Presidential Panel: Freeze Military Pay

Why freeze the military's pay? Why not cut the pay of the senators, reps, and the like? They are keeping these men in war, and want to freeze there pay? What sense does this make?


www.military.com...

hell i hadnt heard bout tht! its thr way screw us over with taxes on anything they can think of, put us into wars to profit themselves and upon hardship screw the very people making u rich and protecting you

reply to post by rakkasansct


In all honesty this really makes me want to vomit. What a total crock of crap that they would even consider this.

reply to post by rakkasansct


Agreed , this is complete BS. I think that they could trim the budget in a hundred other ways besides this. For starters how bout no more vacations for obamas wife to spain that cost a rediculouse amount of money. We seriously have a backwards moving government.

reply to post by rakkasansct


It kind of seems they aren't just taking the money away, but rather holding on to it then giving raises to compensate. It also doesn't affect combat pay, so I'm guessing those people fighting still get paid, right?

It still in the talks, so this might not even happen.

reply to post by Gnarly


So when cost of living in there area rises, they wont have a housing allowance raise to help them live. They don't make much already. Add to that the Feds are asking them to break there bodies and give there life in a foriegn land. Ugh this is just stupidity.

reply to post by Rhadamanthus


I'm with you. Made my blood boil when I read it.

reply to post by joeshsamp


Your exactly right. Don't give out bailout money, and they wouldn't have to consider this.

they need to stop the bloody wars, and cut military all together by about 50% frankly.

Tired of being a poor nation with a gigantic world police force already...get a standing force for defending us from the invading mexicans or whatnot and stop the rest of the nonsense.

You know, this is an awful disrespect for those young men and women who give their lives for their particular cause. I am not a fan of the US nor its warmongering empire, but when an organisation asks or manipulates its young people to go out and give the ultimate sacrifice, for their espouse cause and then.....says,well you're not worth that much really, we must make cuts where we can and your efforts are good but not worth the pay that you're now getting!!! What price life or sanity. Wow, if this doesnt wake US citizens up to the agenda of the rich and famous..nothing will. This is a reason for revolution, folks. This shouldnt be accepted by anybody who knows anyone in the US military, never mind the military themselves!! God luck American, if you accept this, you deserve what you get.

reply to post by Anam Gra


I don't agree with your views of the U.S. But you just made my point alot more eloquently than I did. Thank you sir.

Originally posted by rakkasansct
reply to post by Anam Gra

 

I don't agree with your views of the U.S. But you just made my point alot more eloquently than I did. Thank you sir.

Just two sides of the same pond, my friend. Basic human dignity and respect for the people who believe that what they are doing is right. This is disgraceful.

Members of Congress make $174,000 a year.... the average Military member makes about $23,000 a year. (I know, I used to be one) It's time to even the playing field and slash politicians pay, you know in the interest of "fairness" and "equality". I mean, isn't that what the Dems are always screaming about... fairness and equality? When the Government acts in the interest of fairness and equality the result is never fair or equal.

Originally posted by rakkasansct
reply to post by Gnarly

 

So when cost of living in there area rises, they wont have a housing allowance raise to help them live. They don't make much already. Add to that the Feds are asking them to break there bodies and give there life in a foriegn land. Ugh this is just stupidity.

Actually, doesn't the military give you a place to sleep if you serve? Don't they give you food? They save most of the money they make because they don't have to spend any of it on housing or food, even if it's just a thousand or two a month a G.I. makes. Another thing, wouldn't those people who do combat still get paid, like it says in the article?

I have no idea if this would be good, because there's just not enough details. You serve for a four years minimum unless kicked out, and have housing and food paid for, so it doesn't seem that bad if were guaranteed compensation with interest. Like the article states, they are proposing raises for the G.I.s, so it's not just a, "F you, soldier!"

However, if they do not pay for housing and food, somehow I'm wrong, then yes, that would be a very stupid thing, so stupid in fact that there wouldn't be a military, no one would serve.

Originally posted by Gnarly

Originally posted by rakkasansct
reply to post by Gnarly

 

So when cost of living in there area rises, they wont have a housing allowance raise to help them live. They don't make much already. Add to that the Feds are asking them to break there bodies and give there life in a foriegn land. Ugh this is just stupidity.

Actually, doesn't the military give you a place to sleep if you serve? Don't they give you food? They save most of the money they make because they don't have to spend any of it on housing or food, even if it's just a thousand or two a month a G.I. makes. Another thing, wouldn't those people who do combat still get paid, like it says in the article?

I have no idea if this would be good, because there's just not enough details. You serve for a four years minimum unless kicked out, and have housing and food paid for, so it doesn't seem that bad if were guaranteed compensation with interest. Like the article states, they are proposing raises for the G.I.s, so it's not just a, "F you, soldier!"

However, if they do not pay for housing and food, somehow I'm wrong, then yes, that would be a very stupid thing, so stupid in fact that there wouldn't be a military, no one would serve.

Alot of it depends on how crowded the base is if you can get housing or not. As an e-4 e-5 at Ft. Campbell I lived off post because there wasn't enough baracks space. What they do if your not a junior soldier living in the barracks is give you an allowance for food and housing. If they put a freeze on that and didn't raise in relation to COLA. It would be alot harder to support yourself and family, especially as a junior enlisted not making much money. The point of this is why put a freeze on soldiers pay. When the government is wasting millions of dollars a day? Don't they have a better place to trim the budget, than basic neccessities for servicemembers?

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Members of Congress make $174,000 a year....

550 odd politicians in Congress......10,000 lobbyists on capital hill. Hundreds of millions in lobby money goes where??????

You do the math.

Uh, sorry.
Forgot to add the hundreds of appointed liasions to big business and special interest on behalf of the individual members of the legislative commitees.

Originally posted by Gnarly

Originally posted by rakkasansct
reply to post by Gnarly

 

So when cost of living in there area rises, they wont have a housing allowance raise to help them live. They don't make much already. Add to that the Feds are asking them to break there bodies and give there life in a foriegn land. Ugh this is just stupidity.

Actually, doesn't the military give you a place to sleep if you serve? Don't they give you food? They save most of the money they make because they don't have to spend any of it on housing or food, even if it's just a thousand or two a month a G.I. makes. Another thing, wouldn't those people who do combat still get paid, like it says in the article?

I have no idea if this would be good, because there's just not enough details. You serve for a four years minimum unless kicked out, and have housing and food paid for, so it doesn't seem that bad if were guaranteed compensation with interest. Like the article states, they are proposing raises for the G.I.s, so it's not just a, "F you, soldier!"

However, if they do not pay for housing and food, somehow I'm wrong, then yes, that would be a very stupid thing, so stupid in fact that there wouldn't be a military, no one would serve.

Well now arent you quite the accountant that can weigh up the cost of people's lives, conpared to the price of accomodation and food. Your view of the world seems very cut and dried. What do you pay your solicitor, your doctor, your ....accountant! Obviously not what you're willing to pay the people who die to secure your ideals. I am truly shocked a your level of selfishness and blatant greed.

...cut what we pay out to blackwater type contractors by half (at least) - that would be a HUGE savings...

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
Members of Congress make $174,000 a year....

And a whole lot more, they're raking it in hand over fist from all their outside interests, lobbying/bribes, directorships, stock handouts and media "work".

This is literally incredible, at a time when your forces are fighting on multiple fronts to give what amounts to a huge pay cut when you consider what the real inflation figure is for a young family split by work.

The guys at the various fronts do not need the kind of worries these real financial hardships will place on them while trying to concentrate on fighting, moral will surely plummet, dire times indeed.

This is a true indicator of the state of the economy, not good.

reply to post by Anam Gra


Wouldn't it be selfless since I do believe it wouldn't be that bad being the one with the frozen pay, if certain requirements were met? Serving my country for no pay? How would that be selfish? Also, the people who actually dying, those people aren't affected. Those people are still dying.

Also, I haven't even said I support this, so quit your freaking bashing. I am extremely thankful for the people that do have to suffer from real war just so people like me don't have to.

Again, please read in the article where it states that people who do combat would not be affected, and rethink your remark on how selfish that I am since I wouldn't pay the people who do die. If it were up to me, those people who come back alive would get awarded very nicely.

Again, one more time just to make sure you know what the article states: those who do combat, you know, the people who get shot at, killed and whatnot, would not be affected. Those who truly serve the fullest amount they can will not be affected.