Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 daedalus wrote:
Is this that thread where we talk horribly about someone we have zero connection to because he or she is obnoxiously plastered all over every bit of culture we enjoy by people talking horribly about him or her despite having zero connection to them?

Nah, that sounds more like a Mat Ward thread.

If Bieber didn't want to be trashed in the media he shouldn't have gotten famous in the first place!

 djones520 wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 WarOne wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's interesting that people attest this to some sort of celebrity'isms. Isn't it kind of a "thing" for teenagers to do dumb things?

Frankly, I'd be more surprised if he wasn't being an entitled, dumb gak.

Teenagers doing dumb things is one thing.

He's 19 about to go on 20. Man child might be a better terminology for him.

His friends have been taking the heat (in many ways, to protect him) for miscellaneous chicanery and it was only a matter of time before reckless idiocy caught up with him.

Being rich and power in many ways entitles people to do stupid things. Biebmeister is not an exception.

I didn't know 19 was the age you're supposed to have your gak together.

Only because society today seems to push the idea that 19 is supposed to be an age where you are still a feth-up.

At 19 going on 20 I was more then 2 years in the military, and living overseas. I didn't need caretakers, I didn't need people to take the rap for me. I had my gak together.

What's his excuse? He's got money?

High horse much? The military where your caretakers. And it looks like they still are. They house, feed, and pay you. That's a caretaker.

I knew some person long past the age of majority would take umbrage at that sooner or later.

Imnewherewheresthebathroom wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 WarOne wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's interesting that people attest this to some sort of celebrity'isms. Isn't it kind of a "thing" for teenagers to do dumb things?

Frankly, I'd be more surprised if he wasn't being an entitled, dumb gak.

Teenagers doing dumb things is one thing.

He's 19 about to go on 20. Man child might be a better terminology for him.

His friends have been taking the heat (in many ways, to protect him) for miscellaneous chicanery and it was only a matter of time before reckless idiocy caught up with him.

Being rich and power in many ways entitles people to do stupid things. Biebmeister is not an exception.

I didn't know 19 was the age you're supposed to have your gak together.

Only because society today seems to push the idea that 19 is supposed to be an age where you are still a feth-up.

At 19 going on 20 I was more then 2 years in the military, and living overseas. I didn't need caretakers, I didn't need people to take the rap for me. I had my gak together.

What's his excuse? He's got money?

High horse much? The military where your caretakers. And it looks like they still are. They house, feed, and pay you. That's a caretaker.

Given the sheer ignorance that just poured from your fingers, I'm not even going to bother with a response to this, since you are clearly the type of person who won't even listen anyways.

Imnewherewheresthebathroom wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 WarOne wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's interesting that people attest this to some sort of celebrity'isms. Isn't it kind of a "thing" for teenagers to do dumb things?

Frankly, I'd be more surprised if he wasn't being an entitled, dumb gak.

Teenagers doing dumb things is one thing.

He's 19 about to go on 20. Man child might be a better terminology for him.

His friends have been taking the heat (in many ways, to protect him) for miscellaneous chicanery and it was only a matter of time before reckless idiocy caught up with him.

Being rich and power in many ways entitles people to do stupid things. Biebmeister is not an exception.

I didn't know 19 was the age you're supposed to have your gak together.

Only because society today seems to push the idea that 19 is supposed to be an age where you are still a feth-up.

At 19 going on 20 I was more then 2 years in the military, and living overseas. I didn't need caretakers, I didn't need people to take the rap for me. I had my gak together.

What's his excuse? He's got money?

High horse much? The military where your caretakers. And it looks like they still are. They house, feed, and pay you. That's a caretaker.

Yes, but he performs a vital duty, one where if he was to act out, all that would be taken away and no one would come to defend him.

Disappointed....no fiery crash at the end.....

Imnewherewheresthebathroom wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 WarOne wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
It's interesting that people attest this to some sort of celebrity'isms. Isn't it kind of a "thing" for teenagers to do dumb things?

Frankly, I'd be more surprised if he wasn't being an entitled, dumb gak.

Teenagers doing dumb things is one thing.

He's 19 about to go on 20. Man child might be a better terminology for him.

His friends have been taking the heat (in many ways, to protect him) for miscellaneous chicanery and it was only a matter of time before reckless idiocy caught up with him.

Being rich and power in many ways entitles people to do stupid things. Biebmeister is not an exception.

I didn't know 19 was the age you're supposed to have your gak together.

Only because society today seems to push the idea that 19 is supposed to be an age where you are still a feth-up.

At 19 going on 20 I was more then 2 years in the military, and living overseas. I didn't need caretakers, I didn't need people to take the rap for me. I had my gak together.

What's his excuse? He's got money?

High horse much? The military where your caretakers. And it looks like they still are. They house, feed, and pay you. That's a caretaker.

Your job at 7-11 is your caretaker. They house, feed, and pay you. That's a caretaker.

7-11 pays for housing?

Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

 d-usa wrote:
7-11 pays for housing?

They pay you. Basically, Imnewherewheresthebathroom's argument boiled down to if you have a job they are your caretaker.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

Okay, your job at a fortune 500 company feeds, clothes, and pays you. Therefore, they are your caretaker. The point is that having a job doesn't make the corporation, or government agency a caretaker. Imnewherewheresthe bathroom's argument boils down to anyone who makes money who isn't self employed has a caretaker.

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

7-11 doesn't have that awesome high quality base housing and high quality cafeteria food or MREs!

You can still argue about who gets shot more though...

 d-usa wrote:
7-11 doesn't have that awesome high quality base housing and high quality cafeteria food or MREs!

You can still argue about who gets shot more though...

I'm not sure if your trying to troll or not in trying to compare our work with 7-11... I hold you in high enough regard to think that you are.

no doubt 7-11 employees get shot more, just like marines get shot more than air force personnel. Wrong service bro.

 d-usa wrote:
7-11 doesn't have that awesome high quality base housing and high quality cafeteria food or MREs!

You can still argue about who gets shot more though...

Who ever gets shot more, it's a close-run.

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.




Man this bieber thread really went off the rails

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
7-11 doesn't have that awesome high quality base housing and high quality cafeteria food or MREs!

You can still argue about who gets shot more though...

I'm not sure if your trying to troll or not in trying to compare our work with 7-11... I hold you in high enough regard to think that you are.

I don't think that the two compare.

I do think that military would qualify more of a "caretaker" type job but only because they do provide more benefits in more areas but in return also require much more from people in all areas of their lives. You have more rules being in the military, but you also stand to loose a lot more if you break those rules. 7/11 doesn't give a feth if I get a DUI, but I imagine that you guys would have some issues with your work if you got one.

I don't mean "caretaker" as an insult or anything like that in this situation.

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.

Your presumption would be wrong, since when you factor in BAH, BAS, Life Insurance, and Health Insurance, my "Salary" is about $58,000. Average meteorologist pay in the civilian sector is $92,000.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
7-11 doesn't have that awesome high quality base housing and high quality cafeteria food or MREs!

You can still argue about who gets shot more though...

I'm not sure if your trying to troll or not in trying to compare our work with 7-11... I hold you in high enough regard to think that you are.

I don't think that the two compare.

I do think that military would qualify more of a "caretaker" type job but only because they do provide more benefits in more areas but in return also require much more from people in all areas of their lives. You have more rules being in the military, but you also stand to loose a lot more if you break those rules. 7/11 doesn't give a feth if I get a DUI, but I imagine that you guys would have some issues with your work if you got one.

I don't mean "caretaker" as an insult or anything like that in this situation.

A DUI at a minimum would result in a loss of rank, and potentially catastrophic amounts of pay. In the current military with the massive cuts we're facing right now, it could result in a total loss of job. As for caretaker, the closest to being a caretaker is the fact that we have rules to live by. As I said to Ouze, all of those "benefits" are a part of our pay. Every penny of that stuff comes into me as cash, and then I pay it out. They don't provide the house, or groceries. The only thing that I don't get the choice on is my medical insurance. Otherwise I could opt to live in a cardboard box and eat bread and drink water all day long and put everyone of those pennies away. It's just all a part of my salary.

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.

Your presumption would be wrong, since when you factor in BAH, BAS, Life Insurance, and Health Insurance, my "Salary" is about $58,000. Average meteorologist pay in the civilian sector is $92,000.

How does it work out for less specialized work? What would a regular "no special skills" job compare to a regular "no special skills" civilian job? (Not trolling here).

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.

Your presumption would be wrong, since when you factor in BAH, BAS, Life Insurance, and Health Insurance, my "Salary" is about $58,000. Average meteorologist pay in the civilian sector is $92,000.

"less specialized skills" in the military don't really translate to the civilian sector. An airborne infantryman doesn't really have a civilian counterpart. There's actually very few "less specialized" military jobs out there now a days, certainly nothing on par with a 7-11 job or cashier at a local store type level.

How does it work out for less specialized work? What would a regular "no special skills" job compare to a regular "no special skills" civilian job? (Not trolling here).

"less specialized skills" in the military don't really translate to the civilian sector. An airborne infantryman doesn't really have a civilian counterpart. There's actually very few "less specialized" military jobs out there now a days, certainly nothing on par with a 7-11 job or cashier at a local store type level. Considering that Lynndie England would be one of the closest things to "less specialized" that the military has, you can understand why we would take umbrage with Imnewherewheresthebathroom's comment. Most 19 year olds can't create international incidents and severely damage a war-effort.

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.

Your presumption would be wrong, since when you factor in BAH, BAS, Life Insurance, and Health Insurance, my "Salary" is about $58,000. Average meteorologist pay in the civilian sector is $92,000.

How does it work out for less specialized work? What would a regular "no special skills" job compare to a regular "no special skills" civilian job? (Not trolling here).

Such as Infantry? I couldn't tell you. The closest thing to "unspecialized" work we have in the Air Force is the guys who sit at the gym and hand out basketballs, and even they can spin that to decent paying jobs on the outside. I honestly couldn't tell you with authority how the counterparts are, but I've got friends who worked as sheet metal maintainers getting jobs at Boeing for $60k before benefits. Another friend whose retiring from a more specialized maintenance job getting job offers in the 100k range.

 djones520 wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Or feeds you, even? I knew a girl who worked at 7-11 and she most certainly was not fed by 7-11.

That is part of our salary. Just as the housing, healthcare, etc is...

The salary that I make $30,000 less then my average civilian counterpart.

Presumably your civilian counterpart's pay doesn't include housing, food, a clothing allowance, a pension after 20 years, and healthcare for life, either? You say you make less, but those perks add up, too - I wonder how comparable it actually is if you work all of that out.

Your presumption would be wrong, since when you factor in BAH, BAS, Life Insurance, and Health Insurance, my "Salary" is about $58,000. Average meteorologist pay in the civilian sector is $92,000.

How does it work out for less specialized work? What would a regular "no special skills" job compare to a regular "no special skills" civilian job? (Not trolling here).

Such as Infantry? I couldn't tell you. The closest thing to "unspecialized" work we have in the Air Force is the guys who sit at the gym and hand out basketballs, and even they can spin that to decent paying jobs on the outside. I honestly couldn't tell you with authority how the counterparts are, but I've got friends who worked as sheet metal maintainers getting jobs at Boeing for $60k before benefits. Another friend whose retiring from a more specialized maintenance job getting job offers in the 100k range.

I've got friends with airframe & powerplant licenses which would command 6 figures on the outside working for 50k a year in the army. One of the strengths of a military job is the fact that they can and will mold you into a preofessional. Taking an 18-19 year old and giving him a weapon that in the civilian sector would be labeled a weapon of mass destruction and trusting him to use it correctly warrants a little more pay than your average 7-11 clerk.

I remember when this thread was about Bieber and the ensuing schadenfreude from his DUI.

Is the retirement worth staying in for? Do your 20(?) years to retire from and then work for the civilian side after that?

What's a Beiber?

 Ahtman wrote:
I remember when this thread was about Bieber and the ensuing schadenfreude from his DUI.

hush now, somehow this is Obama/Zimmerman/the Mainsteam Media's fault.

It's a better subject now than it started out with.

 d-usa wrote:
Is the retirement worth staying in for? Do your 20(?) years to retire from and then work for the civilian side after that?

I went active duty when I was 17. I'll retire at 37, with plenty of time for a follow up career.

As long as some asshats in Congress don't push through the axe to our pensions like they've tried recently, I'll get 50% of my pay (averaged from the final 3 years of service), and access to Tricare for the rest of my life (which I do have to pay for, but only something like $30 a month).

In today's political climate of axe the military first, who knows how long it'll remain like that. To me though, that is worth staying in for, and it's why even though I've spent the last 5.5 years eating a gak sandwich, I'm sticking it out. I've got 8 years to go, and while I can't say I have anything close to the enthusiasm to serve that I did a decade ago, now I've just gotta keep pushing it out for that pension.

Hes just doing this to change his terrible image from girly boy to bad boy obviously... hes just one big real life troll

He's certainly following a Lohan-esque trajectory. How long before Oprah?