RE: Military cuts

RE: Military cuts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kalikshama -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 1:50:15 PM)
quote: Where were you when Obama was talking about instituting a new retirement system which would have left most service people without a retirement. Veterans have retirement? Oh, not so much: Veteran's Pensions Eligibility: - you were discharged from service under other than dishonorable conditions, AND - you served 90 days or more of active duty with at least 1 day during a period of war time. NOTE: 38 CFR 3.12a requires that anyone who enlisted after 9/7/80 generally has to serve at least 24 months or the full period for which a person was called or ordered to active duty in order to receive any benefits based on that period of service. With the advent of the Gulf War on 8/2/90 (and still not ended by Congress to this day), veterans can now serve after 9/7/80 during a period of war time. When they do, they generally must serve 24 months to be eligible for pension or any other benefit. But note the exclusions in 38 CFR 3.12(d), AND - you are permanently and totally disabled, or are age 65 or older, AND - your countable family income is below a yearly limit set by law. [chart] Example: Joe (a single veteran) has an annual income of $5,000. His annual income limit is $12,256. To determine Joe's Pension subtract his annual income of $5000 from the $12,256 income limit which gives him an annual pension rate of $7,256. This translates into a monthly pension check of approximately $605.

kalikshama -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 1:59:40 PM)
quote: Last time I check, most civilian jobs didn't require a year or more away from your family. Doesn't require communication blackouts where you aren't even able to speak with said loved ones. So until you can show me a comparable "civilian" job... I really don't see how you can bring military pay on par with everyone else. Good points (and I loved your profile!)

SilverMark -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:01:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead So what is Romney's plan for funding the tax cuts and military spending if that's a lie, then? The statement above looked a lot like he was talking about civilian pay and benifits. Where were you when Obama was talking about instituting a new retirement system which would have left most service people without a retirement. No one was anywhere, it didn't happen.... A congressionally chartered commission has called for scrapping the entire military retirement system and making active-duty troops wait until at least age 57 to begin drawing retired pay. The proposal, which would spell the end of the current active-duty system that pays nondisability retirement immediately after a service member completes a minimum of 20 years of service, is among 95 recommendations in the final report of the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve, which went well beyond its original charter to review the structure and management of the reserve components and delved into personnel policies for active-duty members. A Congressional commision reccomended it be changed, it was never suggested anything more, that I can find.

kalikshama -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:20:25 PM)
Additionally, 83 percent of military personnel don't get a pension at all because they don't make it 20 years.

kalikshama -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:22:24 PM)
quote: ...Mitt Romney's spending plan includes a pledge to "align federal employee compensation with the private sector," and it cites studies showing that "federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected." ...Romney aides and supporters said they are not proposing a 30% to 40% pay cut, and federal compensation involved more than take-home pay, including such benefits as health coverage, retirement, paid leave and student loan repayments. My pay in the military was pathetic, and I was working with explosives overseas. Current enlisted military pay is in the top quartile for high school graduates. Pay hadn't been a consideration though - I was thinking of benefits such as money for college and travelling. It took years for the benefits to get used and pay off. I didn't start using the VA for healthcare until 14 years after I separated. I wonder how Romney plans to calculate all that. I also wonder if when he signed off on this: pledge to "align federal employee compensation with the private sector," and it cites studies showing that "federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected." he realized federal employees include the military. If not, how fucking stupid. Is so, how fucking stupid not to realize what the Democrats could do with this. quote: "To pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, (Romney) drastically cuts pay for the men and women who secure our borders and skies, enforce our laws, inspect our food and search for better treatments and cures," said Obama spokesman Adam Fetcher. Obama's debt reduction plan, he said, "requires federal workers to do their part through eliminating wasteful spending, streamlining government and freezing federal pay for the past two years."

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:42:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Fine Explain how does current military "compensation" exceeds the military "compensation" in the private sector (But he didnt say any such thing... it was written in a policy statement entitled "Smarter, Simpler, Smarter Government") [;)] Which I like that philosophy, and I will bet that I am not alone Especially as opposed to team Obamas, "You cant do anything without government" approach quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Align Federal Employee Compensation With The Private Sector He said nothing about pay.... He didnt? Its on his web site. Per his site... Follow A Clear Roadmap: Build A Simpler, Smaller, Smarter Government Most importantly, any turnaround must have a thoughtful, structured approach to achieving its goals. Mitt will attack the bloated budget from three angles: Of which, one of the three was the part including what you claim he didnt say.

Sanity -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:50:25 PM)
I wonder how anyone seriously believes theres a comparative military force in the private sector to the government military, which the faulty and ridiculous Obama campaign premise that ooh, "Mitt Romney plans SCARY cuts to military wages" is entirely dependent on there being a comparative private sector military, and that provate military force is paid less than our government military is being paid Or "compensated" [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: ...Mitt Romney's spending plan includes a pledge to "align federal employee compensation with the private sector," and it cites studies showing that "federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected." ...Romney aides and supporters said they are not proposing a 30% to 40% pay cut, and federal compensation involved more than take-home pay, including such benefits as health coverage, retirement, paid leave and student loan repayments.

kalikshama -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:52:15 PM)
[image]https://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/12/7/28/jh1Jy75eD0qls2R-OwJW0g2.jpg[/image]

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 2:57:11 PM)
Do private employees get as many days off as federal? Do private employees get as many paid vacation days as federal? Do private employees get as much in hazard pay? In health benefits? In relocation? In housing? Come on, think, you are smarter than this.

Sanity -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 3:12:58 PM)
Yes, I am far, FAR smarter than that. [sm=lol.gif] After all, who doesn't understand that "compensation" as you put it for federal employees in the non-military occupations far exceeds civilian pay? http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/overpaid-federal-workers quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Do private employees get as many days off as federal? Do private employees get as many paid vacation days as federal? Do private employees get as much in hazard pay? In health benefits? In relocation? In housing? Come on, think, you are smarter than this. [image]local://upfiles/292349/FB732C3DC2F6458C9890D0FAA4300176.gif[/image]

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 3:30:27 PM)
I have NO problem with them cutting the compensation for non-military people. MY issue is cutting the military's. Fuck that. When were you last holding a rifle in defense of this country?

Sanity -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 3:50:26 PM)
And no one other that the Obama campaign is even distantly suggesting the military compensation is in danger of being cut quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I have NO problem with them cutting the compensation for non-military people. MY issue is cutting the military's. Fuck that. When were you last holding a rifle in defense of this country?

thishereboi -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 3:55:04 PM)
Why is it that when the left wants to cut from the military, it's because they are focused on more important things and why do we need to spend so much on defencee anyway. Can't we all get along. then someone on the right suggests we cut from the miltary and they are evil bastards who don't care about our troops.....

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 4:08:37 PM)
A Romney campaign adviser authorized to speak on background only would not give a specific figure for defense spending in a Romney administration, saying only that the first priority would be to save the military from Obama’s defense cuts, which could result in discharge of 200,000 troops. Is this what you are referring too? Please do tell me you know the difference between trimming defense spending/troop size and cutting the benefits of those who are already enlisted. Edited to make it clearer

Sanity -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 4:58:25 PM)
Again, youve provided no evidence that Romney policy would cut defense "compensation" Your Obama campaign page link was a four or five Pinocchio lie. Bringing public sector and private sector pay in line has nothing to do with the military "compensation" because there is no such equivalent in the private sector

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 6:01:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Again, youve provided no evidence that Romney policy would cut defense "compensation" Your Obama campaign page link was a four or five Pinocchio lie. Bringing public sector and private sector pay in line has nothing to do with the military "compensation" because there is no such equivalent in the private sector Romney aides and supporters said they are not proposing a 30% to 40% pay cut, and federal compensation involved more than take-home pay, including such benefits as health coverage, retirement, paid leave and student loan repayments. According to the Romney plan, aligning federal compensation with the private sector will save $47 billion. Im sure you can figure it out. [;)] Show me where they excluded compensation.

Musicmystery -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 7:23:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Why is it that when the left wants to cut from the military, it's because they are focused on more important things and why do we need to spend so much on defencee anyway. Can't we all get along. then someone on the right suggests we cut from the miltary and they are evil bastards who don't care about our troops..... I think you're mixing apples and oranges here, no? One reference talks about buying things for the military, even things it doesn't want or need. The other talks about income for military personnel. I can clearly see why one might be for one but against the other, whether they are good ideas or no.

Musicmystery -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 7:27:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Again, youve provided no evidence that Romney policy would cut defense "compensation" Who are these federal employees? For Romney to implement this plan with any significant savings, it would mean that much of that money would be coming out of the pockets of those serving in the military. The vast majority (63%) are employed by the Department of Defense. The second largest agency is the post office, at just 15%. Of the 3.2 million DOD employees, nearly half are active duty military personnel. The implementation of Romney’s plan would be especially hard on military personnel and their families. It would also have a lasting negative impact on the military’s ability to recruit. Benefit cuts to military personnel would presumably include cuts to the GI Bill, a program which helps veterans obtain an education, making them more valuable to the workforce. [the above is floating around the Internet on various sites, all stemming from the USA Today article]

Sanity -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 7:32:47 PM)
It (military compensation) is excluded by virtue of the fact that there is no equivalent to the military in the private sector, and thats what the Romney policy proposal was directly addressing - aligning federal compensation with the private sector quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Again, youve provided no evidence that Romney policy would cut defense "compensation" Your Obama campaign page link was a four or five Pinocchio lie. Bringing public sector and private sector pay in line has nothing to do with the military "compensation" because there is no such equivalent in the private sector Romney aides and supporters said they are not proposing a 30% to 40% pay cut, and federal compensation involved more than take-home pay, including such benefits as health coverage, retirement, paid leave and student loan repayments. According to the Romney plan, aligning federal compensation with the private sector will save $47 billion. Im sure you can figure it out. [;)] Show me where they excluded compensation.

tazzygirl -> RE: Military cuts (7/29/2012 7:53:17 PM)
quote: It (military compensation) is excluded by virtue of the fact that there is no equivalent to the military in the private sector, and thats what the Romney policy proposal was directly addressing - aligning federal compensation with the private sector Show me where they have said that. I have shown you were they said that they werent cutting pay, but they were cutting compensation.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875