Army about to shrink to pre-WWII level...

[ouwasp]

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-proposes-shrink-us-army-pre-wwii-level-183915098.html;_ylt=AwrTWf1X8gtTyCsAGVTQtDMD

Standing armies are very expensive, to be sure. Still...hate to be in a position where we may regret not having enough troops.

Hate to see the USAF giving up the A-10. Maybe it won't come to pass.

[8timechamps]

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-proposes-shrink-us-army-pre-wwii-level-183915098.html;_ylt=AwrTWf1X8gtTyCsAGVTQtDMD

Standing armies are very expensive, to be sure. Still...hate to be in a position where we may regret not having enough troops.

Hate to see the USAF giving up the A-10. Maybe it won't come to pass.

In reality, the A-10 is well past it's intended lifespan, so I'm not expecting it to be around much longer one way or another. One hell of a plane, and like the C-130, was a engineering feat.

I saw a poll on CNN.com (obviously a lib outlet) that asked folks if they agreed with the proposal to shrink the military. 70% were against it, which was surprising given the nature of their readership.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Obammy needs to pays for his slavery payments to the non-working, non-producing dem voters and section 8ers... he can't do that with the needed Defense spending. Besides the Leftist has always hated the military. Hard to figure, given the vision he has, he would never have gone to the schools he did or been able to community organize **** and never been elected to anything...

[rock on sooner]

It makes sense to phase out the U2, because of the drone program. The
Warthog (A-10) was useful in Gulf One and in Iraq in Gulf Two, not so much
in Afghanistan, since the Taliban and AQ don't use tanks very often. They'll
probably wind up on the secondary weapons market.

Downsizing the Army 13% and National Guard 5% is useful, ONLY if rapid
response units, along with JSOC and other spec ops units, are ramped up
and fully funded. I'm not sure the National Guard cuts are in order, since
those units would be called on to support regular army missions. Hagel
talked about Army and the Guard, but no mention of Marines/Navy so I'm
not certain about the overall military strength going forward.

[ouwasp]

Seems like I read somewhere the Navy was still going to keep 11 carriers active...but perhaps cut back on cruisers, or just not replace cruisers as they are refitted. As long as the USN can project power so we can reach out and touch someone when need be.

Back in the day, my ANG unit flew A-7s...when we were doing our wargames in the summer, we always hoped we'd get "attacked" by an A-10 unit. They would come streaking over the base in a smooth, businesslike manner, engines humming. We dreaded and hated an "attack" by F-4s. Those things were the LOUDEST planes we ever faced! They would fly low, blasting us without mercy. and we just knew the aircrews were laughing it up as they roared overhead. About the time we shook our heads, cursing the echoing shockwaves, another pair would RIP IN from another direction, adding to our misery as we threw on our CW suits. Many of my fellow cops semi-jestingly wished we had live rounds to fire at those guys...we hated the F-4. We liked the A-10.

[sappstuf]

They Navy will continue to have 11 carriers unless sequestration continues through 2016. If that happens then the George Washington (I think) which needs its nuclear reactor to be refueled, would instead be retired.

It would maintain buying destroyers and subs at the normal rate, again, unless sequestration continues and then we will go from 2 new destroyers a year to something less.

Service members are about to take it in the shorts. Pay raises are frozen at 1%, the way off-base housing is paid will go back to the way it was in the 90s where service members were expected to pay out of their own pockets to live out in town. When I came in, it was 20% out of pocket. That is 20% that comes out of base pay... In another words, an indirect pay cut. Changes to COLA, commissaries being closed..

Service members, specifically enlisted, would take a big hit if this all went through.

[diverdog]

They Navy will continue to have 11 carriers unless sequestration continues through 2016. If that happens then the George Washington (I think) which needs its nuclear reactor to be refueled, would instead be retired.

It would maintain buying destroyers and subs at the normal rate, again, unless sequestration continues and then we will go from 2 new destroyers a year to something less.

Service members are about to take it in the shorts. Pay raises are frozen at 1%, the way off-base housing is paid will go back to the way it was in the 90s where service members were expected to pay out of their own pockets to live out in town. When I came in, it was 20% out of pocket. That is 20% that comes out of base pay... In another words, an indirect pay cut. Changes to COLA, commissaries being closed..

Service members, specifically enlisted, would take a big hit if this all went through.

Welcome to the real world. The vast majority of civilian companies do not offer cola's. My company froze pay raises for 5 years. Why should we pay colas on top of pay raises in the first place?

Military pay is better than civilian pay in most cases. Not in all career fields but most and the retirement after 20 years of service is a huge benefit.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-vs-civilian-benefits-overview.html

[sappstuf]

Welcome to the real world. The vast majority of civilian companies do not offer cola's. My company froze pay raises for 5 years. Why should we pay colas on top of pay raises in the first place?

Military pay is better than civilian pay in most cases. Not in all career fields but most and the retirement after 20 years of service is a huge benefit.

http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-vs-civilian-benefits-overview.html

That is not what your link says...


Civilian: Usually higher than military pay

I do like this part..


Work hours: Vary. Occasionally work weekends. You are on call 24 hours, 7 days a week.

I was in Afghanistan for 8.5 months where I easily worked 90+ hours a week every single week I was there. Came home for 8 months, moved the family to Italy and I am now 8 months into another 10.5 deployment to the Middle East and I have had exactly 5 days off in those 8 months.

To do the simple math, that is 19 out of 27 months I am gone from my family. Where is the civilian equivalent to that?

And my family lives in Europe where the Euro is killing the dollar. Are you saying there should be no COLA? That service members should be required to suck up all additional costs of living overseas?

[shytnik]

Diverdog I don't know how you think that is even close to true unless you are relying solely on this article for that opinion. When I was in the Army I could barely get by and people doing the civilian equivalent I was doing made nearly 3x what I did and didn't work near the hours. As an E5 I was still eligible for WIC and food stamps with just one kid, and still got WIC as an E6. I know the pay has gotten a bit better in the last 15 years since I left, but not tremendously. This article is geared toward recruiting people into the military and filled with lies, like most recruiters tend to do. Let's look at the claims vs. reality. Special Pay is only if you are doing dangerous things like flying frequently on old *** beat up military aircraft, jump pay for parachutist, hazard pay for being in a war zone and getting shot at, so you earn those easily and civilian jobs that are extremely hazardous will pay you more as well. Tax advantages....again, only when in a war zone. So, pay is in no way better than pay in civilian jobs as you claim, especially when you consider the number of hours worked. I served nearly 12 years and it took me just a few months to be making considerably more outside the military.

Healthcare - free, not so fast my friend, that used to be the case, but now you have to pay for insurance just like the rest of the world. My dad who served in Vietnam and 26 years after and was promised free healthcare pays an insurance company to cover his medical and coinsurance for prescriptions, just like a civilian, so again not true. They do cover his meds and care related to disability as a result of his service.

Housing provided by the military or allowance tax free...yeah, when I got to Fort Carson the waiting list for on base housing was 3 years. My allowance was about $600 a month which wouldn't even buy me rent in the ghetto part of town. most rents were twice that. So partially true, but far from free housing.

Travel....yeah my travel allowed me to spend about a week in Germany in route to deployments in Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia and Hungry. There was also that trip to the desert in the early 90's, but hey, it was a warm spot with sand, I guess you could call that advantageous. Space available travel, there is rarely if ever space unless of course you have a buddy with a bird or stars on his shoulder.

Vacation, yeap 30 days a year is true. I get about 6 weeks a year now that I am out of the army.

Work hours...occasionally work weekends, yeah....every occasion they can. I worked about 60-65 hours a week during most weeks, and during deployments usually 80. Anything over 40 now and I get this neat thing called overtime. Military doesn't pay you overtime, they own you 24/7.

Insurance, yes you have comprehensive life insurance, but not free. They took $16 a month for the $200K policy I had and that was in the early and mid 90's.

Retirement. most places are getting away from defined benefit, my job still has it but requires 25 years to retire, so a 20 year retirement is nice. However it's only 50% of your pay if you retire at 20 and since you don't make great pay, unless you are a high ranking officer, it's not a livable retirement, you simply get out and go to work somewhere else. And honestly the way the military beats up your body many people are very limited in what they can do after 20 years of service. It takes 30 years to get to 75% retirement, which is exactly the same as my current job.

[diverdog]

That is not what your link says...



I do like this part..



I was in Afghanistan for 8.5 months where I easily worked 90+ hours a week every single week I was there. Came home for 8 months, moved the family to Italy and I am now 8 months into another 10.5 deployment to the Middle East and I have had exactly 5 days off in those 8 months.

To do the simple math, that is 19 out of 27 months I am gone from my family. Where is the civilian equivalent to that?

And my family lives in Europe where the Euro is killing the dollar. Are you saying there should be no COLA? That service members should be required to suck up all additional costs of living overseas?

Sapp:

I have worked both in the military and civilian world. The civilian world is much harder. My current work schedule is 70-80 a week. I get in around 7 pm and do not get home til 8 most days. Plus I work 3 saturdays a month. We are under the gun for sales production every second of the day. I am tethered to the blackberry 24/7 even on vacation.....err workation. As my boss says the goals never stop. That is the life of most corporate sales people and managers. Do not even get me started on how hard small business people work....talk about pressure.

When my father retired after 24 years in the AF he was stunned how much harder civilian life was as compared to the military.

I am not saying there are not hard jobs in the military but I can guarantee you by and large civilian work is harder.

No problem with COLA's on overseas deployments. My beef is with an oped I recently read in our local paper about a military retiree bitching about a 1% COLA on his retirement income. When you retire in the civilian world there are damn few companies that pay colas. Mostly you are paid on the set formula at the time of retirement. There is no promise to military people to provide unlimited income increases in retirement.

You asked about deployments. Long term there are probably a few civilian jobs that may require people to be gone that much. However there are guys like my BIL who travel 5 days a week, every week for years.
Another one of my friends works for a forestry company and he is gone overseas for months on end. And then there is my friend who is a medical tech who rotates to Africa on a six month on two month home schedule.

Sorry I grabbed the wrong link on pay:

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,246954,00.html



By 2009, the report says, average RMC for enlisted exceeded the median wage for civilians in each comparison group -- high school diploma, some college and two-year degrees. Average RMC was $50,747 or "about $21,800 more than the median earnings for civilians from the combined comparison groups."



The military is well compensated.

BTW did you ask for an overseas assignment?

[sappstuf]

Sapp:

I have worked both in the military and civilian world. The civilian world is much harder. My current work schedule is 70-80 a week. I get in around 7 pm and do not get home til 8 most days. Plus I work 3 saturdays a month. We are under the gun for sales production every second of the day. I am tethered to the blackberry 24/7 even on vacation.....err workation. As my boss says the goals never stop. That is the life of most corporate sales people and managers. Do not even get me started on how hard small business people work....talk about pressure.

When my father retired after 24 years in the AF he was stunned how much harder civilian life was as compared to the military.

I am not saying there are not hard jobs in the military but I can guarantee you by and large civilian work is harder.

No problem with COLA's on overseas deployments. My beef is with an oped I recently read in our local paper about a military retiree bitching about a 1% COLA on his retirement income. When you retire in the civilian world there are damn few companies that pay colas. Mostly you are paid on the set formula at the time of retirement. There is no promise to military people to provide unlimited income increases in retirement.

You asked about deployments. Long term there are probably a few civilian jobs that may require people to be gone that much. However there are guys like my BIL who travel 5 days a week, every week for years.
Another one of my friends works for a forestry company and he is gone overseas for months on end. And then there is my friend who is a medical tech who rotates to Africa on a six month on two month home schedule.

Sorry I grabbed the wrong link on pay:

http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,246954,00.html




The military is well compensated.

BTW did you ask for an overseas assignment?

From your link:


To make its pay comparisons, the QRMC used Regular Military Compensation, which combines basic pay with Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) and Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) plus the federal tax advantage on the tax-free allowances.

You do understand that there is a large segment of the military that does not receive Basic Allowance for Housing or Basic Allowance for Subsistence.. Almost all are junior enlisted.. So that review is slanted right off the bat along with the federal tax advantage of an allowance they are not receiving. Ask any single Marine below E-5 or E-6 and 99 out of 100 don't receive either one. Hell, at this moment, I am not receiving either one of those.

If you consider being given a choice between Japan and Italy and I asked for Italy, then yes, I asked for overseas assignment..

I was in Afghanistan with several retired Navy Chiefs working as contractors. All were making $175+ with one making almost $400K and always talked about it was so much easier than what they were doing as senior enlisted in the Navy. Instead of having to worry about 100 guys, they either worried only about themselves or just a couple of others.

One of those jobs was almost the exact equivalent to what I do. He made 3 times what I made and lived 2 buildings over. He wore flip flops around in the summer. I was more jealous of that than anything..

[FaninAma]

That is not what your link says...



I do like this part..



I was in Afghanistan for 8.5 months where I easily worked 90+ hours a week every single week I was there. Came home for 8 months, moved the family to Italy and I am now 8 months into another 10.5 deployment to the Middle East and I have had exactly 5 days off in those 8 months.

To do the simple math, that is 19 out of 27 months I am gone from my family. Where is the civilian equivalent to that?

And my family lives in Europe where the Euro is killing the dollar. Are you saying there should be no COLA? That service members should be required to suck up all additional costs of living overseas?

Things like this is why I have advised my kids to never join the military. Members of our military are great citizens and terrific members of our society. Most, if not all, could be very successful in any field they chose. It floors me that individuals of such character and quality would allow themselves to be used by greedy, uncaring, corrupt politicians.

Additionally, the upper echelon of military leadership are nothing more than professional politicians themselves.

[diverdog]

From your link:



You do understand that there is a large segment of the military that does not receive Basic Allowance for Housing or Basic Allowance for Subsistence.. Almost all are junior enlisted.. So that review is slanted right off the bat along with the federal tax advantage of an allowance they are not receiving. Ask any single Marine below E-5 or E-6 and 99 out of 100 don't receive either one. Hell, at this moment, I am not receiving either one of those.

If you consider being given a choice between Japan and Italy and I asked for Italy, then yes, I asked for overseas assignment..

I was in Afghanistan with several retired Navy Chiefs working as contractors. All were making $175+ with one making almost $400K and always talked about it was so much easier than what they were doing as senior enlisted in the Navy. Instead of having to worry about 100 guys, they either worried only about themselves or just a couple of others.

One of those jobs was almost the exact equivalent to what I do. He made 3 times what I made and lived 2 buildings over. He wore flip flops around in the summer. I was more jealous of that than anything..

sapp:

You cannot make any comparisons to the money contractors make to what you make. That is not reality and quite frankly it is a scam on the tax payers. At some point it will go away. As a side note I was recruited to go to Iraq to help set up banking operations. The pay was really really good. Had I not had children I might have done it.

Are those Marines provided room and board? Most likely they are. One of my scouts went into the Army as a cook and I can guarantee you he is making double or triple what a line cook makes in the civilian world. His barracks are far nicer than the crap holes I lived in when I was young.

You also tend to discount vacation time, medical insurance, education benefits and a gold plated retirement plan. Ninety percent of the kids that enter the civilian work force with a little bit of college will not get a job that has any of those benefits. If they have a medical plan it cost more than they can afford. On top of all that you get increases for time in grade. Show me any civilian job where that happens.

I only asked the question about Sicily because my dad asked for overseas assignments and he never got one.

Outside of our usual back and forth.....how is your family doing and how are you doing? Where are you deployed? Since you said ME I am going to assume Qatar, Oman, Kuwait or Bahrain.

[diverdog]

Things like this is why I have advised my kids to never join the military. Members of our military are great citizens and terrific members of our society. Most, if not all, could be very successful in any field they chose. It floors me that individuals of such character and quality would allow themselves to be used by greedy, uncaring, corrupt politicians.

Additionally, the upper echelon of military leadership are nothing more than professional politicians themselves.

You get to blow stuff up! :). That is worth the price of admission alone.

[FaninAma]

You get to blow stuff up! :). That is worth the price of admission alone.

Yaeh and other people get to try and blow you up and if you survive maybe they will put you on a Wounded Warriors commercial to raise money.

[diverdog]

Yaeh and other people get to try and blow you up and if you survive maybe they will put you on a Wounded Warriors commercial to raise money.

See it is a win win situation all around.

[diverdog]

Diverdog I don't know how you think that is even close to true unless you are relying solely on this article for that opinion. When I was in the Army I could barely get by and people doing the civilian equivalent I was doing made nearly 3x what I did and didn't work near the hours. As an E5 I was still eligible for WIC and food stamps with just one kid, and still got WIC as an E6. I know the pay has gotten a bit better in the last 15 years since I left, but not tremendously. This article is geared toward recruiting people into the military and filled with lies, like most recruiters tend to do. Let's look at the claims vs. reality. Special Pay is only if you are doing dangerous things like flying frequently on old *** beat up military aircraft, jump pay for parachutist, hazard pay for being in a war zone and getting shot at, so you earn those easily and civilian jobs that are extremely hazardous will pay you more as well. Tax advantages....again, only when in a war zone. So, pay is in no way better than pay in civilian jobs as you claim, especially when you consider the number of hours worked. I served nearly 12 years and it took me just a few months to be making considerably more outside the military.

Healthcare - free, not so fast my friend, that used to be the case, but now you have to pay for insurance just like the rest of the world. My dad who served in Vietnam and 26 years after and was promised free healthcare pays an insurance company to cover his medical and coinsurance for prescriptions, just like a civilian, so again not true. They do cover his meds and care related to disability as a result of his service.

Housing provided by the military or allowance tax free...yeah, when I got to Fort Carson the waiting list for on base housing was 3 years. My allowance was about $600 a month which wouldn't even buy me rent in the ghetto part of town. most rents were twice that. So partially true, but far from free housing.

Travel....yeah my travel allowed me to spend about a week in Germany in route to deployments in Bosnia, Kosovo, Croatia and Hungry. There was also that trip to the desert in the early 90's, but hey, it was a warm spot with sand, I guess you could call that advantageous. Space available travel, there is rarely if ever space unless of course you have a buddy with a bird or stars on his shoulder.

Vacation, yeap 30 days a year is true. I get about 6 weeks a year now that I am out of the army.

Work hours...occasionally work weekends, yeah....every occasion they can. I worked about 60-65 hours a week during most weeks, and during deployments usually 80. Anything over 40 now and I get this neat thing called overtime. Military doesn't pay you overtime, they own you 24/7.

Insurance, yes you have comprehensive life insurance, but not free. They took $16 a month for the $200K policy I had and that was in the early and mid 90's.

Retirement. most places are getting away from defined benefit, my job still has it but requires 25 years to retire, so a 20 year retirement is nice. However it's only 50% of your pay if you retire at 20 and since you don't make great pay, unless you are a high ranking officer, it's not a livable retirement, you simply get out and go to work somewhere else. And honestly the way the military beats up your body many people are very limited in what they can do after 20 years of service. It takes 30 years to get to 75% retirement, which is exactly the same as my current job.

Go back and look at the last 15 years. Military pay has gone up significantly while civilian pay has remained almost flat. With our budget problems military pay and benefits have got to be looked at. Even conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation agree with this assessment.

i bet you cannot retire at 40 years old and collect retirement at 40 unless you work for the government.