Thread: 2%

"The 2010 National Defense Authorization Act included a 3.4 percent military raise, 0.5 percent higher than the 2.9 percent raise Obama requested for service members in his initial budget. Obama signed the Defense policy bill in October."

The miitary members should get a raise of 3.4%. They deserve that and much more. They have a much heavier load than us civilians.

Originally Posted by Handballer

"The 2010 National Defense Authorization Act included a 3.4 percent military raise, 0.5 percent higher than the 2.9 percent raise Obama requested for service members in his initial budget. Obama signed the Defense policy bill in October."

The miitary members should get a raise of 3.4%. They deserve that and much more. They have a much heavier load than us civilians.

I agree, and they should also get the 5% matching funds on their TSP!!

Originally Posted by ATCJeff

401K limit next year is schedule to decrease for the first time ever to $16,000. Not sure what catch-up will be.

That's not good news!!! Can you PM me with your weblink to confirm? Thanks Man!!

Originally Posted by Aviator_Guy

That's not good news!!! Can you PM me with your weblink to confirm? Thanks Man!!

Back in August that was a possibility, but it looks like they are keeping the limit at $16,500 for 2010 instead of lowering it. I'm trying to find an official IRS document of this, but here are two articles. One is from August and the other is October:

August

In 2010 IRS could cut 401(k) contribution limit to $16,000

The IRS will announce 2010 contribution limits for 401(k) plans in October, based on a formula tied to the inflation rate in the third quarter vs. the year-ago quarter. For 2009, most workers can contribute up to $16,500 to their 401(k) plans, plus an additional $5,500 if they're 50 or older.

Unless inflation picks up in August and September, the IRS could be forced to reduce the cutoff to $16,000 in 2010, according to an analysis by Mercer, a human resources consultant. The threshold for catch-up contributions could be reduced to $5,000. This would mark the first time the IRS has reduced 401(k) contribution limits.

source: http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...mits-irs_N.htm

October:

401(k) maximum contributions to stay the same in 2010

Some analysts had expressed concern that the IRS would be required to reduce the maximum that workers can contribute to 401(k) plans. But the Treasury Department concluded that the relevant law doesn't require a reduction in limits for 2010, even though there was negative inflation, says J. Mark Iwry, senior adviser to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

As a result, the maximum amount workers can contribute to their 401(k) plans next year will remain at $16,500. Catch-up contributions for workers 50 and older will remain at $5,500.

source: http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...n-limits_N.htm

Again, these are just news articles. I haven't found the official documents of this, but USA Today is probably looking at the right source.

Originally Posted by Buster

As long as I have 80 hours/PP and I have the job security ..+2.0% is acceptable for me..last year we only got 3.52% total in my area.

Buster you change your avatar an awful lot, dontcha? Wasnt it a "Spartanesquehotguy" just a scant mintue ago...or am I seeing things??

Originally Posted by nnuut

And who's getting 16 to 18% raise in locality pay. That's how much they owe us of the amount that was voted into law in 1991, they have been giving us .5% to 1% of what the owe us for 19 years, they make it look like something else!

I know, really. Every year, the Federal Salary Council has been giving recommendations, but they're never listened to. That's the pay gap that is spoken about. Here's their page of recommendations each year:

http://www.opm.gov/oca/fsc/

According to their recommendations for locality pay, in 2010 the locality pay for the rest of the u.s. would be 28.88% !!! And for me in New York City, it would be 51.33% . Wahoo!!

Lawmakers back 2 percent raise, but nix locality pay freeze

House-Senate negotiators on Tuesday night backed President Obama's request to give civilian federal employees a 2 percent pay raise in 2010, but rejected his proposal to freeze locality pay.

Conferees announced the omnibus spending package would include a 2 percent average pay hike for civilians in 2010. They allotted 1.5 percent of the overall figure to an increase in base pay, and 0.5 percent to a boost in locality pay.

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=44201

Here's the quote from the section of the bill that congress is voting on in the next week on our pay. It says a 1.5 percent increase in general pay, plus an average .5 percent increase in locality. I still don't know where to find how the locality increase will be distributed. I'm assuming that if it is an average of .5 percent, some people will get less than .5 and others will get more than .5.

7 SEC. 744. (a) The adjustment in rates of basic pay for employees under the statutory pay systems that takes effect in fiscal year 2010 under section 5303 of title 5, United States Code, shall be an increase of 1.5 percent, and the overall average percentage of the adjustments taking effect in such fiscal year under sections 5304-5304a of such title 5 shall be an increase of 0.5 percent (with comparability payments to be determined and allocated among pay localities by the President). Adjustments under the preceding sentence shall also apply to civilian employees in the Department of Homeland Security and in the Department of Defense. All adjustments under this subsection shall be effective as of the first day of the first applicable pay period beginning on or after January 1, 2010.

It's on page 175 of this pdf:

http://docs.house.gov/rules/omni2010...r_divc_txt.pdf

Got the link from this page:
http://www.rules.house.gov/bills_det...px?NewsID=4520

For those who thought gubmint salaries are always inflation adjusted up!!!

Vermont State Employees Union Votes for 3% Pay Cut

We are in a period of deflation.

And, now that we have shot all our bullets...

We have exasperated the problem by attempting to re-inflate via borrowing. That can be a short term stimulus. But, this is a long term retrenchment. All we accomplished was a short term amelioration of deflation matched with a requirement to pay back $879 Billion in principal plus interest. We should have allowed the FED to manage the money supply. They can call back the helicopters, the government cannot call back the debt other than by paying it. And, soon enough the FED will move to strengthen the dollar – their official reason for being. That will occur in a time of high government debt and high inflation. Conversely, the general public will have reduced their debt and learned to deal with less.

What do you think the general public will demand from the government?