Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

to reduce spending on the backs of those in harms way while not addressing those on welfare who do nothing to earn money disqualifies this idiot from ever being President.

We already made the mistake of electing someone like that and are still paying for it.

1 posted on 12/23/2013 7:23:58 AM PST by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: bestintxas

He’s as big an A-Hole as Soetoro.


88 posted on 12/23/2013 9:41:06 AM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bestintxas

I checked a couple of sources and got figures of 21 million and 26 million for the current number of veterans. I took a number somewhere in the middle - 23 million - and divided $6 billion by that number. My answer was $260.87 per person. How are they coming up with these $100,000 per person figures?


95 posted on 12/23/2013 10:27:48 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bestintxas
I'm still trying to figure out the math on this proposal. The article references a potential cut of $100,000 on a pension that would have earned $1.8 million before the cut (reducing the pension to $1.7 million).

It also talks about someone serving from 18 to 38, retiring at 62, and so forth. When you retire from the military, do you begin earning your pension immediately, even if you are only 38 or 40? If so, using the figures given in the article, someone who retires at 38 would collect $1.8 million over 24 years, and $1.7 million in the new system. But if the actual COLA is 2.5%, and they get 1% less (1.5%), that would cut the annual pension COLA by about $700, or about $16,000 over the 24 years from age 38 to age 62, at which time (according to the article) the veteran would be reimbursed for that difference. And is a military pension currently about $70,000 a year? That's the number I get using the figures in the article. So I think the article is very confusing because the numbers don't add up. How could a 1% reduction in the COLA add up to $100,000? Only if we have very high inflation? Even then, at 62 the veteran would get it all back.
97 posted on 12/23/2013 11:02:00 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bestintxas

I am tired of gimmicks and double dealing crooked politicians.


106 posted on 12/23/2013 2:17:00 PM PST by minnesota_bound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bestintxas
Yet this former GOP-e veep nominee inflated his marathon time. I knew then he was a liberal!
110 posted on 12/24/2013 12:00:25 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bestintxas

coal in sock moment


111 posted on 12/24/2013 9:18:31 PM PST by TomasUSMC (FIGHT LIKE WW2, WIN LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson