Skiles and Age 65+

///AMG said:
haha fair enough. Love viper guys, especially retired O-6 viper guys. I think they have made a really good name for themselves :)

It is for this reason that I only talk about mil flying if specifically asked. Better for them to just think I'm an idiot, rather than to think I'm an idiot and also an a hole. Happy to talk about it if someone is interested, or has questions, but honestly, it is much more interesting hearing about the flying that I don't know about (if we're talking flying). We have some pretty interesting backgrounds at my shop. Flew not too long ago with someone who flew DC-8's.....thats really cool. Or some guys who flew as FE's in the 727. Or any number of really random types of lesser size, but more complexity of flying.
Click to expand...
Nah, dude, you can absolutely talk about the mil flying. I may be a bit more worked up on this than I’d normally be. The last three months I’m about 50/50 working with guys that ONLY talk about how awesome their military flying was or completely not giving a • about anything I had to say.
 
Richman said:
Back in the day I'd use a "By your command" in a flat, monotone voice, and it was similarly not received well.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
lostplanetairman said:
But the second statement has always irked me. Things change all the time for valid reasons. It’s life. To say that a rule or system or law or anything should remain because that’s the way we always did it is without merit to me.
Click to expand...

If you can make things better for everyone (or even most people) then I agree. Changing the retirement age benefits those at the very top who, being frozen in place for X years has no detriment. For everyone else, especially those that don't want to utilize those extra years at the end, it's a huge negative to be frozen in place due to no (or minimized) retirements.
 
BobDDuck said:
They aren't honest. They test for mental degradation. And until they do (and start knocking out tons of guys in their early 50s as collateral), I think I'll stick with the system we have.



Trust me... I do. But Skiles (and everybody else) signed up to play the game with a set of rules. You don't get to change the rules (and screw over everybody else) just because it suddenly benefits you.
Click to expand...
Wow! If that's your argument, then I want to hear your "arguments" on every single new "advancement" in tech, biology, chemistry, etc, etc, etc. I also want to hear your analysis of how the Dodd/Frank Act proscriptions/prescriptions on Banking "changed" due to lobbying by, well, you know, people you had a vested interest in making it change.
EVERYTHING changes! ALL the time!
The ONLY proper way to craft or change a law is based SOLEY on NEW FACTUAL DISCOVERY and INTELLECTUAL CONSISTENCY. By your logic... Well, we never went to the moon before... So OBVIOUSLY, we never should have. Nobody 60 years ago signed up to go for the moon.

This is NOT a contractual issue, my friend. This is a competency issue.

And... as Forest Gump said, "Competency IS as competency DOES." (Okay, I'm paraphrasing...)
 
Last edited:
BobDDuck said:
I understand none of this.
Click to expand...
Ok, I understand.
I've already comported myself to a world in which ostensibly "educated" folks are incapable of basic reading...
Next...

...and also, GOAPHAGFY!

But, to be decent and proactive, let me repeat...
This is NOT a contractual issue. This is a competency issue. It really would be nice to get back on point.

You're feeling sleepy. Very, very sleepy. Focus on the contractual vs competency...
When I snap my fingers, you're going to wake up and feel refreshed.
 
Last edited:
ASpilot2be said:
Nobody does. He's been banned multiple times. He's an idiot.
Click to expand...
You too.

Read. Focus. Apply your focus. Think. Connect dots. Etc.

And also, GOAPHAGFY.

Ooooh! Look at dat! I made a new internet abbr. And YOU just don't understand it. Good for you.
 
Last edited:
BobDDuck said:
If you can make things better for everyone (or even most people) then I agree. Changing the retirement age benefits those at the very top who, being frozen in place for X years has no detriment. For everyone else, especially those that don't want to utilize those extra years at the end, it's a huge negative to be frozen in place due to no (or minimized) retirements.
Click to expand...
You totally missed my point.
 
BobDDuck said:
If you can make things better for everyone (or even most people) then I agree. Changing the retirement age benefits those at the very top who, being frozen in place for X years has no detriment. For everyone else, especially those that don't want to utilize those extra years at the end, it's a huge negative to be frozen in place due to no (or minimized) retirements.
Click to expand...
You ARE making all better by allowing ALL to act in accordance with their competency... REGARDLESS of AGE!

Just FYI. Those grocery store "sell by" dates have nothing to do with the wholesomeness of the food product being sold. You get that, RIAAAAGHT???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top