I voted for Obama and continue to support him. The damage done to U.S. prestige by the feckless, buffoonish George W. Bush will take years to repair. Obama has barely begun the crucial mission that he was elected to do.

Having said that, I must confess my dismay bordering on horror at the amateurism of the White House apparatus for domestic policy. When will heads start to roll? I was glad to see the White House counsel booted, as well as Michelle Obama's chief of staff, and hope it's a harbinger of things to come. Except for that wily fox, David Axelrod, who could charm gold threads out of moonbeams, Obama seems to be surrounded by juvenile tinhorns, bumbling mediocrities and crass bully boys.

Case in point: the administration's grotesque mishandling of healthcare reform, one of the most vital issues facing the nation. Ever since Hillary Clinton's megalomaniacal annihilation of our last best chance at reform in 1993 (all of which was suppressed by the mainstream media when she was running for president), Democrats have been longing for that happy day when this issue would once again be front and center.

But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.

There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama's aggressive endorsement of a healthcare plan that does not even exist yet, except in five competing, fluctuating drafts, makes Washington seem like Cloud Cuckoo Land. The president is promoting the most colossal, brazen bait-and-switch operation since the Bush administration snookered the country into invading Iraq with apocalyptic visions of mushroom clouds over American cities.

You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it, Obama keeps assuring us in soothing, lullaby tones. Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.

I just don't get it. Why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the Obama administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is gigantic; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vampirically absorb whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.

As with the massive boondoggle of the stimulus package, which Obama foolishly let Congress turn into a pork rut, too much has been attempted all at once; focused, targeted initiatives would, instead, have won wide public support. How is it possible that Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again? Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical because Democrats control all three branches of government. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the airheads of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us guinea pigs who will be thrown to the wolves.

With the Republican party leaderless and in backbiting disarray following its destruction by the ideologically incoherent George W. Bush, Democrats are apparently eager to join the hara-kiri brigade. What looked like smooth coasting to the 2010 election has now become a nail-biter. Both major parties have become a rats' nest of hypocrisy and incompetence. That, combined with our stratospheric, near-criminal indebtedness to China (which could destroy the dollar overnight), should raise signal flags. Are we like late Rome, infatuated with past glories, ruled by a complacent, greedy elite, and hopelessly powerless to respond to changing conditions?

What does either party stand for these days? Republican politicians, with their endless scandals, are hardly exemplars of traditional moral values. Nor have they generated new ideas for healthcare, except for medical savings accounts, which would be pathetically inadequate in a major crisis for anyone earning at or below a median income.

And what do Democrats stand for, if they are so ready to defame concerned citizens as the "mob" -- a word betraying a Marie Antoinette delusion of superiority to ordinary mortals. I thought my party was populist, attentive to the needs and wishes of those outside the power structure. And as a product of the 1960s, I thought the Democratic party was passionately committed to freedom of thought and speech.

But somehow liberals have drifted into a strange servility toward big government, which they revere as a godlike foster father-mother who can dispense all bounty and magically heal all ills. The ethical collapse of the left was nowhere more evident than in the near total silence of liberal media and Web sites at the Obama administration's outrageous solicitation to private citizens to report unacceptable "casual conversations" to the White House. If Republicans had done this, there would have been an angry explosion by Democrats from coast to coast. I was stunned at the failure of liberals to see the blatant totalitarianism in this incident, which the president should have immediately denounced. His failure to do so implicates him in it.

Well, if you are going to rip off material from Camille Paglia at least link to the original piece. BTW, if you want to get a sense of what actual Democrats think of her writing, read through some of the comments after the story.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/08/12/town_halls/

Pancks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Except for that wily fox, David
> Axelrod, who could charm gold threads out of
> moonbeams...

That should really help in replenishing the coffers after the 80 gajillion dollars we just gave to every failed industry we can think of.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

This exact same post has been floating around conservative blogs all over the internet. How genuine!

Obama's approach to health care reform isn't much different than is approach to the Presidential campaign. He is letting this play out, and Republicans are starting to over-play their hands. Nobody is talking about the details of the plan. They are talking about the manipulative GOP and the coarseness of its rhetoric. Obama's approval numbers have stabilized and are starting to nudge back up. Obama is playing possum - the way Bill Clinton did during Monica-gate - and is letting the GOP annihilate itself in front of the American public.

Republicans are just mad that they didn't come up with the idea to kill the old and infirm first.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Republicans are just mad that they didn't come up
> with the idea to kill the old and infirm first.


If you listened to Obama's remarks yesterday, they did. The Living Will provision that has drawn all of this fire was recommended by a Republican member of Congress.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MrMephisto Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Republicans are just mad that they didn't come
> up
> > with the idea to kill the old and infirm first.
>
>
> If you listened to Obama's remarks yesterday, they
> did. The Living Will provision that has drawn all
> of this fire was recommended by a Republican
> member of Congress.

I'm so proud of my default political party. I knew they wouldn't have gone soft on me.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

It's probably because there was a supple, young male Senate page in the room at the time the proposal was made.

Young naive senate pages like getting in big Audis, especially A5s.....

Really? I thought they preferred Lexuses. That's because if you say the word "Lexus", you can hear some serious hisses come from that word.

Remember that next time someone asks, "What do you drive?"

It didn’t take chaotic town-hall meetings, raging demonstrators and consequent brooding in various sectors of the media to bring home the truth that the campaign for a health-care bill is, to put it mildly, not going awfully well. It’s not hard now to envision the state of this crusade with just a month or two more of diligent management by the Obama team—think train wreck. It may one day be otherwise in the more perfect world of universal coverage, but for now disabilities like the tone deafness that afflicts this administration from the top down are uninsurable.
Consider former ABC reporter Linda Douglass—now the president’s communications director for health reform—who set about unmasking all the forces out there “always trying to scare people when you try to bring them health insurance reform.” People, she charged, are taking sentences out of context and otherwise working to present a misleading picture of the president’s proposals. One of her key solutions to this problem—her justly famed message encouraging citizens to contact the office at flag@whitehouse.gov if they got an email or other information about health reform “that seems fishy”—set off a riotous flow of online responses. (The word “fishy,” with its police detective tone, would have done the trick all by itself.)
These commentaries, packed with allusions to the secret police, the East German Stasi and Orwell, were mostly furious. Others quite simply hilarious. Ms. Douglass, who now has, in her public appearances, the air of a person consigned to service in a holy order, was not amused.
Neither has she seemed to entertain any second thoughts about the tenor of a message enlisting the public in a program reeking of a White House effort to set Americans against one another—the good Americans protecting the president’s health-care program from the bad Americans fighting it and undermining truth and goodness.
She intended no such outcome, doubtless. That this former journalist, now a communications director, failed to notice anything amiss in the details of that communiqué is a bit odd but not altogether surprising.
Crusades are busy endeavors, the enlistees in this one, like those in every undertaking of this White House, concerned with just one message. Which is that the Obama administration is in possession of vital answers to ills and inequities that have long afflicted American society (whether Americans know it or not), and that those opposed to those answers and that vision are cynics, or operatives of the powerful vested interests responsible for the plight Americans find themselves in (whether they know it or not), or political enemies bent on destroying the Obama administration.
It shouldn’t have been surprising, either, that the tone of much of the commentary on the town-hall protests was what it was. There was Mark Halperin for one, senior political editor for Time, bouncing off his chair, Sunday, in agitation over all the media coverage of this rowdiness—“a horrible breakdown of our political culture, our media culture” and so “bad for America,” as he told CNN’s Howard Kurtz. “I’m embarrassed about what’s going on, as an American.” The disruptions and coverage thereof distorted serious discussion, he explained. Mark Shields said much the same on Friday’s PBS NewsHour, if with less excitation, pointing out that these events were “not good for the democratic process,” and were a breakdown of civil debate.
There was no such hand-wringing over the decline of civil debate, during, say, election 2004, when cadres of organized demonstrators carrying swastika-adorned pictures of George W. Bush routinely swarmed about, and packed rallies. There was also that other “breakdown of our media culture,” that will dwarf all else as a cause for embarrassment, the town-hall coverage included, for the foreseeable future. That would be, of course, the undisguised worshipful reporting of the candidacy of Barack Obama.
That treatment, or rather its memory—like the adulation of his great mass of voters—has had its effect on this president, and not all to the good. The election over, the warming glow of those armies of supporters gone, his capacity to tolerate criticism and dissent from his policies grows thinner apace. His lectures, explaining his health-care proposals, and why they’ll be good for everybody, are clearly not going down well with his national audience.
This would have to do with the fact that the real Barack Obama—product of the academic left, social reformer with a program, is now before that audience, and what they hear in this lecture about one of the central concerns in their lives—his message freighted with generalities—they are not prepared to buy. They are not prepared to believe that our first most important concern now is health-care reform or all will go under.
The president has a problem. For, despite a great election victory, Mr. Obama, it becomes ever clearer, knows little about Americans. He knows the crowds—he is at home with those. He is a stranger to the country’s heart and character.
He seems unable to grasp what runs counter to its nature. That Americans don’t take well, for instance, to bullying, especially of the moralizing kind, implicit in those speeches on health care for everybody. Neither do they wish to be taken where they don’t know they want to go and being told it’s good for them.
Who would have believed that this politician celebrated, above all, for his eloquence and capacity to connect with voters would end up as president proving so profoundly tone deaf? A great many people is the answer—the same who listened to those speeches of his during the campaign, searching for their meaning.
It took this battle over health care to reveal the bloom coming off this rose, but that was coming. It began with the spectacle of the president, impelled to go abroad to apologize for his nation—repeatedly. It is not, in the end, the demonstrators in those town-hall meetings or the agitations of his political enemies that Mr. Obama should fear. It is the judgment of those Americans who have been sitting quietly in their homes, listening to him.

What a joke(r)
Attachments:

From that socialist hell hole known as Sweden...Yum!

Obama is a stupid clownish ugly monkey

I like Swedish girls and so does Obama. Therefore, I like Obama. That means you are a male with feminine qualities.

While Big O was out stumping for Reform, he presented it as INSURANCE Reform.
Connolly and Moran are presenting it as Health CARE Reform.
And then there are the fence sitters who just call it Health Reform.

===============

Presuming this is really a Health INSURANCE Plan, it’s itent is to bring the Insurance Industry down a few pegs and force them to offer affordable premiums to everyone without restrictions. So, why can't Congress just appoint an oversight committee to review Industry Standards (as they have with the Finance Industry), make recommendations for change, and then let it slide through Congress and on to Big O for signature?

When everyone who is eligible has their very own insurance card, there are no more free-loaders to bog down our ERs and Hospitals, passing along their costs to us, and bankrupting our medical facilities.

Hoewver, without tort reform, doctors are not going to schedule fewer tests, regardless of the new laws or recommendations. They are going schedule as many tests as necessary to ensure the safety of their patient's health care and their legal health. If the insurers reject the bills, they have to justify to Congress.

When insurance premiums are brought under control and all Americans can afford coverage, health care is no longer an issue.

Pulling in the reins on the Insurance Industry as Congress is doing with the Finance Industry, there is no reason why Congress can't scrap this obviously controversial Bill that appears to be going no where fast - and save face while they still have time.

An (effective) Oversight Committee would produce the same end result, but without the hypertension and strained vocal cords.

truthiness Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I like Swedish girls and so does Obama.
> Therefore, I like Obama. That means you are a
> male with feminine qualities.


Don't know about Obama, but Tiger Woods does....


Elin Nordgren....Yummy....

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> truthiness Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I like Swedish girls and so does Obama.
> > Therefore, I like Obama. That means you are a
> > male with feminine qualities.
>
>
> Don't know about Obama, but Tiger Woods does....
>
>
> Elin Nordgren....Yummy....


Thank you. you helped me find what i needed to whack off.

How's that hope and change working out for you lib suck-asses?

Working great for me, my portfolio and the value of my assets. Plus, I just got a raise.

How about you, Jimbo?

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Working great for me, my portfolio and the value
> of my assets. Plus, I just got a raise.
>
> How about you, Jimbo?



Don't forget your six-figure annual bonus that allows you to buy cars in cash....

Not always. After my trade-in, I financed my Rover at a below-market rate over, because at the time, it made sense. In today's marketplace, it's always advisable to pay cash if your money isn't earning more than what you finance.

Besides, after taxes, my six-figure bonus was reduced to a mere $57k. Six-figures ain't what it used to be.

WTF type of taxes are you paying? Bonuses usually are taxed at 25%. You should have at least 75k to take home, or you could be talking out of your ass. No, it couldn't be. :-(

I had a 45% withholding rate on my bonus. Because of my tax bracket, I didn't see a dime of that money that was withheld. It actually caused me to owe more.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTF type of taxes are you paying? Bonuses usually
> are taxed at 25%. You should have at least 75k to
> take home, or you could be talking out of your
> ass. No, it couldn't be. :-(


This gives us all an idea of your income level if you are saying "25% of a bonus is withheld." Maybe if you make $35K a year and get a $5K bonus. The rest of us assume close to 50% on income and anything below that is gravy.

Does being a senior level douchebag that works overtime really pay that well?

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> This gives us all an idea of your income level if
> you are saying "25% of a bonus is withheld." Maybe
> if you make $35K a year and get a $5K bonus. The
> rest of us assume close to 50% on income and
> anything below that is gravy.


No, I paid a flat Federal tax of 25%. Because I was overseas at the time, I didn't have Virginia tax me as well. And yes, the standard tax on bonuses is 25%. You would know this if you didn't imagine and daydream about being super rich.

>The rest of us assume close to 50% on income and anything below that is gravy.

Who is "us"?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2009 02:24PM by Lexus FTW!.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> >
> > This gives us all an idea of your income level
> if
> > you are saying "25% of a bonus is withheld."
> Maybe
> > if you make $35K a year and get a $5K bonus.
> The
> > rest of us assume close to 50% on income and
> > anything below that is gravy.
>
>
> No, I paid a flat Federal tax of 25%. Because I
> was overseas at the time, I didn't have Virginia
> tax me as well.
>
> >The rest of us assume close to 50% on income and
> anything below that is gravy.
>
> Who is "us"?

People like § and myself. I also understand there are probably about four of five other regulars on this forum who are in that range.

As for your 25%, were you assuming § was overseas, as well? Why else would you bring that up?

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> As for your 25%, were you assuming § was overseas,
> as well? Why else would you bring that up?


Even with a state taxing you, a six figure bonus should not come out to 57k.


People like § and myself. I also understand there are probably about four of five other regulars on this forum who are in that range.

Again, the more you speak, the less credible you sound. I guess the whole fucking forum is made of stay at home consultants.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/14/2009 02:30PM by Lexus FTW!.

Bonuses are often taxed as "non-earned" income ..... and at about a 40% rate.

Someone do the math, the only way § -bag would walk away with that little money from a imaginary six-figure bonus is if he was contributing heavily to a 401k.....

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Again, the more you speak, the less credible you
> sound. I guess the whole fucking forum is made of
> stay at home consultants.


I don't work from home.

Which personally sucks, but like most people, is compensation in leiu of stock options or equity sharing programs. I will say that my bonus is only at that level because of a change in my comp structure as to where I'm now capped in the mid-100s for my base salary.

So, I actually count on my bonus moreso than Clark Griswold in Christmas Vacation did. Without it, I would need to call my Cousin Eddie.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone do the math, the only way § -bag would
> walk away with that little money from a imaginary
> six-figure bonus is if he was contributing heavily
> to a 401k.....

Are you a dummy or what? Do you even know what the max contribution is?

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone do the math, the only way § -bag would
> walk away with that little money from a imaginary
> six-figure bonus is if he was contributing heavily
> to a 401k.....


Is it really that hard to believe that lawyers make good money??

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lexus FTW! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Someone do the math, the only way § -bag would
> > walk away with that little money from a
> imaginary
> > six-figure bonus is if he was contributing
> heavily
> > to a 401k.....
>
>
> Is it really that hard to believe that lawyers
> make good money??


The guy doesn't understand that the bonus he gets for working at The Gap isn't the same as a partnership disbursement at the end of the fiscal year. Tony the assistant manager told him all bonuses are taxed at 25%, and what Tony says is gospel.

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you a dummy or what? Do you even know what
> the max contribution is?

Yes I do, I admit I'm a little foggy on the rules as I have a 403b.....


I'm just trying to figure out what type of deductions you could possibly have.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> § Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Are you a dummy or what? Do you even know what
> > the max contribution is?
>
> Yes I do, I admit I'm a little foggy on the rules
> as I have a 403b.....
>
>
> I'm just trying to figure out what type of
> deductions you could possibly have.

Also factor in AMT.

LOL +1 @ WTL.

Actually, equity partners at my old firm used to take a draw whenever they felt like it in addition to a nominal base salary of about $150k. They could take what is deemed as a reasonable amount out not to exceed their base salary, and at the end of the year, they'd true it all up based on your ability to generate revenue. Our rainmakers would receive checks in excess of $700k+ and the average partner after base ($200k) and a reasonable draw (about +150k, sometimes more, sometime less), would receive an additional bonus of about $200k on top of that (about $600k+ total). This is just the equity partners, or those who have contributed capital.

Comp for jr. partners or non-equity partners work differently where they get just a base salary and a bonus dependent on their billable hours. Same for associates.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> § Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Are you a dummy or what? Do you even know what
> > the max contribution is?
>
> Yes I do, I admit I'm a little foggy on the rules
> as I have a 403b.....
>
>
> I'm just trying to figure out what type of
> deductions you could possibly have.

You'll need to talk to my accountant. As far as I'm concerned, not enough!

Jesus Christ, people don't seem to understand anything about taxes. There is no such thing as a "bonus tax". For the most part, bonuses are taxed as ordinary income. A one-time bonus will make a person's annual income seem higher than it actually is so frequently a large amount of a bonus will be withheld. So, while you may have 45% of the bonus withheld, how much you actually pay in income tax will depend on how much you actually made that year in total, what your deductions were, capital gains, exemptions, etc. You may recoup some of that 45% or you may end up paying more, it just depends.

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> You'll need to talk to my accountant. As far as
> I'm concerned, not enough!


Can you set me up with an appointment with your make-believe accountant? I'm leaving the non-profit (hence the 403b) I work for soon and need some advice on how to set up a retirement plan. Thanks!

Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jesus Christ, people don't seem to understand
> anything about taxes. There is no such thing as a
> "bonus tax". For the most part, bonuses are taxed
> as ordinary income. A one-time bonus will make a
> person's annual income seem higher than it
> actually is so frequently a large amount of a
> bonus will be withheld. So, while you may have
> 45% of the bonus withheld, how much you actually
> pay in income tax will depend on how much you
> actually made that year in total, what your
> deductions were, capital gains, exemptions, etc.
> You may recoup some of that 45% or you may end up
> paying more, it just depends.

+1 Voter. That's exactly my point. It's taxed as income in addition to other sources of income. I just happened to have 45% withheld on the front end, likely due to the timing of the year when I received it to ensure I withheld the minimum tax possible and wouldn't be short at year-end.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> § Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > You'll need to talk to my accountant. As far
> as
> > I'm concerned, not enough!
>
>
> Can you set me up with an appointment with your
> make-believe accountant? I'm leaving the
> non-profit (hence the 403b) I work for soon and
> need some advice on how to set up a retirement
> plan. Thanks!

Well, if you're at a NFP, you must be having a hard time with those Lexus payments, huh? Unless you bought a pre-2004 model with 100k miles. Or perhaps your Daddy helped you because he felt sorry for your lack of self-worth and inability to make your payments.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WTF type of taxes are you paying? Bonuses usually
> are taxed at 25%. You should have at least 75k to
> take home, or you could be talking out of your
> ass. No, it couldn't be. :-(

This will memorialize your lack of knowledge (and a bonus).

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Well, if you're at a NFP, you must be having a
> hard time with those Lexus payments, huh? Unless
> you bought a pre-2004 model with 100k miles. Or
> perhaps your Daddy helped you because he felt
> sorry for your lack of self-worth and inability to
> make your payments.


§ , I can't put anything past you.


BTW, I hope you're not recording the time you spend on FFXU as billable hours. ; )

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
----------------------------
>
> And yes, the standard tax on
> bonuses is 25%. You would know this if you didn't
> imagine and daydream about being super rich.

Memorialized again. Who's daydreaming now, bitch?

What nonprofit pays a bonus?

Yeah, I've got to hear this one.

And don't include the $500 holiday appreciation gift either.

... and welcome back! Round three of the pissing contest is underway, and both competitors are still going strong!

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What nonprofit pays a bonus?

Great question, WTL.

We're all still waiting to hear this whopper of an explanation.

Lexus WTF! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What nonprofit pays a bonus?
>
> Great question, WTL.
>
> We're all still waiting to hear this whopper of an
> explanation.


I'll tell you what non-profit I work for when you tell me what area of law you practice. For being such a busy lawyer, you sure have a lot of time fucking off on this site.

Lexus WTF! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What nonprofit pays a bonus?
>
> Great question, WTL.
>
> We're all still waiting to hear this whopper of an
> explanation.


Actually, in this town a ton of non-profits pay bonuses.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lexus WTF! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What nonprofit pays a bonus?
> >
> > Great question, WTL.
> >
> > We're all still waiting to hear this whopper of
> an
> > explanation.
>
>
> I'll tell you what non-profit I work for when you
> tell me what area of law you practice. For being
> such a busy lawyer, you sure have a lot of time
> fucking off on this site.

It's all relative. I figure I work about a 45 hour work week, but am in the office or working from home about 55 hours. That's about 10 hours to spare, about 5 of which I spend on this site per week, in spurts, like 20 minutes here, 15 minutes there, etc. It's rare that I spend more than an hour a day posting.

I really don't care what non-profit you work for. A lot of non-profits are great. I have several friends that are non-profit lifers all because of the schedule. They may not live in the best neighborhoods or send their kids to private schools, but they get to make the kids dinner and attend t-ball practices on most nights.

They sacrifice hours for pay. Whereas, I sacrifice pay for hours and a little added stress.

bonified bonus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Actually, in this town a ton of non-profits pay
> bonuses.


I was going to say that, but I'd rather watch WTL and § in their hilarious and smug assumptions. I like working for the non-profit, and I know that after 30 years I have done something with my life. Unlike certain lawyers who only go in it for the money and their only accomplishment is buying 15 Audis in a 30 year period.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2009 03:38PM by Lexus FTW!.

duplicate post



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2009 03:38PM by Lexus FTW!.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> bonified bonus Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Actually, in this town a ton of non-profits pay
> > bonuses.
>
>
> I was going to say that, but I'd rather watch WTL
> and § in their hilarious and smug assumptions. I
> like working for the non-profit, and I know that
> after 30 years I have done somwthing with my life.
> Unlike certain lawyers who only go in it for the
> money and their only accomplishment is buying 15
> Audis in a 30 year period.

Some non-profits pay really well. Some trade associations in this town pay their mid-level executives well into the six figures, and they get a good bonus. If you think the only way to make good bank as an attorney is at a firm, you need to reconsider.

It's ok if lack of money and status makes you feel socially awkward. That's a completely normal response. It's easy to envy the rich and the powerful because they often stand alone and are not among the masses.

If you like working at a non-profit and it makes you feel accomplished, then good for you. Seriously. I get great satisfaction from my career as well, so long as I meet my goals and I'm still upwardly mobile.

Just don't become like most non-profiteers and government workers alike: too comfortable and complacent. That's one way to grow old too fast.

§, I'm starting to see a softer side, not the usual materialistic shallow douchebag I've come to know.

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's ok if lack of money and status makes you feel
> socially awkward. That's a completely normal
> response. It's easy to envy the rich and the
> powerful because they often stand alone and are
> not among the masses.
>
> If you like working at a non-profit and it makes
> you feel accomplished, then good for you.
> Seriously. I get great satisfaction from my
> career as well, so long as I meet my goals and I'm
> still upwardly mobile.
>
> Just don't become like most non-profiteers and
> government workers alike: too comfortable and
> complacent. That's one way to grow old too fast.

I think you have a serious misunderstanding of the pay scales of some non-profits in this area. My career path started in the government in the late 90s/early 00s. I worked at a firm for a couple years and then joined a trade association in their gov. relations shop. I make just as much as I did at the firm and work far less hours. My kids go to private schools and I live in a nice neighborhood.

+ 100


WTL and § are typical DC area douchebags. They think money is the most important thing in life, all women are attracted to large incomes and expensive cars, and anybody else that isn't an accountant, banker, consultant, or lawyer is just a pissant.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2009 03:50PM by Lexus FTW!.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> §, I'm starting to see a softer side, not the
> usual materialistic shallow douchebag I've come to
> know.

Ha!

I'm having a really great day and I'm more self-reflective and forgiving for it.

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...money is the most important thing in life,
> all women are attracted to large incomes and
> expensive cars, and anybody else that isn't an
> accountant, banker, consultant, or lawyer is just
> a pissant.

You said it.

§, have you ever realized that the paramedic or the school teacher making
25-40k a year does more for society in one day than you do in ten years? It must be cold and lonely always trying to out-impress your coworkers and friends. Hopefully whatever bar chick you pick up doesn't marry you for your money and then rape you for all you're worth at the inevitable divorce.




.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2009 04:04PM by Lexus FTW!.
Attachments:

Lexus FTW! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> §, have you ever realized that the paramedic or
> the school teacher making
> 25-40k a year does more for society in one day
> than you do in ten years? It must be cold and
> lonely always trying to out-impress your coworkers
> and friends. Hopefully whatever bar chick you pick
> up doesn't marry you for your money and then rape
> you for all you're worth at the inevitable
> divorce.
>
>
>
>
> .

Thanks so much for your kind words. Societal contribution is subjective and open for interpretation. Right now, my tax contributions that I've made in 10 years has allowed me to be guilt exempt since they would have single handedly paid for a few paramedics and school teachers during that time.

You're welcome, by the way.

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> blah blah blah



So you have avoided answering what area of law you practice. I understand wanting to stay anonymous, but just saying what type of lawyer you are doesn't reveal too much.

Let me guess, something not too demanding or doesn't require a lot of quick thinking. Traffic? Real estate?

I'm so glad that I'm comfortable and happy with myself. These kind of arguments look like a lot of effort.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm so glad that I'm comfortable and happy with
> myself. These kind of arguments look like a lot
> of effort.


But not everyone has a pet rat to keep them company. :-(

I'd reveal it, but given the small community in this practice area, I would likely compromise my identity. Let's just say I'm somewhat of an interpreter of positions who makes problems disappear for certain entities, not individuals. Demand is relative to the marketplace and it requires thinking to be precise, not necessarily quick.

Secure? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MrMephisto Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I'm so glad that I'm comfortable and happy with
> > myself. These kind of arguments look like a
> lot
> > of effort.
>
>
> But not everyone has a pet rat to keep them
> company. :-(

Cage, food, bedding, and rat would come to about $60 bucks. No excuses.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'd reveal it, but given the small community in
> this practice area, I would likely compromise my
> identity. Let's just say I'm somewhat of an
> interpreter of positions who makes problems
> disappear for certain entities, not individuals.
> Demand is relative to the marketplace and it
> requires thinking to be precise, not necessarily
> quick.

Christ, next you're going to tell us you are a "fixer" like George Clooney in Michael Clayton.

Anyway, the non profit I work for deals with third world health care. I specifically deal with vaccination distribution.


.
Attachments:

LOL. That's one of the worst legal dramas ever put to screen. Well, there's two types of lawyers: those who make problems disappear and those who make problems. And all lawyers are interpreters. Interpreters of the law and of their clients' positions.

Good. Let's keep that H1N1 under wraps. I have no desire to be constantly shitting and puking this fall.

Good. Let's keep that H1N1 under wraps. I have no desire to be constantly shitting and puking this fall.



He said third world health care, not douchebag care.

And deficiencies in third world health care can spread stateside to douchebags like yourself quite easily. Eesh.

would that be a WHO or USAID subontractor.....that's the only ones i know of that deal with third world heath issues

such as unicef, unesco, one world heath, bio ventures, medicines for malaria venture etc. some also does mosquito nets with vacines

question man Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> would that be a WHO or USAID
> subontractor.....that's the only ones i know of
> that deal with third world heath issues


And the answer is: None of the above.

it is extremely important to portray america in a positive light in sub-saharan africa....give them mosquito nets and twizzlers and they be good togo

§ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lexus FTW! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ...money is the most important thing in life,
> > all women are attracted to large incomes and
> > expensive cars, and anybody else that isn't an
> > accountant, banker, consultant, or lawyer is
> just
> > a pissant.
>
> You said it.


I'd say that in DC, thats pretty much true...

question man Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> would that be a WHO or USAID
> subontractor.....that's the only ones i know of
> that deal with third world heath issues



I AM A COMPUTER SCIENCE MAJOR AT STRAYER ONLINE UNIVERSITY AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!