Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If you guys are right about the "endless war" he'll probably be called back to active duty soon- and i believe the entails a pay raise.

Only when compared to a military pension, perhaps.

• Percentage of American troops in Iraq who are National Guard or Reserve forces: 40%
• Percentage of National Guard members and reservists who are married, as of May 2004: 56%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a loss of income over civilian jobs, as of May 2004: 55%
  Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $1,000 a month or more, as of May 2004: 49%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $30,000 a year or more, as of May 2004: 15%

link

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Only when compared to a military pension, perhaps.

• Percentage of American troops in Iraq who are National Guard or Reserve forces: 40%
• Percentage of National Guard members and reservists who are married, as of May 2004: 56%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a loss of income over civilian jobs, as of May 2004: 55%
  Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $1,000 a month or more, as of May 2004: 49%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $30,000 a year or more, as of May 2004: 15%

link

Are you implying that GiGi's father double-dips?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Only when compared to a military pension, perhaps.

• Percentage of American troops in Iraq who are National Guard or Reserve forces: 40%
• Percentage of National Guard members and reservists who are married, as of May 2004: 56%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a loss of income over civilian jobs, as of May 2004: 55%
  Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $1,000 a month or more, as of May 2004: 49%
• Percentage of married Guard members and reservists who report a decrease in pay of $30,000 a year or more, as of May 2004: 15%

link

what's the percentage of people who were paid in addition to their civilian jobs to be in the Guard for years prior to being called up?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
A couple of forklifts, and that's all the proof of WMD that club and bilmore need. Organized looting? There must have been WMD.

What scares me is the thought that the people in the Vice President's office who are responsible for our foreign policy think this way too.

I didn't need wmd

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
what's the percentage of people who were paid in addition to their civilian jobs to be in the Guard for years prior to being called up?

Hank,

I know you value your tax cuts, but complaining about paying people who are risking their life for our country is going overboard. These people are and have been sacrificing for all of us, and if they actually enjoyed and got paid for a few weekends of military exercises (and beers) on guard duty, that expense is well deserved for their commitment.

We joke about just about everything here, but let's not belittle the soldiers.

G^3

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Spanky
But don't you think Pataki will still run. I am pretty sure he wants it badly. But I agree he does not have a chance. I hope you are wrong about Giuliani but there is strong evidence to support your position.

He'll probably form an exploratory and bow out about as early as Pete Wilson did.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
Oh, I agree that it's a bad idea, one that should go down in flames. It's just that, to me, "Folly" implies something so bad and haunting that it drags down lots of other stuff, as well as the effectiveness and standing of the proponent.

I don't see that happening here. If it does die, (and there's no guarantee it will), I think it just sails away into the sunset, and we all move on.

Why, do you guys think its dead? Personal accounts probably are, but I'm not sure about reform in general.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Hank,

I know you value your tax cuts, but complaining about paying people who are risking their life for our country is going overboard. These people are and have been sacrificing for all of us, and if they actually enjoyed and got paid for a few weekends of military exercises (and beers) on guard duty, that expense is well deserved for their commitment.

We joke about just about everything here, but let's not belittle the soldiers.

G^3

Should the salaries know no limits? This is as unmoored as the Bush argument that the military should get higher pay raises than civilian gov't employees because we're in wartime. Conveniently ignoring that all soldiers in combat get combat pay (and that the military has a large number of civilian non-combat, desk positions), and curiously ignoring the numerous civilian employees (e.g. DHS, FBI) who are engaged in the "war on terror", despite being considered civilians.

Are you saying military pay or pensions are insufficiently generous currently? if so, what is the basis for that statement, other than "whatever they're paying, it should be more" and "my dad deserves to have his standard of living increased by the government, because i'm so greedy (3x, indeed) that I won't increase it for him"?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
We joke about just about everything here, but let's not belittle the soldiers.

I'll agree to that, as long as you don't counter discussion of the elderly by making it about soldiers. I'm not overly fond of the VA cuts myself.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How about Saddam's utter disregard of over 17 UN Security Council Resolutions over a 12 year period?

How do you feel about Israel?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Why, do you guys think its dead? Personal accounts probably are, but I'm not sure about reform in general.

It's the personal accounts of which I'm speaking. Reform certainly has to happen.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
No but you lose credibility if you are part of these resolutions and nothing is done. The US sits on the security council and was part of the proceedings that issued these resolutions. There is nothing worse to ones crediblity than empty threats. And in the international community, if a country's resolve is in question then other countries will be more inclined to disregard your national interest. The UN kept issuing these resolutions, letting their inspectors be pushed around, and continue to let Saddam flout the resolutions. Every time one of these resolutions was issued and not backed, was another day that the UN's credibilty and the US's credibilty diminshed. From my point of view we had two choices. Enforce the UN resolutions or leave the UN. Personally I think the CinC made the right call.

The admin decided to go to war to benefit the UN? Got it.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by bilmore
It's the personal accounts of which I'm speaking. Reform certainly has to happen.

Go do your fucking Roth IRA within your qualified plan, which you can do starting next year, despite the fact you are over the income limit for the original Roths, and shut it.

Add-on personal accounts, or diversion personal accounts?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
The admin decided to go to war to benefit the UN? Got it.

The credibility of the UN is based on the credibility of the supporting members. So, Saddam flaunting the resolutions was Saddam flaunting the proponents of the resolutions - us. Which is why Panda's point is inapposite. When someone fails to support "Israel is the source of all that is bad in the world", they're hardly dissing us.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Go do your fucking Roth IRA within your qualified plan, which you can do starting next year, despite the fact you are over the income limit for the original Roths, and shut it.

Add-on personal accounts, or diversion personal accounts?

So now I'm confused. I just said that the personal accounts idea is bad, and should go away, while basic reform of the funding/outlay scheme of SS should happen. Did you switch sides?