Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fat City (life of a sociology professor)
Weekly Standard ^ | May 30, 2011 | DAVID RUBINSTEIN

Posted on 06/07/2011 6:24:03 AM PDT by reaganaut1

After 34 years of teaching sociology at the University of Illinois at Chicago, I recently retired at age 64 at 80 percent of my pay for life. This calculation was based on a salary spiked by summer teaching, and since I no longer pay into the retirement fund, I now receive significantly more than when I “worked.” But that’s not all: There’s a generous health insurance plan, a guaranteed 3 percent annual cost of living increase, and a few other perquisites. Having overinvested in my retirement annuity, I received a fat refund and—when it rains, it pours—another for unused sick leave. I was also offered the opportunity to teach as an emeritus for three years, receiving $8,000 per course, double the pay for adjuncts, which works out to over $200 an hour. Another going-away present was summer pay, one ninth of my salary, with no teaching obligation.

I haven’t done the math but I suspect that, given a normal life span, these benefits nearly doubled my salary. And in Illinois these benefits are constitutionally guaranteed, up there with freedom of religion and speech.

Why do I put “worked” in quotation marks? Because my main task as a university professor was self-cultivation: reading and writing about topics that interested me. Maybe this counts as work. But here I am today—like many of my retired colleagues—doing pretty much what I have done since the day I began graduate school, albeit with less intensity.

Before retiring, I carried a teaching load of two courses per semester: six hours of lecture a week. I usually scheduled classes on Tuesdays and Thursdays: The rest of the week was mine. Colleagues who pursued grants taught less, some rarely seeing a classroom. The gaps this left in the department’s course offerings were filled by adjuncts

(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: college; collegeprofessors; professors
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last
Send less government to universities. We don't need sociology professors.
1 posted on 06/07/2011 6:24:04 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
The reason is costs a bazillion dollars to send your kid for 4 years of leftie indoctrination is because you are supporting a whole useless leftie society.
2 posted on 06/07/2011 6:27:13 AM PDT by Fido969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

For all intents and purposes, the Father of Sociology is Karl Marx.


3 posted on 06/07/2011 6:31:58 AM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

A confession useful in changing the way leeches can vacation for a lifetime then retire without a monetary concern for the rest of their lives which are of value only to themselves.

Decimate all government.


4 posted on 06/07/2011 6:32:39 AM PDT by IbJensen (Welfare: putting a cake under the sink expecting that it wont attract cockroaches.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
“...my main task as a university professor was self-cultivation: reading and writing about topics that interested me.”

####

And your soft, satin pillow was carried, year after year on the backs of people, working productive jobs in the private sector you so despise, who don't enjoy the indulgent luxury of ahem....”self-cultivation”.

The Left is all about pathological narcissism. College professors have the art perfected.

5 posted on 06/07/2011 6:34:10 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

At least he’s honest about all of it. More than I can say about some of the professors that live in my ‘hood. They think they’re entitled.


6 posted on 06/07/2011 6:40:55 AM PDT by Desdemona ( If trusting the men in the clergy was a requirement for Faith, there would be no one in the pews.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fido969
is because you are supporting a whole useless leftie society.

True. Trust me. I worked on a college campus in the college of liberal arts as secretary to an assistant dean and things haven't changed a bit since I worked there. They say teaching is a noble career - liberal arts was not noble (although the professors thought they were). Summers were spent in different parts of the world and preparing papers on your particular field i.e. language studies in Europe, digs in Egypt - all thanks to tuition. Maybe that wasn't so bad but considering the salaries those trips should have been on their own time.

7 posted on 06/07/2011 6:43:36 AM PDT by Bitsy (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

People don’t change unless they have to.

This will continue until the end, at which time they will be faced with many new challenges.


8 posted on 06/07/2011 6:48:18 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Decimation is insufficient. That leaves 9 of 10. To grow vitally needed farms (private enterprise) in this overgrowth of weeds (government at federal, state, and local levels) we need to remove at least 5 of 6. Not just in taxspend, but also in lawregplex.


9 posted on 06/07/2011 6:48:56 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy
And your soft, satin pillow was carried, year after year on the backs of people, working productive jobs in the private sector you so despise, who don't enjoy the indulgent luxury of ahem....”self-cultivation”.

Try reading the article before criticizing the author. I know it's a violation of FR tradition, but try it anyway.

From his conclusion:

"What these professors and other government workers do not understand is that they are not demanding a share of the profits from the fat-cat bourgeoisie. They are squeezing taxpayers—for whom the professors purport to advocate—whose lives are in most cases far harsher than their own."

10 posted on 06/07/2011 6:55:16 AM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bitsy
{Professors live like entitled gentry] all thanks to tuition.

Tuition? That's just the cutsie cover term. The reality is that Professors and University staff live like a noble class because they have created and entrapped a serf and slave class. Who are those who labor most of their lifetime in servitude to support the Gentry of Academia? The students, shackled to nigh unpayable mountains of student loans. Those fewer and fewer who manage to pay off those loans in under 14 years are the serfs. Those shacked longer, including many whose paltry wages are then reduced further by garnishment--they are in all practical effect--slaves.

Work for or retire from a University and you are in hard truth a slave-owner!


11 posted on 06/07/2011 6:58:49 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

This man’s position, and thousands like him across the country, could be replaced by a single DVD.


12 posted on 06/07/2011 7:04:44 AM PDT by layman (Card Carrying Infidel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

I’ll stop criticizing him when he returns the largesse he has accumulated over 34 years of the soft academic life. His future is secure, so now he wants to take the noble route? How admirable.

My critique reamins firmly in place.

I didn’t need to study the entire article to grasp the essentials.

Disdain for a “Freeper tradition”? Sounds like you don’t like or respect your fellow Freepers.

There are other Forums if you have a problem with that.


13 posted on 06/07/2011 7:10:46 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I feel your pain, but the good professor is, after retirement, engaging in a tongue-in-cheek illustration of basic Econometric Theory, for which the “Chicago School” is famous. Basically, it espouses that one should carefully look at the historic economic details before forming theories about the social group you are evaluating. As opposed to believing what a group says about itself, e.g. “It’s to promote healthy children and mothers.”

As you demonstrate, it’s a powerful way to change attitudes. The truth often is.

We may not need more sociology professors but we can always use more critical thinking... I’ve always wondered how politicians seem to enter a pauper and leave “public service” a prince.


14 posted on 06/07/2011 7:15:45 AM PDT by Veristhorne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: layman

It could, IF you could get credit for taking a course by DVD and taking proctored tests, and do so at a cost in line with the expense. However, at the University of Arizona, for example, distance learning costs the same as attending by class.

A 5 credit calculus class online cost, IIRC, roughly $3000. The local community college offers it in person for <$300.

But online, the class should not cost more than the community college. Tests are administered by someone else, graded by grad students, and any questions probably answered by grad students as well. Done as an online chat, one person should be able to answer questions for a class of 100, while the lectures themselves could be loaded on YouTube.

However, I’d bet you couldn’t get accreditation for classes taught online that way, because it would overthrow the University system.


15 posted on 06/07/2011 7:17:05 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

While Professor DAVID RUBINSTEIN does a social good by reporting this grand theft of public wealth from the citizens, what is he himself doing, accepting the ill-gotten wealth that is ill-gotten because it enslaves others to continuing taking it, or is he honorably quitting the system, and refusing all this blood money?

If he is not then what is this confession but mocking braggadocio, the laughing scorn of a bold thief?


16 posted on 06/07/2011 7:19:23 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy

Hearty regards, Freeper!

Call a man living luxuriously on the broken backs of others in chains what he is!


17 posted on 06/07/2011 7:21:44 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bvw

taxspend, but also in lawregplex.

like that.


18 posted on 06/07/2011 7:31:34 AM PDT by Chickensoup (The right to bear arms is proven to prevent government genocide. Protect yourself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

on line classes are high because like the rest of the higher ed system, it is subsidized by the government.


19 posted on 06/07/2011 7:33:46 AM PDT by Chickensoup (The right to bear arms is proven to prevent government genocide. Protect yourself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood

Here ya go...


20 posted on 06/07/2011 7:36:15 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (I'm sick of damn idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bitsy

Colleges and Universities have helped destroy the concept of value by establishing the notion that all “knowledge” has some value, and, indeed, in many cases the more obscure and esoteric the knowledge is, the more it is celebrated and promoted.


21 posted on 06/07/2011 7:40:13 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (I'm sick of damn idiots)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
“Send less government to universities. “

Send less money to government; much less. We need torches and pitchforks in the streets. We need anger and action. we need our country back.

And yes we do need a handful of sociology professors. But just a handful.
And they should make no more than the building maintenance people.

22 posted on 06/07/2011 7:42:00 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland (2008 was about words; 2012 will be about numbers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup

I think they are high because if they were cheap, no one would pay to go to the University...and the University knows it. A private business could do it cheaper, but the accreditation rules would make it tough for students to get credit for the class.


23 posted on 06/07/2011 7:44:25 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy

Is a man evil for making good decisions about his future? I get retirement pay too - from the military. I consider it deferred pay, and it was a huge part in my staying in for more than 10 years. It isn’t a freebie given to me by kind people. I did the work in advance, and now collect my remaining wages.

If someone had offered me the deal this guy had, I might have taken it. No one was forced to offer it to him. They could have hired professors for less, but chose to pay outrageous salaries and benefits - all approved by the politicians.


24 posted on 06/07/2011 7:51:58 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

A number of my old college profs admitted they had it very nice. But they taught at a smaller state college, UW-La Crosse (Wis) that meant most of them taught their classes personally without having grad student substitutes do much teaching. And they didn’t make as much money as profs who taught at private or bigger colleges. Nevertheless, they said they had it good. Not nearly as good as Rubenstein, who taught at one the nation’s elite colleges, but pretty good.


25 posted on 06/07/2011 7:57:27 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

I don’t recall labeling him as evil.

He’s a hypocrite. He’s gotten his and is set for life, and now wants to be magnanimous and noble about criticizing the deep pathologies of the comically easy academic life.


26 posted on 06/07/2011 8:00:45 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“Call a man living luxuriously on the broken backs of others in chains what he is!”

####

I believe you have already accomplished this, quite eloquently, in this thread.

Kudos.


27 posted on 06/07/2011 8:03:24 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

I believe it is subsidies.

I think it is time to end all these quasiregulatory bodies like accreditating commitees, the epa and all others.


28 posted on 06/07/2011 8:08:38 AM PDT by Chickensoup (The right to bear arms is proved to prevent government genocide. Protect yourself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Good work if you can get it.


29 posted on 06/07/2011 8:17:36 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy

OK. Guess I misunderstood. Sorry.


30 posted on 06/07/2011 9:50:59 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Hey, apology wholly unnecessary.

Miscommunications are part of the lay of the land, when we are simply typing at each other, instead of face to face.

I will say that I put your military service on a MUCH higher plane than the pampered, non-demanding existence of a college professor, particularly a useless, sociology parasite.

31 posted on 06/07/2011 9:55:57 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Hey, apology wholly unnecessary.

Miscommunications are part of the lay of the land, when we are simply typing at each other, instead of face to face.

I will say that I put your military service on a MUCH higher plane than the pampered, non-demanding existence of a college professor, particularly a useless, sociology parasite.

32 posted on 06/07/2011 9:56:12 AM PDT by EyeGuy (2012: When the Levee Breaks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers; EyeGuy
Is a man evil for making good decisions about his future?

As asked, this is a question overly presumptive. What was "good" about his decision way back then? The question presumes it was good. And what does that decision way back then have to do with a decision now? Things that were good at one time are not necessarily a good later.

For example it is good that children live in the house of their parents, are fed and clothed and otherwise wholly cared for by their parents. That it is, it is good while the children are under 16 or so. At 42 it is good for a man to be paying his own way!

At this time, given the burden that the man places on the debt shackled young, and on the taxpayers who also fund his "Retirement"--a life of unaccountable luxury and riches taken from others who made no current agreement with him.

Take your money at the time. Deferred payments for current work or goods are a form of theft from the future. Illegal, not usually. But when the future burdens others who were not part of the original arrangement--who had no say in it--it is immoral.

I get retirement pay too - from the military.
You aren't being paid by the military, you are being paid by me and my children, and my neighbors and my neighbors children. Do you send us thank you letters with each paycheck you receive?

We didn't hire you now, we can't fire you now, we can't even demand any current performance for work from you. To us, friend, you are now no more than a leech.

Moreover the Constitution itself should protect us from such pensioner leechism. In that precious document enacted only via generations of mighty struggle and sacrifices far greater than yours the Army and Navy are only funded a two-years at a time.

How is it any promise was made to you that is longer than two years? We allow for pensions to widows of husbands lost in a war, or to lose men seriously harmed by warfare, but to others? A man able to post here is able enough to earn his own way, and needs no charity of pension to survive.

I consider it deferred pay, and it was a huge part in my staying in for more than 10 years.
In other words you took the promise offered by politicians, who happily would enslave YOUR own grandchildren in debt to pay for it in order to keep you in a job for ten years-- TEN YEARS--that you wouldn't have taken otherwise.

You were willing to be unhappy, to support such loathsome political promises, to keep a needed job from improving (because if you had not been willing to fill the slot for intrinsically dishonest promises about the future they would have improved the job conditions), and to enslave the nest generation. How meritorious! Not!

Also see comment on "deferred pay" prior.


33 posted on 06/07/2011 10:29:03 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland
Send less money to government; much less. We need torches and pitchforks in the streets. We need anger and action. we need our country back.

You mean to say, that we need snipers, but coached it in less harsh terms. Semantically it's the same.

And I agree.

34 posted on 06/07/2011 10:48:46 AM PDT by zeugma (The only thing in the social security trust fund is your children and grandchildren's sweat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
“You mean to say, that we need snipers, “

No I didn't say that.

We do need conservatives to get off their/our a$$es. We should have 10 candidates for every single elected office from dog catcher up to President for starters.
We should be at every school board meeting, every city council meeting, etc...

The left does it. It's hard for us to do because we all have jobs or other productive endeavors.

We also need to get better grounded in our history. Some of us do very well on that; but others like me need to educate ourselves better.

We also need to be smarter in how we do things. The O’Keefe and Giles team (of the ACORN sting) was just brilliant. They are a great model of what can be accomplished just exposing who the left really is.

Younger people should ALL be conservatives. We have done a dismal job of communicating conservative values if younger people vote for systems that will enslave them. Conservatism is about thinking for yourself and self determination. Liberalism is about a system of heavy handed government control over the lives of individuals. Why is that such a problem to communicate to younger voters?

35 posted on 06/07/2011 11:04:42 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland (2008 was about words; 2012 will be about numbers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“You aren’t being paid by the military, you are being paid by me and my children, and my neighbors and my neighbors children. Do you send us thank you letters with each paycheck you receive?

We didn’t hire you now, we can’t fire you now, we can’t even demand any current performance for work from you. To us, friend, you are now no more than a leech.”

You are not very bright, are you?

I am paid by the DOD. Yes, it is deferred payment. I delivered goods (service) on promise of future payments. It is no different than selling a car on an installment plan - the customer (taxpayer, citizen) takes the car (military service) and promises to make future payments.

No, I don’t send you letters thanking you for my retirement pay, nor did I thank you while on active duty. We had a business agreement. I did X, and in return you agreed to pay me Y now, and Z later. I kept my end of the deal, now I expect you to keep yours. If you do not, you are dishonest and a cheat and a thief.

“We allow for pensions to widows of husbands lost in a war, or to lose men seriously harmed by warfare, but to others? A man able to post here is able enough to earn his own way, and needs no charity of pension to survive.”

Again, we had an agreement. I kept my part, now I expect you to keep yours without bitching. If you had preferred, I’d have been willing to take a lump sum in advance - but you chose to buy my service on the installment plan. I accepted, and I delivered on my part - and now you want to weasel out of the contract.

You are not giving me charity. You are not ‘giving’ me squat. The payments are what you owe me. I kept my end of the bargain, but now you want to call it off.

I don’t care if your family pays me for 30 years. You agreed to do so before I accepted the contract. What part of a promise or a legal contract do you not understand?

I suppose you are one of those who buys a house, then refuses to pay - or to move out. You just want an excuse to keep back the money you promised to pay. Screw you!


36 posted on 06/07/2011 11:09:27 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
I don’t care if your family pays me for 30 years. You agreed to do so before I accepted the contract.

We care. And we do not like it. WE never agreed to it.

And I would have fired your arrogant whining no-account butt too!

37 posted on 06/07/2011 11:13:07 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“We care. And we do not like it. WE never agreed to it.”

Bullshit! You have a representative government. Have you been out campaigning to end the military retirement system? If a bill was offered in Congress now to terminate all military retirement, who would vote for it? Anyone?

YOU never sent me into combat. I went there because the government that represents you told me to go.

When I was shot at, where were you? When I was in Turkey or Saudi, patrolling the skies over Iraq and getting shot at, where were you? When I was in Afghanistan, where were you?

You want the protection the military gives, and you want the benefit of having a military, but now you want to back out and claim you never hired us.

You are a liar and a cheat and a coward. You disgust me. I wish there was some way your personal taxes could double as punishment for your loathsomeness. Maybe your soft little butt should be hauled to Afghanistan, where my son is currently on the ground. You want to be safe from terrorists? You do it.

Oh wait, you don’t do it and you haven’t done it. You send others to do it in your place, and then try to change the terms you agreed to pay, you pathetic POS!


38 posted on 06/07/2011 11:44:47 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Politically connected thugs and liars do not represent me, any more than the local mafia Don and his represents the neighborhood, the Italians in the neighborhood, or the Sicilians in the neighborhood.

YOU are taking my money! YOU are NOT doing any work on my behalf. You are not serving anyone except yourself now. And you hide behind the same kind of embeggar-the-future policies of thugs, thieves and liars used to justify union pension bailouts, school district pension bailouts, and your own life of Reilly on my dime.

When you DID work YOU GOT PAID THEN! You cashed those paychecks and you had the same opportunities everyone else has to invest part of that for your future.

A lot of the work I DID goes to providing you and you family the goods and the energy you used your whole life. And some of those jobs where dangerous too. Men got injured, men died on those jobs. I ain’t asking YOU for one thin dime. I ain’t FORCING YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN to make my retirement quite nice and lush and luxuriant, and then arresting you and your children for failure to pay up.

I had good long term benefits—in the form of stock—too. Stock in real companies is a more HONEST way of funding retirement. But some of that is gone. The companies went bankrupt. Companies that provided vital goods and services too.

THIS COUNTRY IS BANKRUPT. You made an agreement about the future. The future is uncertain.

But rather than being part of a viable future, you only look out for yourself.

YOU, with that attitude of entitlement, disgust us.


39 posted on 06/07/2011 12:14:29 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“When you DID work YOU GOT PAID THEN!”

No, I received partial payment.

And now I am receiving payment made after the fact. I did the work I contracted to do, and now you want to avoid the payment you promised to make.

Oh, but wait!

“Politically connected thugs and liars do not represent me, any more than the local mafia Don and his represents the neighborhood, the Italians in the neighborhood, or the Sicilians in the neighborhood.”

Sorry, dude, but this is a republic. You don’t suffer under tyranny. We have elections. They install democratically elected representatives to make decisions.

No one made you dictator for life to make national decisions about when we go to war, or who leaves these shores and goes to others to fight.

I was hired to do a job, with some payment concurrent and other payment deferred. I was hired on the installment plan. You didn’t complain about my service while I was giving it, but now you want to withhold payment.

Kipling wrote a poem about your type:

While it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, fall be’ind”,
But it’s “Please to walk in front, sir”, when there’s trouble in the wind,
There’s trouble in the wind, my boys, there’s trouble in the wind,
O it’s “Please to walk in front, sir”, when there’s trouble in the wind.


40 posted on 06/07/2011 12:34:46 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

I think even Aynn Rand made the point that those serving in the military were not subject to the same rules of employment as those employed elsewhere in business or for government. Their term of employment, once signed on to in an incremental fashion, did not allow them to break employment — they were not in a free market of employment “at will”.

For subjecting yourself to such service at risk to your personal safety and at the beck and call of the national interests and defense, you sacrifice a great deal of your ability to have a productive life after service to the degree that a short timer or a never-served has. For that, if you stick it out the required term, you get a “retirement” pay. It and the instance cited in this article have terms in common but not the same conditions and the two are vastly different, in my opinion.


41 posted on 06/07/2011 12:49:52 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Kipling's son died in WWI. You mock him with that vile use of his words as a cudgel. Make your own if you wish to beat me!

In any case you obviously know me not.

The widespread military pensions in the US today are a new thing. "Retirement" is a new thing. In 1880 78% of men over 65 worked. In 1920: 60%. In 1950: 47%.

In 2000: 18%!

Too many retired! Now those retired folks who rely on their own savings and fortunes do not burden the rest of us.

But those who do not have their own savings, and rely on the public weal--the PROPER word for that is CHARITY.

Friend, you are living on charity.

42 posted on 06/07/2011 12:55:08 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: KC Burke
While there's some merit to that view, the long-term consequences of widespread lifetime government-backed pensions for any, including the military, are now found to be unbearable. Politically and socially, over time, the empensioned class gets bigger, and its pension entitlements grander, than the future can support. We are now well past that point.

In US History General Washington, at wit's end to keep his officers given the low pay the Continental Congress could come up with, cam to push for a lifetime half-pay pensions for them. But that was clearly done desperate measure on his part, and fit better the nascent (aborning) circumstance of the nation. Their service was much harsher and more to the ruin of a man's ability to earn a living in his old age--nearly all trades in those days required a decent health. Men did not live as long. The need for good officers was great, greater then than now, almost surely. And in the national birth process, those who served in the Continental Army took a huge event risk, even with a pension. Would there be a nation to make good on it?

In those more honest days, the states and the people arose against such pensions, recognizing the great danger in them.

43 posted on 06/07/2011 1:13:16 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“But those who do not have their own savings, and rely on the public weal—the PROPER word for that is CHARITY.”

Did I abide by my contract? Yes.

Did that contract include a pension? Yes.

Do I get my pension because you like me, or because you feel sorry for me? No.

I get it because you have a legal obligation, thru the government, to pay me. Not because you like me. Not because you feel sorry. But because we had a deal.

Because I kept my end of the contract, and now you need to keep yours. I’m sorry you don’t like being honest, or keeping your contracts.

When you buy a car on installments, you don’t get to quit making payments halfway through because you wrecked the car. When you make payments on your house, it isn’t charity to the bank.

“Kipling’s son died in WWI. You mock him with that vile use of his words as a cudgel.”

Nope. My Dad died in Vietnam. I spent 25 years in, and went to my fair share of funerals. And my son is in Afghanistan right now. When there is peace, everyone wants to cut from the military. But when there is trouble, they want the men in the military to go take care of things. Kipling knew that, and so do I.


44 posted on 06/07/2011 1:49:38 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You are no Tommy now. You are a retiree. Everyone else is out in front for you, while you demand they bring more tea, sir.

Many a man dies on the job without a pension for his wife and family. Your job was better and more deserving than that man’s?

No. You are no Tommy now. You want us all to be Tommy’s for you.


45 posted on 06/07/2011 1:56:03 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

You have an arrogant demand that I worship your military service, and hold it in higher regard than the services of any other citizen. In fact, that although the nation is bankrupt, many people are bankrupt and many a private business with its pensions bankrupt, and indeed that some of those pension funds are bankrupt—for example ones which invested in GM or Chrysler bonds—and those who had CONTRACTS left bereft and ruined, that nonetheless we Tommies struggle to pay you you fulsome pension and all your benefits with not any reduction.

Is that what any true military hero of this nation killed in some war died to have had happened? That you be at you luxurious leisure in a ripe old age while all mere citizens become slaves on this plantation run by Federal Retirees?

You, sir, with this attitude of entitlement that makes of mere peons of all others I hold in worse esteem than that professor of sociology and all the Marxists with him. YOU should know better.


46 posted on 06/07/2011 2:46:13 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: bvw

Yes, I’m a retiree. A person who did a job in exchange for pay. I didn’t require to be paid it all up front, but agreed to be paid in installments.

And now that age has retired me, you want me to skip the remaining installments so you can have more money to spend on other things.

Sorry. We had a deal. I kept my end. You keep yours.

Yes, the government is out of money. The military didn’t make it that way. We had a balanced budget while military retirement was being paid in full. We have gone deeply into debt paying for needless spending over the last two years.

As bad as GWB was on spending, our current incredible debt is due to spending added since Obama took office.

I’ve said before on this forum and I’ll repeat: I’ll take a 50% reduction in my retired pay IF they will balance the budget tomorrow. If they will cut spending by 50%, then I will do my share.

But they are not looking at military retirement because they cannot find anything else to cut. They still insist on funding for PBS, bringing you 1 more channel out of 150. They still want expanded spending on the Dept of Education, that has never taught anyone anything. They want full funding for health care for illegals, and tuition for illegals, and they want to cut military retirement to pay for it.

To hell with that! Like anyone with holdings in a bankrupt company, I’m willing to take less than 100% - but I don’t see any other shareholder who is willing to take less than 110%!

At the hospital where my wife is a nurse, they recently did an operation on government dollars to relieve back pain in a woman who is 5’0” tall and weighs 290 lbs. They are looking at a knee operation as well. You want to know why she has back & knee pain? It is because a 5’ body wasn’t designed to haul around 290 lbs, and she’ll have pain until she shuts her mouth and loses weight.

While they are funding her operations, don’t tell me my deferred payments can’t be made. Don’t fund losses in Wall Street and tell me you can’t honor your contract with me. I see no sign anyone is serious about dealing with government spending. All I see are people who wanted me to go in harms way when I was younger, who now want me to do without so they can keep paying for Big F’n Bird!

After taxes, my retirement pay has gone down each year for 3 years. As part of a package to cut government spending by 50% this year, I’d take a 50% cut. But all I see right now are people coming after the retirement pay I EARNED - it was part of my contract - and they are doing so to give them more money to pay for illegal immigrants, wasteful medical spending on poor but morbidly fat people, and college professors who don’t teach squat.


47 posted on 06/07/2011 2:50:29 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: bvw

“That you be at you luxurious leisure in a ripe old age while all mere citizens become slaves on this plantation run by Federal Retirees?

You, sir, with this attitude of entitlement that makes of mere peons of all others I hold in worse esteem than that professor of sociology and all the Marxists with him.”

You had a contract with me. Keep it.

Yes, I have an attitude of entitlement. Why? Because someone who fulfills their end of a contract is ENTITLED to have the other side fulfill theirs.

I kept my word. I despise those who want to break theirs. What part of the word “contract” do you not understand?


48 posted on 06/07/2011 2:57:19 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

When we read through the lives and times of the Founders we see that they—to a man and woman—put action first, they didn’t wait for others. Many lost fortunes. Many lost lives and health. They didn’t say—”I’ll wait until at least X% support the cause.” They did what is right.

You want to wait. Wait for the nigh impossible to happen, before you will say no to being on the dole and taking the yoke off of the less fortunate and the young. That is not a great service in the cause of Liberty, is it?


49 posted on 06/07/2011 3:10:32 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: bvw

The pension liability issues of each and every instance are certainly worthy of debate. All public policy is worthy of debate.

But debate on policy is vastly different from taking the stance that as our forebearers did not conduct the debate and we cannot get the debate engaged, it is then our privelege to claim that public policy and lawful agreements should not be honored and failing that, that those that recieve their end of such agreements are failing in principle or conduct because they take that which they are legally entitled to receive.

To take that position is to fail to acknowledge that the falut lies in our countymen and ourselves from policies we have allowed to be put in place. We cannot avoid the fact that we, and our predecessors in our tradition, have failed to instill the virtues of our nation in our own fellow citizens and the correction of that failing does not begin by faulting them all for our shortcomings and poor attention.


50 posted on 06/07/2011 4:02:34 PM PDT by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson