Topix Chitown Regulars

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

United States

#81552 Mar 1, 2013
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think she said she would get a day off with no pay. A pay cut is working the same number of days for less pay. A furlough is taking time off without pay. You voted for "this" also. Deal.


Number one, I did not vote for this, my guy didn't win. I tried warning you people, but no one wants to listen. So now you all get to sleep in the bed you made. And I have to sleep in the bed you made.

Number two, she is not taking a 20% pay cut, her base pay remains the same, she's just working 20% less hours.

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#81553 Mar 1, 2013
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think she said she would get a day off with no pay. A pay cut is working the same number of days for less pay. A furlough is taking time off without pay. You voted for "this" also. Deal.
Same difference. Each week you get 20% less money to live on. With a furlough you also get the day off.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#81554 Mar 1, 2013
Hi Ricky! Most of the regs call me Jamwow (not to be confused with Snooki's BFF, Jwoww). I recently got out of a very long relationship, so I ramble sadly a lot lately. Also, I have friends with drama so I vent about that a lot too. But I'm actually really awesome... I promise.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#81555 Mar 1, 2013
Hee,hee. It is starting to sound like an AA meeting. Not that I'd know what those meetings sound like.

I forgot to confess my sins.

I've become a Topix junkie.

Okay. I said it.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#81556 Mar 1, 2013
Remember when the internet was new and in every "chat" room there'd be a round of "asl?"

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#81557 Mar 1, 2013
I'm covering the front desk for someone and it reeks of ASS up here today.
dahgts

Chicago, IL

#81558 Mar 1, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Number one, I did not vote for this, my guy didn't win. I tried warning you people, but no one wants to listen. So now you all get to sleep in the bed you made. And I have to sleep in the bed you made.
Number two, she is not taking a 20% pay cut, her base pay remains the same, she's just working 20% less hours.
I reread her posts. Nowhere that I saw did it say she was working less hours. Kept referring to a pay cut. That means same hours, less $$. Your laid off week should qualify you for unemployment. At least that's something.

You voted for congressmen didn't you? They share the blame and your bed.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#81559 Mar 1, 2013
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
I'm covering the front desk for someone and it reeks of ASS up here today.
Gross. Spray the chair with something.

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#81560 Mar 1, 2013
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
I reread her posts. Nowhere that I saw did it say she was working less hours. Kept referring to a pay cut. That means same hours, less $$. Your laid off week should qualify you for unemployment. At least that's something.
You voted for congressmen didn't you? They share the blame and your bed.
At least he is not in Jesse Jr's District

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#81561 Mar 1, 2013
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Gross. Spray the chair with something.
I think she already did and that's why it smells.

<runs>

Still not done with my project, but I need a quick break.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

#81562 Mar 1, 2013
Sgt__Smith wrote:
<quoted text>
Speaking of being uninformed, you seem to top the charts.
The sequestration means they are going to cut our pay. It means across the board cuts to certain departments because the politicians won't come up with a budget, and this was the moronic deal they made a year and a half ago, everyone believing the other side would make concessions before it came to this. Reducing my pay by 20%- that's one day's pay out of five, since I doubt your ability to do such complicated math - is in fact, a cut. That is not a "decrease in increases". We haven't had cost of living increases in years, so there is no increase there to decrease. But hey, why waste time telling you, right? You would obviously know far more about it than I do.
I don't get involved with the endless back-and-forth babbling that many of you thrive on here, and this will be my last post on the subject. So feel free to come back with whatever ignorant comments you wish about how this doesn't really affect anyone or your irrelevant opinion on how much anyone should be earning. I won't be responding. I'll be busy talking to my people who are barely making it paycheck-to-paycheck right now, about how to continue making their mortgage payments if the politicians don't fix it.
Here's the deal, Sarge, since 2000 our federal budget has doubled. I don't think we've gotten much of a benefit from this doubling of spending, personally, but maybe that's just me.

Some of this massive increase was due to spending on the military. They've had money literally thrown at them. Their books are a mess. They can't trace tens of billions of dollars in spending. They don't know where this money is going. There is redundancy, cost overruns, you name it. If money is just going to be thrown at them, there is no incentive for them to become more efficient.

Another thing is, the wars are winding down. We simply can't afford a military budget that was necessary when we were fighting two wars. Are jobs going to be lost because of this, yes, of course. But paying to maintain a military as if you are fighting two wars, when you are not, is not efficient spending. There are going to have to be cuts to personnel because of this. People are going to lose their jobs. I don't see anyway around it. What's the alternative ... to fund the military as if we are fighting two wars?

Lastly and more importantly, the republicans have been offering for weeks to sit down with Obama and democrats and find other cuts that would be less painful. The cuts in the sequester were specifically selected (by both democrats and republicans) to be so painful that both sides would come to the table and negotiate a balanced approach that involves tax increases and more sensible spending cuts.

The problem is, the democrats already got spending increases when we hit the fiscal cliff at the end of last year, and gave no spending cuts.

Now, instead of working with republicans to replace some of the cuts in the sequester with less painful ones, they have refused to do so. Instead they want to offset some of them with EVEN higher taxes.

Obama has been saying we need a balanced approach when it comes to our debt problem, but so far, all he seems willing to do is raise taxes. That's NOT balance.

So both sides have dug in their heels. Rather than democrats doing what is sensible and at least agreeing to replace some of the more painful cuts with less painful cuts, they decided to go on the campaign trail, in particular Obama, and use scare tactics and pointed out how painful the cuts would be in order to get the public on their side.

This tactic is dishonest, because it hides the fact that the cuts wouldn't have had to be so painful if Obama and Co. had instead decided to act like grown adults and had sat down with republicans and replaced some of the more painful cuts with less painful ones.

Anyway it is sliced, there needs to be cuts.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

United States

#81563 Mar 1, 2013
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
I reread her posts. Nowhere that I saw did it say she was working less hours. Kept referring to a pay cut. That means same hours, less $$. Your laid off week should qualify you for unemployment. At least that's something.
You voted for congressmen didn't you? They share the blame and your bed.
Working less hours IS a pay cut if you want to look at it that way. I highly doubt they are cutting her salary. If so, it is the first I've heard about it. What I HAVE heard about is forced furloughs.

And my congessman didn't win, either. I'm in a blue district. I get screwed in state AND federal elections.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#81564 Mar 1, 2013
NPR had a good story on Jesse Jackson Jr the other day, and the gerrymandering that was involved in creating his district. They said that he defrauded people even at the level of the fund raising, in that everyone knows that a democrat (especially a black democrat) is going to be elected in that district -- without any fundraising and without actually campaigning -- so to do any fundraising at all should have tipped people off that it was a shady campaign.
Aisle sitter on vacation

Park Ridge, IL

#81565 Mar 1, 2013
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
Wait, so grandma is mad that 30yo grandson is having a birthday party and she's not invited? She doesn't get that it's for friends and most likely drinking? And not wanting your grandma there?
You got it... It's all about her and it absolutely slays her when she's not involved... When others ask her about the same kind of things, she gets huffy ablout them meddling, yet she gets to do that herself and its fine.

He'll, even the cool auntie AS and uncle hubby didn't get invited to the party !!
Aisle sitter on vacation

Park Ridge, IL

#81566 Mar 1, 2013
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
Your mother in law will start digging about your grandmother's estate?They aren't related are they?
Even for her that crosses an awful lot of boundaries.
Will your MIL be at your grandmother's funeral/wake/lunch?
Yes she will and no they aren't... And really, not the worst boundary she's crossed.... She once stole a freezer full of game from HER OWN MOTHER that Her brothers (good hunters in Montana) gave their mother to live off of for the winter... MIL said awhile ago that gramma sais that MIL could have some stuff... We don't believe that but were not sure who lost their mind in that exchange...

As it turns out, MILs g/I troubles are acting up, so they won't be making the drive down for the service... MIL & Gramma were fond of each other, so I do feel kinda bad, despite the relief over the drama factor d ring diminished....
Aisle sitter on vacation

Park Ridge, IL

#81567 Mar 1, 2013
Um, that should be "being diminished"...how can I be more accurate on a phone than on an iPad?
dahgts

Chicago, IL

#81568 Mar 1, 2013
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
NPR had a good story on Jesse Jackson Jr the other day, and the gerrymandering that was involved in creating his district. They said that he defrauded people even at the level of the fund raising, in that everyone knows that a democrat (especially a black democrat) is going to be elected in that district -- without any fundraising and without actually campaigning -- so to do any fundraising at all should have tipped people off that it was a shady campaign.
I live in that district. I sure never voted for JJJ. JJS years ago ruined a date for me with a CHPD cop because he had a BBQ for a foreign dignitary in his back yard that went late. I'm still PO'd about that.:/ But I digress.

This is not a district of deep thinkers. Although I don't think anyone pays much attention to fund raising in itself.

“bELieve”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#81569 Mar 1, 2013
Hi Ricky! I'm Jess :) I'm a Republican, but "one of the good ones" according to the Dems who introduce me to their friends.

I hate carnations, but please don't tell my sorority sisters.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#81570 Mar 1, 2013
dahgts wrote:
<quoted text>
I reread her posts. Nowhere that I saw did it say she was working less hours. Kept referring to a pay cut. That means same hours, less $$. Your laid off week should qualify you for unemployment. At least that's something.
You voted for congressmen didn't you? They share the blame and your bed.
I will be working one less day a week. It really isn't going to amount to any less time, because I have work that needs to be done. Not here on Tuesday to do it? OK, I'll stay later the rest of the week to get it done, and will cut back wherever I can to adjust to the drop in pay. My beef isn't that I, personally, am feeling the impact of this. It is that the people elected to lead this country refuse to do so if it means making a decision that might cost them a vote.

As an aside, I love the baseless assumption, from both dog and Sublime in his little lecture, that I'm a democrat. Couldn't be further from the truth, and I actually have not one elected official, from local city counsel to the White House, who got there on my vote. They all did get there with a lot of votes from the public assistance crowd though, and oddly enough, they are not being hit by the sequestration at all.

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#81571 Mar 1, 2013
http://www.pickstaiger.org/events/spring-fest...

Mostly for Squishy. These sound neat.

Any local G&S fans here?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min USAsince1680 1,277,656
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 20 min Poontang Babalonia 197,012
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 44 min IB DaMann 54,577
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 54 min 40ish 6,435
News Doctor disciplined for allegedly chastising Chi... (Jul '09) 3 hr thenose 162
"Slave clothes" My New, Original Work by Patric... 5 hr Patricia_McGurk 1
Ask amy 9-2-15 7 hr Kuuipo 13
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages