Cut military retirement benefits? At least means test the benefits for Officers?

[BrentWil]

The military gives pretty good retirement benefits. After 20 years of service, one gets half of their pay for the rest of their life. 30 years of service gives one 75 percent of pay and 40 years is 100 percent of pay. This pay doesn't start at retirement age, but starts once the person gets out. Next, they get health care benefits and VA benefits. They will also get social security benifits. This is all highly costly.

So in an age when the Republican are questioning social security and Medicare because of our budget deficit, isn't it time we questioned military retirement? Why should an officer serve 20 years, get to retire was a Lieutenant Colonel with half his pay, and then go work for corporate America? In todays dollars, that Lieutenant Colonel is making 8K a year. He will get half of that, plus a yearly increase, and health care for the rest of his life. Is this retirement system really fair for the rest of us?

Plus, if the benefits aren't as good, perhaps we can bring the American war machine to a halt. Can't fight wars without people.

[benddem]

1. Military retirees

pay into Social Security...so forget that one. Then try and find people who will put up with the danger, constant family separations, and other rigors who would do this without benefits. All retirees are not eligible for VA care.

[sarge43]

11. We also pay income tax on the retirement pay. It isn't a freebie.

Check out the punitive articles of the UCMJ. A few are reasonable, but service members can be court martialed for living with sans marriage a member of the opposite sex.

"Yeah, we lifers have it made. If it's so great why isn't everyone going for 20?"

To put it another way, career military eat a lot of shit sandwiches and most of the time they're open faced.

[BrentWil]

17. There are plenty of jobs that suck...

We have to look at everything, given that they are coming after SS benefits for everyone.

[southernyankeebelle]

31. Sorry buddy you don't take away what was promised people when they first came in.

[Scruffy1]

153. Amen to that

A deal is a deal and I certainly think the members of the armed services are underpaid. And I'm an anti-war activist.

[TBF]

161. I agree -

I'd like to see the military down-sized by about 90%, but we must keep the promises we made to all enlistees (at whatever level).

My dad is a 100% disabled (wartime) veteran. I don't believe his military pension is taxable, but his social security might be. In any case, it is not much money, considering he volunteered at 17 (with parental permission) and ended up with an injury affecting his life forever. He lives in a small town in the midwest, not terribly far from his VA hospital.

We've got to take care of our veterans and current military, and I would think Obama would realize that.

[tsuki]

162. Tell that to retirees & spouses who lost their military medical care

when they were put on medicare with deductibles, co-pays and the need for private insurance. Their excuse, the recruiters lied to the enlistees.

I went through this with my widowed Mother.

If they want to fuck you, they will, especially with Gates and Mullens on board.

[sarge43]

32. And how many those jobs can't the employee walk from without

winding up in one of Uncle penal facilities?

[n2doc]

95. If they make the economy bad enough they will get applicants

The repub goal is to make everyone but the CEO class have to work to death with no retirement, no health care, and starvation wages. Make things bad enough and standard military pay, with no bennies, will look good in comparison.

[old mark]

2. I was in the Army for only 3 years, over 40 years ago, and it still fucks me up.

I have worked with a few retired career military people, and believe me, they earned that pension and benefit package - they gave their youth in service to their country...I see a difference between the career enslisted and the Officer corps, but I see little fair way to cut the benefits of one without cutting the benefits of all. And actually, the number of real career military is not so large - most people do their enlistment tours and leave, and most officers are not career Regular service people either.

I'd rather cut the pay and bennies of professional politicians.

mark

[sarge43]

16. Can't say about the officer corps, but when I got the way below the

poverty level retirement goodie, approximately 20% of AF enlisted went for 20.

[old mark]

122. Sarge, my old work mate was a retired AF master sergeant...He now is also retired

from PA state civil service and so has 2 pensions and social security...he is finally making a decent living, but sadly, lost his wife to illness 2 years before he retired from the state.
You guys earned it, and a lot more.


mark

[sarge43]

130. Thanks old mark.and thanks for your time on the oars.

Well, my standard answer to the "double dipping" whine is of course if it's such a great deal, do sign up. More than a few times when my section manning was down to 60%, I could have used the help.
I just pushed paper. I can barely imagine what the "oh shit that was close" jobs were like. Well yes I can; hubster was munitions maint with two combat zone tours and some close calls. We're waiting on the Agent Orange to kick in.

Some people have no idea.

[old mark]

142. My uncle was career AF enlisted, too - Crew chief on a BUFF, started in

B-29's. Retired to work in a factory, now lives in California.
FWIW, people think civil service is gravy, too, but there is no long line to get the jobs and few people last longer than a year or two.

I enlisted to avoid the draft, and it turned out to be a pretty good idea -
I spent nearly a year in an Army hospital with a leg injury, but got back in one piece.

mark

[Jackpine Radical]

43. Or tax the shit out of CEO golden parachutes.

[Gaedel]

3. To be accurate

Military retirement pay is a percentage of "base pay" which is a less than total compensation.

When I was a Second Lieutenant (back in the day), my base pay was $222.30 per month. My quarters allowance as a married officer with no quarters available was $85.00 per month. I also drew "commutation of subsistence" of $47.88 per month. Total compensation was $355.18 per month at a time when even liberal arts majors could get $450 a month out of college.


Obviously, with promotions and "fogeys" (longevity increases), at retirement the pay would be higher, but still at 20 years, the 50% would be based on 75% of the total compensation.

[BrentWil]

4. It is not based on 50% of 75% of total compensation..

It is based on 50% of actual pay. In other words, you don't get 50 percent of basic housing allowance for example. For an 05 at 20 years, BAH doesn't make up 25 percent of his pay.

[Gaedel]

8. "Actual Pay"

I do not know what the current numbers are. What you get paid across the pay table is base pay plus quarters plus subsistence/rations minus SS minus taxes minus any allotments. When I was in (1961-1989), base pay made up about 75% of the total paycheck and my 50% was based on that.

[tinymontgomery]

151. Base pay based on the last 3 years

averaged out over 3 years. But it as even changed since 1980. And thanks for wanting to screw those of us who put in our time that was required. USN LDO 23 years.

[NavyDem]

113. Housing allowance can be more than 25% of total compensation.

I just did the calculation for my last year of service (Jan. 2009 - Jan 2010). Housing allowance very well could make up 25% of total compensation. For example:

My Base Pay in 2009: 3369.90
My Housing allowance: 2120.00
Total Pre-Tax Comp: 5489.90/Month

I did not get subsistence pay because I was on a ship, and meals were provided. My housing allowance accounts for 38% of my compensation while I was active duty. My retirement pay is based on 40% of my base pay, and does not take into account federal/state taxes to be taken out, or Survivor Benefit Plan premiums that must be subtracted by Law. That leaves me with 1213 per month in retirement.

[cleanhippie]

117. One only gets a % of BASE pay. Period.

BAH, BAS or any special pays do not count. Its only whats on this table.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militarypaytables/2010WebPayTable34.pdf

[Submariner]

5. There are a lot of triple-dippers out there

For instance, when/if McCain retires, he would get his VA disability income, along with congressional retirement pay, and social security. There are a lot of retired ex-military/ex-government workers double- or triple-dipping.

It's paid for by veterans like myself who were re-categorized by the Bush/Cheney junta in 2002, and had ALL my access to VA health care taken away. The AWOL punk who deserted his national guard unit, and his draft dodging coward sidekicks, reclassified those of us without service connected disabilities as Group 8 veterans.

So a couple of punks threw us under the bus so they could have some cash on hand to run their illegal Iraq oil grab war. I personally hope they both die of painful rectal bleeding.

With all the republican draft dodging cowards of my generation in congress nowadays, I would not doubt they are trying to screw military veterans again. More Bush regime tactics.

[sammytko]

25. You cannot triple dip!

I am an Air Force retiree and also receive VA compensation.

I paid into SS, but cannot collect. Well I can, but that amount will be offset in my retirement pay - whoop di doo! I'll get a whole extra 100 dollars or so.

And retirement has changed. It is no longer 50% for 20 years. Its maybe 35% now - have to check the numbers, but don't feel like doing it now.

[Obamanaut]

37. Why can you not collect SS with no offset caused by military retirement?

http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/188

Effect of a military retirement on Social Security benefits.
Updated 03/30/2010 09:34 AM | ID #188 How will my military retirement affect my Social security benefits?
You can get both Social Security benefits and military retirement. Generally, there is no offset of Social Security benefits because of your military retirement. You will get your full Social Security benefits based on your earnings. However, your Social Security benefit may be reduced if you also receive a government pension based on a job in which you did not pay Social Security taxes.
More information may be found in our fact sheet called Military Service and Social Security (Publication No. 05-10017), which is available on the Internet. You can file for retirement benefits online.

[sammytko]

46. because some of us also receive VA compensation.

My soon to be ex has civil service pension and VA compensation - cannot collect full SS benefits.

[Obamanaut]

56. The way I read it, the offset is due to the VA compensation, not the

military retirement.

Bearing in mind I do NOT have any VA compensation, the way it was explained to me way back in 1988 was that with my hearing loss, I would be entitled to X% disability VA comp, which translated into X$, which would be a portion of the regular retirement pay that would be untaxed, and this would eventually impact my social security.

[alfredo]

52. I get SS, a pension from the Post Office which is reduced by

the amount I get from SS. I also get compensation from the VA for the damage done to my hearing (bilateral Tinnitus). I guess I'm a triple dipper.

[MrScorpio]

133. It all depends when you joined

I joined the AF in '83, so I was able to get 50%+ after I retired.

Those that came after weren't so lucky.

[Scruffy1]

155. On the federal retirement the max you can get is 80%

This is even if you have three pensions. Not sure how Social Security works into this.

[pinboy3niner]

6. Emphatic UNREC

Targeting one group as a strawman is ignorant, divisive and uncool. :thumbsdown:

[ShadowLiberal]

7. Republicans would cry 'weak on terrorism' if anyone dared to try to cut the military's budget

That's the sad reality, I mean look at the recent news story about the pentagon wanting to restructure some things to work more efficiently and save money. Politicians are screaming their heads off at the pentagon, saying they haven't properly analyzed the effects of those budget cuts to national security and how well they can function.

And you know what's really bad about all that screaming over the pentagon's 'cuts' they want? The pentagon even with those cuts is still asking for a 1% increase in their next year budget, to them 1% increase is progress and cutting wasteful spending, to politicians it's putting Americans in danger of terrorist attacks.

Apparently to republicans only domestic spending on social programs effect the deficit.

Edit: By 'cutting the military's budget' I'm not talking about just the retirement benefits you mention, I mean all of the military's budget.

[alfredo]

9. Those soldiers have signed their lives and freedoms away.

They are willing to give up freedoms and possibly their lives for us.


And no they don't get increases every year. They get COLA's. If the cost of living doesn't go up, they don't get an increase.


VA benefits are means tested. If you are making $60 grand a year, you won't get the benefits a veteran on SS gets.

Nobody gets out of the military unaffected. I was fortunate, I was in intelligence. I was unfortunate, I was in intelligence.

[BrentWil]

12. No one is saying don't give anything..

All I am saying is that if everything else is going to be at risk of being cut, lets take a hard look at this also.

[alfredo]

49. Not at a time when we are struggling to find and retain

good, qualified soldiers. Telling soldiers that the benefits promised when signing up will be cut is not how you keep them loyal to the service. That would be enough to convince many not to choose the military as a career. If potential recruits see congress cutting benefits for veterans, they might think twice about signing on.

The only thing that has helped recruiting is the bad economy.

BTW, I signed a contract with the military. I kept my part, I expect them to keep their part.

[BrentWil]

53. You know, if you couldn't retain the soldiers you couldn't fight the wars... NT

[alfredo]

61. Fighting wars of aggression like Iraq is abuse of our military.

Self defense is the only reason to fight.

[BrentWil]

62. Which means alot smaller military. If you cut benefits you have that

You can't fight a war without the tools to fight it.

[alfredo]

68. Cut quanity, not quality. Smaller military doesn't mean cutting benefits.

You still have to offer a good package if you want to attract quality talent. Look at the teaching profession. Do you think we'd have better teachers if we made teaching less attractive?

If we have to have a military, let's have it staffed with the cream of the crop. You are right, we don't need the big bloated military we have, and that has to be addressed. But don't do it on the backs of those who have laid their lives on the line.

[southernyankeebelle]

Your right about that with 3 retired servicemembers in my family over 60 yrs it does take a toll and

it takes a special person to want to stay in the military for over 20 yrs. It does effect him and believe it or not the family too.

[alfredo]

59. I can attest what it does to the head. The VA is treating me

for PTSD. I am not getting comp for that because it can't be pinpointed as occurring during my time in. I don't need it or want it anyway. I'm getting treatment for free, plus I'm getting ditty bopper comp (10%) for damage done from listening to morse code for 8 to 16 hours a day.


You don't need to be in combat to be screwed up by military service. Being powerless in so many situations, having your days and nights controlled by someone else fucks with your head. Knowing that you can't get out of your contract without severe repercussions messes with your head too.

I was in intelligence, and depending on job and location, the stress is off the charts. The fact that you have to keep secrets, twists you. Because you are obliged to carry those secrets to your grave means your mission continues long after you put your olive drabs away.


I'd do it again. I'm glad I served.

[tularetom]

10. At a time when all public employee pensions are under fire

it's probably reasonable to take a hard look at military retirements. I think the current system is fair, and anybody who puts in 20 or more years putting up with all that bullshit is entitled to whatever they get, but the potential for abuse is definitely there.

I personally know of at least three people who have been or are currently, triple dipping. They retired from the military in their early 40's with 20 years in, then found work in a government agency (in all three cases it was a CalPERS member agency), got vested, retired from there at age 55, and went to work for another (non PERS) agency or as a teacher, got vested in that system and retired at age 65. Granted the last two pensions aren't huge because of the relatively brief service times, but perhaps some adjustment should be made in the retirement pay for retirees already on a government or military retirement.

The whole system of public pensions is going to get a very hard look in the next few years as baby boomers begin to retire in huge numbers. Reforms are definitely needed but I hope the system isn't destroyed because of the excesses of a few.

[hedgehog]

77. I don't normally say this, but Bullshit! If a person does a job for certain benefits,

then that person should be paid those benefits regardless of any other income. The money earned in the military has nothing to do with the money earned working for anyone else. Look at it this way:

Person A and Person B retire after 20 years in the military. Person A goes fishing, Person B goes to work for a government agency. Person C starts work for that same agency the same day. After another 20 years pass:

Person A has earned a military pension.

Person B has earned a military pension and a second, indepednent pension from the government agency.

Person C has earned a pension from the government agency.

If Person B had not earned the second pension from the government agency, Person D would have been hired and would have earned that pension, so the government agency isn't out any extra money.

The same logic applies to anyone who works a hell of a lot of overtime just ahead of retirement and ends up boosting their pension. They followed the rules and earned the money.

[tularetom]

88. Unlike you I say BULLSHIT often. And I'm saying it now

Not as far as the military retirees are concerned. You have your opinion. I disagree but that's fine.

As far as the person piling up overtime hours to boost their pension, it isn't following the rules. It's using a loophole in the rules to defraud the system. It's called "spiking" and it's very common among our local sheriff's deputies who pile on the OT in their final year to jack up their salary as a basis for their retirement, go out the door at a higher rate of pay than they were earning as a full time deputy, and THEN get hired back as a "consultant" by the Sheriff's office. Meanwhile the taxpayers have to fund a new full time deputy to replace the one who retired. So we are now paying in excess of 200% (sometimes almost 300%) for the same service. We are paying retired deputies who never earned over $70,000 per year as full time employees, $125,000 to $150,000 as retirees. And these aren't people who retired 20 years ago. These guys left within the past 3 years.

It might not bother you but it bothers enough people here in CA that even the Democratic controlled legislature is considering bills to ban the practice. And by giving right wing politicians the ammunition to go after public employees, it could potentially destroy public service as a career choice in the future.

[SargeUNN]

13. I find this post and the poster repulsive

We veterans were promised these and many of us would have been in hell without these promises being kept as our service limited or ruined our potential earning ability. The OP here is one pathetic person for whom I have nothing but contempt. How dare you even suggest such.

[SargeUNN]

15. I accidently hit the rec but I don't rec this post

I TOTALLY UNREC this post and like I said find the poster hideous and insulting.

[DCBob]

14. Its a difficult job, to put it mildly... they deserve it.

That being said there could be tweaks.. considering the dire circumstances we are in.

[WinkyDink]

18. Yeah, just because they could have gone to their DEATHS....

What a godawful OP post.

[BrentWil]

19. Again, no one is saying they should get nothing.

All I am saying is that 50 percent of base pay and health care for the rest of your life, starting as early as age 37 might be a bit much.

[WinkyDink]

20. You're on the wrong board, pal.

[SargeUNN]

35. You must be part of that Grateful Nation I so abhore

It is fine for us to die or get injuried protecting your interest but if we do too well or get too burdensome then you get upset. You are repulsive to me and I think you are disgusting.

[BrentWil]

38. To be Grateful for something you have to think the military is doing something useful and not

HARMFUL!

[SargeUNN]

48. I think you are sick

it is your kind that has caused us who have suffered for our service and yet you want your life to be so enriched even if it means we who served and especially those who have been injured and sacrificed aren't entitled to the very promises made so to keep your ass safe and insure you can have your security. It doesn't matter if we are officers or enlisted veterans, we did what we were asked to do and to suggest an officer or enlisted isn't entitled to these benefits due to any wealth they accumulated afterwards or during their service legit is a sign of what a sick and selfish piece of DNA you are. I have utter comtempt for you and find you totally offensive. I have ask that this topic be locked because you are insulting to me and probably others like me and you only promote the same harm that we have to deal with because of narrow minded people like you. If you had any sense of gratefulness to Veterans you would apology and since you don't this post should be locked.

[BrentWil]

50. Iraq is keeping me safe?

I have nothing against vets. I think they should be treated and cared for by society. However, I see them as victims. If you really think the VAST majority of your serve had anything to do with the physical security of the United States, you are fooling yourself.

One benefit of less benefits would be that less people would be willing to serve. That would be key to stopping the wars.

[SargeUNN]

54. You are reaching idiot

I served during Vietnam and while I certainly didn't think we should be there, it was not my place to make policy. If you don't like a law and you are a law officer you don't choose which law you won't enforce and which one you will. You enforce the laws as you have to work with. It is up to the lawmakers and the people who vote for them to do that not the military you need to get your thinking straight and you might not be so offensive.

[BrentWil]

55. The draft is over. The military gets its people because they sign up...

If they can't get people, they can't fight pointless wars. The only other option is the draft.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BrentWil]

58. No they can't. But if you don't have a military that because you can't keep the people

Policy makers have no one to ask.

[USArmyParatrooper]

60. No. But having a strong military does

[BrentWil]

63. And a smaller one that is focused on self defense would do it the same.

[USArmyParatrooper]

64. Possibly, and we can discuss that in another thread.

But what does this have to do with you wanting to gut our veterans' retirement?

[BrentWil]

66. Who said gut?

I said we need to take a look at it if they are going to take a look at SS benefits.

If anything, I would suggest means testing now and making changes for those in the future.

For example, the retirement at 20 years only encourages people to get out when the government has put alot of money into them. 1st thing would be to move that up to 25 years. That change would save alot of money.

[USArmyParatrooper]

73. "Gut" "Reduce" "Tomato"...

For what reason are you wanting to reduce benefits to retired veterans?

[BrentWil]

74. Because we can't afford to keep giving benefits to retired officers who are making millions

We are broke. Remember?

[tammywammy]

75. How many retired officers are making "millions"? n/t

[BrentWil]

80. A few. 20 years and the rank of LTC is a good place to start off in business in America

[tammywammy]

81. I work with a ton of retired military, none of them are millionaires. n/t

[BrentWil]

82. Well then means testing wouldn't hurt them. NT

[USArmyParatrooper]

84. Less than 50K per year = "millions"?

[BrentWil]

85. Other income. Many people leave after 20 years and do other things NT

[USArmyParatrooper]

104. How many is many?

What's the percentage of millionaire retired veterans? How is whatever income they earn after retirement relevant?

[BrentWil]

110. Because we cannot afford what we are doing.. so we have to take away from those who can afford it.

A maximum income might be another way to get to this problem. Everyone that makes over a certain point gets taxed 100 percent.

[SargeUNN]

111. ok Genius

Tell us about your miiitary service and experience with the VA other than what you read? Let me teach you something if you are able to learn.

I was suppose to discharged at 50% but somehow someone decided it was 0%. All during the Reagan admin. I fought this and finally under another admin. I was upgraded to 10% and during Clinton's admin I was finally given a choice of an upgrade to 20% or go on SSI which was more income. I am allowed less than $630 a month tops and my service connected pension counts against that total. I now have to worry if I can bounce things around to pay my rent, electricity and other things just to live and then someone like you comes along with such as this, I can't help but wonder if you are just a cold hearted ingrate or just too uninformed and possibly uncaring to see how utterly disgusting your idea is. What really is worse is you still don't seem to get it and cling to defending it even after anyone who is capable of rational thought would admit they had a bad idea. That is why I find you offensive and pathetic.

[Gaedel]

78. A poem

God and the soldier we adore
In time of danger, not before
The danger past and all things righted
God is forgot and the soldier slighted

[Jackpine Radical]

21. I have a better idea.

Let's tax the rich in proportion to the benefits they derive from American government activities.

Then there will be enough to go around and we won't have to figure out which of us peons is next for the chopping block.

[BrentWil]

23. Officers in the military often are the rich, once they get out...

Why not at least means test the retirement benefits?

[SargeUNN]

30. that is not a test

ANYONE who earns it is entitled to it. How DARE you even put that test in it. If someone earns something legitimately they are entitled to it no matter how much they have or don't have. We have means testing at the VA and while it can recoup cost, it is a broken promise to veterans and opens the door to abuse.

[BrentWil]

34. Then why does Bill Gates pay taxes?

Didn't he "earn" his money. Above sounds like a republican argument to me.

If an Officer gets out, becomes a billionaire, why the fuck should we be giving him his retirement?

[Cid_B]

79. Because he earned it...

Anything less and you are a thief. Whether he has $1 or $1,000,000,000.... he earned that $$ with time and service (two things you obviously know nothing about).

[sarge43]

139. One more time in case you haven't heard

Both active duty pay and military retirement are taxed, repeat, taxed and has been since the end of WWII.

We give him his retirement because the fucker was promised it for honorable military service and because he earned it.

[HipChick]

42. Define 'rich'?

Different meaning in different regions..I come across a lot of retired 0-6 in my job in new careers..they are just about making it, if the spouse isn't working

[whistler162]

166. Really... the retired Lt. Col across the street was

working as a furniture salesman before taking a job in Japan.

By the way I live in a middle class neighborhood.

[Duckhunter935]

22. Already lost

My free health and dental promised when I enlisted. I worked for mine for years putting in an excess of 100 hours a week.

[sammytko]

27. I dont think free dental was promised

I do receive free dental thru the VA but that is because I was diagnosed with TMJ while in the service.

You do not have to have been in combat and wounded to get VA compensation.

Anything that was diagnosed and treated while in service is fair game for compensation. You have to be screened at the end of your career whether you separate, resign, or retire.

[Obamanaut]

44. I think the free dental is only on active duty. I don't recall dental coverage

being offered as an inducement to stay as a career. I retired in 1988, and have paid for dental insurance ever since.

[USArmyParatrooper]

24. Absolutely NOT

You might want to also point out that we're talking about half, 75 percent and 100 percent of base pay only, which in most cases means even 100% isn't enough to live on.

[BrentWil]

26. An O-5 with 20 years in is making 8K a month in base pay. I can live on that. NT

[WinkyDink]

33. So ENLIST. Or--why didn't you, if you think it's a gravy train?

[USArmyParatrooper]

39. That's why I said MOST base pay isn't enough to live on.

[Duckhunter935]

41. most are not O-5's

Most retired are enlisted

[BrentWil]

45. An E-7 that serves 20 years gets 4131.30 a month

So that E-7 would get over $2K a month in retirement, free health care, free college tuition (if he used his GI Bill), etc.

That isn't a bad deal. It is just a deal we need to look at and see if we can afford.

[sammytko]

47. hello, I retired as an E-7 with 21.5 yrs - I do not get 2K a month!

It comes to 1827 before taxes, yes still pay taxes on that amount.

Medical is not free. I pay for Tricare. Ok its only 21 dollars a month, but still.

[BrentWil]

51. Based off retirement today

Pay has gone up faster then inflation. It also depends if you took the 40K bonus at 15 years.

[NavyDem]

100. We're not getting rich from military retirement...

I get $1213.00 per month as a retired E-6. My retirement pay will only go up if inflation goes up. There is no $40K bonus you can take at 15 years. It is a $30K bonus, taxed at 28%, which REDUCES your retirement pay at 20 years to 40% of BASE pay. Medical care is NOT free, clocking in at $115.00 per quarter for family coverage. Yes, it's cheaper than any civilian plan, but it isn't the FREE healthcare for life I was promised when I signed up.

Given that over the last 20 years, I have been away from my family on average 9 months out of every year, I don't think I am overly compensated for the sacrifices I had to make.

If I stay in my current job for the next 20 years (I'll be age 60 at that point), I will collect a much larger check from social security. Having paid into that system for 40 years, I would say that I'm entitled to that as well.

Tell you what, go work a job for 20 years where you are separated from your family more than half that time, and then come back and discuss with those of us that did it.

[sarge43]

91. First, retirement health care is not free. Tricare has a co-pay.

I'm an E-7 with 21 years AD and my monthly retirement is 1,650.

About that retired medical care. No insurance company will cover anyone on AD and even if one did, very few on AD could afford it. Retirement age, minimum 38, max 65 (higher if a four star and get an extension). Now what's your guess on the cost for anyone trying for first time med insurance in that age bracket? Especially anyone who worked with the shit that kills people and breaks things and very expecially if anyone did it in combat? Ask that O-5 who flew fighters, "How's your health, Colonel/Commander?". I can guarantee you those anyones have significant health or physical problems and either a sizeable portion of that lavish retirement will be eaten up by insurance payments or can you say "pre-existing condition -- sorry".

Now if you want to pay members of the armed forces a living wage consummate with their skills and responsibility, fine. You can cut back some, if not most, of the retirement bennies.

However, what do you pay an eighteen year old E-2 who is arming nuclear warheads? What do you pay RAdm Michelle Howard who's commanding a naval task force off the shores of Somalia, responsible for thousands of lives? What do you pay a 11Bravo noncom in Afghanstan? What do you pay the Commander of ADC who has about three minutes to decide if that radar track is a metrorite or an ICBM? How long are you planning to pay them? Are you going to make it illegal for them to quit whenever they chose?

Pay us now or pay us later, but I can promise you payment will come due, because damn few of us would do that crap for free. It's not that much fun.

[PavePusher]

96. Unless you are trying to put kids through college still.

As many are.

Or Dealing with post-service health care issues.

Or paying a morgatage.

Please become geo-spatially challanged and self-fornicate.

[NavyDem]

107. A lot of civilian companies will assist with paying for education...

If the GI Bill was taken by someone that joined in 1990, the individual paid 1200.00 for that benefit post military. It was not until Chapter 33 was instituted in 2009 (when they started paying benefits), THEN GI Bill became free eduacation for those that have served since 9/11/01 for 3 or more years of active duty service.

[southernyankeebelle]

28. Assholes who never serve would think that way. Where were you when my dad and

father-in-law were in WWII, Korea and my father-in-law VN. Both were wounded. Effects of war left til the day they died after both serving over 22 yrs a piece. They damn well earned their pension and we all should be thanking them while we all sit on our fat asses back home. Their families didn't have it easy either. Moving around the country and in some places overseas. Many times they couldn't take their families home for holidays or vacations because their jobs came first. They earned every penny they get. My own husband retired from the military after 21 yrs. It wasn't easy. We stayed in for the benefits he now gets and thank god we get them. My husband earned his pension. We get Tricare and I don't know what we would do without it. It has been a god send for us. He is still suffering with back troubles while he was on active duty and sometimes its so bad he can't even walk. He got it while he was on active duty. Hell no they better not take the benefits away. This is the only benny many people stay in for. I do tell kids today not to stay in after one tour. Take advantage of the college offerings and get out. It isn't worth staying in any amore.

[tammywammy]

29. Absolutely not. Unrec. n/r

[Obamanaut]

36. Some of your stuff in the OP is not accurate. A Lt Col gets more than

8K a year.

There are different retirement plans available, what with several changes over the years. Have you checked the current options?

The military retirees SHOULD get soc sec benefits, because they paid into the system.

[BrentWil]

40. Should read 8K a month. NT

[Gaedel]

87. Pay

I haven't looked at the pay tables for quite some while. An O-5 does reach a maximum of $8198.40 per month base pay after 22 years of service.


A Private First Class with under two years makes $1705.80 per month base pay.


When I went in in 1961 (under the 1958 pay tables), a PFC under two made $99 and a LTC maxed out at $864.

In fifty years, the pay of the newby PFC has gone up a factor of 17.2 while the pay of a career LTC has gone up by a factor of 9.5.

[itsrobert]

65. unrec and alerting

Hopefully the mods/admin delete this.
Alerting
Personal attack against a specific DU member (or members).
Extreme group insult aimed at all or some DU members.
Insensitive (bigotry, hate, ridicule, stereotyping) toward certain groups of people.
Inappropriate, inflammatory, or over-the-top.
Harassment or threats against any person, on DU or elsewhere.

Inappropriate source or link.


thanks

[BrentWil]

92. THose are all complete lies and I have done nothing of the sort in this thread. NT

[SargeUNN]

67. Moderator Please lock this topic

You must realize some of us here, like myself, have suffered injuries from our service and we have had to give up futures we could have had if we hadn't served. This topic calls for cutting our promised benefits but the OP calls for us to be punished for mistakes made by the lawmakers and/or President. We didn't choose wars and the structure of our system is designed to make sure the military can't make policy but that our elected officals do that. This OP calls for us to be the punished for bad decisions made by elected officals and/or the voters made. He has shown refused to accept that because of our service we tried to do our duty to ensure his rights and his security while giving up some of ours during our years of service. I find him totally offensive and this topic disrespectful to each and every veteran and to call for the breaking of promises made to veterans disgusting and vicious. Please follow the rules and lock this. Thanks

[BrentWil]

69. I am not calling for anyone to be punished

Just saying we need to take a look at this. That is all.

[DevonRex]

71. You're saying if the benefits are so bad then nobody will join. That's punishing the ones who DO.

[BrentWil]

72. I said we needed to look at it..

I would suggest a change of benefits for those who have not yet joined and means testing for those who have.

I don't think that is outrageous.

There are alot of people alot worse off then 2K (E-7 retirement after 20 years) a month and free health care for the rest of their life.

[Duckhunter935]

83. would you please listen

Once again as an E-7 I do not get 2000 dollars a month. My health care is not free. I PAY for health, I PAY for vision, I PAY for dental. My back is messed up and that is the extent of my VA coverage. The retirement plans have changed already and there are now three different plans. I fall under the high three. 50% of the highest three years not my highest pay. The latest is much less than that already. Do you intend to cut that more?

[cleanhippie]

121. You have no idea what you are talking about.

As a retired E-7 over 20, I get $1300 a month, which is TAXED. I pay for my healthcare, I pay for my dental. Its not all as cut-and-dry as you seem to think it is.

[cleanhippie]

120. Take a look at what? These are benefits EARNED.

Its the same as me calling for your 401K "to be looked at" to see if we can take some of it away.

[Gaedel]

86. No Sarge

Some people need to be schooled, not censored.

[SargeUNN]

98. maybe so

I just am so insulted after all the hell I have been thru because of those like this ingrate.

[Gaedel]

99. Welcome home, Sarge

VN 67-68 and 72-73.

[etherealtruth]

89. If you read through (most) of the thread

You'll find that most posters believe the OP is espousing an utterly disgusting idea. Let the discussion progress ... perhaps the OP will see things in a new light 9i'm not holding my breath ...but there is always the possibility).

[BrentWil]

90. Yeah, I agree

Most of the thread has been dominated by the emotions and calling me a bad person for suggesting that we look at this.

It is interesting how we liberals threat someone who says something against the grain. If i am wrong, then logic is how to show me.

[etherealtruth]

93. The logic behind this is that people entered into agreements when they committed to serve

The fact that the benefits of others are being ravaged does not make it right. the argument should be FOR ALL. When a person gives his/her service under a term of agreements (implied or explicitly spelled out) those agreements should be met, for all. I can't see the logic in the thought: we're screwing this group of people so why not screw an other.

On edit: add to that people serving tend to be paid far less than those in the private sector ... a more generous retirement than many helps compensate for this.

[BrentWil]

102. Well to begin with, I said look at it...

We have to look at it. I would not support taking away anything from anyone that is currently serving with the caveat that I do think the benefits should be means tested some. If an Officer leaves the service at 42, goes directly into business, he can make some real money. At some point, we have to say to him, "we are glad you are doing so good. However, your government is broke. We can't give this to you."

As far as your last statement, please look at the current pay scale of the military. I highly doubt that a high school grad is going to find a better deal when it comes to pay and benefits.

[USArmyParatrooper]

103. Well to begin with you've already moved the goal posts with your edits

At first you suggested reducing ALL retirement benefits. And now you changed it to, "we should "look" at officer retirement"

Why don't you just admit you didn't think this through beyond your emotional disdain for the unyielding support the American people gives its veterans?

[BrentWil]

105. There was nothing in my first post that suggested I didn't want to simply look at it

I was asking the question. So what if I sharpen my ideas on how I think it should be done? That is caused critical thought.

[BrentWil]

106. There was nothing in my first post that suggested I didn't want to simply look at it

I was asking the question. So what if I sharpen my ideas on how I think it should be done? That is caused critical thought.

[cleanhippie]

123. Means tested? WTF? Its an EARNED benefit as part of a CONTRACT.

[etherealtruth]

145. I thought you were talking about officers?

"I highly doubt that a high school grad is going to find a better deal when it comes to pay and benefits."

I highly doubt someone with high school education is an officer.

Sadly, I had hoped you would think about your original post and think about taking EARNED benefits away from anyone.

[DevonRex]

70. That's fucking bullshit. Their pay is shitty to begin with, YOU trying retiring on HALF that. nt

[Vickers]

76. How long were you in the military?

:shrug:

[Iggo]

94. Fuck that.

The military budget is out of control, but I doubt it's because of retirement benefits.

[PavePusher]

97. Military pay chart.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militarypaytables/2010WebPayTable34.pdf

Ain't what you claim.

You didn't do your research before floating the idea, and now yer cryin' for gettin' slam-dunked. Boo-frakin'-hoo.

Take notes, look up the evidence, present facts instead of guesses and conjecture and you'll have a more hospitible reception.

[BrentWil]

108. WHat statement on pay did I say that was false?

I think all I said was that an O-5 at 20 years of service makes 8K. He makes 7959.00, Thought it was close enough for government work.

[SargeUNN]

101. It should also be noted

that the OP added to the title from implying all to just include officers. What they don't seem to understand is you have to have officers and many officers I served under were great people and did a great job. Look at David Hackworth who suffered greatly and lost his life from his service but the OP appears to have no respect for men like Hack, Pat Tillman, Audie Murphy, William Conrad and many others. To add to it he isn't even getting it but clinging to his disrespect. Sorry but it appears this person loves the benefits of our sacrifice but since he didn't make it he couldn't care less. I personally hate to admit if he was in a position where I was able to save his life I would even though he probably would spit in my face and demand I pay him for the honor of saving his life.

[littlewolf]

109. here are the facts

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/generalpay/a/retirementpay.htm


The military retirement pay system used to be easy to understand: You put in 20 years, and you got 50 percent of your base pay immediately upon retirement. You put in more than 20 years and you got 2.5 percent more for each year of active duty after 20 years (up to 75 percent).

During the draw-down, Congress decided military retirement pay was too simple, and decided to complicate it. Congress started with small changes, moving the annual Cost-of-Living Allowance to January 1st, instead of October 1st, but then got serious and dug in to make some major changes. Here are some basics of the military retirement pay system that you should be aware of:

For Navy and Marine Corps members, you are considered to be a "retired member" for classification purposes if you are an enlisted member with over 30 years service, or a warrant or commissioned officer.

Enlisted Navy and Marine Corps members with less than 30 years service are transferred to the Fleet Reserve/Fleet Marine Corps Reserve and their pay is referred to as "retainer pay".

Air Force and Army members with over 20 years service are all classified as retired, and receive retired pay.

When a Navy or Marine Corps member completes 30 years, including time on the retired rolls in receipt of retainer pay, the Fleet Reserve status is changed to retired status, and they begin receiving retired pay.

Don't become confused. The above is for information purposes only. The law treats retired pay and retainer pay exactly the same way.

Military retirement pay is unlike civilian retirement pay systems. First and foremost, there is no "vesting" in the military retirement system. There is no special retirement accounts, no matching funds provision, no interest. You either qualify for retirement by honorably serving over 20 years in the military, or you do not. If you are discharged from the military with 19 years, 11 months, and 27 days of service, for example, you do not qualify for retirement pay (other than a few "early retirement" programs, which were designed to reduce the size of the armed forces).

Another significant difference between military retirement, and civilian retirement, is that a retired military member can be recalled to active duty. According to Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 1352.1:

Involuntary Order to Active Duty. The Secretary of a Military Department may order any retired Regular member, retired Reserve member who has completed at least 20 years of active military service, or a member of the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve to active duty without the member's consent at any time to perform duties deemed necessary in the interests of national defense in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 683 (reference (b)). This includes the authority to order a retired member who is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to active duty to facilitate the exercise of court-martial jurisdiction under Section 302(a) of reference (b). A retired member may not be involuntarily ordered to active duty solely for obtaining court-martial jurisdiction over the member.
In all honesty, however, the chances that a military retiree would be recalled to active duty after age 60, or who have been retired for more than five years, are slim. DOD categorizes retirees into three categories, with category I as the most likely to be recalled to active duty, and category III as the least likely. Individuals over the age of 60 are in category III, which is the same category as individuals with disabilities. Recall of category III retires is extremely unlikely. According to DOD, the categories are:

Category I. Nondisability military retirees under age 60 who have been retired less than 5 years. E1.1.3.2.
Category II. Nondisability military retirees under age 60 who have retired 5 years or more.
Category III. Military retirees, including those retired for disability, other than categories I or II retirees (includes warrant officers and health care professionals who retire from active duty after age 60).
Pay Computation

For members who entered active duty or on prior to 8 September 1980, retired pay amounts are determined by multiplying your service factor (normally referred to as your "multiplier") by your active duty base pay at the time of retirement.

If you entered active duty after 8 September 1980, the base pay is the average of the highest 36 months of active duty base pay received. Additionally, your initial (first) cost-of-living adjustment will be reduced by 1 percent.

The "multiplier" for the above two plans is 2.5% (up to a maximum of 75%). For example, a person who entered active duty on or before 8 September 1980, and spent 22 years on active duty, would receive 55% of his/her base pay as retirement or retainer pay. A person who entered active duty after 8 September 1980, and spent 22 years on active duty, would receive 55% of the average of the highest 36 months of active duty base pay.


there is more at the link .....

[BrentWil]

112. Okay, I was playing Devil's Advocate...

I wanted to see the response to this argument. I want to thank you all for taking part and sorry if some got a emotional. I was trying to throw out as much rational for cutting this as I could. Very interesting that no one sided with me.

I am an active duty Army Captain in his 7th year of service. Very good debate and I enjoyed taking the other side of it. It works your mind greatly to take a side that you don't agree with.

[Obamanaut]

114. Horse squeeze. nt

[SargeUNN]

116. I will accept your statement but

I still find your lack of respect for veterans indicated in it reprehensible. I just hope you don't have to suffer when you become a veteran like we have, because of such garbage as you have stated either by your real opinion or not. You better hope more don't buy into your statements since you will have to deal with it longer than I will. If what you say is true you might be cutting your own throat and not realize it. It is young people like you that we are fighting for so you won't have to be degraded like we have.

[BrentWil]

118. Two trips to Iraq

First as a PL to Ramadi Iraq. Second as a advisor for an Iraqi BRT Battalion.

This is a liberal board. That is why I wanted to test it. Conservatives tag us as not being pro-military. I therefore wanted to provide the best argument I could and see what support I would get.

[Obamanaut]

143. Again, horse squeeze. nt

[cleanhippie]

124. Absolute horseshit. Your post was inflamatory and flame bait.

Your "devils advocate" bullshit is a cop out. This Navy Chief is not impressed, sir.

[BrentWil]

127. Would you like my us.army.mil email address...

On the promise that it will not be posted online.

[cleanhippie]

147. For what?

I retired 3 years ago, so I no longer have my .navy.mil address.

[e-mail] is where one can reach me.

[pinboy3niner]

125. Your fellow members did not volunteer to be lab rats in your "test"

You have been dishonest, and you have been disrespectful to members of this board in toying with them so deceitfully.

You should know better.

[BrentWil]

128. I put up an argument, I called no one a name

I have nothing to apologies for.

[Obamanaut]

136. Well, there's spelling. nt

[NavyDem]

150. Your argument...

Was based on false information. Until members started putting up pay charts, you put up false assumptions on what a retiree gets paid.

On another note, I work with at least 20 retired military personnel, the highest of which retired as an 0-6 (Navy Captain). He makes maybe 15K a year more than I do. Neither of us is rich, but neither of us is hurting financially either.

[Obamanaut]

144. Yet another horse squeeze. nt

[cleanhippie]

115. You can try to enact a new law for those that have yet to join.

But you cannot take away the benefits earned (yes, earned) as part of a contract for those currently serving and those already retired. Doing so would be even more costly.

[Odin2005]

119. What an offensive post.

[SargeUNN]

126. I agree and still feel

the moderator made a bad mistake not locking it. I am still steaming over it and feeling insulted not only by the OP but now sorta offended by the moderator allowing this to continue. I certainly lowered my opinion of this site some. No offense meant to the moderators but I think it is sad that they would allow such an insulting post to people like myself and others veterans here and not recognize how offensive we found it while acting on far less offensive things.

[BrentWil]

129. There was nothing it it (said by me) that broke the rules. NT

[SargeUNN]

132. You insulted every veteran and your post

has angered me more than any I have ever seen here. I live it buddy, and if you can't see how horrible such statements as you made could be insulting then you need to get more aware. If you are indeed a Captain I can only say I pity the men under your command because you certainly are one I would not want to have in charge of me.

[BrentWil]

135. Such professional judgements based on an internet board

I am sorry you were upset. I honestly didn't think people took internet boards that seriously. However, I was interested in the opinions of members and this was one way to get them.

[SargeUNN]

138. maybe it is time you do

I served under a Lt. once who wrote a letter to a newspaper and it created such a concern among the troops that we were scared to trust him because we didn't know if he would be dangerous to our welfare. He finally had to resign his commission because nobody felt secure with him in charge. You need to be aware that in your position you could compromise your influence and lose the trust of your men. Don't fall into that trap that what you say online doesn't matter because it isn't real life. I fought hard for Katrina Survivors and if I had posted something online that opened up that I might not be worthy of their trust, it might have cost lives so I was careful how I responded online, on the radio or in person on things. I represented these people not just myself.

[BrentWil]

140. No one knows who I am

Nor does the retirement system affect my ability to lead a company raid on HVTs.

Just playing devil advocate again.

[SargeUNN]

146. just like nobody knew Quayles post at

a website was his. If so why do so many know now? Think about it. Sometimes it is wise to be careful especially when others lives could be affected.

[sarge43]

158. No Captain, you lied to us.

You could have presented your case perhaps like this: I'm an Army officer stationed at Ft Riley and I need some counter-arguments and answers when some civilians start up about our benefits, particularly the retirement ones. This is what I run into ............ Could you all help me out?

You don't think that screwing around with retirement and benefits wouldn't negatively affect the morale of your company? Not surprising.

Your noncoms are on to you. They'll do what they have to do, but they're not going to do what they can do for you.

[Obamanaut]

160. I don't think the part about being a captain on active duty, or even

a captain, is true either.

Inasmuch as a captain would be in the chain that would explain benefits to potential careerists, this guy seems poorly informed.

[sarge43]

163. Quite possible (on the net you're anything you want to be),

but he did 'fess up to gaming us. Further, just because he's suppose to know this stuff doesn't mean he does. He could have been dozing off during the charm school briefings.

[MrScorpio]

131. In case you haven't figured this out yet...

It's the politicians and the corporations that create the wars for America... Not the soldier who has to fight them.

In this country, we have a little something called "Civilian Control of the Military". We've always had it and THAT is the source of the problem.

So, as long as this country continues to elect warmongers in to public office and those warmongers continue to subsidize the deadly toys that just have to be played with, the problem will continue to persist, no matter how much you punish the very people who have the least amount of say as to whether America goes to war or not.

No, cutting military benefits is NOT a good idea at all.

Besides, every single day the warmongers are seeking to take the soldier OUT of the equation with this current trend towards privatization, robotization and remote operated warfare.

Believe me when I tell you this, it's the soldier who is the VERY LAST PERSON who wants to fight a war.

[mariema]

134. Military retirees are different than other retirees

Their careers cannot be compared to anything in civilian life. Besides the danger of combat there are sacrifices that are unlike other careers.

My husband is a combat vet. It is not easy to live with that for your whole life, multiple tours and multiple wars, over different decades. He retired as an E7 and does NOT get 2K per month, it is more like $1800. And he does not receive a pension. He receives "reduced compensation for reduced services” because he carries a set of orders in his wallet that state where he is to report to, should he be recalled to duty. In how many other careers is being recalled to duty a possibility?

You are never off duty completely. Throughout his career he was on call 24/7, sometimes picking up and leaving the family on just hours notice for days, weeks or months at a time. I doubt you will find many civilians who had to do that at their jobs(on enlisted pay).

Another thing I want to bring up is that we moved many times over the years. I never had a chance to successfully establish my own career because of all the moving. As a consequence I couldn't contribute as much to our financial security as I might have. Besides the combat tours, there were unaccompanied tours, during which we were separated for years. Our whole family earned this “reduced compensation” with all of our sacrifices.

[sarge43]

141. Thanks for reminding the audience about recall

and thanks for your service. "They also serve who stand and wait."

Oh yeah, remote tours. 12 of my husband's 20 were spent at those vacation spots.

[stevenleser]

137. Do you really have this little of a clue about American politics?

Let's put it this way, you have a much better chance of directly convincing people that a militaristic foreign policy is not the right thing to do as opposed to passive-aggressively attacking the troops' benefits.

[Odin2005]

148. Does anyone remember the stories of Vietnam vets being spat on by protestors?

That gave our side a lot of bad PR.

[Old Troop]

149. Military retirement pay is actually called "reduced pay for reduced

requirement." My retirement paperwork states that the Secretary of the Army can recall me to active duty at any time. I don't think any civilian retirement has that proviso.

[IggleDoer]

152. It's more like a "retainer" rather than a "retirement".

A retiree can still be recalled, although unlikely.

[hayu_lol]

157. The military started paying into SS in...

1956. Lots of meetings about that.

As to the officer...you can certainly tell his status by his remarks.

There are good officers. There are mediocre officers. Then there are officers like the guy on this thread. Those of us who have served have known all 3 types. We know what sort of officer this character is, has been.

AF, Korean vet,13 years active service followed by 6 years of active reserve(aircrew member).

[Obamanaut]

159. For Navy and Marine Corps, that is called 'retainer pay'. When I

retired in 1988 with 28 years, I was in the "Fleet Reserve" and rec'd retainer pay until my total time of service plus fleet reserve totalled 30 years. At that time I received a retired certificate and my retainer pay was changed to retired pay. There was no difference in the amount, merely the label.

There is a post upthread that goes into more detail, and gives the various categories of retirement.

ETA That is post 109 upthread, which also provides a link to more info

[COLGATE4]

154. Military officers make a great deal less than their civilian

equivalents all through their career. It's only fair that, at the end of a long career they are compensated to a small degree for all the income they were unable to earn during their years of service, and which they would have earned if they had been working in the civilian sector. How else would you possibly convince top-notch officers to stay in?

[w8liftinglady]

156. Maybe I'm the wrong person to reply.4 generations of military.

My Grandpa's were WW2 vets-one was killed,one was fortunate to be hired...in a union...as a reward for his sacrifice.
My dad and uncle and partner-Viet Nam vets.My dad was NOT in Cambodia during the entire Vietnam war,and my partner was NOT In CAMBODIA to guard my dad(needless to say-that was a long time ago)My dad did not drink himself to death because of the things he COULD NOT talk about.
My ex and my cousin were Gulf war one vets.both have post-depleted uranium/physostigmine exposure gulf war illness.
(which has been,until recently,refused service-related treatment)
My son is a 3 time Iraq war vet with the ultimate mental sacrifice-he's going to Afghanistan as a private contractor because a Grateful Nation has no fucking jobs.

so,yeah-the measley bucks for this kind of crap...you better believe it...take it out of some billionaire's slush fund.

[bvar22]

164. I believe you have scored a "First Time Ever on DU Award"

I've been here since early 2001,
and this is the first time I've EVER read an OP seriously recommending cutting Veteran's Benefits.
:patriot:

Of course, you have a lot of company.
Since 2008, I've read plenty of posts cheering for Republican Policy.

[TwilightGardener]

165. You think it sounds like cake, you try it for 20 years.