• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Army "Right Sizing"

Spekkio said:
I know it only amounts to about 25-33% of total compensation but they don't
Click to expand...

how right you are, nearly everyone I talk to says "you get 50% of your pay from active duty", then I explain to them it is 50% of base pay, and how it relates to total compensation that I had on active duty and what percent that actually equates to.
 
Spekkio said:
Five to ten years from now, when OEF and OIF are in the rearview mirror and a generation who never knew the old NYC skyline grows up, John Q. Public is going to want to know why servicemembers get free healthcare, free college, free housing, and 50% pay as retirement (I know it only amounts to about 25-33% of total compensation but they don't) as early as 38 when they are paying $500+/mo for 'affordable care', had to pay for their own college, have to pay their own rent/mortgage, and have to contribute to their own 401k. "Because they're fighting the GWOT" is not going to fly and the world's smallest violin will play for someone who voluntarily signs a contract for which he is paid and then complains about moving/stress/danger/whatever.
Click to expand...

you DO scare me.

Because this:

url2.jpeg



is NOT this:

amputees.jpg

When John Q Public wants to know why he has to pay for health care and the dude without a leg is getting a MODEST pension - send the two of 'em down to NYC together. The later can educate the former on what his legs, and the skyline used to look like.

"Voluntarily signs a contract" - your words. Are matters of compensation not part of that contract? I promise you that I made financial decision to stick around. Because of my relative young age vis a vis my peer group, I can retire at 41 and start a second career. I found it financially irresponsible of me to leave that deal when I was 50% of the way there. That decision has and will continue to subject my family to deployments, sleepless nights and my possible death in a faraway shit hole. Yeah dude, it is a voluntary action - based on previously agreed upon compensation assurances.

Do you really believe the stuff you post here, or are you simply an electronic contrarian who looks to stir the pot with your uber enlightened points of view? I'm genuinely curious.
 
Last edited:
lowflier03 said:
See my PM, I have a decent amount of experience with this process, even have that stupid fkn flowchart around here somewhere still. I have yet to meet anyone who actually supports this process after they see the true extent of the mess. I could spend all day listing examples of fucked up programs (on behalf of all the services) that have come out if it. Not saying I have the perfect solution, but I know some smart guys who do this kind of analysis and I'm sure they, and people like them, have offered up ideas, only to be lost to the machine.
Click to expand...
Just PMd you, feel free to add our conversation here if you like or it can be split to another thread if desired. Bottom line: Not saying the acquisitions is perfect (far from it), but the acquisition beast is monstrous with lots of input, a lot of which is undesirable.
 
I was playing devil's advocate. But to be more direct, I believe that...
-That AD servicemembers earn every bit of their pay and compensation.
-John Q. Public really doesn't have any idea what most of the military does, how many hours the guys work, the optempo servicemembers have been 'asked' to maintain, so he's going to start to build an image of guys being paid to not do anything.
-That parading images of people who were wounded in a war that is over as support of why someone who has never seen combat (which amounts to a large majority of servicemembers) should collect retirement as early as 38 is not going to change their minds.
-That given the more static commitments the DoD has made, it will have no choice but to cut personnel compensation to meet capability goals. Which is really infuriating.

So I think that cutting personnel benefits is the wrong place to look, but I think that it's the only option officials are left with in the near term as long as the government keeps crying poverty. But I also think that someone with 2 arms and 2 legs countering that with "but here's an image of a soldier dismembered in a war we're not fighting anymore, I deserve it!" isn't a good argument and that people are going to get tired of hearing it. I think a better line would be to sell them on why we still need to maintain military capability and that their money is still being put to good use. Because we do, and we can.
 
Last edited:
Spekkio said:
I believe that...

-parading images of people who were wounded in a war that is over as support of why someone who has never seen combat (which amounts to a large majority of servicemembers) should collect retirement as early as 38 is not going to change their minds.
-That given the more static commitments the DoD has made, it will have no choice but to cut personnel compensation to meet capability goals.
-I think that it's the only option officials are left with in the near term as long as the government keeps crying poverty. But I also think that someone with 2 arms and 2 legs countering that with "but here's an image of a soldier dismembered in a war we're not fighting anymore, I deserve it!" isn't a good argument and that people are going to get tired of hearing it.
Click to expand...

And this is why you continue to scare me. When our populace gets "tired of hearing it" we are in big, big trouble. As far as the human capital being the "only option left" for the government to consider when deciding what to cut during budget discussions, perhaps it would benefit all of us to remind them that the men & women who serve are the ONLY argument to consider. I see this thread going on & on, with no one really winning. I will continue to serve and act with the knowledge that my people are the best weapon system I have - and I will do my very best to take care of them.
 
Curious...What are the total political contributions the posters to this discussion have made since, say, 2008? How many of you have put coin in the game at all?
I'll start: I've probably donated about $400 total. $250 to party organizations and the rest to outside advocacy groups like IAVA, VoteVets, and the American Legion (not entirely political, but whatever).
That's a hell of a lot less than the folks who own the Congresspeople who approve these Defense contracts and the outside advocacy groups who have manufactured this phony "deficit crisis."
Oh, and with the exception of a very few states (maybe Virginia for the Navy, for example), military personnel and their families aren't a particularly important voting bloc.
 
We are getting raped in this deal, plain and simple.

Wonder why you don't hear about any of our civilian leadership going to bat for us? This was part of a preexisting deal made behind closed doors. Did you hear about the massive social security and Medicare reform package? Didn't think so...millions of voters suck on the teat of that unsustainable nightmare.

You don't change the rules of the game midway through...start a 401K style pension, redux, whatever you want, but do it for future accessions. This is a sign of things to come. In 5 years when the services are reeling trying to keep good people in, remember this moment.
 
Spekkio said:
I don't follow the leap from cutting CPI increases by 1% to disbanding the military.

As for the past 10 years, let's not forget that military personnel compensation has doubled during that period,'
Click to expand...

I really can't stand this quote from the media...it shows that nobody fact checks, or at least looks for context. SURE our personnel costs have doubled over the last 10 years, but if you look at ALL our costs (cost of a tank, airplane, helicopter, ship, bullets...) have doubled. What that means is that over the last ten years we have kept personnel costs the same percentage of our budget! This is just a cute figure to throw out as ammo to cut THIS portion of spending. Do you hear anyone else saying "...aircraft costs have doubled over the last ten years so we need to cut aircraft" NO, and there is a reason. It has been said elsewhere, but we built a lot of great new war fighting stuff in the 80's, went through 2 drawdowns and re-manning phases, and were able (not necessarily successfully)to recapitalize those systems. Well, now those systems are too old/obsolete to recapitalize/modernize so we MUST keep a majority of these newer programs.

Not that I agree with the way it is all being done, but that is the party line in black and while from DOD side (i'll see if I can re-find the 37 page PDF that states all this). As always, if we can take the time to fact check what we see on TV with a .gov site, it makes us better able to defend our point. I watched CSPAN when the house voted on the budget deal and they were ALL quoting numbers that were not even close to what was in there...and it was only a 10 page PDF on the CBO website.
 
IRfly said:
Curious...What are the total political contributions the posters to this discussion have made since, say, 2008? How many of you have put coin in the game at all?
Click to expand...
Do taxes count? Because that adds up to tens of thousands of dollars.

But my district is a democrat stronghold and the Senaters are practically elected by NYC. Flushing a $400 donation down the toilet would be more effective than giving it to Republican.

Also, Paul Ryan (R) wrote the bill. So there's that.
 
robav8r said:
I will continue to serve and act with the knowledge that my people are the best weapon system I have - and I will do my very best to take care of them.
Click to expand...
robav8r: "Your last drop is scored as a shack/bullseye. Check switches safe…cleared to depart the target and RTB. Hoo-rah!"
 
Renegade One said:
Does "skin in the game" not count for anything? If it's all about "coin"…I'm an epic fail. I simply have better uses for that...
Click to expand...

Color me cynical, sir, but coin counts more than skin any day. Remember, these are the folks who show up to Washington (both parties) and spend hours a day not legislating, but fundraising in office buildings across the street from the Capitol. Military/veterans don't vote as a bloc, and more importantly, we don't donate. Not a prayer 10 years ago, let along in our brave post-Citizens United world.

@Spekkio. You think that your elected representatives don't know where every damn dollar in their campaign coffers come from? Of course taxes don't count.
 
I know it really doesn't matter one way or another, but just for comparison, the amount of money they propose to save (~6 billion) is roughly what was spent on the last presidential election. It's funny what we have money for and what we don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top