Quick! Support an unconstitutional feelgood bill!

[Tekania]

*shrugs*, it's the fact that they're well paid is why I don't generally throw out much "support the troops!" mentality. They don't exactly have much in common with random guy at Valley Forge or Gettysburg these days.

I wouldn't call it "well paid". It can be quite a struggle in many cases to support ones family on a military paycheck.

[SaintB]

*shrugs*, it's the fact that they're well paid is why I don't generally throw out much "support the troops!" mentality. They don't exactly have much in common with random guy at Valley Forge or Gettysburg these days.

I wouldn't call it "well paid". It can be quite a struggle in many cases to support ones family on a military paycheck.

It may be true but the salary they make is still more than mine, or anyone in my family other than my brother who is in the military.

[Tekania]

Most enlisted are just over the poverty line, actually. I think E-2 makes like $24,000 and E-3 makes $26,000?

Soldiers are paid like shit and worked like dogs, tbh.

BBut they get along of free shit for that (most they would never get time to use unless it's part of their job.)

You're not counting that this money in many cases is going to support a wife and also kids. You need to look at the larger picture... Not merely "random single soldier on the battlefield".

[Tekania]

I wouldn't call it "well paid". It can be quite a struggle in many cases to support ones family on a military paycheck.

It may be true but the salary they make is still more than mine, or anyone in my family other than my brother who is in the military.

There is a wide range of salaries depending on ones grade. Most military personnel (those between the grades of E-1 and E-5) make between $17,000 and $28,000 per year. And given that you're talking about not paying someone that you're still working, whereby there is no way to make up the loss of pay within the context of support for their family, it makes it even worse.

[Sibirsky]

Starting pay is only $1,467.60 per month. Now, they get allowances for food and housing if they are not housed in military quarters, they get other allowances for being overseas, or in danger zones. Pay goes up with rank and experience, but most of them are far from well paid.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militar ... ble1-4.pdf

$1,467.60 per month is certainly nothing to complain about since food and housing are taken care of. I'd say they are well paid.

Housing and food are not always taken care of. If they are not deployed that money is taxed. $17,611.20 is not well paid. That's like half of the median wage.

[Sibirsky]

The military's food and housing, while decent, isn't exactly gourmet and is like college dorms, respectively.

Not as great a deal as you're making it out to be.

And in college they'd be PAYING $1,467 a month for that.

For the education. Your point?

[SaintB]

And in college they'd be PAYING $1,467 a month for that.

For the education. Your point?

My point is that the level of income plus room and board is not so bad all told when there are even more people in the same age range living in the same conditions and paying an equal amount to that salary for it.

[Myrensis]

I'm fine with a one-time violation of the Constitution in order to PAY THE FREAKING MILITARY.

These people have families to support and are serving our nation.

A lot of federal employees have families to support and are serving our nation. Why is the military somehow more important?

I'm fairly sure most federal employees don't spend 12-15 months at a time living in tents/cargo containers halfway across the world surrounded by large numbers of people who would be quite happy to kill them.

However, since we're getting paid regardless of the dick waving in Washington, I can't really muster the energy to do much more than shake my head and giggle about how people get so worked up because the people they elected turn out to be idiots.

[Sibirsky]

For the education. Your point?

My point is that the level of income plus room and board is not so bad all told when there are even more people in the same age range living in the same conditions and paying an equal amount to that salary for it.

They are paying for school. Soldiers risk their lives, health and well being if they are deployed. They are underpaid. In the private sector, you can essentially do the same shit (Xe Services for example), and then if deployed you would be well paid by any measure. Instead of 1/2 the median wage, you'd be looking at 10x median wage. Of course they want experience, so a private has no chance of getting that job.

[Sibirsky]

A lot of federal employees have families to support and are serving our nation. Why is the military somehow more important?

I'm fairly sure most federal employees don't spend 12-15 months at a time living in tents/cargo containers halfway across the world surrounded by large numbers of people who would be quite happy to kill them.

However, since we're getting paid regardless of the dick waving in Washington, I can't really muster the energy to do much more than shake my head and giggle about how people get so worked up because the people they elected turn out to be idiots.

They only elected idiots because they were given several idiots to choose from.

[Myrensis]

For the education. Your point?

My point is that the level of income plus room and board is not so bad all told when there are even more people in the same age range living in the same conditions and paying an equal amount to that salary for it.

I'm pretty sure the other people in the age range living in the same conditions don't have a job description that includes possible violent death/dismemberment/maiming, or have contract clauses that allow involuntary extensions, or requires them to be seperated from their families for months/a year or more at a time with only sporadic ability to contact them.

Trying to compare our pay and benefits against civilians working regular jobs/going to school doesn't work. As Sibirsky said, we get paid a fraction of what civilians with equivalent jobs do.

[SaintB]

My point is that the level of income plus room and board is not so bad all told when there are even more people in the same age range living in the same conditions and paying an equal amount to that salary for it.

They are paying for school. Soldiers risk their lives, health and well being if they are deployed. They are underpaid. In the private sector, you can essentially do the same shit (Xe Services for example), and then if deployed you would be well paid by any measure. Instead of 1/2 the median wage, you'd be looking at 10x median wage. Of course they want experience, so a private has no chance of getting that job.

The salary plus the food and housing plus the civilian discounts plus all the other benefits heaped onto them far exceeds what most people at their level of wages receives already; their wages are usually higher than what an average person of their age earns and are far superior to what the average soldier earned throughout history.

I think they are compensated just fine for the most part. We have other matters to worry about such as what the lowest payed workers are earning compared to the highest payed.

[Sibirsky]

My point is that the level of income plus room and board is not so bad all told when there are even more people in the same age range living in the same conditions and paying an equal amount to that salary for it.

I'm pretty sure the other people in the age range living in the same conditions don't have a job description that includes possible violent death/dismemberment/maiming, or have contract clauses that allow involuntary extensions, or requires them to be seperated from their families for months/a year or more at a time with only sporadic ability to contact them.

Trying to compare our pay and benefits against civilians working regular jobs/going to school doesn't work. As Sibirsky said, we get paid a fraction of what civilians with equivalent jobs do.

I'm in the age range. Violent death/dismemberment/maiming is not a high risk for me. One of my boys lost a leg in Afghanistan (roadside IED that also killed one of his friends). He was being paid less then me for work. He's getting free school now, but that's a minor benefit considering the risks involved.

[Sibirsky]

They are paying for school. Soldiers risk their lives, health and well being if they are deployed. They are underpaid. In the private sector, you can essentially do the same shit (Xe Services for example), and then if deployed you would be well paid by any measure. Instead of 1/2 the median wage, you'd be looking at 10x median wage. Of course they want experience, so a private has no chance of getting that job.

The salary plus the food and housing plus the civilian discounts plus all the other benefits heaped onto them far exceeds what most people at their level of wages receives already; their wages are usually higher than what an average person of their age earns and are far superior to what the average soldier earned throughout history.

I think they are compensated just fine for the most part. We have other matters to worry about such as what the lowest payed workers are earning compared to the highest payed.

The income gap is a big issue? Ok, how do you address it?

[SaintB]

The salary plus the food and housing plus the civilian discounts plus all the other benefits heaped onto them far exceeds what most people at their level of wages receives already; their wages are usually higher than what an average person of their age earns and are far superior to what the average soldier earned throughout history.

I think they are compensated just fine for the most part. We have other matters to worry about such as what the lowest payed workers are earning compared to the highest payed.

The income gap is a big issue? Ok, how do you address it?

That's the billion dollar question. I don't pretend to know how but at least I admit it and acknowledge its a problem. The answer would benefit civilians and soldiers alike.

[Sibirsky]

The income gap is a big issue? Ok, how do you address it?

That's the billion dollar question. I don't pretend to know how but at least I admit it and acknowledge its a problem. The answer would benefit civilians and soldiers alike.

Well that's an honest answer. I appreciate that.

[SaintB]

That's the billion dollar question. I don't pretend to know how but at least I admit it and acknowledge its a problem. The answer would benefit civilians and soldiers alike.

Well that's an honest answer. I appreciate that.

I'm pretty sure it would take someone wiser and more knowledgeable in economics and a good many other areas than I to figure it out short of using brute force to accomplish it. I like to think I'm smart but there are things that are arcane to me and that is one of them.

[Sibirsky]

Well that's an honest answer. I appreciate that.

I'm pretty sure it would take someone wiser and more knowledgeable in economics and a good many other areas than I to figure it out short of using brute force to accomplish it. I like to think I'm smart but there are things that are arcane to me and that is one of them.

Brute force is simple, and would work, but would create many problems for corporations in the lower paid fields. The most common approach I've seen is to limit CEO's pay to say 100x the lowest paid employee's pay. But that would create problems for McDonald's for example, compared to Microsoft. They wouldn't be able to get as good of talent for their CEO.

[Tekania]

I'm pretty sure it would take someone wiser and more knowledgeable in economics and a good many other areas than I to figure it out short of using brute force to accomplish it. I like to think I'm smart but there are things that are arcane to me and that is one of them.

Brute force is simple, and would work, but would create many problems for corporations in the lower paid fields. The most common approach I've seen is to limit CEO's pay to say 100x the lowest paid employee's pay. But that would create problems for McDonald's for example, compared to Microsoft. They wouldn't be able to get as good of talent for their CEO.

I doubt Microsoft pays their janitorial staff THAT well.

[Sibirsky]

Brute force is simple, and would work, but would create many problems for corporations in the lower paid fields. The most common approach I've seen is to limit CEO's pay to say 100x the lowest paid employee's pay. But that would create problems for McDonald's for example, compared to Microsoft. They wouldn't be able to get as good of talent for their CEO.

I doubt Microsoft pays their janitorial staff THAT well.

I doubt Microsoft has janitorial staff. They probably outsource that like most businesses.

So, MCD lowest paid $7.25/hr x 2080 = $15,080 = CEO limit of $1,508,000
MSFT, some administrative assistant say $35,000 = $3,500,000 CEO limit.

[Greed and Death]

Starting pay is only $1,467.60 per month. Now, they get allowances for food and housing if they are not housed in military quarters, they get other allowances for being overseas, or in danger zones. Pay goes up with rank and experience, but most of them are far from well paid.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militar ... ble1-4.pdf

$1,467.60 per month is certainly nothing to complain about since food and housing are taken care of. I'd say they are well paid.

If they live on base it is a dorm room, with a cafeteria for food.
If they live off base an E1 would get 462.00 dollars a month for housing and 323.87 dollars per month for food.
Now the housing has a regional adjustment so may be more.
But over all compensation is about 2253.47 a month. For fresh out of highschool it is not bad pay. For working 80 hours a week and being sent around the world to fight wars it is horrendous pay.

[New new nebraska]

Guess what? All federal employees "have families to support and are serving our nation."

Well, except for the job lots that don't have families. Which includes quite a few people in the military.

I'm not OK with a one-time violation of the Constitution in order to pay the military. If you like, think of it as one example of why it's so important to pass a budget.

You care about a piece of paper that's almost 250 years old more than you care about the men and women who protect you? I think you need to get your priorities in order.

While, I certainty agree those military personal should have been paid in the eevnt of a shutdown A) there are other ways to go about doing that, rather than an unconstitutional bill B)all federal workers need to pay there bills, etc. and many also have families. Maybe the national park ranger or IRS accountant isn't essential per se (as in Holy shit we'll die without these people! whereas if the military stop for a couple of days its that) but they still help their country and C) WTF! why the blatant disregard for the constitution. That 250 year old "piece of paper" is the supreme law of the land. It is very much important. Saying you can waive it for convience is basically a giant middle finger to all laws and this country in general. If it was something you disgreed with and I said "oh, its just an old piece of paper." you'd be up in arms. So yeah x 20.

[Caninope]

The military's food and housing, while decent, isn't exactly gourmet and is like college dorms, respectively.

Not as great a deal as you're making it out to be.

And in college they'd be PAYING $1,467 a month for that.

Dorms don't cost 17k a year.

[Tekania]

I doubt Microsoft pays their janitorial staff THAT well.

I doubt Microsoft has janitorial staff. They probably outsource that like most businesses.

So, MCD lowest paid $7.25/hr x 2080 = $15,080 = CEO limit of $1,508,000
MSFT, some administrative assistant say $35,000 = $3,500,000 CEO limit.

The McD's CEO can make $3,500,000... he just needs to to pay his workers at least about $16.80 an hour.

[Ashas Favor]

I doubt Microsoft has janitorial staff. They probably outsource that like most businesses.

So, MCD lowest paid $7.25/hr x 2080 = $15,080 = CEO limit of $1,508,000
MSFT, some administrative assistant say $35,000 = $3,500,000 CEO limit.

The McD's CEO can make $3,500,000... he just needs to to pay his workers at least about $16.80 an hour.

Yep, and this is one of the many huge problems in the US. As the price of everything continues to go up...we expect people to live sensibly off of $7.25 an hour. This is roughly (40 hour week) $1160 a month. If a soldier makes $1400 as mentioned in one of the above posts...this is quite crappy. Am I advocating that the minimum wage be increases (again)? Not really. Why should the government need to get involved with Corporations paying employees a sensible wage to say...be able to live without worrying where gas money will come from. Especially considering that we have adopted the idea that $2000 a month is "plenty" to live off of. It is really easy to see that most of the people that post here have no idea or no experience at all trying to provide for a family and take care of basic necessities. My wife and I make nearly $3000 a month together and struggle at times especially considering student loans, price of food raising, and the ridiculous price of gas at the moment. I shutter to think what someone who fights for the safety and protection of this country thinks reading this nonsense about them being overpaid.