[quote=captcha]Your argument for public workers non-salary compensation applies here. The military will make a man out of you (snark?), but that in itself won’t compel enough kids to join. There has to be a pot of gold at the end or the quota would not get filled. And the public can’t take benefits away from prison guards, C-level executives or teachers is not likely to succeed in taking away a significant chunk from veterans and MIC.[/quote]
“..enough kids to join….” hm. That’s a whole other topic. Do I sense some cheekiness, there? I hope?
Just to clarify, I don’t think that they should get nothing, but a military life used to be about service and some (who will no doubt jump in here any minute) join just because they really feel compelled to do it. I don’t favor war, but sometimes I know you have to do some nasty stuff to bring people in line. Our current commitments have spun far out of control and it’s killing us economically.
But for those that think the public sector is getting special treatment with pensions, I want to make the comparison. San Diego is a community with a high concentration of military families. They go through alot–both the people who leave and the families that stay behind. But let’s look at what they get: Housing for their families is provided or subsidized (this is not just for the serviceperson, but the family dwelling. I can’t think of any other public sector job that provides this); discounted retailers (exchanges, etc.); military discounts everywhere else you go; paid on the job training; regular pay; combat pay; other extra pay for other events; pensions after 20 years (and others I probably don’t know about). (I think they should definitely get health benefits, esp for battle related injuries/conditions, but that their families should have to get insurance like the rest of us.) And you don’t have to go into combat to serve your 20 years and get a pension. My main issue about the pension is that it shouldn’t be paid to you if you have other substantial income. (I feel the same about social security–those with adequate means set out on a sliding scale like tax tables should not be able to collect it.) If you are working full-time at as much or more as the pension amount, the pension should be deferred. Logicially it flies in the face of the definition of a pension.
Serving in the military is a demanding life, no doubt, but so is life everywhere. No one else in the public sector gets these kind of benefits–not even prison guards or police officers, who also deal with “bad guys” every day.
And there is an overreaching aspect to this–the initial point of having a national militia was never to serve as an overseas combat force but to protect our own shores. The world military dynamics changed with the World Wars, but the extra pay for being overseas/deployed just compounds the expense. If service was mandatory (and I don’t know where I stand on that), I’d think the compensation would be justified–since you are giving up a year of freedom in exchange. But with voluntary service, the pay is out of whack, IMHO.
