Should our service members get paid more?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:05 AM
link   
After reading current a thread by Ritual on the US's defense budget
Ritual's thread
I decided to do this one:

Should our militray men and women get a pay raise?
Do you think they make enough considering the hours they put in?
Enlisted Pay Chart 2005

Please answer yes or no and justify your answers:
Yay
or Nay
+ Justfication = good answer


FYI....Here is a Congress yearly pay raise

Consider that all the types of jobs in the military and how much there civilian counterparts make. Computers to Cops to Builders.



[edit on 25-3-2005 by dev_add]

[edit on 25-3-2005 by dev_add]




posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:13 AM
link   
I feel that the people in the military should be paid more, especially the combat troops. I also feel that this shoudl be done solely by increasing the military budget.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:18 AM
link   
What would be a good pay rate for someone to shoot people and hope to hell they miss him, then come home to people spitting on him and calling him Baby killer?

How much money pays for the years of nightmares, the scars on body, mind and soul?

You would think more than the guy at McDonalds anyway



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I would agree that they should get paid more, but then again, who doesn't feel that they should get paid more?

Remember that these soldiers in a conflict recieve combat/hazardous pay.
Maybe that is what is needed to be boosted?
combat pay + hazardous pay

As a single person then, I never worried much about it, but as a married person, obviously this may or would be of concern or issue.




seekerof



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:28 AM
link   
Combat troops do get paid more. now is it enough? That is a tough question. What is their sacrifice really worth? Obviously there is no price you can put on a human life especially when you begin comparing death compensations. WTC victim = millions, 1 dead soldier = lucky to get $250,000 before taxes. Yes I know they signed up for their job, but the same can be said for all those that did not quit working at the WTC after the attack in the 1990s. As you can see it is a very hard argument.

Now back to the OP's question. Do we get paid enough? I say we because I am in the military. I would be a liar if I said I did not want more money. However, I honestly believe I am getting fair pay. This is only because I am living overseas and almost making 1/2 my base pay in un-taxable COLA in addition to normal pay allowances. I also have only a wife and a child to support. However, I know many members who get roughly the same as I do that have more kids to support and often have a hard time paying bills. Mostly these are members stationed stateside. So the OP's question is really hard.

I do not sob for the rich and famous that die, I sob for the common man/woman who does!



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I would agree that they should get paid more, but then again, who doesn't feel that they should get paid more?

Remember that these soldiers in a conflict recieve combat/hazardous pay.
Maybe that is what is needed to be boosted?
combat pay + hazardous pay

As a single person then, I never worried much about it, but as a married person, obviously this may or would be of concern or issue.

seekerof


Combat and hazardous pay usually goes for buying your gear on deployment cause the gear issued is FUBAR.

Anyways...lets not assume combat is a factor here...regular yearly wages should be more alot more



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 12:48 AM
link   

as posted by dev_add
Anyways...lets not assume combat is a factor here...regular yearly wages should be more alot more


That's cool, dev_add.
But I think that what is missing in your equation on figuring should they recieve more pay is BAQ, BAS, living on base or living off base, etc.

In general, they get yearly raises, health/medical, dental, retirement, life insurance, etc.
I think they can do with a step or pay grade increase, but with all the benefits added in, as mentioned above, I think they do adequately. Yes, this can be argued, and argued a variety of ways, but overall, I think they should get more money. Probably not as much as you would be advocating, but an increase nonetheless.




seekerof

[edit on 25-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
That's cool, dev_add.
But I think that what is missing in your equation on figuring should they recieve more pay is BAQ, BAS, living on base or living off base, etc.

In general, they get yearly raises, health/medical, dental, retirement, life insurance, etc.
I think they can do with a step or pay grade increase, but with all the benefits added in, as mentioned above, I think they do adequately. Yes, this can be argued, and argued a variety of ways, but overall, I think they should get more money. Probably not as much as you would be advocating, but an increase nonetheless.

seekerof


I agree with you, I was just pointing out that Combat pay should not be a factor in this because it applies to a few Marines/soldiers....

I know how the pay system works, I recently finished 4+ glorious years in the United States Marine Corps...and I saved alot of money

Then again I was deployed 80% if the time but even now I save.

I think we can both agree on this, Sometimes it seems the junior military enlisted do not make enough because they have nothing to show for it....mostly due to poor money management.

We make enough....everything from bed sheets to food and even condomns are provided for us...the rest is spending cash (at least for us bachelors
).

I do think combat pay should be more and Hazardous duty pay for some locations.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:20 AM
link   
YES!

Why?


Well the more you pay the better the choice in picks the military has, if it paid like civillian markets, they would have no recruitment shortfalls, they would turn away many and therefore get the cream of the crop.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
YES!

Why?


Well the more you pay the better the choice in picks the military has, if it paid like civillian markets, they would have no recruitment shortfalls, they would turn away many and therefore get the cream of the crop.


Ed, I agree they should get a pay raise...just like Seeker stated, but some people argue that they should get a huge pay raise when in fact they signed the contract they know how much they will make before they sign.

And if you pay according to MOS's (military occupational speciality aka job)
then that will break down the rank structure. You cant have a GySgt/E-7 who is a ground pounder or ammo tech making less than the Cpl/E-4 computer geek...it just aint good for business!

And if Petty Officer Joe someday who is in the Nuclear reactor field (I dont know what they do but the school is 2 yrs long) feels that he isnt making enough, then he can tough out 4-6 years get out and get a job making double/triple or whatever.

Anyways most people (at least in the corps) get out after thier 1st term anyways, either cause they cant hack it or cause they take advantage of the good training and get a good paying job or go to college when they get out.


good on them that do



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:51 AM
link   
I'm thinking that perhaps it'd be better to give them something besides a payraise now. Likesay, they don't have to pay taxes, ever. Why should they? They've already done more for society than anyone only paying money. Or they should be better protected from debt, or their families (ie their wives or kids) should get some sort of tax break somesuch when they are deployed overseas. This aparently is a big problem for National Guardsmen. The guys in themilitary tend to not expect to be paid well, but I don';t think that they expect to come home to have stuff repossesed because they couldn't make payments, or have their credit ruined by late payements.

This was actually a huge gripe that ancient republican romans had with military service. They were willing to supply their own arms, march all season in sandals, and fight up close and personal with long knives (practically not swords), and not expect much in return, only to come home to find the senators who didn't go to fight have forclosed on their houses or taken their kids as slaves to repay debt and what not.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

This was actually a huge gripe that ancient republican romans had with military service. They were willing to supply their own arms, march all season in sandals, and fight up close and personal with long knives (practically not swords), and not expect much in return, only to come home to find the senators who didn't go to fight have forclosed on their houses or taken their kids as slaves to repay debt and what not.


goes to show not a lot has changed

I agree that a little "special" treatment for combat troops could be given without costing a lot



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Ya dang skippy they should, the ones that don't run away to Canada. So should teachers that don't sleep with our kids, and cops that don't take the drugs just so they can use them!
Soldiers come home to being treated like crap by people that have no understanding of war and what these fine men and women have provided for our country.
Kiss a soldier and a soldiers angel



posted on Mar, 27 2005 @ 03:18 AM
link   
no, i dont think our service men should get paid more. the only reason why i think that is because they are housed for free, and they get to eat for free. especially in the navy. i mean yea, they are risking thier lives, but thats part of being in the service. maybe you could get a bonus for being on the front, but if you arent on the front risking your life, you dont need to be paid anymore than you already are. plus you get great benefits.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 06:36 PM
link   
hell yeah there should be more pay!
& the family should be exempt from all taxes as well during war time.



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by MAVERICK05
no, i dont think our service men should get paid more. the only reason why i think that is because they are housed for free, and they get to eat for free. especially in the navy. i mean yea, they are risking thier lives, but thats part of being in the service. maybe you could get a bonus for being on the front, but if you arent on the front risking your life, you dont need to be paid anymore than you already are. plus you get great benefits.


Eating for free in the Navy, huh? I am paid about $240 dollars a month (BAS) to buy food for me and my family. When I go to sea, I lose that money. If you live in the barracks, that money is immediatly taken from your check, and sent to the galley. Nothing is free in the miliary, its all give and take.

Same goes for "Free Housing". THe military has started this new program call PPV. What this does, is sells housing to a private company, which now charges you to live there. Sure, it goes according to your paygrade, but I am still paying over $800 for a little place that most people run away from, 30 miles from base.

As to those great benefits, how come my good everywhere insurance won't pay for my daughters dental?

As to being on the frontline to get paid more, why? Doesn't everyone face the chance of going into combat? Just because you are told to go there, doesn't entitle you to more money.

As to Nucs, they get payed way more than they should. To give an increase in everyones pay, cut Nucs pay. Do you really need $500 more a month to change a lightbulb? I don't thinks so.

Personal opinion here, cut minimum wage to what what we make an hour, get rid of the huge salaries given to politicians, and make them work a real job, and earn there pay. (If everyone makes less money, prices for things go down, amazing, huh?)

Anyways, enough ranting for now, maybe more to come later...



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   
I was a soldier for 4 years and the pay was lousey. I almost made more as a ditch digger for a plumbing contractor than as a private in the US Army. Soldiers should be paid the same amount as a new police officer in a big city ($60,000 annually?), because the risk of injury or death is pretty much the same.

Let me take it a step further, I was a 19E tanker (M60A3 and M1A1) and combat MOS's like mine should be paid alot more than a REMF in a supply depot.

Bear with me here..... as I sat in the mud one cold day in Germany...my track was broken down, it was pouring rain and my breakfast was floating on my paper plate...I thought to myself:

-If I become a lifer, Ill never have a nice house, Ill never have a nice new pick-up truck and Ill never make enough money to enjoy life. I know moneys not everything, but......

-If I become a lifer, Ill end up looking like Top ( Company 1st Sergeant) drinks too much caffiene, too skinny and always yelling...Hell Top probably died at 57! Life is hard for a NCO in a front line unit....I did'nt want to end up like that.

sorry for the long answer dev_add


Maximu§

[edit on 103131p://111 by LA_Maximus]



posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   
*Gives puppy dog eyes* Please, pay us more!


In all seriousness, you do get paid more for going overseas rather then staying CONUS. I'm not familiar with the pay for those who are in combat zones. If they don't already they should get paid more than those who aren't risking their lives. Partying in Germany or Japan for the Airmen isn't putting your life in risk no matter how many beers you have.





top topics
 
0

log in

join