Sometimes

[Wewild]

Personally, I'd rather a whole lot of extra money go to rehabilitating the wounded/crippled and their getting the best care we have. Instead these fighting men and women often have to wait an absurd amount of time to get second rate care when they get back to the states. I have a hard time comprehending it.

As to the why of it all, I'd still rather deal with the wolf now than wait for it to arrive at my door but it looks like certain goverment types will get their way anyhow and force us to fight on our own soil in the near future. I hope they are as proud of their "retreat" decision then as they are of it now.

good post

 

[Frankie]

Retirees from what, Wewild? Government retiree's that spent their lives putting themselves in harm's way...yes, I think they deserve a break.

Alice

No. I would have been speaking of the rest. I think I made myself clear on "the harms way issue". If you need help ....arrow up some posts

The question was income tax on retired individuals and others.

Military retirees pay Federal income tax on their retirment pay. Some states give them breaks on state income tax.

Would that mean you agree or disagree with me?

About what? I'm merely responding to your question which I thought was "did military retirees pay tax on their rentirement income". They do. I guess I missed any other question, so if you want to restate it, I'll tell you whether I agree or not. I usually have an opinion. :lol:

 

[Wewild]

About what? I'm merely responding to your question which I thought was "did military retirees pay tax on their rentirement income". They do. I guess I missed any other question, so if you want to restate it, I'll tell you whether I agree or not. I usually have an opinion. :lol:

Everybody get taxed on there retirement by the Feds. Do you think it's right?

 

[Horticattleman]

Has anyone bothered to ask the troops what they want?....

From the current Newsweek article about the search for the missing three soldiers:

"But most U.S. soldiers interviewed by NEWSWEEK have long since stopped insisting that their greatest mission is to bring peace and democracy to Iraq. More and more, they talk about their desire to simply protect their buddies, and to get everyone home alive."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18754290/site/newsweek/

Regardless if the fight is just or a waste, grunts on the ground have one mission... to save their buddies butt and get the job done. It's that way at the beginning of a war and at the end of a war. Never changes. Whether they agree with you or the person who sent them there. They're doing their job and thank God they are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[NamVet_Farmer44]

And remember, pay raise or not, our service is still an all voluntary service. When I joined the Corps, I don't even ever rember asking the recruiter how much I was gonna make. I was 17! I didn't care. I just knew that this Country needed good hard working young men to defend Her freedom. No matter what. And if that means getting shot at well so be it. If you are scared, stay at Mickey Dees. It can't always be someone elses son. And just in case your wondering, my Dad told me that with a tear in his eye when i told him I wanted to defend this country.

And don't doubt it for a minute, i think putting your life in harms way deserves the highest pay rate, but it aint a perfect world. You hear more squealing from the liberal left who have supplied the least bodies for ANY fight for freedom, than those actually defending it.

My biggest point is that i agree with Wewild. I saw it as just an excuse to jab the President. Most of the jabbers have never served a day in uniform so they will never understand the most important thing about it all.....it's more than just money, its pride. Its being able to stand up and say 'Yes ma'am I did my part.'


p.s. I hope they get a 50% pay raise. They can take way more money from me in taxes if it goes straight to military pay raises.

I guess I'm still haunted by the Viet Nam War...that was my generation. Then, serving in the military was not voluntary. And, as far as the liberal left supplying the least amount of bodies, I really don't know the political leanings of the ones that served in Viet Nam. Then, it didn't matter. When a young man reached the age of 18, he was eligible for the draft and it didn't really matter what his leanings were. And the draftee wasn't offered what area of the service he'd like to be placed in. He wasn't told, well, son, you can go into communications or learn this or that...he was sent to boot camp, handed a gun, and shipped to Viet Nam. And it really didn't matter if he was scared or not...he went. He had no choice.

And, when he came back, if he came back, he came back facing uncertainty as to how he was going to support himself and where he would fit in. And, if he came back injured either physically or mentally, God help him. And now, my generation of veterans are still facing uncertainty when what they were exposed to in Viet Nam, mentally and physically, is beginning to crop up because no one seems to want to take responsibility and offer them the help they need...so it's just denied. That's tough on those guys...it's like they're being denied that fact that they also gave up a lot, even tho they didn't volunteer to do it...even tho they were scared.

One war is no worse than the other...one war is no better than the other...and in General Sherman's words...War is He11. So's the aftermath. Yes, it makes me mad when there is quibbling over what should be paid to active duty and retired military. And, I'll admit my biggest fault of all...I can't seem to separate then from now.

Alice

Horticattleman, I know it might be about "pride, not money" to some...but when I was in the service...we didn't do it for the pride...we didn't have much pride at all in most of the stuff we had to do...it wasn't something we should've took pride in...yeah we fought to try to keep our country safe...but it took it's toll overtime...we did it because it was our responsibility, it was what we had to do at that time and day...we were able to fight...and the country needed people fighting...so that's what we did...we fought...but there is a part in there for pride...I do have pride in serving...but it was responsibility that brought me into the service

And Alice...many people are still haunted by Vietnam...but there was a whole lot of volunteers in the War...not everyone turned 18 and was shipped off...the draftees were also permitted more training than just boot camp, handed a gun, and shipped off...basic survival and weapons skills were taught to everyone...I don't know how it is now, but boot camp back then was just made to "toughen us up"...no skills were really learned there...we had basic training though...although some men were shipped off to their basecamp, then trained there...but I will say, most of the men that came back injured, well they weren't looking for someone to pay for their injuries...they just felt darn lucky they weren't a name carved in a wall...

 

[Alice]

And remember, pay raise or not, our service is still an all voluntary service. When I joined the Corps, I don't even ever rember asking the recruiter how much I was gonna make. I was 17! I didn't care. I just knew that this Country needed good hard working young men to defend Her freedom. No matter what. And if that means getting shot at well so be it. If you are scared, stay at Mickey Dees. It can't always be someone elses son. And just in case your wondering, my Dad told me that with a tear in his eye when i told him I wanted to defend this country.

And don't doubt it for a minute, i think putting your life in harms way deserves the highest pay rate, but it aint a perfect world. You hear more squealing from the liberal left who have supplied the least bodies for ANY fight for freedom, than those actually defending it.

My biggest point is that i agree with Wewild. I saw it as just an excuse to jab the President. Most of the jabbers have never served a day in uniform so they will never understand the most important thing about it all.....it's more than just money, its pride. Its being able to stand up and say 'Yes ma'am I did my part.'


p.s. I hope they get a 50% pay raise. They can take way more money from me in taxes if it goes straight to military pay raises.

I guess I'm still haunted by the Viet Nam War...that was my generation. Then, serving in the military was not voluntary. And, as far as the liberal left supplying the least amount of bodies, I really don't know the political leanings of the ones that served in Viet Nam. Then, it didn't matter. When a young man reached the age of 18, he was eligible for the draft and it didn't really matter what his leanings were. And the draftee wasn't offered what area of the service he'd like to be placed in. He wasn't told, well, son, you can go into communications or learn this or that...he was sent to boot camp, handed a gun, and shipped to Viet Nam. And it really didn't matter if he was scared or not...he went. He had no choice.

And, when he came back, if he came back, he came back facing uncertainty as to how he was going to support himself and where he would fit in. And, if he came back injured either physically or mentally, God help him. And now, my generation of veterans are still facing uncertainty when what they were exposed to in Viet Nam, mentally and physically, is beginning to crop up because no one seems to want to take responsibility and offer them the help they need...so it's just denied. That's tough on those guys...it's like they're being denied that fact that they also gave up a lot, even tho they didn't volunteer to do it...even tho they were scared.

One war is no worse than the other...one war is no better than the other...and in General Sherman's words...War is He11. So's the aftermath. Yes, it makes me mad when there is quibbling over what should be paid to active duty and retired military. And, I'll admit my biggest fault of all...I can't seem to separate then from now.

Alice

Horticattleman, I know it might be about "pride, not money" to some...but when I was in the service...we didn't do it for the pride...we didn't have much pride at all in most of the stuff we had to do...it wasn't something we should've took pride in...yeah we fought to try to keep our country safe...but it took it's toll overtime...we did it because it was our responsibility, it was what we had to do at that time and day...we were able to fight...and the country needed people fighting...so that's what we did...we fought...but there is a part in there for pride...I do have pride in serving...but it was responsibility that brought me into the service

And Alice...many people are still haunted by Vietnam...but there was a whole lot of volunteers in the War...not everyone turned 18 and was shipped off...the draftees were also permitted more training than just boot camp, handed a gun, and shipped off...basic survival and weapons skills were taught to everyone...I don't know how it is now, but boot camp back then was just made to "toughen us up"...no skills were really learned there...we had basic training though...although some men were shipped off to their basecamp, then trained there...but I will say, most of the men that came back injured, well they weren't looking for someone to pay for their injuries...they just felt darn lucky they weren't a name carved in a wall...

I understand what you are saying...I truly do. Thank you so much for that...

Alice

 

[Frankie]

About what? I'm merely responding to your question which I thought was "did military retirees pay tax on their rentirement income". They do. I guess I missed any other question, so if you want to restate it, I'll tell you whether I agree or not. I usually have an opinion. :lol:

Everybody get taxed on there retirement by the Feds. Do you think it's right?

Yes, I think it's right. Military retirees use Medicare, drive on highways, use libraries, enjoy the same rights secured by our military, as do non-military retirees. I think they should pay their share of taxes. Oklahoma doesn't tax a portion of military retiree's retiremeent benefits. I assume some other states don't either.

Firemen, policemen also put their lives on the line for us every day, without the same acclaim that our military currently gets.

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

 

[Frankie]

I think those soldiers that have been incapacitated, as a result of their service, should be the exception and receive extraordinary benefits and breaks. Veteran medical facilities should be state-of-the-art and the waiting period for treatment should be measured in minutes and not months. I would gladly place their treatment needs ahead of mine. Yes, other service entities stick their necks out too, but soldiers are in a class of their own and nothing compares to the service they perform.

Of course, we could write off all these war issues, like one of our repesentative buddies did, by just saying "if we weren't meddling over there all the time they would leave us alone."

Military retirees who are 100% disabled don't pay taxes on 100% of their retirement pay. If they have a 25% disability, they don't pay taxes on 25% of their pay, etc. But you're right about treatment facilities. The facilities available to them when they're still on active duty, Walter Reed, Wilford Hall, take pretty good care of them. But once they're discharged they have to deal with the VA hospitals and they're always behind in appointments, therapy, specialists, etc. And that's another place soldiers are getting mistreated. In the last couple of years, the number of 100% disabilities has dropped. Even as more soldiers come home without limbs and with emotional problems, the Army has made it harder to quality for permanent disability status and, thus, more retirement pay!

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/T ... ney070222/

 

[aplusmnt]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

 

[aplusmnt]

And don't doubt it for a minute, i think putting your life in harms way deserves the highest pay rate, but it aint a perfect world. You hear more squealing from the liberal left who have supplied the least bodies for ANY fight for freedom, than those actually defending it.

Good point!

 

[63DH8]

I think those soldiers that have been incapacitated, as a result of their service, should be the exception and receive extraordinary benefits and breaks. Veteran medical facilities should be state-of-the-art and the waiting period for treatment should be measured in minutes and not months. I would gladly place their treatment needs ahead of mine. Yes, other service entities stick their necks out too, but soldiers are in a class of their own and nothing compares to the service they perform.

Of course, we could write off all these war issues, like one of our repesentative buddies did, by just saying "if we weren't meddling over there all the time they would leave us alone."

Military retirees who are 100% disabled don't pay taxes on 100% of their retirement pay. If they have a 25% disability, they don't pay taxes on 25% of their pay, etc. But you're right about treatment facilities. The facilities available to them when they're still on active duty, Walter Reed, Wilford Hall, take pretty good care of them. But once they're discharged they have to deal with the VA hospitals and they're always behind in appointments, therapy, specialists, etc. And that's another place soldiers are getting mistreated. In the last couple of years, the number of 100% disabilities has dropped. Even as more soldiers come home without limbs and with emotional problems, the Army has made it harder to quality for permanent disability status and, thus, more retirement pay!

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/02/T ... ney070222/

Vets no longer get a percent of their retirement tax free. They get the VA money in addition to their retirement. If they are getting military retirement, they can get their tax free VA disability money in addition to their retirement. This started only last November. I helped my father's friends, my uncle, and my ex's uncles get their VA disability ratings and money. I you are still getting a tax exemption on your military retirement, go to the VA hospital's Veteran's rep and have them change the pay for you. You still get to keep your ID card and base/post privilege.

Also… Military members who are in the combat areas are not getting taxed on their pay. I don't know if the Government did this back during Vietnam, but they did this during the 1990-91 Gulf War.

Now for my two cents: I feel military pay should be tied to the politician's pay. It should equal the same as the congresscritter's pay for the years they served and go up at the same rate as the congresscritter's pay. Every time politicians vote themselves a pay raise, the military should get a raise too.

 

[Frankie]

Vets no longer get a percent of their retirement tax free. They get the VA money in addition to their retirement. If they are getting military retirement, they can get their tax free VA disability money in addition to their retirement. This started only last November. I helped my father's friends, my uncle, and my ex's uncles get their VA disability ratings and money. I you are still getting a tax exemption on your military retirement, go to the VA hospital's Veteran's rep and have them change the pay for you. You still get to keep your ID card and base/post privilege.

Well, not quite. If you have a 50% or greater service related VA disability rating, you can get both the VA disability money and your retirement pay. If you have a lower % disability, you still have the offset.

From the link: "As of 2004 this law changed so that qualified disabled military retirees will now get paid both their full military retirement pay and their VA disability compensation. This recently passed law phases out (over 9 years) the VA disability offset, which means that military retirees with 20 or more years of service and a 50% (or higher) VA rated disability will no longer have their military retirement pay reduced by the amount of their VA disability compensation."

http://www.military.com/benefits/milita ... t-overview

 

[63DH8]

Thanks Frankie! I stand corrected.

 

[msscamp]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

 

[aplusmnt]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

That is different, they are criminals within a group of Hero's.

Frankie is not talking about the small fraction who turn to crime she is saying the average soldier is not a hero, that they have to do something Heroic to become one, that most are just doing the job they are being paid to do. I disagree, I say the average soldier that is doing his day to day job is a Hero to me. He put his life on the line for the freedom of his fellow man and that in itself is Heroic! When he took the oath to defend America with his life, that is a pretty Heroic act!

A soldier defending his country is a Hero and only they themselves can strip this Heroism from themselves by acts of Dishonor, they can remove this from themselves, but their acts can not strip the other soldiers of such honor, only themselves.

 

[msscamp]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

That is different, they are criminals within a group of Hero's.

Frankie is not talking about the small fraction who turn to crime she is saying the average soldier is not a hero, that they have to do something Heroic to become one, that most are just doing the job they are being paid to do. I disagree, I say the average soldier that is doing his day to day job is a Hero to me. He put his life on the line for the freedom of his fellow man and that in itself is Heroic! When he took the oath to defend America with his life, that is a pretty Heroic act!

A soldier defending his country is a Hero and only they themselves can strip this Heroism from themselves by acts of Dishonor, they can remove this from themselves, but their acts can not strip the other soldiers of such honor, only themselves.

Thank you for clarifying that. I'm torn on this one - I do wholeheartedly believe that the men and women who voluntarily (not 'persuaded' by run-ins with the law, etc.) are doing a very selfless, noble thing that most certainly benefits their entire country, but to call them 'hero's' doesn't seem quite right somehow. Maybe it's just the way I perceive the meaning of 'hero', but giving them that title seems to detract from those who go above and beyond the call of duty. Does that make sense? Back to you for rebuttel(sp?).

 

[aplusmnt]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

That is different, they are criminals within a group of Hero's.

Frankie is not talking about the small fraction who turn to crime she is saying the average soldier is not a hero, that they have to do something Heroic to become one, that most are just doing the job they are being paid to do. I disagree, I say the average soldier that is doing his day to day job is a Hero to me. He put his life on the line for the freedom of his fellow man and that in itself is Heroic! When he took the oath to defend America with his life, that is a pretty Heroic act!

A soldier defending his country is a Hero and only they themselves can strip this Heroism from themselves by acts of Dishonor, they can remove this from themselves, but their acts can not strip the other soldiers of such honor, only themselves.

Thank you for clarifying that. I'm torn on this one - I do wholeheartedly believe that the men and women who voluntarily (not 'persuaded' by run-ins with the law, etc.) are doing a very selfless, noble thing that most certainly benefits their entire country, but to call them 'hero's' doesn't seem quite right somehow. Maybe it's just the way I perceive the meaning of 'hero', but giving them that title seems to detract from those who go above and beyond the call of duty. Does that make sense? Back to you for rebuttel(sp?).

Yea it makes sense, maybe we can have Hero's and Super Hero's, it works in the comic books :lol:

 

[NamVet_Farmer44]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

my lai massacre...

 

[msscamp]

And while I'm on my box, I'll say I don't think every person wearing the US military uniform is a hero. I get pretty irritated when I see people proclaiming that every soldier, sailor, marine, etc., is a hero. IMO, it demeans those who step out and actually do heroic deeds. For most of these people it's their job. It's what they're trained to do. They should receive good pay, benefits, our respect and gratitude for their hard work.

I disagree, when a person volunteers to defend its country that in itself is an act of heroism. There is degrees of being a Hero, to me a Hero is a person willing to risk their life for the good of their fellow man. And I think every soldier fits that definition rather they are in harms way or not. When they accepted their Job, they displayed a willingness to die for this country, and that is a Hero in my books.

Would that include the participants of the Melei(sp?) massacre, or the servicemen who raped that girl in Iraq? I do not believe them to be hero's and to define them as such demeans our men and women in uniform who are honorable and doing their jobs. Rape, and massacre of unarmed civilians are not a part of honorably serving one's country.

That is different, they are criminals within a group of Hero's.

Frankie is not talking about the small fraction who turn to crime she is saying the average soldier is not a hero, that they have to do something Heroic to become one, that most are just doing the job they are being paid to do. I disagree, I say the average soldier that is doing his day to day job is a Hero to me. He put his life on the line for the freedom of his fellow man and that in itself is Heroic! When he took the oath to defend America with his life, that is a pretty Heroic act!

A soldier defending his country is a Hero and only they themselves can strip this Heroism from themselves by acts of Dishonor, they can remove this from themselves, but their acts can not strip the other soldiers of such honor, only themselves.

Thank you for clarifying that. I'm torn on this one - I do wholeheartedly believe that the men and women who voluntarily (not 'persuaded' by run-ins with the law, etc.) are doing a very selfless, noble thing that most certainly benefits their entire country, but to call them 'hero's' doesn't seem quite right somehow. Maybe it's just the way I perceive the meaning of 'hero', but giving them that title seems to detract from those who go above and beyond the call of duty. Does that make sense? Back to you for rebuttel(sp?).

Yea it makes sense, maybe we can have Hero's and Super Hero's, it works in the comic books :lol:

That works! Thank you, NamVet.

 

[Wewild]

About what? I'm merely responding to your question which I thought was "did military retirees pay tax on their rentirement income". They do. I guess I missed any other question, so if you want to restate it, I'll tell you whether I agree or not. I usually have an opinion. :lol:

Everybody get taxed on there retirement by the Feds. Do you think it's right?

Yes, I think it's right.

I don't.