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.
The military is planning some pretty significant cuts in pay and benefits for members in the near future. I have 2 thoughts on both sides of the argument:
1. FOR: The fact is that most members of the military are overpaid for the amount of education and skill they bring to the job. If you look at pay and benefits especially, you will see that jobs in the military pay about the same as private sector jobs for years 1-3 and then more after. Benefits and housing allowances are also much better in the military than you would find anywhere in the private sector just with a high school diploma and the ability to score 50 or better on the AVSBAB test. Add to that full retirement after only 20 years and you can see why the military is thinking of cutting back. And people will say that the military is a hazardous job which is true but the death and injury rate among service members is lower than many occupations in the private sector that do not have the pay or benefits of service members.
2. AGANIST: The Pentagon waste billions and billions of dollars a year buying weapons and other items it does not even want or use. Usually they are forced to buy them or bullied into buying them by Congressmen who have contributors including everybody from huge military industrial businesses like Lockheed and Kellogg-Brown-Root to boot manufactuers. Surely they can find other areas to cut than the soldiers, Marines and sailors. Secondly, the military may lose some of the better talent that they have which will certainly hurt. Who is going to reup when the military is cutting pay and benefits and they can get a 9 to 5 that pays the same and go home everyday without worrying about Iraq and Afganistan? Finally, at least for existing service members, we did kind of make promises to them to get them to join the military and these are promises that we need to keep.
The military is planning some pretty significant cuts in pay and benefits for members in the near future. I have 2 thoughts on both sides of the argument:
1. FOR: The fact is that most members of the military are overpaid for the amount of education and skill they bring to the job. If you look at pay and benefits especially, you will see that jobs in the military pay about the same as private sector jobs for years 1-3 and then more after. Benefits and housing allowances are also much better in the military than you would find anywhere in the private sector just with a high school diploma and the ability to score 50 or better on the AVSBAB test. Add to that full retirement after only 20 years and you can see why the military is thinking of cutting back. And people will say that the military is a hazardous job which is true but the death and injury rate among service members is lower than many occupations in the private sector that do not have the pay or benefits of service members.
2. AGANIST: The Pentagon waste billions and billions of dollars a year buying weapons and other items it does not even want or use. Usually they are forced to buy them or bullied into buying them by Congressmen who have contributors including everybody from huge military industrial businesses like Lockheed and Kellogg-Brown-Root to boot manufactuers. Surely they can find other areas to cut than the soldiers, Marines and sailors. Secondly, the military may lose some of the better talent that they have which will certainly hurt. Who is going to reup when the military is cutting pay and benefits and they can get a 9 to 5 that pays the same and go home everyday without worrying about Iraq and Afganistan? Finally, at least for existing service members, we did kind of make promises to them to get them to join the military and these are promises that we need to keep.
Basically we need to pay the less than 1% of people in US that serve in the military much more not less. Heck we pay some who do nothing but take from the nation.
And people will say that the military is a hazardous job which is true but the death and injury rate among service members is lower than many occupations in the private sector that do not have the pay or benefits of service members.
What do I think?
Well, first off, you could do with some work on your spelling and grammar if you are going to criticize others for lack of education. Proofreading is a wonderful thing.
Second, just what is the "AVSBAB TEST"? I know what the ASVAB test is, that's the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a SERIES of aptitude tests that tests people to see what job they would do well in. There is no pass or fail. I'm not sure they still use them.
The AFQT, or Armed Forces Qualification Test is a general knowledge test.
Third, I don't know what world YOU live in, but in my world the pay and benefits are nowhere near the equivalent civilian job, until you accumulate a LOT of seniority and become an E-5 or higher. Been there, did that! A LOT of married military personnel qualify for food stamps!
" Finally, at least for existing service members, we did kind of make promises to them to get them to join the military and these are promises that we need to keep."
In that respect, you are absolutely right! No "kind of" to the promises, they have been firmly stated for many years.
The military is planning some pretty significant cuts in pay and benefits for members in the near future. I have 2 thoughts on both sides of the argument:
1. FOR: The fact is that most members of the military are overpaid for the amount of education and skill they bring to the job. If you look at pay and benefits especially, you will see that jobs in the military pay about the same as private sector jobs for years 1-3 and then more after. Benefits and housing allowances are also much better in the military than you would find anywhere in the private sector just with a high school diploma and the ability to score 50 or better on the AVSBAB test. Add to that full retirement after only 20 years and you can see why the military is thinking of cutting back. And people will say that the military is a hazardous job which is true but the death and injury rate among service members is lower than many occupations in the private sector that do not have the pay or benefits of service members.
2. AGANIST: The Pentagon waste billions and billions of dollars a year buying weapons and other items it does not even want or use. Usually they are forced to buy them or bullied into buying them by Congressmen who have contributors including everybody from huge military industrial businesses like Lockheed and Kellogg-Brown-Root to boot manufactuers. Surely they can find other areas to cut than the soldiers, Marines and sailors. Secondly, the military may lose some of the better talent that they have which will certainly hurt. Who is going to reup when the military is cutting pay and benefits and they can get a 9 to 5 that pays the same and go home everyday without worrying about Iraq and Afganistan? Finally, at least for existing service members, we did kind of make promises to them to get them to join the military and these are promises that we need to keep.
If you honestly feel our service members are over compensated for what they do, I would invite you to walk a mile in their boots. That is usually where those making this argument balk. They freely argue the troops are over paid but shy away feom outting their money where their mouth is. What other jobs routinely require 24 hour a day work with no breaks, or year long tours in a combat zone, or missing thr birth of children?
The rest of the country has been suffering from pay and benefit cuts for awhile now, welcome to reality and maybe this will discourage some from enlisting in the government jobs program known as the armed forces.
When are the troops going to have a "Thank a taxpayer" day?
The rest of the country has been suffering from pay and benefit cuts for awhile now, welcome to reality and maybe this will discourage some from enlisting the government jobs program known as the armed forces.
When are the troops going to have a "Thank a taxpayer" day?
There wont be a thank a taxpayer day. I know a guy who got a leave of absence from his civilian job to go back to Afghanistan because he could make more than the $6,000 per month civilian job he had. I wonder if the military is living in an unreal world which hits them in the face when they separate.
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.
