RE: The Fiscal Cliff and punishing those who screw things up!

dusty · Post by **dusty** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:11 pm

major_bob wrote:I don't know about Congressional salaries, but I do know that federal employee salaries will only increase between 1/2 and 1 % in March. This is after a 2 year freeze on any cost of living increases. With increases in taxes and health insurance a federal employee will still be making less than they were in 2010.

As a minimum, that equates to $100 a month. I would really appreciate a $100 monthly increase in take home. But then someone grossing $250,000/yr doesn't feel that way. Why that isn't even a Starbuck's budget for many.

As for a COLA increase, when was the last COLA and how much was it?

dickg1 · Post by **dickg1** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:54 pm

dusty wrote:, . . . .
As for a COLA increase, when was the last COLA and how much was it?

Dusty,
The last COLA increase was 2012 and it was 3.7%. The COLA increase for 2013 is 1.7%.
Dick

Ed in Tampa · Post by **Ed in Tampa** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:28 pm

forrestb wrote:I was disturbed upon seeing the movie Lincoln and would like to know more about the 'real' world then. Ed, it sounds like you have something in mind and I would like a starting point. Who knows what current 'historians' are correct about.
Thanks
Forrest - once from Tampa

History has rewritten the cause of the War and Lincoln's stand on various things. The war was over taxation and state rights. The slave issue became an issue only after the north was able to secure enough men to fight. Lincoln's stand on slavery and the war was if the was about slavery he would not support it.

Most in the south were small farmers that could not afford slaves and had little or no interest in them. But they had a major interest in how much tax on their cotton they had to pay to the Feds.

Fact more than one political/social/historical expert are on record saying the Civil War would have been fought had ther been no slavery in America.

The south was and is fighting exactly what we have today, the federal government telling them what they must tax and give to the Feds. Only at that time it was cotton and wiskey taxes.

What is really rewritten is the fights in congress by men on both sides of the Mason Dixon line that believed the cause of the war was unjust and should not be allowed to occcur.

What most don't know is Lee was the first pick to lead the Northern army but refused to back unrighteous legislation and was drawn into the leadership of southern army by the war itself.

major_bob · Post by **major_bob** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 7:06 pm

dickg1 wrote:Dusty,
The last COLA increase was 2012 and it was 3.7%. The COLA increase for 2013 is 1.7%.
Dick

The last cost-of-living increase for federal employees was in 2010 which means their effective pay has gone down due to inflation. Not saying it is right or wrong, just establishing the facts. I serve everyday with a lot of hard working Dept of the Army civilians who keep or soldiers trained, fed, and paid. The Army could not function without them.

By the way, I don't know why you would believe the average federal employee makes $250000 a year. The GS pay scale tops out at about $130,000 for GS-15's and there are very few of them.

major_bob · Post by **major_bob** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 7:15 pm

dickg1 wrote:Dusty,
The last COLA increase was 2012 and it was 3.7%. The COLA increase for 2013 is 1.7%.
Dick

Dick,
I believe you are referring to Social Security COLA while I was talking about federal employee pay scales.

major_bob · Post by **major_bob** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 7:20 pm

dusty wrote:As a minimum, that equates to $100 a month. I would really appreciate a $100 monthly increase in take home. But then someone grossing $250,000/yr doesn't feel that way. Why that isn't even a Starbuck's budget for many.

As for a COLA increase, when was the last COLA and how much was it?

Dusty,
The average GS Dept of the Army employee working for me probably makes about $75,000 per year. A 1% raise is about $14 per week before taxes. After taxes closer to $10. Their health insurance is going up more than that.

pennview · Post by **pennview** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:03 pm

No, Carter gave us Ayatolla Khomaini. He also gave us 17 percent inflation.

But Obama's is following in Carter's footsteps. He's given us the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and radicals running amok in Libya. Oh, and I do recall Hillery claiming that Asad was a "reformer." Nevertheless, radicals are on the ascendancy there too.

As far as those two wars, Obama chose to continue them and he also continued to pay for those prescriptions. I'd guess if wanted, he could have stopped all of that. But then again, talk is cheap, and he's got a lot of that. Obama even sent more troops to Afghanistan and then started a war in Libya.

Obama did quit Iraq, but you must know that it was George Bush who reached the status-of-forces agreement before leaving office that required all U.S. troops to leave Iraq at the end of 2011.

The national debt has increased $6 trillion since Obama took office and his spending likely will add at least another $4 trillion in his second term. I'm waiting for a Democrat to explain how all this debt gets repaid and by whom.

fredsheldon · Post by **fredsheldon** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:31 pm

pennview wrote:No, Carter gave us Ayatolla Khomaini. He also gave us 17 percent inflation.

But Obama's is following in Carter's footsteps. He's given us the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and radicals running amok in Libya. Oh, and I do recall Hillery claiming that Asad was a "reformer." Nevertheless, radicals are on the ascendancy there too.

As far as those two wars, Obama chose to continue them and he also continued to pay for those prescriptions. I'd guess if wanted, he could have stopped all of that. But then again, talk is cheap, and he's got a lot of that. Obama even sent more troops to Afghanistan and then started a war in Libya.

Obama did quit Iraq, but you must know that it was George Bush who reached the status-of-forces agreement before leaving office that required all U.S. troops to leave Iraq at the end of 2011.

The national debt has increased $6 trillion since Obama took office and his spending likely will add at least another $4 trillion in his second term. I'm waiting for a Democrat to explain how all this debt gets repaid and by whom.

It takes at least a mile for a fast moving train to stop and reverse direction especially when the fireman and oiler refuse to assist in applying the brakes.

swampgator · Post by **swampgator** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:47 pm

Major Bob has a much more accurate handle on federal civilian employees. However, I knew very few civilians in the federal sector making the kind of money. Most of the men and women keeping tanks running, ships sailing and planes flying are making less that $50,000 per year. From that is deducted life and health insurance, FICA and income taxes and then if they have TSP another 5 or 10 percent deducted. To my knowledge, from NARFE, OPM and other sites, federal workers have not gotten a COLA for the first 3 years of Obama's position. Although he proposed 1/2% for each year, the Congress blocked it. Retirees, social security recipients and military retirees get the same thing at the same time. For two years, no COLA, last year 3.6% and this year 1.7% COLA. Then Social Security recipients got $250 for one year with no COLA, federal employees did not get that. With this big COLA, I'll get $40 per month more, deduct income taxes and health insurance increase and I'm back to where we started.

All new federal workers pay FICA taxes, plus another 2.8 percent toward FERS retirement program, higher insurance premiums and the number of dollars they can contribute to their TSP. So, if you think we are rich, come look at my bank account. YOu are going to be amazed. And, I can line them up for you, so let me know when you want to start.

Remember, Social Security recipients get the same COLA as federal retirees and military retirees.

heathicus · Post by **heathicus** » Mon Dec 31, 2012 10:23 pm

The party not in power are always "fiscally responsible" but spend like crazy once they are in power again. What surprises me is that it's not just the politicians, but the citizens. Remember all the Democrats complaining about the Bush deficits and spending increases? Senator Obama even called it irresponsible and unpatriotic. Democrats campaigned on cutting the deficit. Then they get in power and spend even more making Bush look miserly by comparison. And now that the Republicans are paying lip service to fiscal responsibility again, the very Democrats that used to talk about cutting spending are now demonizing the Republicans for not going along with their massive spending increases.

And the people that vote for them just buy right into the rhetoric. They will still complain about Bush while praising Obama for doing the same. Or they attack Obama for doing the same thing they loved Bush for. And it's not just financial. Obama is even more of a warmonger than Bush, but have you seen any anti-war protesters lately? Obama has drastically increased the citizen spying programs - warrantless wiretapping was just the beginning, now they can intercept and read our emails without even any accusation of wrongdoing. But I don't see any Democrats pitching the fit they did when Bush was president.

And when the Republicans take power again, they will keep spending like crazy, the Democrats will call for spending cuts and be ant-war again, and still nothing will really change. Because the people will continue to buy into the party rhetoric.