Tracking Bailout Bill

From Thursday’s Congressional Record page S5604:

At the request of Mr. BROWN, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. COONS) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2254, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create a Pension Rehabilitation Trust Fund, to establish a Pension Rehabilitation Administration within the Department of the Treasury to make loans to multiemployer defined benefit plans, and for other purposes.

Coons is a Democrat so it is not major news and govtrack.us gives S. 2254 only a “3% chance of being enacted” but the big news may be on the companion bill that has already passed the house.

Per govtrack.us H.R. 397 now has a “29% chance of being enacted”.

Presumably the two bills are identical and the Senate version still needs to pass and then some combined bill has to be signed by the president in order to be enacted. So, theoretically, both bills should have the same percentage chance of being enacted unless I am missing something that maybe someone out there can explain.

71 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on September 21, 2019 at 9:33 pm

    You are not missing anything I can see. However, tell me is this bill good for pensioners in your opinion? Please reply.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on September 21, 2019 at 10:01 pm

      Sucks for taxpayers (who should NOT be paying for this BAILOUT ….. not a LOAN), but certainly is a “plus” for the Plan participants who might otherwise lose benefit amounts in excess of the PBGC guarantees.

      Reply

    • It is obviously good for pensioners who have had or will have their pensions cut otherwise.

      The problems are for those who will be paying those pensions that would otherwise not be paid and ‘unintended’ consequences. Why would a union negotiating with a company to come into their multiemployer
      plan not low-ball costs knowing that there is someone else to pay part of the tab when necessary?

      Reply

      • Posted by skip3house on September 22, 2019 at 3:24 am

        Sure seems natural to feel for the workers being shorted from what they were promised, but I hope some also have separate savings realizing the promises might be exaggerated after realizing old ‘you get what you pay for…’.
        For future/too late now of course….Have to print/track actual individual pension value (audited) on each pay stub….easiest with 401 type.

        Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 11:20 am

        “I hope some also have separate savings…”

        Very few, I’d bet. Their experience told them they were doing the right thing, the smart thing. For years, they watched their co-workers retire successfully. It was taken for granted. Until 2007. For those (of us) earning average wages, or less, it was payday to payday, saving or investing was a non-starter. I have known very few, perhaps one out of fifty, in that income range to “put savings first” and follow through.

        After the last child moved out, we managed to start an IRA (5% of wages). If necessary, we could live off that IRA for… months, unless the next “greatest recession” wipes us out again. (a good chunk of the IRA already went to a new roof and extensive termite damage.)

        Andrew Biggs has written several articles explaining that there is no “retirement crisis”, and most people are more prepared than we think. Part of that reasoning is that, below a certain income, “savings” is not even recommended. My father retired at 62 after a heart attack and lived on Social Security alone (with the help of eight children). I still have three sisters living on SS. Two with paid off houses, and one without. (Also with help from their kids.)

        It is said that 401(k)s work best for those with over $200,000 income, but everything works better with $200,000 income.

        I am confident that, even if my pension is cut (and/or SS cut), in the next decade I will get by.

        Nothing I have said here means I agree that taxpayers should bail out union retirees. Nothing says they shouldn’t.

        Just saying don’t blame the victim.

        Reply

        • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 1:05 pm

          Just saying don’t blame the victim.
          I blame the troll that wrote this sewage ^^^
          🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

          Reply

          • I agree with Rex, I fully expect PFRS to be there for me. However, in the extremely unlikely event that the plan goes belly up, I max out my 457, max out 2 Roth IRA and will pay off a 15 year mortgage. How do I do that. 1) live within my means and 2) take all the OT I can.
            If the 457 and pension plan all go belly up, that’s what I have my Glock for. Cause I’ll need it….,cause the whole damn country will need to hit reset and my family’s safety at that point will be Paramount.

          • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 6:15 pm

            NO ONE that retires, at any age, should be paying a mortgage/trust deed off. Your home should be PAID off at or before retirement. It is, by far, the biggest living expense. If you have no housing payment you can basically sell grapes on the street corner and be able to survive. I paid off my mine years ago.🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

          • Posted by NJ2AZ on September 22, 2019 at 8:43 pm

            Rex: this is a big proportion of my plan.

            I put just enough of my pay into a 401k to get the maximum company match, and pretty much all my extra money goes towards the mortgage. Should own the house outright by the time i’m 40 or so. at that point, i would have to completely crap the bed to not be able to make enough to get by.

          • Posted by Anonymous on September 23, 2019 at 12:39 am

            What about all those folks who never owned a home?

          • I agree guys. I’ll have mine paid off right about when I retire. Maybe one year later. I could have paid it off sooner however, with a interest rate of 2.75%, I see no real urgency to pay it off as opposed to investing the extra $$ I would use to pay off in the market intstead with the idea that I would make more than 2.75 and still keep the write off. That said I refinance when I did an addition in 2011 and took out a 15 yr.
            I max on a 457 and 2 Roth and 2 529 plans(not max there of course).
            I feel I am better off putting the dough in there. And just paying until 2026 on the mortgage

          • Posted by NJ2AZ on September 23, 2019 at 1:54 pm

            you might be right El G. Personally i am very risk averse. Paying off my house at 4% or so (i’ve done the math, a refi won’t really save me any money with my accelerated payoff schedule) is more appealing to me than carrying the debt and hoping i earn more than 4% in the market. I really expect a big down turn in the next 5 years and i’d rather know i own a house outright than have a bunch of stocks worth junk.

            and if i’m wrong, then i still own a house. Much less upside, but also much less downside with my approach.

          • Posted by stanley on September 23, 2019 at 2:06 pm

            “…with a interest rate of 2.75%, I see no real urgency to pay it off as opposed to investing the extra $$..”

            I wouldn’t recommend paying it off early. To some extent, it represents a hedge against the inflation that is coming. There is a good chance that sooner or later interest rates will spike. We either go into a catastrophic inflation or interest rates have to spike and maybe some of both. If interest rates spike, there is a good chance that lenders will offer substantial discounts to pay low yielding mortgages early.

            In your situation, you have extremely low default risk.

          • @AZ. When the stocks are worth junk( in reality cheap) is when you buy lots more. lol

          • Posted by NJ2AZ on September 23, 2019 at 3:32 pm

            @E agreed re: buying when they are at junk prices.

            My concern now is most things are overvalued.

          • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 23, 2019 at 9:42 pm

            If interest rates spike, there is a good chance that lenders will offer substantial discounts to pay low yielding mortgages early.
            I have never, ever seen any lender do this. Not saying it doesn’t/won’t happen, but I have never seen it personally and I am a very experienced in RE .. If interest rates are low, there is no need to pay off the house, but me personally, I would do it, just so I don’t have to worry about it. There is no telling what the future can bring. Unemployment makes house payments impossible, no matter what the interest rate is.🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

          • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 23, 2019 at 9:46 pm

            @AZ. When the stocks are worth junk( in reality cheap) is when you buy lots more. lol
            My Mom wanted to buy Apple stock back in the early 1990’s when it was $5-$7/share. I begged her NOT to, as they were certainly going to file BK, and soon. I talked her out of it. Long story short, Apple was 3-4 months away from BK and Jobs came back, and did the biggest business turn-around in US history, taking Apple from close to BK to the biggest company in the world (for a time). I still cannot believe it. Needless to say, Mom tried to kill me… 🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

  2. Posted by stanley on September 22, 2019 at 8:48 am

    “So, theoretically, both bills should have the same percentage chance of being enacted…”

    Not exactly. Of course the House will pass the Butch Lewis Act; the democrats are in charge there. Brown says that he is working with Portman to get a bill that can pass the Senate and I assume that means some change from what is reported out of committee in the House. (Not quite so foolish.) Chuck Grassley has much control over what is voted on in the the Finance committee and hopefully he knows what a tar baby this amounts to. Push comes to shove, the Government couldn’t come close to performing on half of the promises that it presently has on the books. It’s liabilities and contingent liabilities are already staggering.

    And, what’s the rush? Heck! They won’t run out of money for another three, four years. And every concerned party is already budgeting for diminished pension income unless they are totally brain dead.

    The country and the world is already way beyond its credit limit. Bailing out the MEP PBGC would amount to serious luxury. Butch Lewis is more of the hair of the dog that bit us.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 9:22 am

      Quoting ……………

      “Bailing out the MEP PBGC would amount to serious luxury.”

      AND ……… would set a terrible precedent for the many seriously underfunded PUBLIC Sector State & Local Pension Plans sure to become insolvent over the next decade.

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 12:21 pm

      According to some, there may be a better justification for bailing out public pensions than private.

      “While citizens of states that are particularly hard-hit by the pension crisis may be able to escape to other states, an acceleration of this demographic phenomenon would leave a dwindling taxpayer base behind in the states facing the largest liabilities. This would increase the likelihood of a federal taxpayer bailout in which taxpayers in all states would bear the burden of the states in default. The problem of state and local pension liabilities is therefore a problem for all US taxpayers, not just those in the states with the largest deficits.”

      Joshua Rauh

      It is a national problem.

      Reply

      • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 1:08 pm

        According to some, there may be a better justification for bailing out public pensions than private.
        “Some” ??You mean PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. Stop it, I am dying from the laughter of your comment…🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

        Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 2:11 pm

        Nah, MOOCHERS should not be “bailed out”.

        Reply

    • Posted by PS Drone on September 22, 2019 at 3:11 pm

      As the Russian comic used to say– “what a country!!” $22 Trillion in recognized debt, another $100 Trillion or so in unrecorded future net liabilities and our beloved legislators can somehow conjure up a huge slush fund to backstop union, and later, public sector pensions? Congress not only has no shame, they completely lack any rational thought process with respect to the country’s outrageous fiscal condition. A total joke.

      Reply

    • I thought this was the model for perfection!!!!

      Doesn’t work so well when the economy good and the private employers(same as the public ones) have trouble retaining workers for poor pay.

      Can’t blame the moochers for this one can ya?

      Btw. Pats cover today. The Brown saga won’t really effect them against the JV squad

      Reply

      • Posted by stanley on September 22, 2019 at 11:20 am

        “Can’t blame the moochers for this one can ya?”

        They would have been far better off to go with one year contracts to tide them over until this falsified economy comes to an end. Printing money can create an enjoyable party but the hangover can be rather unpleasant. To think that we can endlessly print money and party on just won’t happen. (Isn’t that just like government management not to be up to speed on how to deal with this?) Throw the baby out with the bath water, I declare! The newbies will be sure to vote for the PTB at city hall.

        Chowiing down at the government trough has its disadvantages. It relieves the requirement to understand and deal with what is happening in the economy.

        Reply

        • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 1:10 pm

          To think that we can endlessly print money and party on just won’t happen. (Isn’t that just like government management not to be up to speed on how to deal with this?
          When this party ends America is going to have the biggest hang over of its life.. Will make the 1929 depression look like a picnic.🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

          Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 11:38 am

      As I recall, a major reason for Sandy Springs breaking off from Atlanta was that the Sandy Springs area was a —very— high income enclave, and they didn’t like subsidizing the poverty, parks, and problems of the common folk in the city (where most of the SS folk probably earned their higher incomes.)

      Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 2:15 pm

      I was aware of that change. My guess is that the current administration is more amenable (than past ones) to caving in to the Unions. They’ll be sorry in the long run.

      More “employees”, but I don’t believe they went back to DB Pension for city employees.

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 3:00 pm

      “Full-time City employees receive a contribution of 12 percent of their annual salary into a 401(a) from the City of Sandy
      Springs beginning the first of the month following one month of employment.
      Retirement planning is one of the most important financial decisions we make. In addition to the City contributions to the 401(a),
      you can defer 1 up to 100 percent of your salary into the 457(b) plan. The City will match dollar-for-dollar the first 5 percent of the
      amount you defer into this plan.”

      Not a DB, but up to 17 percent is substantial.

      Butt…

      Like the man says, It is —still— invalid to compare pensions outside the context of total compensation.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 4:00 pm

        17% would pay for about 1/3 of El gaupo’s pension……and CA’s Police pensions are much richer.

        Reply

        • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 6:19 pm

          …and CA’s Police pensions are much richer.
          Using a REAL discount rate of 4%-6% the REAL/TRUE cost of a 3%@50 pension exceeds the base cash salary.

          Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 10:35 pm

          That’s incredible!

          As in not credible.

          Please show your math.

          Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on September 23, 2019 at 10:07 am

          Dog,

          With the current 7 percent discount rate, normal cost for CHP 3%@50 pensions is 31 percent of pay, of which half will be paid by employees under the latest contract.

          Where do you get your “cost exceeds the base cash salary.” claim?

          Reply

          • Posted by Tough Love on September 23, 2019 at 10:38 am

            Stephen,

            I just ran some numbers” for CA’s 3%@50.

            Inputs:

            Hired at age 22
            Retires at age 52 (after 30 years)
            Salary pattern…… annual 4% increase (total from all sources)
            Dies at age 83
            COLA increases @ 3%
            Pension as % of final wages is 90%
            Final wages are $100,000, but this input does NOT effect the results

            Results, for the fund accumulation during the working years to be exhausted to zero at the time of death:

            The 31% total contributions would require an assumed investments rate of 6.86%.

            If that 6.86% rate were dropped to 3% which is consistent with the latest FTSE Pension Liability Index (the source for Moody’s liability discount rate), the total annual contribution would rise from 31% of wages to 97.7% of wages.

          • Posted by Tough Love on September 23, 2019 at 10:50 am

            Follow-up to my above comment………..

            Because I’m quite sure your will laugh at the 97.7% contribution required under the 3% investment return assumption, you should be aware that CalPERS uses a termination discount rate of about 2.75 percent.

            You see, when (under a Plan termination) CalPERS takes on the prospective investment “risk” (and can no longer IGNORE that risk because they can no longer force taxpayers to pay more if things go badly) they are no longer flippant about using assumptions such as 7%.

          • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 23, 2019 at 10:55 am

            With the current 7 percent discount rate, normal cost for CHP 3%@50 pensions is 31 percent of pay,
            Dougie, put your crack pipe DOWN.
            #1- Using the 7% discount rate the 3%@50 pensions cost 60% of base salary, using a 4%-6% it is over 100% of base salary.
            #2- NO employee in CA pays MORE than 14% of their base salary to pensions, NO ONE. Most pay FAR less
            #3- NO trough feeder public employee pays ANYTHING towards the unfunded liability costs. Nothing. Nada. Zero.
            BAM!!!!!
            Double BAM BAM!!!!!

          • Posted by Anonymous on September 23, 2019 at 11:07 am

            Thanks for the math. COLAs are the lower of CPI or 2 percent.

            I am fairly sure the dog got his disinformation from the fact that a few cities are actually contributing over one hundred percent due to amortization costs, which are often higher than the normal cost.

          • Posted by Tough Love on September 23, 2019 at 11:21 am

            Substituting a 2% COLA for my original input of 3% changes my results as follows:

            The 6.86% inv. return (assuming a 31% contribution) becomes 6.45%

            The 97.7% contribution requirement (assuming a 3% inv. return) becomes 84.7%

          • Posted by Anonymous on September 23, 2019 at 12:47 pm

            Thanks again.

            The normal cost for CHP PEPRA members (About 25% of members) is 23.6 percent of pay. The blended rate is 29.9 percent. The current employee contribution is 11.5 percent, increasing to 14.5 percent in 2022.

            I don’t know what the payment is on the unfunded liability. Probably more than the normal cost.

            https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4089

          • Posted by Tough Love on September 23, 2019 at 3:12 pm

            Stephen,

            In case you were still looking for El gaupo’s #s………

            Inputs:

            Hired at age 25
            Retires at age 50 (after 25 years)
            Salary pattern…… annual 4% increase (total from all sources)
            Dies at age 83
            COLA increases @ 0% (hopefully they will NEVER be reinstated but see below)
            Pension (as % of final wages) is 65%
            Final wages are $100,000, but this input does NOT effect the results

            Results, for the fund accumulation during the working years to be exhausted to zero at the time of death (i.e., the Normal Cost).

            Using the 3% Inv, Rate which is consistent with the latest FTSE Pension Liability Index (the source for Moody’s liability discount rate), the total level annual contribution as a %-of-wages would need to be 56.7%.

            And, if his COLA (assumed to be the same 2%) were reinstated upon his retirement, that 56.7% would rise to 75.2%.

          • Posted by Anonymous on September 23, 2019 at 4:56 pm

            What was his normal cost in 1995-99, when he first started his job?

            Twenty year T-bill rates.

            What would it be when he retires in five years, if rates raise to 6-7 percent?

      • Posted by geo8rge on September 23, 2019 at 8:22 am

        Maybe SS Ga is being clever. Hire retired early union firefighters, who are getting pension and healthcare from someone else, and pay them somewhat more in cash upfront. I cannot find a link confirming that, but I noticed on their career website they mention health savings accounts but not health insurance. But they do mention the 17% matching.

        http://www.sandyspringsga.gov/public-safety/fire-rescue/about-ssfr/careers-with-ssfr

        It is also possible that they have fewer firemen than other communities. “The department currently employs 116 full-time and five part-time personnel, operating from five fire stations with state of the art equipment.” Part-time employees might imply fully pensioned and health insured early retirees from other communities. State of the art equipment implies they are allocating money to capital rather than labor (pay and benefits).

        On the issue of privatization, It looks to me that SS Ga is ‘firing’ their management company.

        The management company was CH2M Hill which was acquired by jacobs engineering in 2017. It is possible Jacobs overestimated their ability to increase prices when they acquired CH2M. Which is to say de-privatization might be a temporary negotiating tactic.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CH2M_Hill

        Reply

        • That’s not really being clever. The place would be a training ground. You would have to think the average career of a retired FF in sandy springs would be about 5 years max. Sandy springs is not a town of 5,000 people. It is a bigger city. It takes awhile to learn everything there.
          The reality is that they were wealthy people used to getting their asses wiped but no longer wanting to pay for it. When the economy started getting good, the private sector employees they hired stopped wiping them. They didn’t know what to do, so they hired career employees again to wipe them during good times and bad. Fact.

          Reply

          • Posted by geo8rge on September 23, 2019 at 9:22 am

            “The place would be a training ground.” My guess is that they are hiring retired firefighters, very likely local firefighters, and even higher rank firefighters, who worked in areas similar to SS Ga. ‘State of the Art’ equipment is possibly more user-friendly and has better technical support. It is possible that in SS Ga local housing is torn down and replaced by newer safer housing, and there are no abandoned buildings and other fire hazards. Non fire hazards in SS Ga might also be less due to better traffic engineering ect.

            My guess is that SS needs to pay market rates for firefighters, but they are able to transfer some employee costs like healthcare to previous employers and they use that money saved in part to pay a higher cash salary and provide a better working environment, state of the art equipment possibly attracting more productive firefighters.

  3. Posted by Marine1 on September 22, 2019 at 11:02 am

    Kind of reminds me of when Congress bailed out all the banks except this is much,much,much smaller and I’m certain for a better group of people.

    Reply

    • Posted by stanley on September 22, 2019 at 11:23 am

      And just what was the lesson of Canute the Great, prey tell?

      Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on September 22, 2019 at 12:37 pm

      Different question, same answer.

      According to some, there may be a better justification for bailing out public pensions than private.

      “While citizens of states that are particularly hard-hit by the pension crisis may be able to escape to other states, an acceleration of this demographic phenomenon would leave a dwindling taxpayer base behind in the states facing the largest liabilities. This would increase the likelihood of a federal taxpayer bailout in which taxpayers in all states would bear the burden of the states in default. The problem of state and local pension liabilities is therefore a problem for all US taxpayers, not just those in the states with the largest deficits.”

      Joshua Rauh

      It is a national problem.

      Reply

      • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 2:18 pm

        Repeating ………. MOOCHERS should not be “bailed out”.

        Reply

        • This one will NOT need to be bailed out. We BOTH know that. And your answer to the Sandy
          Springs question was weak. Even for you. It didn’t work out. Nothing to do witb a pro union council. Such bullshit from a woman who can NEVER admit that she was wrong!!!!! Article specifically said it was a result of increasing costs due to a great (read:Trump) economy. Nothing in there whatsoever would lead a reader to think that a pro union council would be elected in that city!!! And that they would reverse the attempt to privatize everything. The costs don’t change.
          You try to bait me with stories of cops screwing up….but I’m man enough and indeed human enough to agree with you that those guys deserve the discipline that they received. I don’t defend them.
          You are way off here. Grasping at straws. Like these dopes who think the economy is on the brink. Yea they e been saying that since the recession ended. Sooner or later we will have another. Set $$ aside in good times and you’ll be fine.
          You’re really a shallow, at times rather jealous and petty individual TL. No proof that unions had anything at all to do with that.

          Reply

    • Posted by PS Drone on September 23, 2019 at 11:56 am

      I may be confused, but I think the bailed-out banks actually paid the government back. Fat chance these pension plans will pay any “bailout” back. You can’t “pay” unfunded liabilities by borrowing money to do so. Only idiots and the public sector would think that you can. Pardon the redundancy.

      Reply

  4. You should be charged with a “hate crime”. “Lol”

    My exclamation points drive home a “point” that I am a winner. While you are a “whiner”

    My comments are “direct”. No “confusion” as to what a “alternate” meaning might be due to “your” overuse of quotes.

    As you say “I don’t “deserve” my pension”
    See the outer quotes are just fine. I am QUOTING you. You think I don’t deserve my pension…just say that without the quotes. lol. Actually gets the “point” across better. I’ll even throw in an emoji for you 🙄
    I notice you don’t chastise your puppy dog when he uses them. 🐶 🦴 etc.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on September 22, 2019 at 6:06 pm

      No El gaupo, you’re not a winner, just the recipient of the ill-gotten gains of a racketeering arrangement between your Union ( OK, your “Association” if that makes you feel better) and self-interested, contribution-soliciting, vote-selling, taxpayer-betraying Elected Officials.

      Hopefully, there will be a comeuppance, and Taxpayers will reclaim those illgotten gains.

      Reply

      • Posted by stanley on September 22, 2019 at 6:53 pm

        I believe that you can make book on that one. (Hopefully, there will be a comeuppance) If anything was ever baked in the cake, that one is.

        Reply

        • Reminds me of a line from an oldie….sing it with me…..”dream dream dreee-am…..dreeeeeaam”
          Lol. You both know barring an early death, I will collect about $4M if I leave at 54 and live to about 87.
          And one thing I wish for you both (and all on here)is to live to be 100 and healthy.
          The numbers for PFRS don’t back your “hopes” up. Lol. See what I did. No, and I repeat, NO politician is going to cut pensions of retired cops. S5 will prevent it. Again, TL even you have said that I will probably be paid in full being so close to retirement. Lol.
          And by the way, I am a winner baby. One hour with me and you’d never criticize my pension again. You’d be an advocate of the amazing E. I have that effect on folks. I’m a lover, not a hater. Like you.

          Reply

    • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 22, 2019 at 6:25 pm

      🐶 🦴
      EG, those copyrighted and protected emoji trademarks, you cannot use them without my express written permission 🙂
      🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴

      Reply

      • Haha. Okay. I will immediately cease and desist. 😑😑

        Reply

        • I see you finally told me, indirectly, through your owner, what state you live in. Oh well, no coffee and bagels Rex.
          Maybe you just settle for her pulling your choke collar and you can try to auto erotic asphyxiate yourself without going David Carridine on us.

          Reply

          • Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog! on September 23, 2019 at 5:53 pm

            I see you finally told me, indirectly, through your owner, what state you live in.
            LOL…Rex has no “owner” … It has also been rumored that Rex is a champion Surf Puppy 🐶🐶🐶🦴🦴🦴 NJ has good surf too, and Rex would love to visit some day … 🙂

          • Come the great beaches. Stay for the high taxes. 😛

  5. I think I read in Insider NJ today that 2300 public sector jobs were created this year? Wow I guess NJ’s economy is humming…not to mention the sanctuary residents who are taking not giving. With companies leaving and private folks not far behind I do wonder who will pay the bills?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: