Veterans!!

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Veterans!!

Postby charlie beard » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:43 pm

The nation is 17 plus Trillion in debt. Our great grandchildren have been sentenced to pay off this burden. Our Iraq and Afghan war vets have to fight for the benefits they deserve without any government hesitation whatsoever. And then I hear we have pledge 8 million and much more to African people for aids research.

And now there is a move to cut military pay. If any military pay cut were tied to a congressional and administration pay cut at the same percentage, this would never happen and shouldn't happen now.

These people in Washington make Bernie Madoff look like a Cub Scout.
"If you put the Federal Government in charge of the Sahara desert,
in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand"
charlie beard
hunter
 
Posts: 2236
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 7:13 am
Location: West Central IL.


Re: Veterans!!

Postby ScaupHunter » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:58 pm

This administration is no different than the Clinton administration was. They despise and fear the military. It represents a direct threat to their hopes for taking over and controlling the people. They want to tax and spend like a drunken sailor, then take the benefits from the people who ensure we can live free and safe.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Fri Dec 06, 2013 6:43 am

The military is far overpaid in comparison to our historical norm and compared to every other nation. They were getting pay raises when everyone elses salaries were either stagnant or falling. They should get a pay freeze.

Hell, an officer in the military is pulling down serious cash. A colonel makes $150k a year for christsake. The military should never be a place where you can earn a "good" living like that.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:28 am

Actually it should be just like that in a volunteer military. You want the best and the brightest defending you not the worst and the dumbest. How much money in annual budget, equipment, men, and operational supplies does a colonel run in a year? That answer is in the multi millions of dollars. Name one job in the civilian world that doesn't pay better than $150,000 for that level of responsibility. A civilian running a company with that level of assets and over 1,000 employees would often be making two to four times that amount. If the private company is successful they would be making over a million a year. Now toss in asking that Colonel to make life and death decisions, Deal with having ordered warriors to their deaths while leading successful combat missions that support your freedom. Then stop to calculate that colonels annual value to the people of the United States. It is far beyone $150,000 a year.

The military got pay raises while everyone elses were frozen to help with retention and to compensate for the crap pay they had been recieving for decades. A Soldier, Sailor, Marine or Airmen sacrifices more for their job in two days than the average American sacrifices in a year. The job is dangerous. A lot of warriors die in training every year. Then add in two wars going on for over a decade. Multiple tours, the damage and loss of warriors, divorces and emotional distress, PTSD, etc.... Soldiers are underpaid, and often under appreciated. The job is 24/7. That colonel is never really on vacation. He is on call all the time. He puts in way more hours a week and a year than all but a very few civilians.

Send that Colonel to war. They have pretty much all gone on a few tours by now and figure out his pay.

$150,000 a year / 365 days in a year = $410 a day. $410 day / 24 hours in a day = $17.08 an hour The gentlemen is not a very high payscale for someone running over 1,000 people.

Would you work for that pay Vince?
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:52 pm

That is a sorry attempt to make it personal. Nobody is belittling or diminishing the effort and sacrifice of our military.

Being in the military is and has always been about sacrifice and service. The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional. A person should join the military because of devotion to one's country. A person should join the military not because of personal gain or ambition. This invites disaster. Once the politicians start to buy the favor of the military, the risk of the military becoming politicized is too great. Throughout history, whenever the politicians/kings/emperors began to buy the patronage of the military, it spelled the beginning of the end for that country/system/empire. The militaries grew more powerful and gained more political influence. The military eventually expected the patronage. When it didn't get what it expected, the military took it by force. Never attempt to empower those that hold the weapons. Eventually, they turn the weapons on you.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby SpinnerMan » Fri Dec 06, 2013 2:58 pm

vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.
I'm sure you work with a lot of retired military. I know that I have. I don't think there is a single one of them that did not make less in the military than they did in the private sector. I'm sure the retired colonels that I have worked with earned as much or more than they did in the military. My experience is that the pay scale is still at or below the average professional and that is before you factor in any of the other things that are true that SH mentioned.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16054
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Veterans!!

Postby assateague » Fri Dec 06, 2013 3:05 pm

vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.


The "average Joe or professional" what? Carpenter? Truck driver? Mechanic? The "average Joe" infantryman? The "professional" mortarman? How you can even compare those things is beyond me.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Veterans!!

Postby ScaupHunter » Fri Dec 06, 2013 5:00 pm

I can guarantee you the average private makes bupkiss. He is broke and being advanced does not increase his pay much until he makes NCO pay. I made exactly 38,962 base pay for 11 months and 2 weeks as a Staff Sgt in Iraq. Add in the combat pay and overseas pay and I made $43,000. We didn't sleep much, ate MRE's for 7 months. Lived in holes we dug for 6 months then tents, and for one month in hooches before we went home. Our average day saw a maximum of 4 hours sleep and often less for the first 8 months. After that we averaged 6 hours a day which was heaven. There was no real down time. Even when sleeping we could be mortared, called out for a raid, roadside bomb response, or QRF type mission when the actual QRF left the post. If you figure out my pay for that time frame it was a freaking joke.

I make way more than a SSG does today. I am responsible for far less in my job. As an acting Platoon Sgt and Platoon Leader for the last 6 months of my tour I ran a 20 man platoon, with 3.2 million dollars worth of equipment. Including multiple secured items with daily tracking and reporting. I planned, commanded, and participated in hundreds of combat missions. I participated in company and battalion level command and control planning and operations management as well. I was often woken up for or drug off various taskings to design a variety of defenses. ditch or canal crossing systems, along with other Civil Engineering systems for the Brigade. I even got the pleasure of figuring out failed water and sewer systems and plants and working with the locals to get them repaired. It was the most demanding year of my life, much less my working life. I have no doubt in my mind that I will never work that hard again. I was very clearly underpaid and overworked. That would still have been true if I made $150,000 for that year. A Colonel has far more responsibility than I ever had and answers for a whole lot more.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Veterans!!

Postby dave79 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 7:20 pm

vincentpa wrote: A person should join the military because of devotion to one's country. A person should join the military not because of personal gain or ambition. This invites disaster.

So this is why you served the country.......
dave79
hunter
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:34 pm
Location: indiana

Re: Veterans!!

Postby ctdeathfrombelow » Sat Dec 07, 2013 8:35 am

charlie beard wrote:The nation is 17 plus Trillion in debt. Our great grandchildren have been sentenced to pay off this burden. Our Iraq and Afghan war vets have to fight for the benefits they deserve without any government hesitation whatsoever. And then I hear we have pledge 8 million and much more to African people for aids research.

And now there is a move to cut military pay. If any military pay cut were tied to a congressional and administration pay cut at the same percentage, this would never happen and shouldn't happen now.

These people in Washington make Bernie Madoff look like a Cub Scout.

Not sticking up for Obama, but.....
you do know that Bush spent $30 billion on aids research right?

And the billions Obama is spending isn't for aids in Africa . The money is for GLOBAL research and goes to Geneva, first of all, and is being used to fund research on TB, malaria, and aids.

There is however a cadre of other things you should be upset about!

This being one of them.....
http://www.google.com/gwt/x?u=http://md ... QCQ&wsc=yh

The roughly three dozen young immigrants have been granted temporary permission to stay in the U.S. under an Obama administration policy introduced last year. They filed a lawsuit in August asking a judge to instruct the university system’s Board of Regents to allow them to qualify for in-state tuition.
User avatar
ctdeathfrombelow
hunter
 
Posts: 1513
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: Connecticut: The Confiscation State

Re: Veterans!!

Postby 'JaminC'mon » Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:52 am

vincentpa wrote:The military is far overpaid in comparison to our historical norm and compared to every other nation. They were getting pay raises when everyone elses salaries were either stagnant or falling. They should get a pay freeze.


The same can be said for every other government job. Hell, most postal workers are paid better than our soldiers and much less stress and responsibility, they screw up daily with almost no consequences. You screw up in the military and you are DEAD..

I recently graduated from college with a finance degree and have been looking for jobs for 6 months. Most jobs in my area pay on avg $12/hr. Any government job listed, even for a secretary pay a minimum of $16/hr. When you look at the numbers, $16.00 X 2080 annual standard work hours = $33,280 annual salary. You can't tell me what a secretary does in one year is almost as valuable as what ScaupHunter did in one year?!?! Thank you for your service, by the way, you are a better man than I. :clapping:

In my eyes, the soldiers that see active duty deserve way more than they are getting. I have several friends that have served and they won't talk about what they saw because it is too horrific. One of my best friends died on Christmas day 2 years ago in an ambush in Afghanistan. He was an SSG, so his salary was not much better than hypothetical secretary I mentioned above. The real reform needs to be in the millions of government workers that receive far better wages than anyone in the private sector can receive for an equivalent job and their benefits are unreal. There is a reason those wages and benefits (and pensions) are not available in the private sector, they are UNSUSTAINABLE. That is why the postal system is on the verge of bankruptcy. The city of Detroit is going through bankruptcy court right now. And from what I was reading from the Associated Press a few days ago, the Illinois state government isn't far behind, and all because they are paying their employees far too much, mostly in the form of pensions.

So you tell me who should be paid more, a soldier risking their lives every second of the day to protect us, or the millions of government workers nationwide?
'JaminC'mon
hunter
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:17 am

Re: Veterans!!

Postby goodkarmarising » Sat Dec 07, 2013 11:12 am

'JaminC'mon wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military is far overpaid in comparison to our historical norm and compared to every other nation. They were getting pay raises when everyone elses salaries were either stagnant or falling. They should get a pay freeze.


The same can be said for every other government job. Hell, most postal workers are paid better than our soldiers and much less stress and responsibility, they screw up daily with almost no consequences. You screw up in the military and you are DEAD..

I recently graduated from college with a finance degree and have been looking for jobs for 6 months. Most jobs in my area pay on avg $12/hr. Any government job listed, even for a secretary pay a minimum of $16/hr. When you look at the numbers, $16.00 X 2080 annual standard work hours = $33,280 annual salary. You can't tell me what a secretary does in one year is almost as valuable as what ScaupHunter did in one year?!?! Thank you for your service, by the way, you are a better man than I. :clapping:

In my eyes, the soldiers that see active duty deserve way more than they are getting. I have several friends that have served and they won't talk about what they saw because it is too horrific. One of my best friends died on Christmas day 2 years ago in an ambush in Afghanistan. He was an SSG, so his salary was not much better than hypothetical secretary I mentioned above. The real reform needs to be in the millions of government workers that receive far better wages than anyone in the private sector can receive for an equivalent job and their benefits are unreal. There is a reason those wages and benefits (and pensions) are not available in the private sector, they are UNSUSTAINABLE. That is why the postal system is on the verge of bankruptcy. The city of Detroit is going through bankruptcy court right now. And from what I was reading from the Associated Press a few days ago, the Illinois state government isn't far behind, and all because they are paying their employees far too much, mostly in the form of pensions.

So you tell me who should be paid more, a soldier risking their lives every second of the day to protect us, or the millions of government workers nationwide?


You need to recheck your numbers. For several years I worked below $16 an hour as a federal worker.
Only number that matters, retrieves by the pup: 176
Cooper: 15
Proud owner of 2 non hunt trial/field trial fire breathers
User avatar
goodkarmarising
hunter
 
Posts: 10874
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:57 am
Location: Leavenworth, KS and all thru MO

Re: Veterans!!

Postby ScaupHunter » Sat Dec 07, 2013 4:15 pm

'JaminC'mon wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military is far overpaid in comparison to our historical norm and compared to every other nation. They were getting pay raises when everyone elses salaries were either stagnant or falling. They should get a pay freeze.


The same can be said for every other government job. Hell, most postal workers are paid better than our soldiers and much less stress and responsibility, they screw up daily with almost no consequences. You screw up in the military and you are DEAD..

I recently graduated from college with a finance degree and have been looking for jobs for 6 months. Most jobs in my area pay on avg $12/hr. Any government job listed, even for a secretary pay a minimum of $16/hr. When you look at the numbers, $16.00 X 2080 annual standard work hours = $33,280 annual salary. You can't tell me what a secretary does in one year is almost as valuable as what ScaupHunter did in one year?!?! Thank you for your service, by the way, you are a better man than I. :clapping:

In my eyes, the soldiers that see active duty deserve way more than they are getting. I have several friends that have served and they won't talk about what they saw because it is too horrific. One of my best friends died on Christmas day 2 years ago in an ambush in Afghanistan. He was an SSG, so his salary was not much better than hypothetical secretary I mentioned above. The real reform needs to be in the millions of government workers that receive far better wages than anyone in the private sector can receive for an equivalent job and their benefits are unreal. There is a reason those wages and benefits (and pensions) are not available in the private sector, they are UNSUSTAINABLE. That is why the postal system is on the verge of bankruptcy. The city of Detroit is going through bankruptcy court right now. And from what I was reading from the Associated Press a few days ago, the Illinois state government isn't far behind, and all because they are paying their employees far too much, mostly in the form of pensions.

So you tell me who should be paid more, a soldier risking their lives every second of the day to protect us, or the millions of government workers nationwide?




Wages and pensions are not why Chicago is broke. Wasteful spending. Borrowing more money than they could afford to borrow And failed fiscal planning are why it is broke. They are using wages and pensions as a scapegoat. Pensions are not paid by the city when a person retires. They are funded through a workers pay system. The funds are invested for the worker during their career. Those funds are paid out through the investment fund provider during retirement.
Last edited by ScaupHunter on Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6539
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Veterans!!

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:11 am

ScaupHunter wrote:failed fiscal planning are why it is broke.

Absolutely true.

ScaupHunter wrote:They are using wages and pensions as a scapegoat. Pensions are not paid by the citynwhen a oerson retires. They are funded through a workers pay system. The funds are invested for the worker during their career. Those finds are paid out through the investment fund provider during retirement.

I believe this is not true. The pension fund is in part like the Social Security Trust fund. It is a Ponzi scheme in part. Year after year what they paid into the pension fund was inadequate to cover future liabilities incurred in that year. It is not a fully funded pension as you describe and the benefits are not determined by the value of the assets in the fund, they are independent of the performance of the fund.

Now paying a huge number of teachers and other employees monopoly wages and benefits far beyond the free market rates so they can have a political power base, while fiscally unsound is clearly politically sound. Same with promising pensions that exceed what is invested to pay those pensions.

This system should be 100% criminal. However, everybody involved knew the scam that was being run on the taxpayers. They just assumed that these scams could go on forever or at least until they crashed down on someone else. It was a fraud committed by the politicians and the pensioners. Both knew that they would NEVER get such lucrative pensions if they had to fully fund them when the liability was incurred. They all assumed that future generations would honor their scam and so far it has mostly worked, but at some point, the money just is not their to keep running the scam just like social security and so many other scams were politicians promise future benefits and refuse to pay the bills today when they are due if the system is to be economically sustainable.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16054
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:37 am

assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.


The "average Joe or professional" what? Carpenter? Truck driver? Mechanic? The "average Joe" infantryman? The "professional" mortarman? How you can even compare those things is beyond me.


So how does this support your position?

You take one sentence out of post and comment on it when the entire post is the relevant whole. It's both your and spinner's favorite tactic.

How do I compare them? very simple. One is service to one's country. The other jobs and professions are just that jobs and professions that do not require service or sacrifice (to one's country). Now if you want to understand my comparison, go back and read my first two posts. Everything you'll want to know about my position on this is there. Please address the entire post the next time.
Last edited by vincentpa on Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:41 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.
I'm sure you work with a lot of retired military. I know that I have. I don't think there is a single one of them that did not make less in the military than they did in the private sector. I'm sure the retired colonels that I have worked with earned as much or more than they did in the military. My experience is that the pay scale is still at or below the average professional and that is before you factor in any of the other things that are true that SH mentioned.


Really? And why do they make more now in the private sector? They make more in the private sector mostly doing work unrelated or completely different than what they did in the military. They got the job after their careers in the military precisely because they were in the military as officers; they were connected.

Your comparison is farcical. You cannot state that these men would've achieved the same success in the private sector that they did in the military. Nice try.

If you don't know what the currect military pay scale is, look it up. You might be surprised. I sure was.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby assateague » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:30 am

vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.


The "average Joe or professional" what? Carpenter? Truck driver? Mechanic? The "average Joe" infantryman? The "professional" mortarman? How you can even compare those things is beyond me.


So how does this support your position?

You take one sentence out of post and comment on it when the entire post is the relevant whole. It's both your and spinner's favorite tactic.

How do I compare them? very simple. One is service to one's country. The other jobs and professions are just that jobs and professions that do not require service or sacrifice (to one's country). Now if you want to understand my comparison, go back and read my first two posts. Everything you'll want to know about my position on this is there. Please address the entire post the next time.



I did.

So, in your opinion, a carpenter in the Navy should make less than a carpenter in the civilian world? An airplane mechanic in the Air Force should make less than an airplane mechanic in the civilian world? Because they're "in service to their country"?

I missed the part where civilian jobs are jobs where they are expected to go where they're told. To work in a combat zone. To work as many hours as necessary for no overtime. For them to live where they're told. For them to not be able to quit their job, no matter how bad it may get. For them to often be called in at all hours. For them to have to show up at their place of employment every morning 2 hours before work, and go for a mandatory 6 mile run in the rain.

Oh? That's right- because none of that happens in the civilian world. Your argument is just silly. "Because a job DOESN'T require service or sacrifice", it should have higher compensation than those jobs which do. Makes sense. In bizarro world.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Veterans!!

Postby assateague » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:31 am

Furthermore, you're entire argument is moot, because I don't believe that the military DOES make more than their civilian counterparts in the first place.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:42 am

assateague wrote:Furthermore, you're entire argument is moot, because I don't believe that the military DOES make more than their civilian counterparts in the first place.



Do you believe or do you know? Are you comparing union contracts to those of the military? Do you include other tangibles and intangibles the military personell receive over their civilian counterparts?
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:48 am

assateague wrote:
I did.


you did not and still haven't.

assateague wrote:So, in your opinion, a carpenter in the Navy should make less than a carpenter in the civilian world? An airplane mechanic in the Air Force should make less than an airplane mechanic in the civilian world? Because they're "in service to their country"?


Yes.


assateague wrote:
I missed the part where civilian jobs are jobs where they are expected to go where they're told. To work in a combat zone. To work as many hours as necessary for no overtime. For them to live where they're told. For them to not be able to quit their job, no matter how bad it may get. For them to often be called in at all hours. For them to have to show up at their place of employment every morning 2 hours before work, and go for a mandatory 6 mile run in the rain.

Oh? That's right- because none of that happens in the civilian world.

Stating the deprivations and sacrifices of military life is not a rebuttal to my argument. It has nothing to do with the thrust of my position. I've already acknowledged the sacrifices and stated they are part of the job.
assateague wrote:Your argument is just silly. "Because a job DOESN'T require service or sacrifice", it should have higher compensation than those jobs which do. Makes sense. In bizarro world.


My argument is not silly. If it is bizzaro world, then bizarro world has been the norm for the last few thousand years.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby assateague » Mon Dec 09, 2013 9:29 am

vincentpa wrote:Stating the deprivations and sacrifices of military life is not a rebuttal to my argument. It has nothing to do with the thrust of my position. I've already acknowledged the sacrifices and stated they are part of the job.


Yes, it is. Unless you believe that hours worked, and the job conditions should have nothing to do with compensation.

In the civilian world, there is a differential for shift work. 3rd shift gets paid more than 1st shift, for example. But by your argument, that should not be the case, because compensation should have "nothing to do with the thrust of your position". Because working 3rd shift is "just part of the job". Nor should someone who is expected to work 60 hours a week expect to be compensated more for the same job than someone working 30 hours a week. Because it is "part of the job". As I said- silliness.


In your mind, what factors SHOULD be used to determine compensation?
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Veterans!!

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:28 am

vincentpa wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.
I'm sure you work with a lot of retired military. I know that I have. I don't think there is a single one of them that did not make less in the military than they did in the private sector. I'm sure the retired colonels that I have worked with earned as much or more than they did in the military. My experience is that the pay scale is still at or below the average professional and that is before you factor in any of the other things that are true that SH mentioned.


Really? And why do they make more now in the private sector? They make more in the private sector mostly doing work unrelated or completely different than what they did in the military. They got the job after their careers in the military precisely because they were in the military as officers; they were connected.

Your comparison is farcical. You cannot state that these men would've achieved the same success in the private sector that they did in the military. Nice try.

If you don't know what the currect military pay scale is, look it up. You might be surprised. I sure was.

I was just responding to your example of the colonels. The same is true of retired NCOs and nearly all other ex-military that I have I have worked with and am familiar with and it wasn't because they were connected. People that come out of the military are reliable, disciplined, and skilled. These are a significant premium to their value as an employee. I don't know how you would do an apples to apples comparison, but in my experience, they all make more in the private sector. The only ones that aren't making that much did not make much in the military and did their minimum commitment and got out.

BTW, I looked at the pay scales and I just don't see a problem.

Now like anything else, they should pay no more and no less than they have to to get the number of people with the talent they need. In my experience, they pay less than these same people could make in the private sector. They are allowed to give an intelligence test and do a better job of weeding out the morons than their counterpart in the private sector. For the same job, they are on average better. Sure an 18 that just enlisted as a private is still a dumbass kid, but on average is smarter than the 18 year old in the general population.

When I was 17, a buddy of mine was in the Navy and convinced us to go to the recruiter. Sure, why not? I went with another friend. They gave us a short version of the ASVAB. My friend was told that if he studied hard enough, they MIGHT be able to get him into the Navy.

Apples to apples, I just don't see them being over paid. Maybe there are some exceptions and maybe things have changed quite a bit with combat being the norm and not some theoretical possibility when I was that age. Back then, the Navy offered my a crapload of money to join and bothered me all the freaking time. I did just a tad better than my friend on the test :yes: The reason I did not join the military is precisely the reason you suggest. It was purely to get and education and training. Had I turned 18 shortly after 9/11/01, I'm pretty certain I would have chosen a different course. And I do know that if I was not blind as a bat without my contacts, I'd be flying jets today, but there was no way they were going to let me do that with uncorrected vision that was about 20/600 :eek: :eek: :eek:
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16054
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:42 am

assateague wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Stating the deprivations and sacrifices of military life is not a rebuttal to my argument. It has nothing to do with the thrust of my position. I've already acknowledged the sacrifices and stated they are part of the job.


Yes, it is. Unless you believe that hours worked, and the job conditions should have nothing to do with compensation.

In the civilian world, there is a differential for shift work. 3rd shift gets paid more than 1st shift, for example. But by your argument, that should not be the case, because compensation should have "nothing to do with the thrust of your position". Because working 3rd shift is "just part of the job". Nor should someone who is expected to work 60 hours a week expect to be compensated more for the same job than someone working 30 hours a week. Because it is "part of the job". As I said- silliness.


In your mind, what factors SHOULD be used to determine compensation?


The factors shouldn't determine the pay at all. What should determine the pay is the market. Yes, the free market. People have all sorts of decisions about a career path or job path or path in life, etc. The military is one of those choices. The choice to pursue the military is a little different in that it involves many considerations including service, life and death, surrendering certain freedoms, lower pay to name a few. People are motivated to pursue a military path for different options than those that pursue careers in the private sector. In a way, the detriments of a military life are a great determination of motivation in the individual. How much should those in the military be paid? As much as it takes to attract enough people with the right qualifications to maintain the type of fighting force we require to defend our nation and not a penny more.

I was dating a Navy NCO while living in Washington DC. She wasn't really hot but she was a great @!$%. Anyway, at that point in time, the Navy was losing a lot of NCOs to the private sector, more than they could afford to lose. So the Navy started to offer the NCOs larger signing bonuses and other incentives to stay. I'm perfectly fine with that. The NCOs started to get what the market would bear. Their price had gone up.

Giving raises to the troops is the Republican feel-good thing to do much like redistributing money from rich to poor is for the Democrats. Who could resist? We love the troops right? Of course we do. However, we don't have to show our love by paying them more than they would accept otherwise. The repercussions could be terrible for future generations if the military were to become politicized. Military life shouldn't be as comfortable as life in the private sector. And if the pay is lower and the life not as comfortable, we are more sure of the motives of those in the military; they are there for the love of country and not personal gain, which leads to corruption and eventually to disaster.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby vincentpa » Mon Dec 09, 2013 11:44 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
vincentpa wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
vincentpa wrote:The military should never be a place where the pay is above the pay scale of the average Joe or professional.
I'm sure you work with a lot of retired military. I know that I have. I don't think there is a single one of them that did not make less in the military than they did in the private sector. I'm sure the retired colonels that I have worked with earned as much or more than they did in the military. My experience is that the pay scale is still at or below the average professional and that is before you factor in any of the other things that are true that SH mentioned.


Really? And why do they make more now in the private sector? They make more in the private sector mostly doing work unrelated or completely different than what they did in the military. They got the job after their careers in the military precisely because they were in the military as officers; they were connected.

Your comparison is farcical. You cannot state that these men would've achieved the same success in the private sector that they did in the military. Nice try.

If you don't know what the currect military pay scale is, look it up. You might be surprised. I sure was.

I was just responding to your example of the colonels. The same is true of retired NCOs and nearly all other ex-military that I have I have worked with and am familiar with and it wasn't because they were connected. People that come out of the military are reliable, disciplined, and skilled. These are a significant premium to their value as an employee. I don't know how you would do an apples to apples comparison, but in my experience, they all make more in the private sector. The only ones that aren't making that much did not make much in the military and did their minimum commitment and got out.

BTW, I looked at the pay scales and I just don't see a problem.

Now like anything else, they should pay no more and no less than they have to to get the number of people with the talent they need. In my experience, they pay less than these same people could make in the private sector. They are allowed to give an intelligence test and do a better job of weeding out the morons than their counterpart in the private sector. For the same job, they are on average better. Sure an 18 that just enlisted as a private is still a dumbass kid, but on average is smarter than the 18 year old in the general population.

When I was 17, a buddy of mine was in the Navy and convinced us to go to the recruiter. Sure, why not? I went with another friend. They gave us a short version of the ASVAB. My friend was told that if he studied hard enough, they MIGHT be able to get him into the Navy.

Apples to apples, I just don't see them being over paid. Maybe there are some exceptions and maybe things have changed quite a bit with combat being the norm and not some theoretical possibility when I was that age. Back then, the Navy offered my a crapload of money to join and bothered me all the freaking time. I did just a tad better than my friend on the test :yes: The reason I did not join the military is precisely the reason you suggest. It was purely to get and education and training. Had I turned 18 shortly after 9/11/01, I'm pretty certain I would have chosen a different course. And I do know that if I was not blind as a bat without my contacts, I'd be flying jets today, but there was no way they were going to let me do that with uncorrected vision that was about 20/600 :eek: :eek: :eek:


How do you know if they are getting paid what they should or more appropriately what the market will bear? You understand economics. What seems to be reasonable may not be. The military has been getting pay raises every year based on feel-good legislation, not retention. Cut the raises and we will be able to see what the real wages should be.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Veterans!!

Postby assateague » Mon Dec 09, 2013 12:05 pm

vincentpa wrote:
assateague wrote:

In your mind, what factors SHOULD be used to determine compensation?


The factors shouldn't determine the pay at all. What should determine the pay is the market. Yes, the free market. People have all sorts of decisions about a career path or job path or path in life, etc. The military is one of those choices. The choice to pursue the military is a little different in that it involves many considerations including service, life and death, surrendering certain freedoms, lower pay to name a few. People are motivated to pursue a military path for different options than those that pursue careers in the private sector. In a way, the detriments of a military life are a great determination of motivation in the individual. How much should those in the military be paid? As much as it takes to attract enough people with the right qualifications to maintain the type of fighting force we require to defend our nation and not a penny more.

I was dating a Navy NCO while living in Washington DC. She wasn't really hot but she was a great @!$%. Anyway, at that point in time, the Navy was losing a lot of NCOs to the private sector, more than they could afford to lose. So the Navy started to offer the NCOs larger signing bonuses and other incentives to stay. I'm perfectly fine with that. The NCOs started to get what the market would bear. Their price had gone up.

Giving raises to the troops is the Republican feel-good thing to do much like redistributing money from rich to poor is for the Democrats. Who could resist? We love the troops right? Of course we do. However, we don't have to show our love by paying them more than they would accept otherwise. The repercussions could be terrible for future generations if the military were to become politicized. Military life shouldn't be as comfortable as life in the private sector. And if the pay is lower and the life not as comfortable, we are more sure of the motives of those in the military; they are there for the love of country and not personal gain, which leads to corruption and eventually to disaster.




So you said "the market" should determine the pay. I agree. And part of "the market" is the available labor force. If you are offering $20,000 a year for 60 hours a week, and $20,000 a year for 30 hours a week, which one do you think "the market" is going to fill first? And as a result, "the market" will raise the compensation for the 60 hour a week job in order to fill necessary positions, correct? But yet you act as if this dynamic doesn't occur at all in the military.

As for comparisons, where in "the market" will you find a job in combat arms? I'm not sure how you could even suggest that a "civilian" infantryman should be paid more than a "military" infantryman, but somehow you've got that one figured out in your mind.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Next

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests