Jughead

Why, thank you! I assume you refer to the video made of me sitting in a cubicle for the last 4.5 years having my very lifeforce sucked out of me into a computer monitor...? Actually, I'll be changing it soon (read: when I get around to it)--I had my first flight in a USAF aircraft in 4.5 years in late Sep, and I'm now enroute to my deployed location w/ the mighty MC-12.

Kayla, one suggestion that the previous respondents haven't made is to try flashing the guard. No, I don't know how that fits into the protocol manual, either--but I assure you, we're all eager to hear about the results...!!

Still not tracking, addict. Yes, there's "no direct tax benefit" from putting tax-exempt income in--you can't make a deferred contribution with money that's already tax-exempt. However, you still get the benefit of tax-defferred growth. If I put a tax-exempt $1 in the TSP, it grows/compounds over time. When I withdraw that $1, I pay no tax on it. When I withdraw the interest and/or gains attributable to the $1, I pay tax on it. If I put a tax-exempt $1 in a CD/savings account/mutual fund/whatever, it grows/compounds over time. In any (non-tax advantaged) of these, I pay tax on any gains in the year they are paid--thus reducing the amount of compounding available. In the case of a single stock or equity, yes, you only pay the tax when you sell ("withdraw")--but unless you only sell at the time you intend to spend the money, you've still lost the ability to compound growth on the money lost to taxes. Also, if one makes the assumption that he will be in a lower tax bracket in retirement, deferring taxes until then means even more effective growth. BL, there are still advantages to putting already-exempt money into the TSP, even though it doesn't affect your tax bottom line in the current year.

I intend to do exactly that. I should be in-country w/in a week--I doubt my Nov LES will catch up, so I probably won't have a good source to look at until I get my Dec LES. Based on the foregoing, I suspect it won't be until W-2 time (late Feb?) that I can convince you of the error of your ways.... In all seriousness, I really do hope to be proven wrong (and soak up the double tax-exemption!).... Do you have an opinion on the maximum Base Pay to TSP question, FG? If the 7.65% FICA withholding *must* come out before any TSP consideration, than I'd say that 92% is the "real" max Base Pay contribution, not 100%....

Hmm? Elaborate, please?

Following up on my own question. I've been delayed getting to the desert--the MC-12 program & associated delays are discussed I just finished MQT and will be trying out my TSP & CZTE theories shortly. One snag I've hit is that I seem unable to set my Base Pay TSP deduction to 100%--I change it, and it comes back (the next month) at 92%. I did some poking around and found this on MyPay: I'm assuming that the 7.65% FICA deductions are where the 8% is going. That implies that the "mandatory deductions" must come out of Base Pay only (and not, say, BAH and/or BAS, which in my case could cover it). In other words, even though the TSP advises that each category can be contributed at any whole-number percentage, 1 - 100%, apparently the max is really 92% for Base Pay. The only "allotment" I have is SGLI, but I don't think that comes into play here. FG or anyone else, does that jibe? This also seems to make any question of exceeding the net amount due (per the note on my LES's) a non-issue. I guess maybe there are other types of deductions that could be made that would put you updside down...?

MK, that one's actually pretty easy to answer--and it has NOTHING to do with "more uniform appearance" or any other of the offially-cited reasons. Too many (predominantly) young, (predominantly) female (predominantly) airmen had begun turning deployed locations into an arena to try out their latest "fashion" experiments (READ: can you see my cooter now?). It's basically impossible to define what is or is not "in good taste," but it's pretty easy to say, "wear a uniform." The rest is history. Yes, it's definitely in the category of a few piss in their beds so everyone wears diapers. But if you look back just a couple of years, you'll see it was CENTAF pushing for the implementation of the official AF PT gear, in order to be able to fully push their PT wear policy. I'm fairly convinced that this AOR issue (real or perceived, makes no difference) led directly to there even being AF PT gear (not solely, but as a major contributing factor).

Do you think Baseops has enough bandwidth for that...? Do you think the internet has enough bandwidth...?

Guaranteed to meet Baseops' nudity rules....

Say, I'm unfamiliar with that unit of measurement--what's the metric equivalent...? 'Nother for Jeep--*that* was funny...! EDIT to remove triple-posting buffoonery

You guys arguing about what's "vag" or not in a tactical approach has got to have all the fighter guys on here alternately laughing or rolling their eyes.... A case of internet around the house to stop the pain....

Schokie's advice ref getting your gaining CC's approval is spot on. Also, you won't "count against" anything until you sign in--so, if that's the only reason you think leave would be denied, then it should be a non-issue for you to take the leave enroute to your PCS. Unless there's more to the story, I can't imagine you'd get denied--no one's going to be around to in-process you until after the New Year, anyway....

Precisely why I need to see pics before beer!!

Hmmm... I'm gonna need to see pictures of the sisters first....

...and, in case you want some current reference material: Still smokin'!!

All true--but, to muddy the water a bit, and for reasons not clear to me, your flight pay does not count toward your FICA or Medicare taxes.... Oh, and ACP (Bonus) is taxed for FITW, but not FICA either....

Good thing the crash response guy isn't actually using that firehose--I'm sure the pressure would tear that airplane to shreds. Interesting story--too bad about the outcome. I "flew" a simulator of the Wright Flyer at Oshkosh--it was *not* easy to do. Pitch was pretty standard and easy to control as long as you avoided the stall, but the turn-via-wing-warping was not at all intuitive, made worse by the control for that being an up/down lever (up = left, if I recall correctly).

Oh, c'mon, we've all been there, haven't we...? Um, guys?? Anyone?!?

Toro, I still don't see anything that applies to the eligibility of the member himself--every place I see discussion of an ADSC, both on the website and on the doc you posted, uses it in the context of trasnferring the benefit to an eligible family member. That's been my understanding of how it works (though I have NOT researched it). So, sorry if I'm still misunderstanding you--but I simply can't find anywhere that talks about an ADSC for a member's own use of the benefit. Indeed, the only place I see discussion of the program as a recruiting or retention tool is for (a) payment of "kickers" or (b) transferability. Is the question of an ADSC for a member's own use something you have specific info on? I think you're spot-on about anyone being in the right range of years to sign up for this--but the question is whether it even applies to guys w/o dependents (which it does not, by my reading).

Good info--thanks, Toro. I didn't know there was an ADSC for this. Is that only to transfer to dependents? For someone who retired recently (after Aug), would they be eligible? (Not me, I'm still active duty--got a buddy who just retired and was planning to use this....)

Be sure to replace your standard search engine page with this one, if you want to get full credit: http://www.google.com/intl/xx-pirate/

Charge $.99 instead, sell 10x the copies. Same concept as movies on VHS (now DVD). Don't think about what it's "worth" in terms of your investment; think about what will get the most money back to you--units sold x price per unit. The movies studios thought that the home video market would be a niche market--and it was, when they were charging $80 per title. Then some bright boy discovered that $20--rather, $19.99--was the magic price point at which the videos flew off the shelves. The iPhone app pricing model reflects that--most titles that I've seen are in the $1 - $3 range--but, it also creates a situation where the $3 titles are "expensive." On the other hand, many more may try a $.99 title, "Eh, it's only a buck." My opinion only. I do NOT have an iPhone, no immediate plans to get one, so I'm not in your target market. Good luck.

Here's one with a couple of quick glimpses. Probably not terribly NSFW, but....

Had a NASA guy there in the class right before mine, so I'd say "yes," other agencies (not just services) can attend. Sorry, though, I can't give you any details on how, or if there are quotas, etc. This was almost 10 years ago now, too, so much may (is likely to) have changed....

Thunderchief, 4Fans is correct ref PCS reimbursement. What you may be confusing it with is DITY (or whatever the hell they're calling it now). While you can't "claim" the oil as a reimbursible expense, you can claim it as an expense (of performing the DITY), which reduces the taxable amount*. I don't know what the time window is; I also don't know if you can claim an oil *change* vs oil *added* during the trip (and I suspect it's just the latter). I usually just stick to the fuel and any repairs, since the tax benefit of a $30 oil change isn't worth the headache (to me). If you're confident enough of your debate skills w/ the IRS if they call you and have to make a "facts & circumstances" decision on whether the oil change was incident to the DITY move, you could always itemize it as an unreimbursed business expense (again, to me, not worth it). *This is actually a better deduction than most realize, since DFAS (?) makes the deduction prior to calculating your taxable pay--essentially making it a "front page" deduction for those who itemize, and a "built-in" itemized deduction for those who do not. Still, the amounts in question usually won't be large enough to really matter (at least that's been my experience).