Jughead

No deadline* to do so; you will pay tax on any gain, but otherwise it's just a paperwork exercise. If your original contribution was deductible (unlikely, given the situation you describe), you'll pay tax on that, too. *Unless the law gets changed. In any case, if a Roth is what you want, chances are "sooner" is better than "later"....

Which you then (reference ) were able to convert back to a Roth (assuming you prefer the Roth for your own situation...).

Yes & no. If the VSP (or any income source) pushes you above the limits, you cannot contribute to a Roth. However, make a contribution to a traditional IRA, then convert it to a Roth. Back door way of making Roth "contributions" has been in place since 2009 (?) or so....

Looks too small & busy to be of any practical use. How are all those two-handed button presses shown in the vid going to work while you're wearing it on your wrist...? As a toy for a nerd? Sure, go for it. As a working GPS navigator? I'll pass. As an emergency backup? I'll stick to ForeFlight on my phone.

They should make a movie based on this....

Agreed on the rest of your math, but #3 is only sometimes true. VA/FHA rates fluctuate independently of conventional rates (though it's the same market forces ultimately driving all of them). It's typically the case (and has been for several years now) that VA/FHA rates are lower, so it's currently true--but not always. Anyone who doesn't shop around all of his options for a mortgage transaction deserves what he gets....

Just in case you were thinking that OUR legal system is fucked up.... http://news.kron4.com/news/pianist-might-face-jail-for-practicing/

Masshole, this is probably your best post ever. Spot on. Liquid, take note: your incomprehension of what everyone on this board is trying to tell you on this subject has just been boiled down to four sentences. By a ROTC cadet. Unfortunately, Masshole, the answer to the rhetorical question in bold is (barring some big cultural changes, and NOT related to those which Liquid espouses) an unequivocal "yes." There are dirtbags of either gender in any community--those who make you scratch your head and wonder how they got there in the first place. Speaking from first hand experience (various -135s over 21 years), the men are usually dealt with, up to & including administrative separation where warranted. The women... not so much. Everyone is so terrified of charges of sexism that they will ignore, coddle, look the other way, etc., rather than address the issue if the person in question happens to be female. Thus you end up with a situation where a minority group (last time I looked, females were something like 20% of the total force, and much smaller yet in rated billets) has its normal share of bad apples to start--no more & no less than the men--but, since those bad apples aren't weeded out, an already more visible group (by virtue of their minority) gains a disproportionately high share of the under- or non-performers, where they REALLY stand out. That's not fair to anyone (and certainly is counter-productive to mission accomplishment). Staying on this particular point, though, is it fair to the women who perform well? Hell, no--and, also in my experience, it is those women who are MOST pissed off about the situation, for precisely the reasons you cite: they're forced to deal with people questioning their qualifications simply because of their gender coupled with the institutionalized pattern of allowing sub-standard performance from a "protected" group.

Lake of the Ozarks! Great place--MM47 (and, since LotO is 92 miles dam-to-dam, it's close enough to "half way" to earn its name). http://halfway-inn.com/ I like this name, though there's an informal competition for "most suggestive" name for waterfront bars. "Richard Knoggin's" is a good one, and "Everyone Loves to Eat at the Beaver!" (slogan for the Beaver, the bar at MM0--see, it's at the dam, get it...?). Some have gotten somewhat PC (The Horny Toad's is now simply H. Toad's, for example).

Then I submit that a bit of even casual research would leave you shocked. There have been innumerable cases of a military member convicted by court martial of Art 88 violations, the First Amendment notwithstanding.... You don't say....

One of these things is not like the others, one of theses things doesn't belong.... C'mon, Kids, sing along!! Can YOU spot the thing that doesn't belong...? Two serious questions, if anyone knows: A) WTF is "allowing the consumption of alcohol" doing in this complaint to begin with? How is that related? B) What law/reg/policy is violated by having a drink at the end of the day, albeit (presumably?) "at work"? I apparently was a long-time & repeat-offender criminal during my AF career....

On the one hand, I lol'd; on the other hand, if that's true, what did this guy I met on BODN mean when he told me to EABOD?? I was with up to this one....

Dude... Does your brain hurt?!? Seriously, thanks for all the time/effort you're putting into this!!

...or simply swipe right from the far left side of the screen to go back (& vice-versa to go forward).... [/geek]

Yes

Haven't seen it mentioned here yet, so I'll throw out a recommendation for We're the Millers. Funniest movie I've seen in years, and Jennifer Anniston as a stripper was worth the price of admission alone.... Wife loved the movie, too, FWIW. EDIT: me no spel gud

1:21

I hear they're planning to re-commission the one across the bay from MacDill....

Fast birds they have down there in TX....

AAD: no. With certain exceptions in certain career fields, it's a silly requirement at any level (O-4, O-5, or beyond). Half the issues raised in this thread could be eliminated if the AF simply stopped tracking AADs altogether. IDE: yes, with strong emphasis on the "or" in "res or corr," and absolutely no weight on when completed and equal weight given to correspondence EDIT: Disclaimer: recent O-5 retiree, no dog in this fight. FWIW, I played the game--got the worthless* AAD, and SOS/ACSC/AWC (all correspondence); while the AAD was simply to make myself promotable, I actually agree with the PME requirement (though the implementation requires a LOT of work). *worthless = said degree did not make me a better officer; better manager; better leader; better pilot; better anything. Its "value" was solely in punching the ticket for O-5.

I'm old enough that I had to Google that code. Nifty easter egg--but how would that have been "discovered"? Obviously someone's hoping for viral ("free") advertising....

I truly hope so. I absolutely saw the same in my last community (insofar as flying heavies out of the 'Deid qualifies as "combat," beyond 781 purposes). More telling, IMHO: My last job was at the FTU. I had a significant number of students (AC or IP upgrades, primarily, but even a few init-qual copilots fresh from UPT)--maybe as high as 20%--who were taking one or two (three, in one case I know of) master's classes while going through the schoolhouse. Their GK generally sucked, which was identified as a trend issue and became a special-interest item. Guys were doing everything they could to skip out of mission planning and/or debriefs ASAFP to go to class, write papers, whatever--and they sure as shit weren't studying flying the rest of the time. Guys were showing up for 0530 showtime exhausted--come to find out they were in class until 9:30 PM (go ahead and get the barracks lawyers fired up on how that plays wrt crew rest rules). Several were sent back to their squadrons, or Q-3'd, or squeaked through by the narrowest of margins. I was present for one debrief w/ an IPUP who was being removed from training (technically, "recalled by his squadron," thus avoiding FEB unpleasantness--and, more to the point, enabling the squadron to send them back for a future slot)--those debriefs are held with the instructors involved, the schoolhouse CC or DO, and the owning squadron's leadership (typically the DO). This guy flat out said, "Look, finishing this program or Q-3'ing my checkride won't mean much on my upcoming promotion board, but I may as well not even show up without my master's done." And, as fucked up as all of us in that room (and hopefully those reading it here) thought that was... he was 100% correct. Hard to fault his logic--that is what he has been told, and has seen in action, since Day 1 of active duty. Like Rusty said: not his fault.... Indeed.

May I suggest you find out, and write a short email to that effect, including the name of the Airman who helped you? I make it a point to offer praise where earned as quickly as complain when warranted--goes a long way. If nothing else, the two-striper who worked your voucher will get a bit of recognition, which may inspire him to continue to provide excellent service to the next guy....

Now go talk to a finance professional to see what $112.5K (less taxes) can be expected to earn over those same 9 years.... Hint: it's more. Big assumption here, of course, is that you invest the money instead of a hookers-and-blow extravaganza....

I can't wait for the first UCMJ adultery case in this scenario...!