Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

I find this interesting reading. =

Subject: Military Pay

This is an Airman's response to Cindy Williams' editorial piece in the Washington Times about MILITARY PAY, it should be printed in all newspapers across America.



On Nov. 12, Ms Cindy Williams (from Laverne and Shirley TV show) wrote a piece for the Washington Times, denouncing the pay raise(s) coming service members' way this year -- citing that the stated 13% wage was more than they deserve.



A young airman from Hill AFB responds to her article below. He ought to get a bonus for this.



"Ms Williams:

I just had the pleasure of reading your column, "Our GIs earn enough" and I am a bit confused. Frankly, I'm wondering where this vaunted overpayment is going, because as far as I can tell, it disappears every month between DFAS (The Defense Finance and Accounting Service)and my bank account.

Checking my latest earnings statement I see that I make $1,117.80 before taxes. After taxes, I take home $874.20. When I run that through the calculator, I come up with an annual salary of $13,413.60 before taxes, and $10,490.40, after.

I work in the Air Force Network Control Center where I am part of the team responsible for a 5,000 host computer network. I am involved with infrastructure segments, specifically with Cisco Systems equipment. A quick check under jobs for Network Technicians in the Washington, D.C. area reveals a position in my career field, requiring three years
experience with my job. Amazingly, this job does NOT pay $13,413.60 a year. No, this job is being offered at $70,000 to $80,000 per annum...I'm sure you can draw the obvious conclusions.

Given the tenor of your column, I would assume that you NEVER had the pleasure of serving your country in her armed forces Before you take it upon yourself to once more castigate congressional and DOD leadership for attempting to get the families in the military's lowest pay brackets off of WIC and food stamps, I suggest that you join a group of deploying soldiers headed for AFGHANISTAN; I leave the choice of service branch up to you.

Whatever choice you make, though, opt for the SIX month rotation: it will guarantee you the longest possible time away from your family and friends, thus giving you full "deployment experience." As your group prepares to board the plane, make sure to note the spouses and children who are saying good-bye to their loved ones. Also take care to note that several
families are still unsure of how they'll be able to make ends meet while the primary
breadwinner is gone -- obviously they've been squandering the "vast" piles of cash the government has been giving them.

Try to deploy over a major holiday; Christmas and Thanksgiving are perennial favorites. And when you're actually over there, sitting in a foxhole, shivering against the cold desert night; and the flight sergeant tells you that there aren't enough people on shift to relieve you for
chow, remember this: trade whatever MRE (meal-ready-to-eat) you manage to get for
the tuna noodle casserole or cheese tortellini, and add Tabasco to everything. This gives some flavor. Talk to your loved ones as often as you are permitted; it won't nearly be long enough or often enough, but take what you can get and be thankful for it. You may have picked up on the fact that I disagree with most of the points you present in your opened
piece.

But, tomorrow from KABUL, I will defend to the death your right to say it.


You see, I am an American fighting man, a guarantor of your First Amendment rights and every other right you cherish. On a daily basis, my brother and sister soldiers worldwide ensure that you and people like you can thumb your collective nose at us, all on a salary that is nothing short of pitiful and under conditions that would make most people cringe. We
hemorrhage our best and brightest into the private sector because we can't offer the stability and pay of civilian companies.

And you, Ms. Williams, have the gall to say that we make more than we deserve? Rubbish!

A1C Michael Bragg Hill AFB AFNCC

------------------------------------------

Pantera

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

WOW, what a letter. I have a son in Mississippi rite now getting ready to go to Iraq. (25 yrs. old) We are NOT happy about this at all. He is in communications and technical data with computers. I applaud this Soldier for writing this! Sam

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

I was dumbfounded that it was like that. I was 4F so missed out on the service. I wanted to go into the Navy like two of my uncle's.

Pass this along if you think it will do any good. I seldom read these kinds of letters but this one got to me.

Pantera

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

My draft number was 2. I was 4F also. Believe it or not flat feet. Thanks for the letter.

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

The United States Government has a long and proud history of paying the military as little as possible. Republican or Democrat, it makes no difference. We pay them a pittance because we can. As a matter of fact, the Bush administration has been cutting pay and benefits for active duty (and activated Guard and Reserve) personnel and they've been cutting Veterans Administration benefits too.

Lots of flag waving when the TV cameras are rolling but behind the curtain the slashing continues.

Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said: "You go to war with the army you have, not necessarily the army you want or would like to have." Well, he's in charge and he can certainly change it if he wanted to. Donald Rumsfeld is probably the most powerful Secretary of Defense we've had in decades and he can't blame Congress for inaction because both houses are controlled by his party.

Why is pay so low? Because that's the way it's always been.

Why do they keep cutting pay and benefits? Because they can.

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

Was Active Duty Army for nearly 8 years (was caught up in the Clinton "10%" troop cuts). Please bear with me, because you probably will never see me stand up and disagree with someone here like this. But, here goes. President Bush HAS NEVER cut military pay, nor has any President I know of! This is the new mantra of a certain Party about the new budget. And it doesn't stop at just military pay, it goes into Medicare and everything. Even the AMTRAK subsidies, they ARE NOT getting money taken away!!! They may have been projected to get a 8% increase in budget and were actually allocated 4%. The Dems are calling this a 4% cut. If you make $1000/month now and your boss says you may get a 20% increase next year but you only got a 10% increase--- you did not have your pay cut!! There may not be the same level of increase this year as in past years.....but he is not "reducing" the pay of troops. I once actually got a pay reduction by getting an increase that put me in a higher tax bracket resulting in more taxes taken out and less take home pay.

The information about the dismal pay is absolutely correct. When I left the Army, generally speaking any married E-4 and below was eligible for food stamps. To be honest, while it would have been nice to have more money--that wasn't why I joined. I think the troops are worth more than they get, just remember these are extraordinary people who are not motivated by the same things as most others. The true tragedy is what these service members families get paid in the event of the service member's death-- especially when compared to that recieved by those it ground zero on 9/11. While the people in the towers families have recieved on average (going off memory now--so not accurate) 1.3 million-the families of those killed in Afghanistan within one month of 9/11 recieved the stipend that is less than 200k. And that is just a standard insurance policy THE SERVICE MEMBER PAYS FOR. THAT IS WHAT IS SAD!

I guess what got my dander up on this post is that people CANNOT take whay they hear/read at face value as it is often skewed to someone's point of view. Research these things, don't repeat propoganda put out by a political party or politician. Sorry guys, couldn't hold back.

Rant officially over. https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...mlins/flag.gif

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

I was 9.5 years USAF active duty with 39 combat (not combat support) missions flown in Desert Storm.

Consider the following:

With 130,000 soldiers still in the heat of battle in Iraq and more fighting and dying in Afghanistan, the Bush administration sought in 2003 to cut $75 a month from the “imminent danger” pay added to soldiers’ paychecks when in battle zones. The administration sought to cut by $150 a month the family separation allowance offered to those same soldiers and others who serve overseas away from their families. Although they were termed “wasteful and unnecessary” by the White House, Congress blocked those cuts in 2003, largely because of Democratic votes.

Last year’s White House budget for Veterans Affairs cut $3 billion from VA hospitals—despite 9,000 casualties (killed + wounded) in Iraq and as aging Vietnam veterans demand more care. VA spending today averages $2,800 less per patient than nine years ago.

The administration also proposed levying a $250 annual charge on all Priority 8 veterans—those with “non-service-related illnesses”—who seek treatment at VA facilities, and seeks to close VA hospitals to Priority 8 veterans who earn more than $26,000 a year.

Until protests led to a policy change, the Bush administration also was charging injured GIs from Iraq $8 a day for food when they arrived for medical treatment at the Fort Stewart, Georgia, base where most injured are treated.

In mid-October 2003, the Pentagon, at the request of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, announced plans to shutter 19 commissaries—military-run stores that offer discounted food and merchandise that helps low-paid enlisted troops and their families get by—along with the possiblility of closing 19 more.

At the same time, the Pentagon also announced it was trying to determine whether to shutter 58 military-run schools for soldiers’ children at 14 military installations.

The White House is seeking to block a federal judge’s award of damages to a group of servicemen who sued the Iraqi government for torture during the 1991 Gulf War. The White House claims the money, to come from Iraqi assets confiscated by the United States, is needed for that country’s reconstruction.

The administration beat back a bipartisan attempt in Congress to add $1.3 billion for VA hospitals to Bush’s request of $87 billion for war and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In perhaps its most dangerous policy, the White House is refusing to provide more than 40,000 active-duty troops in Iraq with Kevlar body armor, leaving it up to them and their families to buy this life-saving equipment. This last bit of penny-pinching prompted Pentagon critic and Vietnam veteran Col. David Hackworth to point to “the cost of the extraordinary security” during Bush’s recent trip to Asia, which he noted grimly “would cover a vest for every soldier” in Iraq.

Yes, all things and all statements can be quibbled with and certain disagreements are forever. One man's lies and innuendo is another man's burning bush.

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

Amazing how many web sites have posted the EXACT stuff you post, Bill - for example,

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Dish...rge_112603.htm
http://www.dc37.net/news/PEP/2_2004/soldiers.html
http://www.joecitizen.org/bush_myths.html

Two democrat activist organizations, and one labor union.

plus dozens of message boards - all posting the same text, word for word and punctuation mark for punctuation mark.
What do you suppose is the source of it all? Why hasn't all of this been substantiated by any reputable news organization?

All half-truths or outright fictions, designed to help defeat Bush in the last election.

George Soros is behind it, I don't believe there is much if any truth to it all.

I for one agree that our military should be paid better than they are today, but let's be fair about what Bush really stands for:

http://www.factcheck.org/article144.html

I'm off the soapbox now and back to cars...
-Sam
-Sam

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

I feel that everyone, when they come out of school, should go into the armed forces for at least one tour of duty in a hot spot. Had all these people, especially politicians, done so, they would have a considerably different outlook. They might actually appreciate what they have instead of taking them for granted. Our son and son-in-law are in the Canadian forces and have been in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. Our family has them on a pretty high pedestal. I wonder how Cindy would handle cleaning up the mess after her buddies got blown up? The troops on the ground are not appreciated half enough and are definitely under paid.

Re: Subject: Military Paid too much?
 

Thanks Sam, I stand corrected! I'm no bleeding-heart but I do get a little touchy over veteran's benefits and how our military is treated.

I should point out that while I was in the Air Force we lost many services such as the 24-hour emergency room on base. When my wife mis-carried (twice in two years) we had to go in to town (Del Rio, TX) and sit around with numerous illegal aliens at the public hospital, waiting our turn. Then, when my wife was finally seen by a doctor, it was an Air Force doctor from the base! He was moonlighting downtown for the extra money. Those cuts took place on Bill Clinton's watch and our commanders just shrugged and said that's the way it is.

The article you cited on fact-check.org says that while spending for veteran's benefits is down this year (while the number of aging vets signing up for benefits is up), it has increased steadily for over a decade. I guess it's like allowing a temporary tax cut bill to expire and calling that a tax increase. It's all in the interpretation. More (disabled) vets entering the list for needed benefits + reduced spending rate = benefit cuts? Maybe it's just less money available for vets. That's a nicer way to put it.

https://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/imag...lins/beers.gif