Can someone pull the plug on the FAAST team

[alaskaflyer]

1. Yes.

2. No and yes. They are easily sustainable. Our representatives just aren't taking the proper fiscal action to make them so.

3. For every "survey" or opinion piece that says yes, I can trot out one that says not only "no" but quite the opposite. Which to me says that things are just about right.

 

[TMetzinger]

1 - Yes
2 - No
3 - Depends on the work... in my technical field, a senior fed (say a GS 15) is not making what a similar guy in the private sector is making. Now, I will say that 60% of the senior feds I've seen in IT would not be competent in the private sector. On other fields feds make a lot more than their private-sector counterparts. So... it depends.

 

[alaskaflyer]

1 - Yes
2 - No
3 - Depends on the work... in my technical field, a senior fed (say a GS 15) is not making what a similar guy in the private sector is making. Now, I will say that 60% of the senior feds I've seen in IT would not be competent in the private sector. On other fields feds make a lot more than their private-sector counterparts. So... it depends.

60% of senior workers in the private sector wouldn't be competent in either sector but they are still working in the private sector. What's your point?

 

[N801BH]

60% of senior workers in the private sector wouldn't be competent in either sector but they are still working in the private sector. What's your point?

You can fire incompetent workers in the private sector....

Government workers get promoted and shuffled around when found incompetent...

Other then that.... no point really...

 

[alaskaflyer]

You can fire incompetent workers in the private sector....

Government workers get promoted and shuffled around when found incompetent...

Other then that.... no point really...

Though it is very stylish to say so, as someone who has worked in both sectors, I can say there really isn't much difference between the two in this regard, except for the amount of paperwork involved. And if you happen to have a large HR department at your private employer, then the difference isn't much even in that.

 

[TMetzinger]

60% of senior workers in the private sector wouldn't be competent in either sector but they are still working in the private sector. What's your point?

Not my experience. I've been on all sides as a federal employee, a federal contractor, and doing the same sort of work outside of gov't altogether.

The peter principle is much more evident in the federal employee workforce.

 

[oldShar]

Every FAAST presentation I have attended has been very worthwhile. I always learned something and very much appreciate their volunteer effort.

I'll second that

 

[RotorAndWing]

Speaking as someone who takes home a tiny fraction of the aforementioned pay grade, has marginal health insurance and no pension, I find your comments somewhere between laughable and offensive.

Hey, don't blame me because you decided to skip career day at high school. You are the only one to blame for your financial situation.

I went back into Industry because of the low pay and lack of benefits of government work.

We are the multitudes, paying for this insanity with the sweat of our brow -- and the future earnings of our kids.


Aside from the fact that we could easily attract top-notch people at half that salary -- reason enough to kill this right there -- it is simply immoral to steal money from future generations so that we can have yet another government acronym program like FAAST.

Top notch people for half that amount??? YGTBSM? You have very low expectations.

No doubt there are multitudes of government programs that need to be trimmed or cut out all together, but why someone like yourself who is a GA supporter wants to cut out the safety arm defies logic!

 

[Ghery]

Let's go about this a different way.....

1- Do you agree the workforce of the Federal Government is excessive ?

2- Is all the legacy costs that are paid out the all the Federal workers sustainable now.... and in the future?.

3- Is the payscale for federal workers excessive compared to similar work in the private sector?

Thanks in advance for your answers sir...

1 - Yes, without a doubt.

2 - If, and I say IF, Congress funded the pension plans, shouldn't be a problem. If not...

3 - I'd have to take a significant pay cut to go back to work for Uncle Sugar. And when I did work for him in the late 1970s we were getting raises and a special pay scale to compete with private industry. I got a nice raise when I left Civil Service and went to work for an aerospace contractor. But, that's from an engineer's perspective.

 

[alaskaflyer]

Actually, from a budget perspective federal pensions are now fully front funded down to the unit level by the agency. There is no massive separate pension fund out there requiring separate funding unlike many states or the old civil service retirement system which is drawing its last breaths as those generations have almost all matriculated.

That there is deficit budgeting on a macro scale by Congress is not inconsequential obviously but there are less headaches.

 

[N801BH]

Actually, from a budget perspective federal pensions are now fully front funded down to the unit level by the agency. There is no massive separate pension fund out there requiring separate funding unlike many states or the old civil service retirement system which is drawing its last breaths as those generations have almost all matriculated.

That there is deficit budgeting on a macro scale by Congress is not inconsequential obviously but there are less headaches.

Hmmm...
Interesting....

There close to 3 MILLION federal employees..

Alot make over 100,000 a year... not including bennies
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...workers-earn-twice-as-much-as-private-workers

So, Let's take 3 million, and assume they will retire on a large percentage of that... and they average 90 grand a year before retirement... That means the feds will have to pay out 2+ TRILLION per year and suppose they live 25 years past retirement.. Now we are looking at 50+ Trillion in taxpayer obligations.. And this is VERY conservative...

I would love to see the accounting to cover that burden..

 

[aviatingfool]

Hmmm...
Interesting....

There close to 3 MILLION federal employees..

Alot make over 100,000 a year... not including bennies
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...workers-earn-twice-as-much-as-private-workers

So, Let's take 3 million, and assume they will retire on a large percentage of that... and they average 90 grand a year before retirement... That means the feds will have to pay out 2+ TRILLION per year and suppose they live 25 years past retirement.. Now we are looking at 50+ Trillion in taxpayer obligations.. And this is VERY conservative...

I would love to see the accounting to cover that burden..

Ben,
Nobody is paying attention to the facts, they are just too difficult to comprehend. It's going to be an ugly awakening some day - but how soon.....?

 

[TMetzinger]

Hmmm...
Interesting....

There close to 3 MILLION federal employees..

Alot make over 100,000 a year... not including bennies
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...workers-earn-twice-as-much-as-private-workers

So, Let's take 3 million, and assume they will retire on a large percentage of that... and they average 90 grand a year before retirement... That means the feds will have to pay out 2+ TRILLION per year and suppose they live 25 years past retirement.. Now we are looking at 50+ Trillion in taxpayer obligations.. And this is VERY conservative...

I would love to see the accounting to cover that burden..

Bad assumptions - the FERS retirement system doesn't work that way. The majority of a retirees income under that system is from the Thrift Savings Plan - and is like any other 401K - the employee and the employer contribute to the plan, and when they retire that money is there for them to manage. I don't know exactly what sort of defined-benefit portion there is under FERS, but I am pretty sure it's very small.

In fact, the only defined-benefit pensions outside of CSRS and whatever Congress gave themselves are probably the military pensions. But I freely admit I'm guessing here.

 

[N801BH]

Bad assumptions - the FERS retirement system doesn't work that way.......but I am pretty sure it's very small.

In fact, the only defined-benefit pensions outside of CSRS and whatever Congress gave themselves are probably the military pensions. But I freely admit I'm guessing here.

A good friend who happens to own a plane parked next to me at the airport just retired form the National Park Service... He was a lowly park ranger for 27 years and his wife never worked.. They have two kids.. he just bought a 1.1 million dollar house last year... I asked how he could afford the plane, house, his new Chevy Surburban, a new Subaru for the wife... He said the federal pension covers all those payments... plus a grand or so extra each month... You do the math.. In my book that is one SWEET deal..

 

[RotorAndWing]

Hmmm...
Interesting....

There close to 3 MILLION federal employees..

Alot make over 100,000 a year... not including bennies
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...workers-earn-twice-as-much-as-private-workers

So, Let's take 3 million, and assume they will retire on a large percentage of that... and they average 90 grand a year before retirement... That means the feds will have to pay out 2+ TRILLION per year and suppose they live 25 years past retirement.. Now we are looking at 50+ Trillion in taxpayer obligations.. And this is VERY conservative...

I would love to see the accounting to cover that burden..

Under FERS it would be hard to retire on a large percentage of the final 3 highest years of pay since your retirement is based upon about 1 to 1.5% per year served. This is why FERS was supplemented by the TSP (essentially a 401K plan). Under the old CSRS yes the high payout retirements were available but like mentioned earlier those are all but gone now.

No doubt the federal government is an overgrown albatross. But I feel there are far more worthless programs to cut than aviation safety. JMO

 

[RotorAndWing]

A good friend who happens to own a plane parked next to me at the airport just retired form the National Park Service... He was a lowly park ranger for 27 years and his wife never worked.. They have two kids.. he just bought a 1.1 million dollar house last year... I asked how he could afford the plane, house, his new Chevy Surburban, a new Subaru for the wife... He said the federal pension covers all those payments... plus a grand or so extra each month... You do the math.. In my book that is one SWEET deal..

Ask him what his retiring paygrade was and if he's CSRS or FERS. It's easy to do the calculation from there.

But I suspect he's BS'ing a bit.

 

[N801BH]

.... But I feel there are far more worthless programs to cut than aviation safety. JMO

I feel 100% the same way.....

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Not to belittle the great volunteers, lecturers and participants (of which I am one), it is probably worth the ~5 or ~10 bucks per taxpayer that it costs, if only to help keep GA in the government system, even when rightfully assuming massive inefficiency and overpayment in the program.

 

[N801BH]

Under FERS it would be hard to retire on a large percentage of the final 3 highest years of pay since your retirement is based upon about 1 to 1.5% per year served. This is why FERS was supplemented by the TSP (essentially a 401K plan). Under the old CSRS yes the high payout retirements were available but like mentioned earlier those are all but gone now.

No doubt the federal government is an overgrown albatross. But I feel there are far more worthless programs to cut than aviation safety. JMO

Let's get back to the original topic... FAAST...

This was quoted earlier...

"Created in September 2004 as the education and outreach arm of FAA, the FAASTeam consists of 154 FAA employees in eight regional field offices, along with 32 groups and 2,500 individual members from the general aviation industry".


Assuming they are FG-14, and 154 had a base pay of 100,000 a year. That adds up to 15.4 MILLION... Not including bennies... Now add in the expenses of staff, vehicles, printing, renting space for the FAAST meetings, etc. etc.etc... I bet the program has/had a budget of 50 million a year... Am I close ?

 

[X3 Skier]

Assuming they are FG-14, and 154 had a base pay of 100,000 a year. That adds up to 15.4 MILLION... Not including bennies... Now add in the expenses of staff, vehicles, printing, renting space for the FAAST meetings, etc. etc.etc... I bet the program has/had a budget of 50 million a year... Am I close ?

I would assume that the 154 includes support staff who don't make 100K per year which results in an overhead of over 250% which is pretty steep even for government.

Cheers

 

[RotorAndWing]

Let's get back to the original topic... FAAST...

This was quoted earlier...

"Created in September 2004 as the education and outreach arm of FAA, the FAASTeam consists of 154 FAA employees in eight regional field offices, along with 32 groups and 2,500 individual members from the general aviation industry".


Assuming they are FG-14, and 154 had a base pay of 100,000 a year. That adds up to 15.4 MILLION... Not including bennies... Now add in the expenses of staff, vehicles, printing, renting space for the FAAST meetings, etc. etc.etc... I bet the program has/had a budget of 50 million a year... Am I close ?

I think the amount could be found online. Something to consider, even if they claim 154 FAA employees they are not all Inspectors. FAA employee covers support staff as well (secretaries, ASA's, AST's) who work at the lower paygrades.

Each FSDO has at least one FAAST team rep assigned and they report to Region where there is a FAAST team Manager and Asst Manager (nine Regions) plus the staff at the DC headquarters.

Before I left the Agency there was talk of eliminating the FAAST program altogether. The problem in that is with the GA accident rate where it is it would be hard to justify eliminating a safety program when there is an obvious safety issue at hand. Since the FAA's mission is to promote aviation safety it's difficult to severe safety related programs.

 

[RotorAndWing]

One could always join this FAAST team instead.

 

[silver-eagle]

Let's get back to the original topic... FAAST...

This was quoted earlier...

"Created in September 2004 as the education and outreach arm of FAA, the FAASTeam consists of 154 FAA employees in eight regional field offices, along with 32 groups and 2,500 individual members from the general aviation industry".


Assuming they are FG-14, and 154 had a base pay of 100,000 a year. That adds up to 15.4 MILLION... Not including bennies... Now add in the expenses of staff, vehicles, printing, renting space for the FAAST meetings, etc. etc.etc... I bet the program has/had a budget of 50 million a year... Am I close ?

I believe what was said was there was one guy that was a level FG-14. I would believe there were a number of entry level salaries and some middle level salaries. If I look at my own team, we have a similar difference. Plus if someone retired with a considerable sum after 27 years, it's that they started saving early on. Note to the young people in the crowd, whether 20 25 or 30, start contributing to your retirement NOW!.

 

[JB1842]

If the government is smart (which they aren't) they'll look at re-alinging all the redundant agencies and cut out a bunch of positions. There will be a lot of people retiring from fed jobs at the end of 2013. It would be smart for the government not to just hire people to fill those jobs, but to eliminate some of them. I'm sure every agency can eliminate jobs. I work for one of the smallest, and we could cut some fat. And 154 employees for FAAST isn't bad. Last I heard (but it could false information) the FBI has over 100 agents plus staff assigned to DC in their Congressional Affairs office. That is a large agency that sucks the tax-payers money.

 

[N801BH]

If the government is smart (which they aren't) they'll look at re-alinging all the redundant agencies and cut out a bunch of positions. There will be a lot of people retiring from fed jobs at the end of 2013. It would be smart for the government not to just hire people to fill those jobs, but to eliminate some of them. I'm sure every agency can eliminate jobs. I work for one of the smallest, and we could cut some fat. And 154 employees for FAAST isn't bad. Last I heard (but it could false information) the FBI has over 100 agents plus staff assigned to DC in their Congressional Affairs office. That is a large agency that sucks the tax-payers money.

You bring up some good and valid points... What has peaked my interest in the last month or so is the Bengazi fiasco and listening to all the facts now coming to light showing a total disfunctional government agency.. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.. People are blamed, admitted to the failure and thrown under the bus, and it turns out they ALL kept their jobs. A couple were even promoted.....

Reports are there are 256 embasssy's around the world. If they are staffed by 10 people then that makes for 2560 foreign positions.. Then Hillary gets on the TV, takes the blame and says the State Dept has 76,400 employees....... and it is hard to keep track of all those employees........ Ya Think ..

I had NO idea that the State Dept was even 1/4 that size.. So, if you put two and two together, the image in my mind is all government agencies are bloated to the MAX... And the FAA is probably just a bloated.. IMHO..

 

[timwinters]

I believe that is the second rule. From my experience as a contractor to the EPA, the fist rule is that you must spend every last nickel in your budget, or your increase next year won't be as large. Near the end of the fiscal year, we were often frantic to find things to waste (er, I mean spend) money on so that we would get more next year.

And, unfortunately, It's the exact same way in corporate America too. At least it was at the three I have experience with. By far the worst of the three being FedEx.

 

[Ted]

I'd agree that the FAASTeam is certainly not a low-hanging fruit in the realm of "Things we need to cut spending on."

That said, everyone thinks that something that benefits their industry in any way, shape, or form shouldn't be cut. If they cut it, I'd accept it since we have so very, very much that must be cut from the federal budget, even if it means that some other, significantly more expensive and useless programs, aren't cut at the same time.

 

[RotorAndWing]

I'd agree that the FAASTeam is certainly not a low-hanging fruit in the realm of "Things we need to cut spending on."

That said, everyone thinks that something that benefits their industry in any way, shape, or form shouldn't be cut. If they cut it, I'd accept it since we have so very, very much that must be cut from the federal budget, even if it means that some other, significantly more expensive and useless programs, aren't cut at the same time.

Eliminate the Dept of Education, EPA, DEA, DHS, DOE to start with plus all the other government agencies that have duplication.

Gotta start somewhere.

 

[Ted]

Eliminate the Dept of Education, EPA, DEA, DHS, DOE to start with plus all the other government agencies that have duplication.

Gotta start somewhere.

Agree 100% - I'd love to see all those removed. And that would probably solve the budget problem.

But, most people won't see the sense there.

 

[alaskaflyer]

A good friend who happens to own a plane parked next to me at the airport just retired form the National Park Service... He was a lowly park ranger for 27 years and his wife never worked.. They have two kids.. he just bought a 1.1 million dollar house last year... I asked how he could afford the plane, house, his new Chevy Surburban, a new Subaru for the wife... He said the federal pension covers all those payments... plus a grand or so extra each month... You do the math.. In my book that is one SWEET deal..

He's likely on the old system. That said there's no way his 'pension' would pay for all that. You know he had 27 years to save money too, in an IRA or somewhere.

My pension will equal somewhere between 35-45% of my salary when I go. Add social security and the rest will depend on savings, a very small portion of which the government contributed as matching funds. I am almost guaranteed to have to work again after 'retirement' especially because my kids will still be in their teens. Great timing eh?

 

[X3 Skier]

The way expenditures for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are going, you could eliminate ALL of government in the future and we will still run a deficit.

Yet anyone who points out that when SS was instituted, relatively few lived long enough to collect it and the eligibility age should be raised, they are pilloried by AARP, etc. As one who thinks it should have been raised before or when I became eligible, I am thought to be crazy by some of my peers.

It is these three programs that are the primary cause of the problem and until thay are addressed, it is not going get any better no matter how many FAAST, NEXGEN or whatever are cancelled.

Not to denigrate any cost savings that are needed but until somebody does something about the elephant in the room, deficits will grow.

Cheers

 

[TMetzinger]

Eliminate the Dept of Education, EPA, DEA, DHS, DOE to start with plus all the other government agencies that have duplication.

Gotta start somewhere.

As a former DEA'er... I'd say keep the demand reduction folks and the Diversion (the folks who monitor the pharmaceuticals). The agency wasn't very featherbedded when I was there - but whether legalization would eliminate the need for it is a diffferent question.

 

[X3 Skier]

A good friend who happens to own a plane parked next to me at the airport just retired form the National Park Service... He was a lowly park ranger for 27 years and his wife never worked.. They have two kids.. he just bought a 1.1 million dollar house last year... I asked how he could afford the plane, house, his new Chevy Surburban, a new Subaru for the wife... He said the federal pension covers all those payments... plus a grand or so extra each month... You do the math.. In my book that is one SWEET deal..

Did the math and I would guess the payments are around $60000 a year. Monthly payments guesstimated at $3750 on a $800000 mortgage, $1000 or so for the cars and plane. With the extra $12000, the income is $70000 after taxes or say around $100000 a year. He was either a) was not a lowly Park Ranger, b) has other income, c) lived as a hermit for 27 years and spent nothing, d) won the lottery, e) lying, e) a combination of all of the above.

The highest possible grade in the government, SES, making the max of $125000 and retiring under the old CSRS, would probably get around $80000 Pre tax and much less under the FERS system today so do the math.

Cheers

 

[JB1842]

You bring up some good and valid points... What has peaked my interest in the last month or so is the Bengazi fiasco and listening to all the facts now coming to light showing a total disfunctional government agency.. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.. People are blamed, admitted to the failure and thrown under the bus, and it turns out they ALL kept their jobs. A couple were even promoted.....

Reports are there are 256 embasssy's around the world. If they are staffed by 10 people then that makes for 2560 foreign positions.. Then Hillary gets on the TV, takes the blame and says the State Dept has 76,400 employees....... and it is hard to keep track of all those employees........ Ya Think ..


I had NO idea that the State Dept was even 1/4 that size.. So, if you put two and two together, the image in my mind is all government agencies are bloated to the MAX... And the FAA is probably just a bloated.. IMHO..

The State Department is huge! I was an embassy guard in the Marine Corps. There are a lot more than 2560 foreign positions. Not to mention all the locals that are hired to work at the embassies.

 

[alaskaflyer]

Did the math and I would guess the payments are around $60000 a year. Monthly payments guesstimated at $3750 on a $800000 mortgage, $1000 or so for the cars and plane. With the extra $12000, the income is $70000 after taxes or say around $100000 a year. He was either a) was not a lowly Park Ranger, b) has other income, c) lived as a hermit for 27 years and spent nothing, d) won the lottery, e) lying, e) a combination of all of the above.

The highest possible grade in the government, SES, making the max of $125000 and retiring under the old CSRS, would probably get around $80000 Pre tax and much less under the FERS system today so do the math.

Cheers

I probably would know the person Ben is talking about. Since I don't know who he is talking about, I will simply note that a "lowly park ranger" at retirement could be anything from GS-7 doing field duties, to GS-15 managing over 200 employees and a budget north of $20 million dollars. And yes we do have a few SES positions too though much less than most federal agencies, per capita.

 

[N801BH]

Did the math and I would guess the payments are around $60000 a year. Monthly payments guesstimated at $3750 on a $800000 mortgage, $1000 or so for the cars and plane. With the extra $12000, the income is $70000 after taxes or say around $100000 a year. He was either a) was not a lowly Park Ranger, b) has other income, c) lived as a hermit for 27 years and spent nothing, d) won the lottery, e) lying, e) a combination of all of the above.

The highest possible grade in the government, SES, making the max of $125000 and retiring under the old CSRS, would probably get around $80000 Pre tax and much less under the FERS system today so do the math.

Cheers

Park rangers with 27 years of employment receive, on average, 88,000 a year in base pay, plus bennies, plus housing allowances, etc, etc.. He is frugal so I am sure the house does not have a big mortgage.. if any...
He has worked the system perfectly..

Of course the latest (scam) oops,,, (retirement plan ) is for guv employees to become " permanently disabled" in their last few years of work... ..

I personally know 4 LEO who are on permanent disability... Two from California, one from NY and one from Fla..

All 4 are healthier then me and probably most of us on the list..

All 4 found a " special doctor" who greased the wheel of disability claims forms.

All 4 don't pay income tax as that is waived if you just happen to be a LEO on permanent disability.

All 4 make 1.5 more then if they took normal retirement benefits.

All 4 think they are not doing anything wrong...

Oh yeah.. In Wyoming disabled persons get a huge reduction in their property tax exposure..

Guess who gets to pay for that new scam??

Ya see where I am going with this..


Just a small blurb out of that article...

" This is of a piece with what cities and towns are seeing across the country. Eight out of ten senior California Highway Patrol officers discover a disabling injury about a year before they retire, the Economist Magazine reports."


Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/01/12/federal-gravy-train-end/#ixzz2HDQFCDWm​

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/01/12/federal-gravy-train-end/

 

[alaskaflyer]

Park rangers with 27 years of employment receive, on average, 88,000 a year in base pay, plus bennies, plus housing allowances, etc, etc.. He is frugal so I am sure the house does not have a big mortgage.. if any...

Ben, he may have been a supervisor, but if not he would have been earning all of $63,000 in his last years, or a bit more if he lived in Alaska or in a metro area.

We don't get a housing allowance. Some of us have to live in government quarters and pay rent and utilities through payroll deduction. Rent IS pretax if we are required occupants.

I'm a second level supervisor/manager and even I don't earn $88,000 a year. Nor did I in Alaska.

I don't complain but my brother has a bachelors degree with some postgraduate work, like me, and about the same amount of time in his chosen (business) field as me. He manages about the same number of employees, and about the same budget. Of course if he makes a mistake at work, people aren't likely to die, but we'll leave that out of consideration He makes approximately $2500 more a month than I do. Benefits are about the same though I get many more vacation days. My retirement is better. I wouldn't have his job, and he wouldn't have mine.

You wouldn't have my job, and I wouldn't have yours. But you, and Jay, and everyone else who likes to grouse with limited information are free to send in a resume. Ain't life grand?

 

[N801BH]

...... Ain't life grand?

Seeing how I live right next to Grand Teton National Park, I say yes....... Life is <<<Grand>>> and I am enjoying what is left of it.....:wink2:

 

[alaskaflyer]

Actually the FAAST team rep within the FAA is a coveted position. It's a FG-14 paygrade, you are not attached to the FSDO (you are Region assigned but housed in the local FSDO), you only have 2 "R" items assigned in your work program, no accident duty or investigation, no enforcement duties, no FSDO duties, no certification duties.

And on top of that you get to go to seminars, host seminars and hang out with the local pilots.

https://www.faasafety.gov/FAASTApp/directory/default.aspx

I believe the reps are FG-13 same as other ASI's? The manager is FG-14. Aren't all ASI managers FG-14 or FG-15?

If people think FAA folks are "overpaid", you should see the NTSB payscales :wink2:

 

[Jay Honeck]

Hey, don't blame me because you decided to skip career day at high school. You are the only one to blame for your financial situation.

I went back into Industry because of the low pay and lack of benefits of government work.

Top notch people for half that amount??? YGTBSM? You have very low expectations.

No doubt there are multitudes of government programs that need to be trimmed or cut out all together, but why someone like yourself who is a GA supporter wants to cut out the safety arm defies logic!

My financial situation is 100% my choice, and I wouldn't trade it for ten gummint jobs. It's Year Three now, we have one more year of extensive remodeling, and by the end of Year Four we will be in the black.

But that's hardly the point. Paying a government employee almost six figures to put on FAAST seminars is wasteful at best, fraudulent at worst. There are 5000 multimedia graduate students who would JUMP at that job for less than half that pay grade -- and do a far better job of it.

But, of course, THAT'S not the point either, is it? Whether we're paying six figures or five is irrelevant because WE ARE BROKE. When is this going to ever sink in?