Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
Deficit Reduction, avoiding the fiscal cliff, bending the spending curve, and having Americans pay their fair share of taxes are all measured in terms of how they affect the total increases (or decreases ) in annual deficit spending over the next 10 years.
One Trillion Dollars in military related defense spending cuts are coming over the next nine to ten years.
Even if the divided U.S. Government is unable to agree on passing anything out of Congress that can be signed by President Obama, cuts of at least One Trillion in military spending are going to happen.
Existing law, passed by both houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Obama before the election requires those cuts.
The only questions is will those One Trillion Dollars in cuts be identified by a bipartisan group of U.S. Congressman and Senators and President Obama, working together, to write new laws, or will President Obama alone, through his employees in the Defense Department, decide what is to be cut, as he blames the Republicans in Congress for refusing to avoid the cuts?
The purpose of this thread is to discuss what those cuts are likely to be given President Obama's goals and the parochial interests of each Congressman and each Senator that is likely to make up the majority that decides what cuts are to be implemented as part of a grand scheme to avoid the "Fiscal Cliff", and how the choices made will impact the coming Crisis War.
The timing of a coming Crisis war will be impacted by the political messages coming out of the United States capital as to what is planned to be cut and when, and also by the dismantling of U.S. military manufacturing capacity before the cuts take effect, in addition to the actual implementation of the cuts over a ten year period, which may never fully happen before a Crisis war begins.
One Trillion Dollars in military related defense spending cuts are coming over the next nine to ten years.
Even if the divided U.S. Government is unable to agree on passing anything out of Congress that can be signed by President Obama, cuts of at least One Trillion in military spending are going to happen.
Existing law, passed by both houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Obama before the election requires those cuts.
The only questions is will those One Trillion Dollars in cuts be identified by a bipartisan group of U.S. Congressman and Senators and President Obama, working together, to write new laws, or will President Obama alone, through his employees in the Defense Department, decide what is to be cut, as he blames the Republicans in Congress for refusing to avoid the cuts?
The purpose of this thread is to discuss what those cuts are likely to be given President Obama's goals and the parochial interests of each Congressman and each Senator that is likely to make up the majority that decides what cuts are to be implemented as part of a grand scheme to avoid the "Fiscal Cliff", and how the choices made will impact the coming Crisis War.
The timing of a coming Crisis war will be impacted by the political messages coming out of the United States capital as to what is planned to be cut and when, and also by the dismantling of U.S. military manufacturing capacity before the cuts take effect, in addition to the actual implementation of the cuts over a ten year period, which may never fully happen before a Crisis war begins.
Last edited by Reality Check on Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:21 pm, edited 4 times in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
There are many ways to Reduce Military spending over a ten year period. Both real cuts and "on paper" cuts will work for "Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff" and kicking the can down the road.
Some of the Major Ones include:
Change the U.S. Military from an all volunteer high paid military to a conscription military where only the Commissioned Officers and the upper grades of Non-Commissioned Officers are highly paid professionals. Lower enlisted, which make up the vast majority of all U.S. military services, would be paid subsistence wages typical of most military around the world. Highly paid as used here means compared to every other military in the World, they are not high paid in comparison to comparable U.S. civilian jobs.
Cut the size of the activity duty military by 100s of thousands of Soldiers, Sailors, Airman and Marines immediately.
Eliminate all Military Training exercises thus eliminating all the expenditures on fuel and maintenance parts related to training.
Bring all the troops home from overseas bases and stop sending the fleets out on patrols around the world.
Eliminate the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine reserve services and transfer their personnel to National Guard units.
Eliminate Federal subsidies for Nation Guard Unit training and transfer the full cost of the National Guard to the individual states until such time as the Guard units are called up and federalized during a National emergency.
Eliminate the construction of one, or more, major weapon systems immediately. For example any, or all, of the following: kill the building of all Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines. Kill the building of all F35 fighters. Kill the building of all Nuclear Aircraft Carries. Kill the building of all Nuclear Submarines. Kill the building of all Tanker Air Craft.
Eliminate the construction of individual ships, airplanes, tanks etc. that were scheduled to begin construction during the ten year period, but have not yet begun construction.
Stretch out the construction plans of individual ships, airplanes, tanks, et all, so that they are still promised to be built, but most of the costs of building them are moved outside the next ten years until some future year beyond ten years in the future.
Eliminate the existing military retirement system and replace it with a civilian like retirement system.
Eliminate one, or more, of the existing activity duty, medical care systems.
Move active duty military members stationed in the United States to Obamacare and eliminate most of the Military Medical System costs and the Military Medical Insurance system costs.
Move dependents of Active Duty Military Members from a the Military Health care system, and from the Military Medical Insurance Systems, to Obamacare.
Move military retirees and their families from a Military Medical Insurance System to Obamacare.
Shift more of the costs of Military Medical Care and Military Dependent Medical Care to each Military Member ( or Retired Military Member ) and his/her family.
Require by law that a future Congress do one, several, or all of the above during the ten year period, but refuse to define exactly what they are required to do.
Some of the Major Ones include:
Change the U.S. Military from an all volunteer high paid military to a conscription military where only the Commissioned Officers and the upper grades of Non-Commissioned Officers are highly paid professionals. Lower enlisted, which make up the vast majority of all U.S. military services, would be paid subsistence wages typical of most military around the world. Highly paid as used here means compared to every other military in the World, they are not high paid in comparison to comparable U.S. civilian jobs.
Cut the size of the activity duty military by 100s of thousands of Soldiers, Sailors, Airman and Marines immediately.
Eliminate all Military Training exercises thus eliminating all the expenditures on fuel and maintenance parts related to training.
Bring all the troops home from overseas bases and stop sending the fleets out on patrols around the world.
Eliminate the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine reserve services and transfer their personnel to National Guard units.
Eliminate Federal subsidies for Nation Guard Unit training and transfer the full cost of the National Guard to the individual states until such time as the Guard units are called up and federalized during a National emergency.
Eliminate the construction of one, or more, major weapon systems immediately. For example any, or all, of the following: kill the building of all Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines. Kill the building of all F35 fighters. Kill the building of all Nuclear Aircraft Carries. Kill the building of all Nuclear Submarines. Kill the building of all Tanker Air Craft.
Eliminate the construction of individual ships, airplanes, tanks etc. that were scheduled to begin construction during the ten year period, but have not yet begun construction.
Stretch out the construction plans of individual ships, airplanes, tanks, et all, so that they are still promised to be built, but most of the costs of building them are moved outside the next ten years until some future year beyond ten years in the future.
Eliminate the existing military retirement system and replace it with a civilian like retirement system.
Eliminate one, or more, of the existing activity duty, medical care systems.
Move active duty military members stationed in the United States to Obamacare and eliminate most of the Military Medical System costs and the Military Medical Insurance system costs.
Move dependents of Active Duty Military Members from a the Military Health care system, and from the Military Medical Insurance Systems, to Obamacare.
Move military retirees and their families from a Military Medical Insurance System to Obamacare.
Shift more of the costs of Military Medical Care and Military Dependent Medical Care to each Military Member ( or Retired Military Member ) and his/her family.
Require by law that a future Congress do one, several, or all of the above during the ten year period, but refuse to define exactly what they are required to do.
Last edited by Reality Check on Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
What will NOT happen if a bi-partisan coalition in Congress determines where the cuts will come from:
A coalition of very powerful Senators and Congressmen from the states of California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Virginia, Missouri, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Washington State will ensure none of the major weapon systems are killed out right.
The same coalition will make sure that none of the Military bases in their states are eliminated or have their manning substantially reduced, as this would negatively effect employment in their home state.
To avoid a reduction in the military payroll in their home states the same coalition would block the immediate adoption of a conscription military pay system in the United States.
Terminating the construction of any ship, aircraft, tank etc. that is currently being built or is scheduled to start being built would also be blocked by this bi-partisan coalition. Most of the construction of each of the major weapons systems is done in one, or more of these sates, and they stick together to protect each other.
A coalition of very powerful Senators and Congressmen from the states of California, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Virginia, Missouri, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Washington State will ensure none of the major weapon systems are killed out right.
The same coalition will make sure that none of the Military bases in their states are eliminated or have their manning substantially reduced, as this would negatively effect employment in their home state.
To avoid a reduction in the military payroll in their home states the same coalition would block the immediate adoption of a conscription military pay system in the United States.
Terminating the construction of any ship, aircraft, tank etc. that is currently being built or is scheduled to start being built would also be blocked by this bi-partisan coalition. Most of the construction of each of the major weapons systems is done in one, or more of these sates, and they stick together to protect each other.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
What WOULD happen if a bi-partisan coalition in Congress determines where the cuts will come from:
Training budgets for the Active Military would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out, claiming Hundreds of Billions in budget savings over 10 years, related to fuel costs and maintenance parts costs, when compared to what has actually been spent for fuel and maintenance over the past few years. The Beauty of these cuts is they can be claimed as ten year budgets savings, and yet emergency funding laws can be passed to restore them outside the budgeting process, or the President can be given emergency authority to re-implement training from other DOD funds. Problem is, while this might fool the voters, it will not fool the Credit Rating Agencies, they have seen these "Smoke and Mirror" non-savings, savings, year in and year out. Obama administration would likely strongly support this type of approach for the reasons discussed below.
Budgeted Monies for Fleet cruises around the world and for Air Force, Army and Marine overseas deployment exercises would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out. These cuts to Navy cruises and Military Deployment "cuts" have the same advantages and disadvantages as noted above for slashing training budgets.
Budgets for Active Duty U.S. Military permanently stationed overseas in places like Japan, Korea, Europe, Turkey and Afghanistan would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out, with the understanding that troops would be "temporarily" deployed to these locations on an "as needed" basis with no money budgeted for unknown "as needed" deployments. These cuts to "permanently" stationing U.S. Military forces overseas have the same advantages and disadvantages as noted above for slashing training budgets.
Base closings, in states that were not strongly represented in the Bi-Partisan coalition, would also be something that Bi-Partisan coalition would support.
Continued non-funding of Nuclear Weapons facility repairs and continued non-funding of Nuclear Weapons testing for reliability and continued non-funding of nuclear weapons modernization will be acceptable to the Bi-Partisan coalition, because this non-funding primarily effects the small state of Tennessee. Obama will "reluctantly" agree to break the promises Obama made to fully fund these nuclear weapons activities as part of the Senate deal to ratify OIbama's "NEW START" treaty in 2010.
Move Military Dependents to Obamacare, Move Military Retirees to Obamacare, and Move the Families of Military Retirees to Obamacare. The Bi-Partisan Coalition would go along with this if those Medical Costs were transferred from the Defense budget to the Domestic budget and were counted as part of the required One Trillion in cuts to defense. The Obama administration would agree if the Bi-Partisan Coalition also supported increases in Domestic spending to fully fund Obamacare not only for the new people moving over from the Military health care system, but also for the other things Obama was unable to fund, or just omitted funding for, for whatever reasons, when Obamacare was passed using reconciliation, rather than regular order.
The Obama administration would strongly encourage all the above "Smoke and Mirrors" cuts as part of a "grand compromise" with Congress to "avoid the Fiscal Cliff". The Obama administration would gain the advantage of being able to ignore the Congress in the future as to when an "as needed" deployment to, say, South Korea was actually needed, while the North Korean military prepared to invade South Korea. The Obama administration could also unilaterally decide if they should go to Congress for an emergency authorization to spend more money, or merely move money ( on an emergency basis ) out of accounts set aside for the military priorities of the Congress, that Obama does not share.
The "Smoke and Mirror" portion of the above "on paper" budget cuts would require the U.S. Military to come home, consolidate into fewer bases in the United States, and stay home without training for the next ten years, if the cuts were to be real, as opposed to just on paper. But the cuts would look good on paper, they would not hurt the Congressmen and Senators who voted for them back home with the voters, and they would serve the Obama administration's objectives so they are very likely to occur, on paper, as part of a grand bargain. All the above Military cuts, even if they were real, would not meet the One Trillion over 10 years reduction requirement.
Training budgets for the Active Military would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out, claiming Hundreds of Billions in budget savings over 10 years, related to fuel costs and maintenance parts costs, when compared to what has actually been spent for fuel and maintenance over the past few years. The Beauty of these cuts is they can be claimed as ten year budgets savings, and yet emergency funding laws can be passed to restore them outside the budgeting process, or the President can be given emergency authority to re-implement training from other DOD funds. Problem is, while this might fool the voters, it will not fool the Credit Rating Agencies, they have seen these "Smoke and Mirror" non-savings, savings, year in and year out. Obama administration would likely strongly support this type of approach for the reasons discussed below.
Budgeted Monies for Fleet cruises around the world and for Air Force, Army and Marine overseas deployment exercises would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out. These cuts to Navy cruises and Military Deployment "cuts" have the same advantages and disadvantages as noted above for slashing training budgets.
Budgets for Active Duty U.S. Military permanently stationed overseas in places like Japan, Korea, Europe, Turkey and Afghanistan would be zeroed out, or near zeroed out, with the understanding that troops would be "temporarily" deployed to these locations on an "as needed" basis with no money budgeted for unknown "as needed" deployments. These cuts to "permanently" stationing U.S. Military forces overseas have the same advantages and disadvantages as noted above for slashing training budgets.
Base closings, in states that were not strongly represented in the Bi-Partisan coalition, would also be something that Bi-Partisan coalition would support.
Continued non-funding of Nuclear Weapons facility repairs and continued non-funding of Nuclear Weapons testing for reliability and continued non-funding of nuclear weapons modernization will be acceptable to the Bi-Partisan coalition, because this non-funding primarily effects the small state of Tennessee. Obama will "reluctantly" agree to break the promises Obama made to fully fund these nuclear weapons activities as part of the Senate deal to ratify OIbama's "NEW START" treaty in 2010.
Move Military Dependents to Obamacare, Move Military Retirees to Obamacare, and Move the Families of Military Retirees to Obamacare. The Bi-Partisan Coalition would go along with this if those Medical Costs were transferred from the Defense budget to the Domestic budget and were counted as part of the required One Trillion in cuts to defense. The Obama administration would agree if the Bi-Partisan Coalition also supported increases in Domestic spending to fully fund Obamacare not only for the new people moving over from the Military health care system, but also for the other things Obama was unable to fund, or just omitted funding for, for whatever reasons, when Obamacare was passed using reconciliation, rather than regular order.
The Obama administration would strongly encourage all the above "Smoke and Mirrors" cuts as part of a "grand compromise" with Congress to "avoid the Fiscal Cliff". The Obama administration would gain the advantage of being able to ignore the Congress in the future as to when an "as needed" deployment to, say, South Korea was actually needed, while the North Korean military prepared to invade South Korea. The Obama administration could also unilaterally decide if they should go to Congress for an emergency authorization to spend more money, or merely move money ( on an emergency basis ) out of accounts set aside for the military priorities of the Congress, that Obama does not share.
The "Smoke and Mirror" portion of the above "on paper" budget cuts would require the U.S. Military to come home, consolidate into fewer bases in the United States, and stay home without training for the next ten years, if the cuts were to be real, as opposed to just on paper. But the cuts would look good on paper, they would not hurt the Congressmen and Senators who voted for them back home with the voters, and they would serve the Obama administration's objectives so they are very likely to occur, on paper, as part of a grand bargain. All the above Military cuts, even if they were real, would not meet the One Trillion over 10 years reduction requirement.
Last edited by Reality Check on Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
ADDITIONAL Military cuts that the Obama administration could negotiate with a Bi-Partisan coalition in Congress:
Cuts of 100s of Thousands of active duty Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines from the military, even more than have already been proposed, provided the cuts occurred, on paper, at overseas bases, or from military bases in the United States being downsized or closed, and located in states other than those making up the core of the Bi-Partisan Coalition. As long as the active duty military permanently stationed in the core states making up the Bi-Partisan coalition increased or stayed the same, at least on paper; then decreases in the size of the overall military would be agreeable to the Bi-Partisan coalition.
Delays in the start of construction of individual ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, etc of a few years could be negotiated by Obama. As long as the Senators and Congressman could show they saved those jobs related to building those ships at the manufacturing plants within their home state, and they had a commitment from the President that all those ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, etc. would be built, someday.
Authorization for the Obama Administration to "reform" and "modernize" the "military retirement system" and the "military medical system", provided "long time" current active duty military members would not be "too negatively impacted" by the changes. The Congress and the President could agree that the Obama Administration would implement reforms saving tens of Billions of dollars, over ten years, without actually identifying what the reforms would be.
The Obama administration would agree to very modest delays in the on paper military construction schedules in exchange for Congress granting the Obama administration the legal authority and the flexibility for the Obama administration to "renegotiate construction costs and construction schedules" with the military construction contractors if it were necessary for the President to divert funds from construction accounts on an emergency basis to cover unforeseen training costs or unforeseen deployment costs.
Cuts of 100s of Thousands of active duty Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines from the military, even more than have already been proposed, provided the cuts occurred, on paper, at overseas bases, or from military bases in the United States being downsized or closed, and located in states other than those making up the core of the Bi-Partisan Coalition. As long as the active duty military permanently stationed in the core states making up the Bi-Partisan coalition increased or stayed the same, at least on paper; then decreases in the size of the overall military would be agreeable to the Bi-Partisan coalition.
Delays in the start of construction of individual ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, etc of a few years could be negotiated by Obama. As long as the Senators and Congressman could show they saved those jobs related to building those ships at the manufacturing plants within their home state, and they had a commitment from the President that all those ships, submarines, aircraft, tanks, etc. would be built, someday.
Authorization for the Obama Administration to "reform" and "modernize" the "military retirement system" and the "military medical system", provided "long time" current active duty military members would not be "too negatively impacted" by the changes. The Congress and the President could agree that the Obama Administration would implement reforms saving tens of Billions of dollars, over ten years, without actually identifying what the reforms would be.
The Obama administration would agree to very modest delays in the on paper military construction schedules in exchange for Congress granting the Obama administration the legal authority and the flexibility for the Obama administration to "renegotiate construction costs and construction schedules" with the military construction contractors if it were necessary for the President to divert funds from construction accounts on an emergency basis to cover unforeseen training costs or unforeseen deployment costs.
Last edited by Reality Check on Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
Industrial capacity to produce military equipment would be immediately impacted by cuts of this scope and this type.
Defense contractors would merge and close redundant facilities.
The work force would be downsized and competition would be eliminated.
It would cost substantially more per ship/airplane/tank to produce fewer ships, airplanes and tanks.
Building fewer units over a longer period of time requires less capacity.
Defense contractors would merge and close redundant facilities.
The work force would be downsized and competition would be eliminated.
It would cost substantially more per ship/airplane/tank to produce fewer ships, airplanes and tanks.
Building fewer units over a longer period of time requires less capacity.
Last edited by Reality Check on Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
Obama would have the unilateral option of delaying construction of military equipment even longer than Congress expressly agreed to, and renegotiating contracts to require consolidation of defense contractors and elimination of "excess capacity" in the defense manufacturing sector, all in the name of saving money. The U.S. ability to build ships, submarines and aircraft can be permanently downsized in the next year or two.
The military can be downsized by simply retiring ships, aircraft and tanks on schedule while at the same time delaying the construction of replacement ships, aircraft and tanks. All of this would be at Obama's sole option.
The U.S. Navy is already the smallest the Navy has been in nearly 100 years ( before World War ONE, was the last time the Navy was substantially smaller ).
The U.S. Air Force, created 65 years ago, has never, ever, been as small as it is today.
If Obama's intent is to further downsize the U.S. Military, by massive attrition, in a manner Congress never expressly authorized, Obama will have the legal authority, and the opportunity, to do so in the next year or two.
The military can be downsized by simply retiring ships, aircraft and tanks on schedule while at the same time delaying the construction of replacement ships, aircraft and tanks. All of this would be at Obama's sole option.
The U.S. Navy is already the smallest the Navy has been in nearly 100 years ( before World War ONE, was the last time the Navy was substantially smaller ).
The U.S. Air Force, created 65 years ago, has never, ever, been as small as it is today.
If Obama's intent is to further downsize the U.S. Military, by massive attrition, in a manner Congress never expressly authorized, Obama will have the legal authority, and the opportunity, to do so in the next year or two.
Last edited by Reality Check on Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 1441
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:07 pm
Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
The signals this "Kick the Can down the Road" budgeting process will send to Allies and Potential Enemies alike will be profound.
The fact that Obama will agree to the Congress zeroing out Military deployments and Military Training in the Budget process, even if Congress is just playing "Smoke and Mirrors" budget games, will strike fear in the hearts of U.S. allies.
The fact that Congress is signalling that the U.S. no longer plans to station trip-wire troops in Korea, Japan, Europe and other places on a 24x7 basis, but instead, on an "as needed" basis, in whatever manner Obama chooses to interpret that, will have allies considering looking for new allies, or becoming non-aligned.
China, will correctly identify that the U.S. role in the Pacific, as in the rest of the world, is declining, not increasing.
Ironically, China might actually delay starting a crisis war to give the U.S. more time to eliminate military production capacity, and to give the U.S. time to finish downsizing the Ground Based, Underground Silo based, portion of U.S. Strategic deterrent, and to give the U.S. time to fully retire ( and cut into pieces ) the largest aircraft carrier in the World.
China may also wish to allow themselves more time to press the major diplomatic advantage they will gain from the U.S. announcing to the world a greatly diminished future U.S. presence in the world.
The fact that Obama will agree to the Congress zeroing out Military deployments and Military Training in the Budget process, even if Congress is just playing "Smoke and Mirrors" budget games, will strike fear in the hearts of U.S. allies.
The fact that Congress is signalling that the U.S. no longer plans to station trip-wire troops in Korea, Japan, Europe and other places on a 24x7 basis, but instead, on an "as needed" basis, in whatever manner Obama chooses to interpret that, will have allies considering looking for new allies, or becoming non-aligned.
China, will correctly identify that the U.S. role in the Pacific, as in the rest of the world, is declining, not increasing.
Ironically, China might actually delay starting a crisis war to give the U.S. more time to eliminate military production capacity, and to give the U.S. time to finish downsizing the Ground Based, Underground Silo based, portion of U.S. Strategic deterrent, and to give the U.S. time to fully retire ( and cut into pieces ) the largest aircraft carrier in the World.
China may also wish to allow themselves more time to press the major diplomatic advantage they will gain from the U.S. announcing to the world a greatly diminished future U.S. presence in the world.
Re: Avoiding the Fiscal Cliff - Military Cuts - Crisis War
The Palladium price has moved strongly upwards recently and has broken the main down trend. Other base metals have similar charts and appear to be following Palladium.
ANAIM
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 21 guests