Leaderboard

If you don't mind, I'll do the moderating around here...

Well,... since they want "gender equality" in combat jobs, I'm sure Secretary Panetta & Company will require that women begin to register for the draft.

No matter how hard folks wish it wasn't, "obscene, vulgar, and disrespectful images, songs, and traditions" are very much a part of our heritage and culture. (I have doofer books to prove it)

With a firehose as a straw...

It will not pass. On a lighter note, I got my new 30 round .223 mags in the mail yesterday, only took a month for the Mako Group, but I've got them.....I mean....I threw them in the desert.

Shredded it, then dumped it with M2s guns. I still might have digital.....looking.

I played football in college. I'm 33, and 1 each of my knees and shoulders are code 2, my back hurts daily, and it's possible that my frequent foul moods stem from repeated blows to the head. It was worth it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTsNEUZx8v8

That's next on the chopping block...

I wonder if they will get rid of blues? The women wear these skirts and see-through blue shirts and that has to be distracting. There you go folks, I think I just made a case for getting rid of blues forever...they create a sexually inappropriate work environment. Out

Just shows how much of a pussy he really is...

I think I see where your logic is coming from and what you mean by marginal vs effective tax rates. This is a great discussion, by the way, and very important for most folks to understand. But I still honestly believe that you and I are looking at the exact same numbers in a different way, and that you are interpreting tax rates incorrectly. You are saying that if you dump the $5K into a Roth, that $5K was taxed at your highest marginal rate (say 28% if your taxable income was over $80K) because had you put that into a traditional, tax-deferred plan you would not have been taxed on that last $5K at 28%. I disagree with that line of thinking. For the sake of argument, what if I were to say that my $5K Roth contribution came from the first $5K of my income, which is of course taxed at only 10%???? So was the $5K in this situation (both individuals earning $85K taxable income) taxed at 10% like my argument says, or 28% like your argument says? Neither argument makes sense, which is why I keep coming back to the average, effective tax rate as being the sole number that I look at when making these types of decisions. I just don't see how it makes sense to look at investments and single out certain tax rates. It's almost like you are cherry picking tax rates for your argument - "Roth contribution is taxed at 28% but traditional but retirement withdrawal is taxed at your effective of 20%." Like my above linked article says about tax rates, your $5K of money hits every tax bracket on the way up to 28%. The first $5K of the year that you make is indeed taxed at 10%, even if you make $85K for the year. And yes, the last $5K you make that year is indeed taxed at 28%. Hence the concept of averaging the rates out to come up with an effective tax rate, which is the only rate I believe you should look at for an apples-to-apples comparison. If you haven't done so, read the article above on how tax rates really work. The fact that you mentioned the phrase "getting knocked into the next tax bracket" means you truly don't understand taxes or tax brackets. Most people don't. There is no such thing as getting knocked into another tax bracket, ever. Period.The use of that phrase tells folks in the tax business that you don't understand tax rates. As the article illustrates, when you earn the proverbial additional dollar going from $80,000 to $80,001 for the year, your overall tax rates do not go from 25% to 28%. Period! Your marginal tax rate changes to 28% for any ​additional income over $80K, but your overall tax rate for the year went from 20.625% to 20.626%. Do the math and run it through a tax calculator. That additional dollar, which "bumped you from the 25% tax bracket into the 28% tax bracket" will literally cost you $.28 in additional taxes, not the $2,000 that some people think. Again, in case I haven't mentioned it, read that freaking article on tax rates if you guys are going to read anything on this argument. Just to slaughter the already dead horse one more time, here it is graphically. Each additional dollar you earn incrementally increases your overall tax rate for each additional dollar you earn, up to infinity. Your tax rates never spike. If you were to graph your overall (effective) tax rate versus your income, it would be a nice, smooth, increasing curve from middle-school algebra. The graph doesnot look have a series of vertical lines, or jumps in your tax rates like some people think: How tax brackets work (2007 IRS total tax numbers): How tax brackets do NOT work (ignore the titles on the axes, just something I quickly grabbed from the web): EDIT - just to add a caveat to my "you never can jump into another tax bracket" argument above. One way where your overall tax bill can spike would be through the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). They keep making exceptions to it, but it really only starts to kick in when you are earning way over $100K from what I understand. I hadn't done more then a cursory review of it, since it doesn't apply to me, but from what I understand, if you literally hit a certain dollar threshold, then deductions and credits start to be disallowed, and your tax bill can indeed spike dramatically with the addition of a single dollar of income. The logic in my argument above about being bumped into lower/higher tax rate brackets and seeing spikes in your income due to that still stands, though. That is just not the way tax rates and tax brackets work, in case I did not mention that already. I agree that if you are comparing person A to person B, then credits and deductions don't count, because both get them. I am not trying to compare person A to B, my strategy is to figure out if person A (me) is going to have a lower overall tax rate today or if person A (still me) is going to have a lower tax rate at retirement. From that standpoint, deductions and credits matter, because like others have said, you most definitely won't have mortgage interest deductions, child tax breaks, military tax-free pay, etc. in retirement. Plus rates are lower now too. So my summary judgement is that we have lower rates today and over the past few years, and my personal effective rates that I illustrated proves that. Also, I don't think you have to count on BAH and combat pay to have a low effective rate. Remember, Joe Schmoe with a mortgage and a few kids gets a ton of tax reducing items that he will not have in retirement (assuming the house is paid off and the kids move out - two things that are unfortunately very far from a given these days).

I was real close to buying a P99QA from a buddy in the squadron a while back but didn't pull the trigger so to speak. I liked that gun a lot, not sure why I hadn't thought of a Walther 9 again. Probably will add the PPQ to my list, thanks!

Huggy? Spoo? Kuma? Good job either way. (From Chive DAR, pic #25, good luck scrolling down to it without getting distracted)

Women have served in combat (yes, direct combat) for thousands of years. Women are dying in direct combat in Afghanistan right now. The few career fields that are being opened to women, aside from grunt infantry, have washout rates so high for males that very few women will even qualify to enter training unless the standards are changed. The standards are there to ensure success in completion of the course, so they are most likely logical to retain. Seeing this as a social experiment ignores the facts. With no further limitations, one can rightly say that it is an equal opportunity military. Those of us who have served have seen examples to dispute that assertion, but it's an imperfect system.

I'm trading my M&P with Apex Trigger for a Saiga 12 gauge. I always liked how it shot until it started having the accuracy issues that have plagued the M&P. The deciding factor for me is that the slide would go forward about half the time when I reloaded. I carry a Gen 2 Glock 19 and recommend the earlier generation (2/3) Glocks. If I was shopping for a new full size right now I'd be looking for a Hk P30 or a PPQ.

The wife and I have Walther PPQ's in 9mm, we absolutely love them, incredible trigger, very accurate, extremely comfortable to shoot. They are roughly the size of a Glock 19, so on the smaller side. Only real down side is the cost of magazines. Some people don't like the HK style mag release (I actually prefer it) but the newer version that should be available late next month has a traditional button mag release. We rented it back to back with the M&P 9mm, Glock 17, and Berretta 92FS and the PPQ was the clear favorite (with the M&P 2nd, 92FS was my 3rd/wife's 4th, and the 17 was my 4th/her 3rd) It shot similar to the M&P but with a much better trigger and a more ergonomic grip (we shot it more accurately than the M&P too). I know concealed isn't a factor, but it is concealable. (any outfit that would conceal a Glock 19 would conceal this).

Thank God that has his full attention. The rest of the Air Force is running fine with no input required.

Hell, suicide bombers have the gall to stand up for what they believe in...doesn't quite make them heroes in my book because their methods are unacceptable, let alone that in their case, I also think what they believe in is wrong.

Ctrl+F is your friend LOL

Mobility exercises There is only one good thing about Volk Field: Spotted Cow

A 1288 endorsed by a hiring unit is not required until after your PC is approved, however it does go a long way in the Palace Chase approval process. After your Wg/CC signs your 1288 it can be packaged for AFPC. 11M, OTS 03, pilot training 04-10, approved summer 2012, PC'd in Oct 12

That's the problem right there. Decisions like this should have nothing to do with feelings or emotions. Like the article says, the only thing that should be considered is will this have a positive or negative impact on combat capability. I think most combat professionals would argue that this is merely a political move that will in the end hurt combat capability. I just hope no one is injured or killed as a result of this decision. Edited cause I don't rite good

You guys are acting like common sense will have something to do with the basing decision.

PM me your issues with 6.0, specifically what ILA's you're having trouble with.

Many people get that error (and several other errors) multiple times a test. The testing booth is authorized around 20 dB or so (depending on frequency) of ambient noise, per OSHA/AFOSH. You think it's louder than reality by the sudden decrease in ambient volume that your perception ramps up. I try to test people in an environment as quiet as possible, but we can legally test you in what you would consider a pretty noisy area (from a tester's perspective). The time intervals are "randomized" (it cycles through 30 or so preset differences in milliseconds between stimulus). You got lucky or you tested well. Many people that do this think they did better, but know that you need to respond TWICE on the same intensity (volume). I often switched to manual testing because I noticed what they were doing. They still thought they were doing well because they stopped getting error messages, but there aren't computerized errors on manual mode. If they kept doing it, I'd open the door and re-educate them I've given thousands of tests in my career (as have most non-retrainee NCO's); I'm wise to your tricks. However the dopey E-2 might not be. The advice I give testers is push the button if you think you might hear it. If you start to get a few error messages, then be a little more positive you actually hear it before you respond. Also, if you can tell, push the button between the second and third beeps. You're less likely to get errors. Pushing it after the third beep or on the first beep will likely result in the machine not counting that response, but immediately re-testing you on that intensity.