For the record I applaud the attempt of bipartisan deal.

Better not say that out loud in Boone County. "Compromise" is a dirty word among the anti-library tea party crowd. Ha ha. Just having a little fun here.

Union workers establish benefits through what is known as bargaining. Both sides sit down at a bargaining table and hammer out a win-win agreement. The Ryan-Murray plan was achieved in similar fashion. If you right-wing boys don't like inflation curbs on military pensions, then I suggest that you send letters to your GOP reps and senators in Congress.

Pretty funny that a union guy is talking about this. Unions are basically what bankrupted Detroit.

Pretty funny that a union guy is talking about this. Unions are basically what bankrupted Detroit.

Glad you mentioned that. Right-wingers are all for cutting pension benefits for Detroit's municipal retirees to "balance the books" but howl like banshees when similar is proposed for ex-military.

Glad you mentioned that. Right-wingers are all for cutting pension benefits for Detroit's municipal retirees to "balance the books" but howl like banshees when similar is proposed for ex-military.

 

I could care less how Detroit balances their books, that's their mess and their business. However, I don't think anyone should EVER compare civil service to military service. Not in the same hemisphere with the benefits we(taxpayers) gained from their different service.

Glad you mentioned that. Right-wingers are all for cutting pension benefits for Detroit's municipal retirees to "balance the books" but howl like banshees when similar is proposed for ex-military.

 

I believe in equal sarcrifice , but I also believe the Military benefits should be one of the last things we touch. No one in there right mind is going to compare civil service employees to military .

I believe in equal sarcrifice , but I also believe the Military benefits should be one of the last things we touch. No one in there right mind is going to compare civil service employees to military .

So a Detroit police officer is inferior to an MP stationed in Okinawa? It's OK to only give the Detroit police retiree 16 percent of his/her pension while declaring all military pensions untouchable? Sounds like you and your flag-waving cohorts need to take a course in remedial logic. By the way, only 17 percent of men and women who serve in the military stay in for 20 years and actually draw a pension. Medical and psychiatric services for troops never should be cut, but I have no problem with tweaking the inflation formula for ex-military who retire in their 40s and immediately get a second job.

Glad you mentioned that. Right-wingers are all for cutting pension benefits for Detroit's municipal retirees to "balance the books" but howl like banshees when similar is proposed for ex-military.

 

The fact that you're comparing military veterans to Detroit government workers only solidifies my thought that you live your life with your head firmly buried in the sand.

 

Military, firefighters, police officers, their benefits should never be cut in the interest of balancing budgets or politics. They deserve, and have more than earned, better than that, and anyone who thinks differently is despicable.

Medical and psychiatric services for troops never should be cut, but I have no problem with tweaking the inflation formula for ex-military who retire in their 40s and immediately get a second job.

 

I have always been told that the theory of giving retired military their pensions and allowing it to grow with inflation is that after 20 years, many military are not only allowed to retire but are required to retire to allow their positions to open up for younger up and coming military to be promoted up. Sort of the up or out culture some law firms use. This looks to be especially true for officers. Because some of these military are not allowed to continue to traditional retirement age (62 or 65), and a 40 something person who's only work experience is military related, they may have difficulty finding employment in the private sector after their retirement from the military.

 

This is what I have been told, not defending it or attacking it, just giving info that I have been told.

 

For most public service employees, I can't think of a position where you could be forced into retirement and not allowed to continue working till your 60's.

So a Detroit police officer is inferior to an MP stationed in Okinawa? It's OK to only give the Detroit police retiree 16 percent of his/her pension while declaring all military pensions untouchable? Sounds like you and your flag-waving cohorts need to take a course in remedial logic. By the way, only 17 percent of men and women who serve in the military stay in for 20 years and actually draw a pension. Medical and psychiatric services for troops never should be cut, but I have no problem with tweaking the inflation formula for ex-military who retire in their 40s and immediately get a second job.

 

Did you read my post? Where did I say they were untouchable. I just said they would be one of the last things I touched. Also you can't compare the financial situation of Detorit to the U.S. Government. Citizens of this country outside of Detroit have no obligation to make sure pensions are stable in that city.

 

I would argue since I believe National Security and Infrastructure are the two main jobs of the Federal government that it is the responsibility of every U.S. citizen to take care of every U.S. military member who keeps us safe and protects our freedoms. Sorry I do hold the U.S. Military on the highest of levels of all government employees. There is no other government organzation or employees that should be compared to them. The next tier below but very very important is the police and firefighthers. The military then police and firefighters we should do all we can to make sure they and their families are provided for. But that does not mean someone living in Lexington should pay for a pension for police officer in Detorit who provides no service for him/her. .

 

 

I'll repeat again. I believe in shared sacrifice. But I also believe in common sense. If we can cut aid to illegal aliens or foreign countries instead of cutting pay to military men and women who served our country that is the obvious answer. If we have already cut all we could from other area's and military pay is one of the last things left well then we have to do what we have to do if there is no money.

 

In this case I just think we could of cut elsewhere. In the case of Detroit what you can't seem to grasp is that they have no money and have to cut everything. I want every police officer to get 100% of their pay. I also live in the real world where money doesn't grow on trees.

I have always been told that the theory of giving retired military their pensions and allowing it to grow with inflation is that after 20 years, many military are not only allowed to retire but are required to retire to allow their positions to open up for younger up and coming military to be promoted up. Sort of the up or out culture some law firms use. This looks to be especially true for officers. Because some of these military are not allowed to continue to traditional retirement age (62 or 65), and a 40 something person who's only work experience is military related, they may have difficulty finding employment in the private sector after their retirement from the military.

 

This is what I have been told, not defending it or attacking it, just giving info that I have been told.

 

For most public service employees, I can't think of a position where you could be forced into retirement and not allowed to continue working till your 60's.

The reason that Paul Ryan is proposing reining in inflation triggers for military pensions is simple: He intends to do same with Social Security when the second round of budget cuts takes center stage. If you're in your 40s right now, you better save three times what you think you'll need at age 62.

Really? Who even remembers the government shutdown except for the employees who ended up getting a free paid vacation out of the deal?

 

Outside of the political establishment few may remember, but the likes of Ryan and McCain shudder at the fear of another shutdown. They have no clue how to frame the beliefs of the conservatives. They just want to wait for their chance at the next election. How do they expect to have Republicans elected if they cannot stand up for their principles? The RINOS fear the liberal press, instead of going out and making their case to the public.

The fact that you're comparing military veterans to Detroit government workers only solidifies my thought that you live your life with your head firmly buried in the sand.

 

Military, firefighters, police officers, their benefits should never be cut in the interest of balancing budgets or politics. They deserve, and have more than earned, better than that, and anyone who thinks differently is despicable.

Uh ... police and firefighters are "Detroit government workers."

The reason that Paul Ryan is proposing reining in inflation triggers for military pensions is simple: He intends to do same with Social Security when the second round of budget cuts takes center stage. If you're in your 40s right now, you better save three times what you think you'll need at age 62.

 

Why do you continue to discuss topics you obviously don't grasp?

Most compentent people under 50 should plan for retirement without it.

 

Any competent person under 50 does. Really, any competent person regardless of age does.

Uh ... police and firefighters are "Detroit government workers."

 

Do you understand the difference between a local government employee and a federal? If you understand that difference then you will understand why there is not a comparison. If a city can't pay their police then blame the politicians who didn't make it a spending priority in the past . In this case 40 years of democrat leadership.