fusion

Wow. Pegging the rancor meter there Fuse-on.

FTR:

- I got family in public-sector unions, active and retired, that are raking it in or will soon.

- My 401(k) is fine - thanks for your, uh, concern.

- I have a pension at work, too.

So this isn't a bitch about my situation or my family's.

Private sector folks can easily get pensions? That's great - once they get a JOB first. Then they count themselves lucky and don't go asking for more stuff from boss man.

Hey you're the one that brought up the bullshit and used a broad brush to paint it with.

Now you want to say can "easily" get pensions, way to add a qualifier. You get what you go after or do you want some organization to go fight those battles for you?

Now, average pay of government workers is at or above average pay of the taxpayers. Benefits of government workers is WAY above average. This is the general sense from various published media. I can't quote exact figures and I'm sure there'll be tons of studies/research to support either side.

So you don't actually know. You're just "sure" there's evidence to support both sides of such a broad brush.

So, people are pissed. Most of the private folks have no pension or defined benefit plans. They've watched their 401(k) take a massive hit (though now recovering). On top of that, states have to balance budgets that have also shrunk.

Large numbers of us did and do just fine with our 401(k)'s, those of us smart enough to make adjustments with the markets as needed. If you didn't, tough shit.

Private folks can easily get pensions and benefit plans, it's up to YOU to discuss that with you're employer. If you haven't, too bad. That's a YOU problem not a market problem.

States budgets are more affected by poor budgeting than over paid public sector folk.

Walker gins up ‘crisis’ to reward cronies

"In its Jan. 31 memo to legislators on the condition of the state’s budget, the Fiscal Bureau determined that the state will end the year with a balance of $121.4 million.

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist."

That's awesome

Why is collective bargaining so important versus performance based/cost of living increases?

These things aren't mutually exclusive. You can have collective bargained performance based agreements.

Yeah saw this on the news this morning. Sucks.

Which guy? The one with the insurgent?

Yeah the one with the "insurgent"...

Errr where did that last guy point that weapon?

The word "among" is a preposition. Another preposition for the same word is "between" We call those "synonyms".

Whatever. Among means more than one. That means if a single state doesn't exchange goods/services with another state' date=' the FedGov can jog on.[/quote']

You need a new dictionary. Any dictionary or thesaurus should have notes explaining the difference in actual usage between those two words. The same with any other synonym. Just like in contract land we use a word like shall as opposed to will. The differences in the usage of the words are important. There's a reason in a lot dictionaries among is a definition of between, while between isn't a definition of among.

Multiple means more than one. Among generally deals with multiples, it doesn't mean multiples.

You can't regulate among something that is singular. In order to use the word' date=' "among".. there must be more than one. Therefore, the law translates to, "regulate commerce between"...[/quote']

That made zero sense, of course it's plural. Your mistake is thinking among means the same as between particularly in this type of usage. Had they meant between they would have used that word or one like amid to more literally indicate a physical relationship.

the word "among" is the important part

Right, among not just between.

I'm pretty lucky. My wife carries her own and doesn't care where/if I'm carrying.

You just made me laugh sir.

Smiled and asked if I could tuck my shirt in.

OOPs.

I would have told him No.

I would honestly go look, handle and rent a few. VRA and Target World both have a decent selection of rentals. I've never consider carrying in a boot though so I'm not sure what I would recommend for something like that specifically. You're more than welcome to shoot what I have though if you want to meet at the range sometime.

I carry a GLOCK 23 which isn't always completely concealable because of it's size, but I don't care either. It doesn't bother me if the end is sticking out the bottom of a shirt or jacket or if it imprints a bit sometimes. The wife carries a Springfield XD9 subcompact which conceals much easier. Neither of us carry in a boot or on leg. She carries in a shoulder type or waist and I carry on waist. You'll find it easier to find something slimmer with a higher capacity moving down in calibers also.

It's just been announced he's really stepped down now.

Already pulled the bikes out to get ready.

That is the sexiest CBR I've seen!

It finally took Honda to put a decent shade of green on a motorcycle.

I had an interesting talk at my barber shop about this yesterday. Everyone in the room was all about shooting anyone who broke into their house, except one guy. He starts in with this story about a buddy of his that went bankrupt trying to get out of charges for killing a burglar in his home 12 years ago. I told this guy that was before the Castle Law was accepted in Ohio. He said it didn't matter. So I asked if he was a judge or a attorney, and he said no, but he is an NRA instructor. Couldn't believe that an NRA instructor had that kind of opinion!

Most NRA instructors I've talked to have a similar opinion even after Castle Law in Ohio. I've run into very few personally that are of the immediately shoot someone breaking in types.

I had hoped not... you seem like a pretty good dude most of the time.

I'd still feel bad, but not as bad as i would feel for the guy who was parked legally who got his bike run over by a chick on the phone not paying attention and parking on top of his bike. I'd feel way worse for that guy.

I do tend to go out of my way not to look like an arrogant prick. (although sometimes i really am)

Yeah I guess I didn't it obvious I wasn't being serious.

I'm just of the mindset that it's a motor vehicle so it goes where other motor vehicles go as far as things like parking. A Smart car is really small and I don't imagine anyone making excuses for it if it were parked on a side walk.

I actually don't see you being an arrogant prick ever, a bit of an ass maybe...

would you still follow this philosophy if you pulled into the parking lot and every space had only one bike in it?

parking on the sidewalk is only a dick move if you block the way, or park in front of someones door or something.

It was a joke but yes.

that's a dick move... kinda like opening your door when one is about to filter past you... it's just ignorance. Why fuck with someone's bike? I can see it from ignorant fuckers who don't ride/can't ride, but from a fellow rider? complete bullshit.

I'm of 2 minds about the issue, if for some reason the parking lot isn't a viable option, I can understand using empty sidewalk space, but honestly, the majority of the time, the parking lot is perfectly fine.

now how do you feel about double parking with other bikes (people you don't know)?

if I find a bike parked single, I will sometimes park in the same spot if it looks like an easy/convenient thing to do, and if not, I park in such a way that someone else on a bike can park in my spot with me. (diagonal to the lines, towards the front of the space) this seems especially effective when parking on the street against a curb.

It was a joke. I wouldn't kick another guys bike over. I sure as fuck wouldn't feel bad for him if someone fucked up his bike for parking on a sidewalk though.

Riding a motorcycle doesn't give you special rights to be an arrogant prick. It only makes riders look even worse to cagers. Parking on a sidewalk puts you on the same level as a squid.

i do not know a lot of people on the site, as in body size or meeting them face to face. But, for some it is hard to conceal even a 4" style gun. I am a bigger person 6'3" 235. I can carry a fullsize 1911 with no issues. However, someone that is 5 foot nothing and 140 pounds cant do such a thing very easily.

Yeah wasn't sure since the reason was to get something that can be concealed. I'm 6' 205 and I carry a G23, and looked at this as a potential addition. Just trying to get some context.

You can't conceal carry this?