at the sloganeers.
We should use this. Over and over.
"Share the wealth, share the pain."
Reminds me of that song, that repeats: "This is what you want, this is what you get".
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 09:36 AM (eyJSG)
Not a word about foreign aid? Seems we could cut that first.
No, no. That's further down the list. Cut out the "free pho's" first. And still Peggy Joseph. The FSA voted for this shit, make them suffer the consequences. Gotta feed and clothe yourselves, worthless parasites!
Posted by: Jay Guevara at February 23, 2013 09:37 AM (IDSI7)
A funlough, not a furlough? They'll have more time to spend with the family, reading, working in the yard, golfing, going to the beach. Just imagine the possibilities!
"Funlough." I am so stealing that.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 23, 2013 09:37 AM (+z4pE)
>>Posted by: Red Shirt
Your nic makes me think fed. employees shouldn't wear red on the day they pick who gets furloughed.
Posted by: Mama AJ, Assault Poiser at February 23, 2013 09:37 AM (SUKHu)
Posted by: AmishDude at February 23, 2013 09:37 AM (xSegX)
>>Your nic makes me think fed. employees shouldn't wear red on the day they pick who gets furloughed.
(casually takes off red scarf and throws it into the giraffe area)
Posted by: Stylish Polar Bear at February 23, 2013 09:38 AM (SUKHu)
Posted by: Hobojerky at February 23, 2013 09:39 AM (lh7TU)
Posted by: Deli LLama at February 23, 2013 09:39 AM (lGu1O)
Posted by: Hobojerky at February 23, 2013 09:40 AM (lh7TU)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit. at February 23, 2013 09:40 AM (+z4pE)
Posted by: Former Lurker at February 23, 2013 09:40 AM (Yoym7)
Posted by: Tuna at February 23, 2013 09:41 AM (M/TDA)
Posted by: AmishDude at February 23, 2013 09:41 AM (xSegX)
Posted by: Mama AJ at February 23, 2013 09:41 AM (SUKHu)
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 01:37 PM (6TB1Z)
I did read your number 2 but I have also read the rest of your comments as well which, intentionally or not, walk back your sentiment in your initial comment. You assert there is an aspect of vengeance to this. Are you then seeking vengeance on yourself? After all, if you support the sequester and are not complaining then you are contained within the group of people you are claiming have ill motives for such support.
Look, the problem is the same here as when we get into the generational wars arguments. We are discussing aggregates and the broad statements applied to those aggregates may or may not apply to the specific person at issue.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at February 23, 2013 09:41 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Clemenza at February 23, 2013 09:42 AM (x59Gv)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:42 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:42 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Palandine at February 23, 2013 01:31 PM (g7D8V)
+1
Hey, I like money. But, if this is the only way to so much as get the ball rolling regarding spending reduction, then let's just do it already. I was in favor of letting Chimpy McBushilterburton's tax cuts expire across the board. Sure, my taxes would have increased but it would have pulled at least part of the Free Shit Army back into the pool of net tax payers.
Posted by: Sandra Fluke's hi-cap assault diaphragm at February 23, 2013 09:43 AM (7xeJQ)
Posted by: slackmac at February 23, 2013 09:43 AM (v+H2k)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:43 AM (piMMO)
Backwards Boy, the people you cite, the politicians--they won't get their pay cut. It's all the cogs, like me, who will.
And we've been cutting personnel for 6 months now--25% of our agency's people. I will nap on my off days, as thye've been cramming all the work on those left--just like in "civvie" life.
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Bly, Azof, UK at February 23, 2013 09:43 AM (7v5Ct)
Theoretically speaking I have no problem with the sequester.
I only have a small problem with the fact that my wife's job is on the 22 day furlough list.
What I do have a problem with though is that it's pretty clear the particular implementation of the cuts (not the cuts themselves) are designed to be visible, not smart.
I don't think it'd be hard to cut double the sequester amount. I think you could do it sans furloughs with minimal impact on defense. But The Dipshit in chief doesn't want that because he wants to score political points.
We'll make it through, we began belt tightening a few months back in perpetration, and we're putting off some of the repairs we'd like to do to our house (nothing urgent, a driveway resurfacing, some tuck pointing.) We also bought a rice cooker so we can roll back to the good old days of rice and beans as a meal.
Posted by: tsrblke at February 23, 2013 09:44 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: BuddyPC at February 23, 2013 09:44 AM (jfUIE)
Posted by: nip at February 23, 2013 09:45 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 09:45 AM (dZQh7)
I say Lead On, McDuff! And damned be he who first cries "Hold, Enough!"
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 23, 2013 09:45 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:46 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Clemenza at February 23, 2013 09:46 AM (x59Gv)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:46 AM (piMMO)
You are not trying hard enough - suck it up, get away from the keyboard and get busy looking, becoming a wealth producer, etc.. What? you don't like that attitude? Shocker.
The feds are not the enemy but Obama is successfully dividing everyone into the "take mine not theirs" camp.
I'm not going to enjoy losing 20% of my pay but enjoy even less the new embrace of socialism by those who cheer the bad fortune of others.
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 09:47 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: nip at February 23, 2013 09:47 AM (11Tdq)
Not at all. I support the sequester because it is the only way I see to start solving the overspending problem.
We are discussing aggregates and the broad statements applied to those aggregates may or may not apply to the specific person at issue.
Absolutely agree. That's my point. It is very dangerous to condemn all government workers just because of the actions of some, especially politicians. The source of the problem is the majority of voters who returned the pillagers to office.
Posted by: pep at February 23, 2013 09:47 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Bly, Azof, UK at February 23, 2013 09:48 AM (7v5Ct)
Posted by: Timon at February 23, 2013 09:48 AM (hHlaS)
Posted by: BuddyPC at February 23, 2013 09:49 AM (jfUIE)
Posted by: Leo Tard at February 23, 2013 09:49 AM (R18D0)
Posted by: nip at February 23, 2013 09:50 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: Timon at February 23, 2013 01:48 PM (hHlaS)
You sound like a Medtronics employee.
Same thing sort of happened to me -- I got offered a job, then that offer was removed: project cancelled.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 23, 2013 09:50 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Red Shirt at February 23, 2013 09:50 AM (FIDMq)
Posted by: Typical Government Employee at February 23, 2013 09:51 AM (Vk2pI)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 09:51 AM (PxYrx)
Its just a fact of life that you can be fired for ANYTHING, including getting sick, in the real world. The poor economy should have devastated these crybaby pricks 4 years ago.
I cannot relate to this crying on ANY LEVEL. Being furloughed a couple days isn't a hardship. Its what we deal with in the private sector all the time. DEAL WITH IT.
I welcome 40% across the board cuts for gov't. You want to know how we live? That would be a start.
Posted by: Just the Facts at February 23, 2013 09:51 AM (4pEBT)
Unemployed federal workers. Serious You Guys.
Posted by: Beached Whale at February 23, 2013 09:51 AM (Cjcon)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:51 AM (piMMO)
Same thing sort of happened to me -- I got offered a job, then that offer was removed: project cancelled.
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 23, 2013 01:50 PM (Qxe/p)
__________________________________________________________
Very close. Also, all jobs I was interviewing for disappeared after the election. I was lucky and finally start a new job on Friday!
Posted by: Timon at February 23, 2013 09:53 AM (hHlaS)
Yeah, the cuts are *designed* to be painful.
Across the board cuts, mean that everything is cut...instead of starting with cutting the fat.
And by 'fat', I mean...all those lavish perks and wastes of money, like the endless 'conventions' and 'seminars' and 'retreats' that our government betters go to.
Which are basically parties...that government workers travel to...and party for a long weekend, on our dime.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 09:53 AM (eyJSG)
Posted by: mpfs, assault fishstick at February 23, 2013 09:54 AM (TCy/B)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 23, 2013 09:56 AM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 09:57 AM (piMMO)
Asked one of my libtard coworkers who was bitching about sequestration: "If this was such a monumentally stupid idea, why didn't President Obama veto it?" Still waiting for an answer.
Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at February 23, 2013 09:57 AM (ZEICx)
but the dirty little secret is the universe can get along just fine with these bureaucrats missing a few days work. When that little secret gets out, there will be a glimmer of hope for the future.
That's the one thing the politicians, and their friends dare not let happen, that people learn we can do without those bureaucrats for a few days.
Posted by: Skandia Recluse at February 23, 2013 09:58 AM (6oFkA)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 09:58 AM (dZQh7)
The United States military base at Pearl Harbor will be made less secure as a result of Washington's failure to avoid across-the-board sequestration budget cuts, Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii warned Saturday.
"The plain fact is that will undermine our capacity for readiness at Pearl Harbor," Abercrombie said, referring to the base that was attacked by Japanese military forces in 1941 that resulted in the deaths of 2,400 Americans. "Now if that doesn't symbolize for the nation that far from overstating it, it is zeroing in on a graphic example of what happens when we fail to meet our responsibilities congressionally, I don't know what does."
Speaking at the annual Winter Meeting of the National Governors Association in Washington, D.C., Abercrombie said that the $487 billion reduction in Pentagon spending will have an impact on 19,000 civilian employees who work with the United States Pacific Command. The budget reduction, he said, would cut four work days from each employee.
(Is Abercrombie expect someone to attack Pearl Harbor any time soon?
Posted by: mallfly at February 23, 2013 09:59 AM (bJm7W)
If they are getting paid less than a quarter than what they made before then all is at parity as the feds are taking about a 20-25% cut. You should be happy that justice for all is accomplished, the greater good, etc.
Seriously though you missed the point of my post. You didn't like that comment any more than I like the generalizations about the feds.
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:00 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:00 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at February 23, 2013 10:00 AM (dF8d/)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:00 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 23, 2013 10:01 AM (xm1Dn)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:01 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Bly, Azof, UK at February 23, 2013 10:01 AM (7v5Ct)
I will say this though.
They canceled several of my wife's trips by moving them to her office south of here and making her drive (unreimbursed.)
I told her to keep track of everything she spends over those few days (especially if the snow storm comes to pass an she gets stuck there) because I plan on handing it to my accountant and saying "find a way to make this a tax deduction."
Posted by: tsrblke at February 23, 2013 10:01 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Sandra Fluke at February 23, 2013 10:02 AM (2jQGY)
#ScandalousSequesterThreats
Until further notice ALL internet porn will be placed behind a paywall.
Posted by: garrett at February 23, 2013 10:02 AM (tvKLH)
Posted by: Palandine[/i] at February 23, 2013 10:03 AM (g7D8V)
Posted by: ghostofhallelujah at February 23, 2013 10:03 AM (XvrTA)
Most DoD employees I know did NOT vote for Obama, and the union does NOT speak for many of us. I refuse to join, actually.
There seems to be a great deal of, "Fuck you. Glad you're hurting!" out there. We're not the ones who set policy, and none of us have enjoyed the economy in the shitter. Like Mr. Historian (post #12), I'm all about service to the country. I took a pay cut to do this job, and could command much more in the private sector, and likely wouldn't need to worry at all about a layoff. But I work hard and perform a service that I'm proud of for the taxpayers and the defense of the nation, just like any military officer does (and we take the same oath).
In short, I'm not the enemy. I pay taxes, too, and want spending cut back. I also hate that the DoD is taking an across the board hit, while all the non-defense spending is diffused. I will not be watching soap operas and fondling a sack of gold coins during the days I'm not paid. Obama and Panetta are using us as pawns, just as Obama has manipulated private sector markets. If you don't think that pisses most of us off, you're nuts.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:03 AM (jgWCv)
Half of these bastards jobs in the fed govt shouldn't even exist.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:04 AM (p/cQy)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:04 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Ed Anger at February 23, 2013 10:04 AM (tOkJB)
Posted by: snowybeach at February 23, 2013 10:04 AM (LpQbZ)
Posted by: soothie, now with exfoliating beads at February 23, 2013 10:04 AM (C0ttM)
Posted by: xuyee at February 23, 2013 10:05 AM (/QiO2)
169...I now realize this is why Obama choose sequestration. The "teachers, firefighters, police" angle.
Yeah, maximum Drama.
King OhDrama knew there would be more pain with 'across the board cuts'...than with targeted cuts, to cut the fat.
No one would really notice if all those government 'conventions' and 'retreats' were eliminated.
Well, the hotels would feel it.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 10:05 AM (eyJSG)
Should we not be cheering that result as well? /sarc
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:05 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:05 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Mama AJ at February 23, 2013 10:06 AM (SUKHu)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 10:06 AM (/b8+5)
Yeah, that was Obama's platform, to spend taxes on new government jobs in order to improve the economy. He made no secret about it, and is probably proud of having kept that promise, economically devastation not recognized. Since the majority of '08 and '12 national votes counted determined that to be "the" national mandate from "the" people, no thanks to GW phraseology, this would prove Obama's political capital. Fiat value, eh?
**
"Honestly, it's not right that these people have to take a pay cut. They should quit their job and get a job in the private sector."
It's not enough for federal employees to quit. The job positions and entire bureaus must be terminated in order to cut federal spending and require significantly less taxation.
Don't be surprised, though, should bipartisan government officials further conjoin corporations within the federal system of operations. It's already the case in health/medicine. There is no way that American working "class" can afford to pay the mandated (at risk of prison and loss of homes/property) insurance costs that are far from affordable or reasonable. No thanks to the SCOTUS, citizens have no standing regarding our own bodies and health care. And that wasn't even spawned via proper congressional protocol.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 23, 2013 10:06 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Palandine at February 23, 2013 02:03 PM (g7D8V) [/I
Yeah, this
So why exactly doesn't the Republican party latch on to this? Let's go ahead and find other ways to cut, reduce travel, skim some off programs, hell the Per Diem for travel meals is FAR to high.
Posted by: tsrblke at February 23, 2013 10:06 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: soothie, now with exfoliating beads at February 23, 2013 10:07 AM (s+8Vv)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:07 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: BuddyPC at February 23, 2013 10:08 AM (jfUIE)
Posted by: soothie, now with exfoliating beads at February 23, 2013 02:07 PM (s+8Vv)
FIFY
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 23, 2013 10:08 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: Loudpeaker Announcement at February 23, 2013 10:08 AM (z6h4X)
Posted by: Tutu at February 23, 2013 10:08 AM (CpWI4)
I know, Barrel.
But before I go, I'd also like to point out there are many Federal workers (especially in the DoD) not represented by unions.
These fuckers don't speak for many people I know. (In fact several of them have suggested that a good culling of the bottom 5% of performers is in order.)
Posted by: tsrblke at February 23, 2013 10:09 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:10 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 10:10 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: Mike James at February 23, 2013 10:14 AM (cgDgK)
I didn't say you did - you missed the sarcasm in contrast with two different povs.
I've got a twenty something child who did all the right things for degrees, hard work, etc. who cannot find anything in the way of a job. We are supporting her not the government -- would be nice if we could use the money for something different but that's the way it goes.
How many other feds are doing the same thing for one or more of their kids impacted by the economy?
But to cheer their misfortune as some commenters are makes no sense.
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:15 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: Whatev at February 23, 2013 10:15 AM (A7Wh1)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:15 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 10:15 AM (PxYrx)
I really don't want to paint all fed govt workers with the same brush, but for some of them to pretend of hardships when they have been getting COL raises the last few years when many in the private sector have been getting zero or actual cuts smacks of arrogance. And that is not even to mention what has been happening in healthcare, many of these govt workers would be absolutely shocked at that increase.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:16 AM (p/cQy)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:16 AM (dZQh7)
No need for a telethon - just eliminate all the red state welfare farm subsidies
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:16 AM (IF2l8)
I remember Barky crowing about all those jobs he "created or saved" with the Stimulus.
Most of those were government jobs.
But government jobs...are Revenue Negative.
Sure, there are taxes taken out of those checks.
But that is not new revenue...it is 'recycled tax dollars' that were taken from the private sector.
So, when the government does things that cause jobs to die in the private sector...the government is killing the funding for it's own payroll.
When jobs are killed in the private sector, there should be automatic cuts in the government payroll.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 10:17 AM (eyJSG)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 02:10 PM (PxYrx)
I noticed that last part (I was 63).
I'd also like to point out that if you're "beating the streets" with a resume instead of using the keyboard, the only job you'll find involves slinging hash or working at Home Depot.
I actually tried personally delivering resumes to "high tech" companies, and was literally told they only reviewed electronic applications, and did not consider walk-in applications.
I retired "early". Pays the exact same as double-super-secret unemployment, and I'm using my own money from my perspective (for the next 12 years, anyway).
Posted by: jwb7605 (Let It Burn) at February 23, 2013 10:17 AM (Qxe/p)
These fuckers don't speak for many people I know. (In fact several of them have suggested that a good culling of the bottom 5% of performers is in order.)
Posted by: tsrblke at February 23, 2013 02:09 PM (GaqMa)
______________________________________________________________
Reforming Gov't firing practices would be a great thing. The Gov't can't cull dead wood like industry can. When layoffs hit a vendor, they take the opportunity to take a scalpel to the workforce. The government uses seniority, which means that an ineffective 15 year employee, particularly with a veteran's preference, can pretty much do what they want, including sleeping on the job. Scum like that needs to go, but their supervisors can't get rid of them.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:18 AM (jgWCv)
So when they were active duty they were salt of the earth and well respected but once they get a federal job they transform into scum overnight....?
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:20 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:20 AM (dZQh7)
Yes and all blue state welfare.
actually all subsidies period and those fed govt jobs that manage the subsidies.
I think we have a deal.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:21 AM (p/cQy)
I agree with you but you know it will never happen. Lots of moral relativism when subsidies come into play.
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:22 AM (IF2l8)
Hey, kids, let's put on a show!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRZ5400UKSc
Posted by: Mickey Rooney at February 23, 2013 10:22 AM (bAGA/)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 10:22 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:23 AM (dZQh7)
I really don't want to paint all fed govt workers with the same brush, but for some of them to pretend of hardships when they have been getting COL raises the last few years when many in the private sector have been getting zero or actual cuts smacks of arrogance. And that is not even to mention what has been happening in healthcare, many of these govt workers would be absolutely shocked at that increase.
_______________________________________________________________
We haven't gotten a COL raise in years. The military may have, but I haven't.
My healthcare premiums also went up, along with deductibles and co-pays.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:23 AM (jgWCv)
Many government agencies are important. But when considering ALL of the federal agencies, fewer are integral to the nation than are most agencies.
Even if no agencies were amputated from the federal government, every agency needs to trim the size of its own administrative costs. They already have health benefits (didn't require a federal union of workers, btw, just the legislated package). I wonder if mid-level management were actually be the best to maintain public works -- trim off the top administration as well as the secretary's secretary (Office Managers manage the office work themselves). Without pay increase, the mid-level would assume the vacated responsibilities which they've already witnessed "on hand" at work. Sink or swim. There are plenty of unemployed, available highly skilled workers ready to do well for the taxpayers.
Since the tithe was enough to sustain civilization without the impositions of empire, then some percentage of income close to 10% (less than double, certainly not triple) is what government must constrain itself within. What taxpayer would argue a flat 10% for state and 10% for federal flat taxes, no "mandated" fees beyond? For that money, we'd get as much government as The US Constitution stipulated.
Imo, spare us the DHS (as if it ever coordinated all of the federal intelligence programs/bureaus), the EPA, USDA, Dept./Ed. Terminate all "comprehensive legislative reform" packages including the not-Affordable Health Care mandate to purchase exorbitantly overpriced health insurance coverage, the amnesty for illegals rather than immigration law enforcement, and the just as hackable as any other low or high tech gimmick "National Identification Card" program. pfft, just what we want any hacker to get more of, personal identification data.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 23, 2013 10:24 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: nip at February 23, 2013 10:24 AM (11Tdq)
Posted by: xuyee at February 23, 2013 10:25 AM (/QiO2)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 02:15 PM (dZQh7)
--- $89000
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at February 23, 2013 10:25 AM (R8hU8)
Asked one of my libtard coworkers who was bitching about sequestration: "If this was such a monumentally stupid idea, why didn't President Obama veto it?" Still waiting for an answer. Posted by: The Poster Formerly Known as Mr. Barky at February 23, 2013 01:57 PM"
Not only that, he promised to veto ANY attempt to replace it. Remember that?
Posted by: Jeff Weimer at February 23, 2013 10:25 AM (rqlRk)
Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at February 23, 2013 10:26 AM (r2PLg)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:26 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:26 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 02:15 PM (dZQh7)
Depends on the area of the country. I as offered GS13 in DC (Navy Yard) at just about $90K. Didn't take it, I wanted to go back down to the Norfolk area.
Posted by: Jeff Weimer at February 23, 2013 10:27 AM (rqlRk)
damn right it will never happen, not one dollar per year, which is why it annoys me when govt workers scream poverty. I know the game, but its still annoying.
Eventually, the new game for private sector workers is gonna have to be what they do in Greece and simply not claim most of their income. Once most people figure out they are being played for fools, all of this will finally and mercifully come to a head. And then we can have a true conversation.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:27 AM (p/cQy)
Posted by: Pipe Fittings at February 23, 2013 10:27 AM (0K4Xj)
Posted by: soothie, now with exfoliating beads at February 23, 2013 10:28 AM (FC8Yl)
Senator Rand Paul returned $500K of his federally tax funded office budget expense account to the federal government last year, and $600K this year. Trimming expenditures is obviously feasible when there's a will, there is a way.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 23, 2013 10:29 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at February 23, 2013 10:29 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:30 AM (dZQh7)
employee, particularly with a veteran's preference, can pretty much do
what they want, including sleeping on the job. Scum like that needs to
go, but their supervisors can't get rid of them."
So when they were active duty they were salt of the earth and well respected but once they get a federal job they transform into scum overnight....?
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 02:20 PM (IF2l
____________________________________________________________
You missed the point. They may have been useless on active duty, too, (hell, they may have been Soldier of the Year) but that's irrelevant to the point I'm making. With enough seniority, it's nearly impossible to get rid of someone who doesn't get the job done. In some cases, people take advantage of that by not doing anything and still collecting a check.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:30 AM (jgWCv)
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 02:23 PM (jgWCv) <<<<<
Serious, tell me your new deductible and co pay. Then let me shock the crap out of you for a family of four.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:30 AM (p/cQy)
Posted by: lincolntf at February 23, 2013 10:31 AM (ZshNr)
"red state farm subsidies" = look, a squirrel! Fuck you.
Posted by: Stuff Jeremiah Wright Said, Vol IV at February 23, 2013 10:32 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:32 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at February 23, 2013 10:32 AM (n8LUb)
--
China, just like everything else?
--
50% of every Dollar "spent" is owned by China, the middle man between the Federal Reserve and the US Government.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 23, 2013 10:32 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Pipe Fittings at February 23, 2013 02:27 PM (0K4Xj)
No Butt Welded Pipe Fittings?
Piker.
Posted by: garrett at February 23, 2013 10:33 AM (z6h4X)
Posted by: Ed Anger at February 23, 2013 10:34 AM (tOkJB)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:34 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:34 AM (IF2l8)
Now can we just have a drinking/food thread to get us in the mood for the pregame warmup?
Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 23, 2013 10:35 AM (4Mv1T)
That was sarcasm. Federal employees are not hurting, and I assume because they are the best and brightest, they have either been saving 20% of their salary in their emergency fund (now is when you spend that) or they can easily find a higher paid job in the private sector.
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 02:30 PM (dZQh7)
______________________________________________________________
And I spent a lot of years gaining expertise and education in order to make my skill set valuable.
Like I said, yes, I did command more in the private sector, and yes, I did give that up. I wasn't making that sort of money my whole career. Yes, I could make more if I went out now and have had overtures to that effect. The problem is that the people I work for (my green suited customers) depend on me doing my job, and it's an inherently governmental function that cannot be duplicated in the private sector.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:35 AM (jgWCv)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:35 AM (dZQh7)
Do Federal workers get...a Pension + Social Security?
Sorry if that's a stupid question, but I've always wondered that.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 10:36 AM (eyJSG)
Posted by: tony redenzo at February 23, 2013 10:36 AM (0KgIG)
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 10:36 AM (IF2l8)
Posted by: Palandine[/i] at February 23, 2013 10:37 AM (g7D8V)
Sorry, us folks out in the districts already paid and paid and paid at the office. Time for the Capital to get some skin in the game.
Posted by: Stuff Jeremiah Wright Said, Vol IV at February 23, 2013 10:37 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 23, 2013 10:39 AM (PxYrx)
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 02:23 PM (jgWCv) <<<<<
Serious, tell me your new deductible and co pay. Then let me shock the crap out of you for a family of four.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 02:30 PM (p/cQy)
__________________________________________________________
Serious, the amounts are my business, and I'm not going to share them with you to win an online argument. So, you win.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:39 AM (jgWCv)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 10:39 AM (dZQh7)
http://annapuna.blogspot.com/2013/02/gun-show.html
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 23, 2013 10:39 AM (U1VhH)
Posted by: Josef Stalin on Acid at February 23, 2013 10:40 AM (Q9qpj)
Since this is all just a bullshit game anyways.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at February 23, 2013 10:42 AM (Q9qpj)
Posted by: T-DUBYAH-D at February 23, 2013 10:43 AM (hhsyr)
Posted by: PabloD at February 23, 2013 10:44 AM (WFeZL)
Hey you brought up how tough it was with your healthcare increases, but I will take the victory.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 23, 2013 10:45 AM (p/cQy)
259 wheatie, older fed employees do--newer ones don't get a pension--we do Thrift Savings Program, which is a govie 401(k) that we contribute to.
Ah. Thanks, Paladine.
I'm all for giving our Veterans a good pension...as well as any other services where they put their life on the line for us.
The whole concept of a 'government pension' got started with a pension for our soldiers.
But a pension for bureaucrats?
We can't afford it.
And it creates unfair competition against the private sector employers...as well as a financial burden for all taxpayers.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 10:45 AM (eyJSG)
“this is going to be very stressful.”
Stressful? Oh no! *faints*
Posted by: The Republican Leadership While Getting The Checkbook Out
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 23, 2013 10:46 AM (kdS6q)
I think the one thing that buyers need to know is that with the massive amount of internet shopping and buying of ammo, many vendors no longer update their inventory on line and you just have to call to find out what's shakin'.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at February 23, 2013 10:47 AM (4Mv1T)
You would better serve the people if you took the private job that paid more:
1) More money for you.
2) More tax revenue and we need it.
3) Open up a desperately needed job for someone else.
Fly, be free. Seriously.
As Charles DeGaulle said "graveyards are full of indispensable men"
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 02:39 PM (dZQh7)
_____________________________________________________
Yeah, because skill sets like mine are a dime a dozen.
In my position, I've saved the taxpayers many millions of dollars by doing what I do, and that has enabled advantages for the warfighters. While I could employ my talents in the private sector, it would not have the same impact. I won't get into my specific functions because frankly, they're not your business. You can choose to believe me or not. I don't give a shit.
Now, I'm sorry that you and your business have suffered. I sincerely hope it turns around for you and your employees, and if it makes you feel better to hate people like me, fine. Knock yerself out.
Posted by: SARDiver at February 23, 2013 10:51 AM (jgWCv)
One vendor was blaming the snow storms in Missouri for delaying his ammo shipment. Saying that was why he had hardly any on hand. Said FedEx couldn't get it through.
One vendor was selling the Korean Glock 50rd drum magazine for like $145. Geez. A bit of overkill for a handgun.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at February 23, 2013 10:52 AM (U1VhH)
I wonder if unions see its members joining the US Military as "mutiny".
...between use and abuse
In 1980 "right to work" states where the nation's aerospace industry corporations had manufacturing facilities, rather than deal with employee unrest or unions, the corporation cut to the chase and provided their employees all the benefits "won" by unions nationally, and the employees didn't have to pay union membership fees. Of course, when the massive recession hit the next several years' American aerospace industry, the union rules applied, so lay-offs were mandated according to seniority rather than an employee's productivity. Not only did the little shops close without subcontracted bids, but some of the giants closed as well, swallowed by bigger fish that massively cut jobs while the Wall Street investors speculating in losses amassed profits.
Posted by: panzernashorn at February 23, 2013 10:55 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: freeTibet with purchase of equal or greater value Tibet at February 23, 2013 10:57 AM (quLHy)
Posted by: HeatherRadish� drinking beer at February 23, 2013 11:01 AM (hO8IJ)
Posted by: Vyceroy at February 23, 2013 11:14 AM (7igc6)
Wheatie:
Yes...Feds pay into Social Security (if they are FERS) and they have a pension. Employees after 1985 were placed in FERS, employees before that were in CSRS. CSRS employees paid no Social, but paid 7.5 % of the wages into CSRS..they have a sweet deal, 30 yrs and 56 gets you 80% of salary. FERS employees pay into the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) as a 401 K, have their FERS retirement (1.5% of salary) and pay social security. 56 and 30 for a FERS employee gets you social security (@62), 30% of salary and your 401K.
Let me say that I am a federal employee for DoD. In my department, of the 30 something engineers I manage, there will be quite a few that decide to retire (our average age is 5
. Also, everyone of these employees has no problem with the sequestor nor the 20% cut in pay. We all know what is going on in the econonomy. We all have 401Ks in various stages of repair and we all know the problems.
Posted by: Hamish at February 23, 2013 11:19 AM (jwqOs)
I say this as a small biz guy myself. Opening in 2008 but have not been able to hire anyone as I'm just managing to pay business bills as is. I have had to work part time in other jobs to pay my home bills. I would love to hire a person or two but the money has not been there to justify it, not to mention the looming threat of more increases in the cost of business because of MW and "affordable" care laws.
Posted by: Arcadehero at February 23, 2013 11:20 AM (27BfC)
Posted by: Hamish at February 23, 2013 11:24 AM (jwqOs)
282...Posted by: Hamish at February 23, 2013 03:19 PM (jwqOs)
Thanks for that info, Hamish.
As I said upthread...we should be cutting out all the frivolous 'fat' out of our govt spending, before we start cutting other things.
But then, common sense is in short supply in DC.
And Pixy makes that
smiley...whenever someone types an '8' + ')'.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 11:37 AM (eyJSG)
283...It needs to drilled into the heads of LIVs that the previous enforced wage hikes and the new proposed ones are poisoning the economy.
Yep, Arcadehero.
The Minimum Wage has become a job killer.
Not to mention, inflationary.
Every time the MinWage goes up, jobs are killed...or prevented from happening...and because employers have to add that additional cost onto their products, the prices for everything go up.
Posted by: wheatie at February 23, 2013 11:41 AM (eyJSG)
Posted by: confused at February 23, 2013 11:42 AM (E7i+5)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 11:46 AM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 11:53 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Ms. Michigan at February 23, 2013 12:00 PM (DJp+r)
Posted by: matteus at February 23, 2013 12:03 PM (negY9)
Posted by: Ms. Michigan at February 23, 2013 12:10 PM (DJp+r)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 12:15 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: sexypig at February 23, 2013 12:19 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Ms. Michigan at February 23, 2013 12:26 PM (DJp+r)
Posted by: matteus at February 23, 2013 12:27 PM (negY9)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at February 23, 2013 12:31 PM (1hM1d)
Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie ® at February 23, 2013 12:33 PM (1hM1d)
Posted by: Ms. Michigan at February 23, 2013 12:33 PM (DJp+r)
That they are coming after us with the Code of Federal Regulations instead of with muskets does not make them any the less oppressive.
Posted by: Shouting from behind a closed door at February 23, 2013 12:35 PM (nEDGE)
So, for all those moaning government employees in this thread ...
Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Welcome to our world, dumbasses.
Go ahead and vote democrat. You will be out of a job even faster once that socialist puke finishes auguring the economy into the ground.
Posted by: Kristophr at February 23, 2013 12:39 PM (wYVte)
Posted by: Sentry at February 23, 2013 12:43 PM (pjBvs)
Oh, right, I don't work for a union, I don't suckle from the government teat, and I don't vote Democrat, so it's not like that JEF gives a damn for me, does he?
Fuck them all, let them reap what they have sown. Let them have the barest taste of what they have already visited on the rest of us.
Posted by: acethepug at February 23, 2013 12:53 PM (l/NFX)
I'm not going to enjoy losing 20% of my pay but enjoy even less the new embrace of socialism by those who cheer the bad fortune of others.
Posted by: Brad at February 23, 2013 01:47 PM (IF2l
**********************************
True, but I don't have to put up with their whining.
Posted by: Been there more times than you've been born at February 23, 2013 01:02 PM (nEDGE)
After all, some of the reason for never ending deficit spending is related to the need to fund overly robust public sector benefit programs, and with more and more public sector retirements, it's only going to get worse and worse. Never mind that these sorts of poorly funded but overly robust pensions are somewhat a rarity in the private sector.
Since the Ocrats like to make a lot of noise about having Choices, for those BurrOcrats who don't want to pay the defined benefit tax, offer them the option to evolve their define benefit pensions into defined contribution pensions based upon their actual prorated contributions to their pensions. Oh wait, wouldn't that expose how poorly some of these programs have been funded...?
Gee, if the BurrOcrats and pOliticians actually had their pensions based upon private sector prosperity instead of wishful unicorn farts, how long would it take before there would be a big evolution away in the excessive tax and regulations that is crushing the private sector prosperity?
Posted by: drfredc at February 23, 2013 01:03 PM (y9L1G)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile[/i] at February 23, 2013 01:03 PM (e/OuK)
I'd suggest directing more wrath against politicians, their political appointees, and those salaries and benefits, than against the tiny cogs, but that seems so 99%...
Damn, I hate having to put four....where I used to put three... .
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Bly, Azof, UK at February 23, 2013 01:15 PM (7v5Ct)
Posted by: BignJames at February 23, 2013 01:16 PM (Sg0G/)
Nonetheless, whenever we are lucky enough to have a truely visionary POTUS who needs to make some fundamental changes to the bureaucracy, they got to bend some rules to purge the 'crats and get their own in there.
So, massive new hires for the Fed civil service in the last few years (20%?) but need to cut equivalent number of current employees (purge) - pay freeze three years running will get them out, but no worky, why?
OK, let's try to force the old guys out with unpaid furloughs (20% paycut). This will no worky as well. Why?
Because, by design, the primary feature of the civil service is that they are supposed to be very hard to fire And it is really hard to game it too.
No old guard is going to take (early) retirement now because the system calcs pension based on most recent/high salary years. Old guard been in civil service longer than this POTUS been in politics, and know when the shit get straight they'll get backpay, maybe even retroactive raises.
In the end, all Barkies attempts to circumvent the civil service will fail and HIS recent hires will have to be let go in a retroactive RIF where low seniority go first.
Posted by: Obamao at February 23, 2013 01:20 PM (JtyGg)
Posted by: DaMav at February 23, 2013 01:34 PM (rT08W)
Posted by: Dion at February 23, 2013 01:38 PM (q+FIa)
Innocent, sincere and dedicated people will be and are being sacrificed to protect the guilty who rule over us today. It is all about maintaining power and control for people who absolutely do not care about anything else.
The elites have plenty of supporters. A critical plurality of the voters are deluded into believing that they can get unlimited free stuff just like the elites keep promising. Of course those promises cannot be kept. The promise are not even meant to be kept; they are made only to placate the subjects.
Apparently you can fool most of the people all of the time.
The elites would rather rule in Hell than service in Heaven. The economy mean nothing to them.
A crash is inevitable now. Plan accordingly.
Posted by: Engineer at February 23, 2013 01:42 PM (CS58+)
We got furloughed and 5% pay cuts and no raises and late paychecks off and on for years since reality set in with the budget and tax revenues. We didn't really feel the impact. Banks waited for our paychecks to clear, and what with taxes and forced union dues, we didn't feel the 5% much and enjoyed having the day off. The union, of course, exaggerated it all and made it sound like we were starving, so that the Dem whores would give us a raise ASAP.
Most of us are grateful that we had these jobs. Don't hate all of them just because the hated MSM cherry picks the whiners to quote. Hate the unions and pols who run the show.
Posted by: PJ at February 23, 2013 01:43 PM (ZWaLo)
Posted by: Bureaucrats Wrapped in Swaddling Clothes at February 23, 2013 01:47 PM (Jcd0S)
Posted by: Mrs. Peel at February 23, 2013 01:52 PM (rO7vb)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 23, 2013 01:55 PM (Jcd0S)
I worked for the DOD as a GS-15, and did it for ten years. They wasted so damned much money it was unbelievable. All you government employees, you don't have a hope in Hell of convincing me your departments couldn't take a 30% across-the-board cut and still actually get your job done. I know better because I've been there.
I used to actually ask our suppliers, who jacked prices immediately upon knowing I was Government, "Aren't you a taxpayer, too? Doesn't it bother you that we are wasting our money this way?" The answer was usually silence or a shamefaced, "Well, that's just the way it is."
Government is too bloated and needs a massive purge. It also needs to stop being the hirer of last resort for nonwhites and women. It's no coincidence that respect for government started going down at the same time it started being drastically affected by affirmative action. Affirmative action is well on its way to destroying the country. Look at preezy for a prime example.
Posted by: mac at February 23, 2013 02:06 PM (TMssB)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 23, 2013 02:07 PM (Jcd0S)
Posted by: Marine 83 at February 23, 2013 02:08 PM (82TI1)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot: Epic Battle of the Cycling Stars at February 23, 2013 02:08 PM (Jcd0S)
I am one of the DoD workers who will shortly be furloughed. Realize that DoD is one of the few institutions left in public life that is largely conservative controlled. Folks here understand the importance of cutting the budget. We know all about boiled frogs and Saul Alinsky. Most are appalled at what is going on at the top.
I, personally, work for the U.S. Navy. I understand that the point of the Navy is to fight wars; it is not a jobs program. I am deeply concerned about the loss of readiness (the sequester will impact training), however. That should come ahead of the civilian workforce as well.
We do need to decide whether we want a military that is capable of taking on the world's toughest opponents. Even if times were "good", it is incredibly difficult to stay ahead of those opponents and that is just the fact of the matter. How the Navy is planning to fight in 5, 10 or 20 years is based on a national warfighting strategy that flows down from the top. That generates scenarios that themselves generate what combat capabilities are studied in my lab for the future fight. If we can't afford to fight first rate opponents anymore, than those scenarios have to change. What would be intolerable is asking young men (and now women) to fight with tools that are knowably inadequate.
Posted by: DoD Jim at February 23, 2013 02:10 PM (clzVx)
Posted by: Minuteman at February 23, 2013 02:16 PM (0YmiY)
Posted by: Cluebat at February 23, 2013 02:29 PM (KUAE5)
Posted by: Talibill at February 23, 2013 02:33 PM (qk/nQ)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] at February 23, 2013 02:37 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Steve Roberts at February 23, 2013 02:55 PM (oG53/)
Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at February 23, 2013 03:04 PM (EXemq)
Hey Jorge... screw you and your government employee friends too. Things were paycheck to paycheck here, and then your boss and union buddy Obama stuck is with tax increases, on top of ObamaCare tax increases, on top of double the cost for gas and no end in sight since he hates fossil fuel and rejects pipelines, and double the cost for electricity since he's killing all the coal generation.
Your boss and buddy is killing us in the private sector. I have extremely competent and experience IT expert friends with families and kids in college that have been unable to find work for more than two years. F-you and your unions too if you can't tighten the damn belt (I noticed you still get your raise and your automatic additional year of experience paygrade bump, which ought to offset some of this furlough difficulty).
If the American people get our chance, we'd fire 80% of you and slash the rest 50% of your pay so you're back to the same wages we get.
Posted by: Multitude at February 23, 2013 03:21 PM (bpONz)
Posted by: Jim at February 23, 2013 03:39 PM (HVff2)
Posted by: Sentry at February 23, 2013 03:48 PM (pjBvs)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] at February 23, 2013 04:00 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] at February 23, 2013 04:04 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith[/i] at February 23, 2013 04:43 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 05:03 PM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at February 23, 2013 05:08 PM (/b8+5)
Posted by: t9 at February 23, 2013 06:48 PM (x3YFz)
Posted by: Talibill at February 23, 2013 06:33 PM (qk/nQ)
Yeah. Good luck with that. Not sure what you do but whatever it is, right now there's about 20,000 people out of work who do it to, guaranteed.
Posted by: t9 at February 23, 2013 06:54 PM (x3YFz)
Snarky....I work for DoD, non-appropriated, managing 30 engineers, non-appropriated. Do you know what non-appropriated means....I'll give you a clue, congress does not appropriate money to pay us, we earn our money. We provide a service to the military that the private sector will not provide. Thus, even though I have enough money to pay my personnel for the rest of the year....we will all be on furlough and not one penny for their labor was appropriated by congress. Suffice to say that we are a government entity that basically is a defense contractor.
We actually perform a great deal of work for the Private Sector (defense contractors) that wish to keep their cost down. They come to us for services because we are cheaper than other contractors or their own labor force. By law we cannot operate at a profit and thus we have a consistent labor hour rate across multiple years. If I turn a profit this year (and I will thanks to the furlough), we will have to reduce our rates next year to achieve that 0 profit margin. Though, I will be turning down those requests the rest of this year because we cannot provide those services when we are being furloughed.
I don't have the time to describe color of money and Federal Appropriation Law, suffice to say that DoD personnel will be far more impacted by this than other agencies. Many of those agencies will just carry over funds into next year, thus not saving one damn dime for the taxpayers. Their employees will be allowed to work massive OT to spend those carried over dollars next Fiscal Year and they will not lose a penny due to the furlough. Most of DoD money cannot be carried over, end of the FY and it goes back to the Treasury.
I cannot speak for most of the government employees on this thread, but I can speak for myself. Yes, I have saved the taxpayers in one year $15 million and that was one program, one project. I can document other savings over the cost of my salary for every year of my service.
I have three engineers that work for me that I will state unequivocally they are the best in this country in their respective fields. Defense contractors and other private industry have attempted year after year to hire them away, yet they stay for multiple reasons, the main ones are that they highly value their commitment to the guys at the point of the spear and the freedom they have in doing their jobs.
To close, I have no problem with the sequestor....let it come...we will deal with it.
Posted by: Hamish at February 23, 2013 06:59 PM (jwqOs)
Posted by: The Man from Athens at February 23, 2013 09:33 PM (RXQ2T)
I used the wrong terminology for non-appropriated funds. There are military non-appropriated funds that are used to fund Morale, Welfare for military and their dependents. My mistake and I would not wish to confuse any body. Defense Working Capitol Funds are not appropriated and I did not want to go in depth about Working Capitol Funds, but Wikipedia actually explains it very well for Navy WCF.
"The funding of the NWCF is based on a revolving-fund concept of operations, under which the NWCF activities received their initial working capital through an appropriation or through a transfer of resources from existing appropriations of funds and used those resources to finance the initial cost of products and services. Financial resources to replenish the initial working capital and to permit continuing operations are generated by the acceptance of customer orders.
Revolving funds operate in a fashion similar to a personal checking account. An individual deposits income into their account. In order to maintain themselves as a "continuing operation," necessary goods and services must be purchased, reducing the fund total. In order to keep the fund balanced, expenditures must not exceed income. By keeping a positive account balance, and by looking for ways to stretch capital further, revolving fund activities are exercising sound financial management.
A revolving fund gets its name from the cyclic nature of the cash flow. Income from customer purchases is used to finance a service providers' continuing operations, i.e., the business areas in a working capital fund sell goods or services with the intent of recovering the total cost incurred in providing those goods and services. Income from sales is then used to buy or replace inventory and finance the production of future goods and services."
NWCFs are any year money, they do not expire. Oh they will have an expiration date on them, but they can be extended for long periods of time.
Posted by: Hamish at February 23, 2013 10:01 PM (jwqOs)
Both of you hit the nail on the head. The impact on the private sector contractors will be HUGE and that shit will roll downhill, fast. But like I said, screw us because our money comes from the government. I keep reading in the news that the government will just delay contracts, or slow them down, or keep them the same but slow down payment. People seem to think these companies can afford to float the capital to have employees sit around and do nothing. WTF planet are these people on??? Did anyone notice the earnings reports that came out last week? The large companies can't afford that. They'll have no choice but to go ahead with the 25% layoffs most of them are talking about. We've already sustained large reductions in staffing (oh yeah, I forgot - we haven't done any belt tightening like anyone else, huh?), so we are down to the best in the business. And the thousands upon thousands of small businesses that depend on our subcontracts to keep afloat? Shit, they'll be gone within 3 months, tops. But, we're sticking it to those lazy, overpaid government employees, aren't we?
The people who lose their jobs won't be able to find new ones - every defense company will be in the same position. All those small business owners and their employees? We'll just call them casualties in the war on Obama; a little collateral damage is all. Personally, I might be able to switch industries, but it might mean moving my family again. I just dragged them halfway across the country simply because I love my job and the fact that it helps keep our military safe, so they'll love that. At least my husband's been out of work since June 2009 so I don't have to inconvenience him with moving again. Ironically, my entire job is to prove to the government that the tax payer money we are given is spent efficiently and appropriately; but by all means, we wouldn't want someone doing that!
Posted by: Ms. Michigan at February 23, 2013 10:37 PM (DJp+r)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 24, 2013 12:39 AM (PxYrx)
My career was because of government: Corporate sales tax accountant. I worked for a national retail chain and had to be well-versed in the complex laws of each of the different taxing states and localities. I've seen tax law at its convoluted worst. I've also had to 'work' with state and local tax auditors too many times to count. They'd come to our office, work 9-5 (no unpaid OT for those guys), while many had the attitude that we worked for them (make copies, blah blah blah). Sorry, but government could be slashed 25% right now and the public wouldn't notice a thing. Now that would be bad for the goonion honchos, no doubt, as well as the individual worker, but great for the taxpayers.
I've also been reading where the government workers who are not laid off want guarantees that they won't suffer if the job no longer gets done. I've got some real world news for these types: If people are laid off and you can't get the job done, you should be fired. I've seen it many times in private business where layoffs come to a 10 man department, 10%, so the department is down to 9. That one worker's work is now shifted to the other 9 remaining and the work is still expected to be done correctly and timely. Then another round of layoffs, another loss of an employee or two, more shifting of those laid off employees' work load to the survivors, again with the expectation that the work will still be done in a correct and timely manner. If you have to stay late to get the job done, then that is what is required. When was the last time you heard about paper pushing bureaucrats staying 'late' unpaid to get their work caught up?
Sorry so many government employees are offended at the comments here, but geez, get a grip. The government steals from us to pay you, so why can't we have a say in how our bloody money is used? Why can't we bitch about the profligate waste within the government bureaucracy? Do you think government employment will always be ouside the harsh laws of economics?
Posted by: RickZ at February 24, 2013 02:47 AM (CPKp2)
Posted by: DaveA at February 24, 2013 05:31 AM (GRQWU)
RickZ,
Most of us are not offended by most of these comments nor am I offended by yours. You make several statements that are your perceived opinion. I have worked many unpaid hours in order to get a project completed on schedule. I know many government employees that take home work every weekend in order to get a problem solved without compensation. Guess what it is part of the job and I will be doing it this weekend.
As for getting the job done...if you are already understaffed and now you have 8 hrs less per week per employee ( in my case 240 hrs per week for 22 weeks that comes out to 5280 hrs for my section or 3 full man-years 
to finish multiple projects on time and on budget. You determine priorities and go from there, there will be programs and projects that slide to the right. If you can make an engineering schedule that suffers a 20% decrease in hrs be completed on time just by us working harder and more efficently you are in the wrong business. There is not that much slop to these program budgets.
Posted by: Hamish at February 24, 2013 05:56 AM (jwqOs)
Posted by: PatQ at February 24, 2013 08:55 AM (4Mmpm)
The majority- or all- of you celebrating because DOD GS employees and contractors are taking a significant haircut don't understand the scope and extent of DoD activities. This is a function mandated by the constitution.
Yet, guess what? If you are a DoD non-military employee, you are getting a big pay cut this year. Meanwhile other governmental GS employees are not. In fact, congress was just debating giving themselves a raise.
How the fuck is that equal treatment? Why is my particular flavor of govt service deemed less valuable than, say, the FDA? EPA? DOE? Education? And as someone who was an active duty officer until 3 yr ago, how is it fair that my military counterpart- who does 70% of the work I do and has 70% of the responsiblity- is getting a pay raise while I'm getting a 10% pay cut over a 12 mo period, actualized over 6 mo?
But instead of cries of equal sacrifice on conservative blogs, what I'm seeing is joy that the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE is getting raped. Fuck all of you. I'm done with the so-called conservatives in the republican party and this website. You short-sighted clowns are letting obama rape people like me while cheering, and totally missing the fact that the raping is targeted to the very.fucking.group you should be supporting.
Get your head out of your asses.
Posted by: patrick at February 24, 2013 10:45 AM (MEdo5)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 24, 2013 11:37 AM (MuHYc)
Posted by: patrick at February 25, 2013 12:56 PM (dL8PI)
Posted by: nk469 at March 01, 2013 06:40 PM (JHXG1)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3526 seconds, 479 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Vic at February 23, 2013 08:49 AM (53z96)