Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That headline on that general is like on say pulbic offical indicted for misuse taxpayer money. Both are not anythig but corruption, I think if this had been a public offcial we would just say;oh;anther one. As far as generals retirement I don't think we are going to get good candiaites by offering muchl ess than they can get in other pulbic office or private. Many make the real money after retiring in private work.Especailly with the work contditions and responsibilty for lifes.Anyone remmeber katrina;who did we finally turn to to strighten that politcally involved mess out. A genral.All the others were too busy avoiding consequence and pointing fingers;he got the job done.
Of all the wastefullness the OP could have chosen to complain about, he/she chose to complain about something which is probably well-earned and appropriate. Let's reflect a moment. Take an aircraft carrier - a large ship worth hundreds of millions of dollars full of complex systems and manned by a crew of some 3,000 navy personnel. Things have to be done right - there are loads of safety issues, navigation issues, personnel issues such as discipline and morale. The captain of an aircraft carrier holds the rank of "captain", one step above "commander" and one step below "rear admiral". If memory serves, a navy captain is the equivalent of a full colonel in the army or air force. As such, the skipper of that aircraft carrier would be getting a salary of maybe $90,000 a year. That is not a bad salary of course, but when we consider the enormous responsibility coupled with the high level of technical understanding coupled with the requirement for absolute reliability of the individual, anyone in private industry with equivalent responsibility and skills would be earning triple or quadruple that. So after a 30 or 35 year career, that captain (or maybe rear admiral by the time he retires) will be getting a pretty decent pension, a pension which is well merited and deserved.
Of all the wastefullness the OP could have chosen to complain about, he/she chose to complain about something which is probably well-earned and appropriate. Let's reflect a moment. Take an aircraft carrier - a large ship worth hundreds of millions of dollars full of complex systems and manned by a crew of some 3,000 navy personnel. Things have to be done right - there are loads of safety issues, navigation issues, personnel issues such as discipline and morale. The captain of an aircraft carrier holds the rank of "captain", one step above "commander" and one step below "rear admiral". If memory serves, a navy captain is the equivalent of a full colonel in the army or air force. As such, the skipper of that aircraft carrier would be getting a salary of maybe $90,000 a year. That is not a bad salary of course, but when we consider the enormous responsibility coupled with the high level of technical understanding coupled with the requirement for absolute reliability of the individual, anyone in private industry with equivalent responsibility and skills would be earning triple or quadruple that. So after a 30 or 35 year career, that captain (or maybe rear admiral by the time he retires) will be getting a pretty decent pension, a pension which is well merited and deserved.
Hear! Hear! Even as a small unit commander, and I'm talking company and cavalry troop level, I was responsible for hundreds of men as well as many millions of dollars worth of equipment. The higher you get in rank in the military the more responsibilities and accountability you have. For those who choose to and are able to have lengthy careers the retirement benefits are more than fair.
Is this military versus non military or just general unhappiness by some that ones retirement is not 6 figures a year?
That's a good question. Let me disclose my own bias, or lack of bias. I have defended military pensions in this thread, yet I never served in the military (and it seems unlikely that I ever will at age 68). There is such a thing as objectivity, as seeing the big picture. Those are things I strive hard for, altlhough I cannot claim a 100% success rate.
The issue remains on affordability of paying any pensions to anyone. Most pensions are not funded in government and too many in private sector. The issue is not whether a pension is deserved, the issue is coming up with the money to pay it. We are going to see, one way or another, a restructuring of what it means to retire and at what level of benefits. And before anyone freaks out, I happen to be a retired senior officer (not flag rank) and have a son with almost 18 years in one of the services who could potentially retire at age 39. His pay is in the six figure range and he is not a senior rank yet. We are seeing a shift in our economy that is going to demand changes whether we wish it otherwise or not. For the average person, working for the federal government, military or civilian, is very lucrative. Most military folks do not make significant sacrifices in a career and most never see or hear an enemy round fired. But that is another story. We are reaching a situation where only federal employees will be in a defined pension plan unless things change significantly. I would advise anyone with children to advise them to pursue government work.
The issue remains on affordability of paying any pensions to anyone. Most pensions are not funded in government and too many in private sector. The issue is not whether a pension is deserved, the issue is coming up with the money to pay it. We are going to see, one way or another, a restructuring of what it means to retire and at what level of benefits. And before anyone freaks out, I happen to be a retired senior officer (not flag rank) and have a son with almost 18 years in one of the services who could potentially retire at age 39. His pay is in the six figure range and he is not a senior rank yet. We are seeing a shift in our economy that is going to demand changes whether we wish it otherwise or not. For the average person, working for the federal government, military or civilian, is very lucrative. Most military folks do not make significant sacrifices in a career and most never see or hear an enemy round fired. But that is another story. We are reaching a situation where only federal employees will be in a defined pension plan unless things change significantly. I would advise anyone with children to advise them to pursue government work.
Cheers all.
You are probably in a position to correct some of the details of my post which used the skipper of an aircraft carrier as an example. I estimated his salary at $90,000 but it seems I was a bit low? Also, was I correct that a navy captain is the equivalent of a full colonel? My basic line of reasoning remains valid, I think, namely that a person in private industry with similar responsibilities would be making a whole lot more.
Your point above, on a totally different aspect of the matter, is well taken.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
