Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What if they only serve a four year enlistment? They do not qualify for retirement. If they are discharged after a four year enlistment, they get no retirement.Guaranteed?
No.
and the pension of most retirees is not enough to live on anyway.
But, that pension is enough to help, especially with the job situation as it is today.
But they do get veteran's preference for civilian government employment...they get the extremely generous post-9/11 GI Bill...and VA loans.What if they only serve a four year enlistment? They do not qualify for retirement. If they are discharged after a four year enlistment, they get no retirement.Guaranteed?
No.
and the pension of most retirees is not enough to live on anyway.
But, that pension is enough to help, especially with the job situation as it is today.
you get the same pay for marching or fighting....
if you elected to get out after 4 years that is your choice....
if you retire at 20 that is your choice....
if you are lucky you get into civil service and double dip....
so my answer is no
Aren't VA loans standard, and have been for decades? Also, education expenses have been standard for many decades.But they do get veteran's preference for civilian government employment...they get the extremely generous post-9/11 GI Bill...and VA loans.What if they only serve a four year enlistment? They do not qualify for retirement. If they are discharged after a four year enlistment, they get no retirement.Guaranteed?
No.
and the pension of most retirees is not enough to live on anyway.
But, that pension is enough to help, especially with the job situation as it is today.
Yes, but those are still benefits of service. If you're proposing guaranteed support or "living wage" employment, you'd have to decide if those benefits would continue.Aren't VA loans standard, and have been for decades? Also, education expenses have been standard for many decades.But they do get veteran's preference for civilian government employment...they get the extremely generous post-9/11 GI Bill...and VA loans.What if they only serve a four year enlistment? They do not qualify for retirement. If they are discharged after a four year enlistment, they get no retirement.Guaranteed?
No.
and the pension of most retirees is not enough to live on anyway.
But, that pension is enough to help, especially with the job situation as it is today.
you get the same pay for marching or fighting....
if you elected to get out after 4 years that is your choice....
if you retire at 20 that is your choice....
if you are lucky you get into civil service and double dip....
so my answer is no
You can't double dip. If you're eligible for military retirement pay and join the civil service you can either defer your military retirement or buy into FERS to count your military time towards civilian pension.
Should military personnel be guaranteed living wage employment once they leave active duty?
Should military personnel be financially supported for a certain length of time once they leave active duty?
If yes, why?
If no, why?
Absolutely not. As a person who considered the military after highschool I can say for one I didn't consider joining to fight for our country. My consideration of taking on the role was primarily inspired by financial motives.
They sell their bodies for money. They make a lot of money. Military is a sure way to make good money at the expense of selling your body and of course risking their life, limb and mentality all of which risks every person joining the military would know.
The people who don't join the military without employment connections have a hard time too and their own struggles. I'd say let the employment process be fair. The person most qualified for the job should get the job notwithstanding what they say they did for their country when really they did for themselves.
yeah you did you just don't appreciate the amount you made and didn't save it. Prolly spent it all on girls and liquor your own fuckin fault.Absolutely not. As a person who considered the military after highschool I can say for one I didn't consider joining to fight for our country. My consideration of taking on the role was primarily inspired by financial motives.
They sell their bodies for money. They make a lot of money. Military is a sure way to make good money at the expense of selling your body and of course risking their life, limb and mentality all of which risks every person joining the military would know.
The people who don't join the military without employment connections have a hard time too and their own struggles. I'd say let the employment process be fair. The person most qualified for the job should get the job notwithstanding what they say they did for their country when really they did for themselves.
They make a lot of money?
I'm retired military, and I NEVER made a lot of money while I served.
Don't matter if you work 24/7. You're still getting paid more. So what is your argument for saying you're on call 24/7 hmm? You whining you were on call?Someone working full time on minimum wage isn't required to be on call 24/7/365.
Even working fulltime, they can take part time jobs weekends, evenings, etc.
Military, a part time job ends the minute you deploy, and not likely to be there when you get back.
Pay raise?
Annually, at the discretion of Congress.
Best way to get a pay raise in the military is to advance in rank.
College, a class here, a class there.
You think the military pays for it?
Housing?
One of the worst things about the military, is living conditions.
You've got a roof over your head, and share it with god knows how many others.
I don't know what movie you got YOUR info from, I lived it.
No. We're entitled to nothing that isn't in our contract. If you want a wage for your service after it ends then you'll do it the twenty years to get it.Should military personnel be guaranteed living wage employment once they leave active duty?
Should military personnel be financially supported for a certain length of time once they leave active duty?
If yes, why?
If no, why?
I think many people often don't understand exactly how small the actual number of military personnel who go into combat really is. In the Air Force, it's practically just security forces and special forces. In the Marines, everyone may be a trained rifleman but most are still the support for the actual grunts. Twelve years doing contracting work at a desk doesn't merit taxpayer bought psychological counseling. It's a better job than you probably would have gotten as a civilian, and either way it's a damn sight better than four years largely spent in a shitty tent in the desert wondering when the next mortar shells were going to fall and kill your closest friends, compliments of the religious fanatics that the ROE drafted by your lefty senator trying to get reelected says you can't fire at.Reminded of the line from "Running Scared" about how cops aren't qualified to do anything after so long,
"After being a cop you're not qualified to do anything else. What are you guys gonna do? Open up a bar?" or to that effect.
Military personnel should receive free psychological counselling and treatment after service and free housing and food until sufficiently re-re-conditioned for civilian life.
After spending hundreds of thousands or millions to turn a peaceful well-adjusted person into a murderer, it's only fair to spend an equal amount turning em back into peaceful people.
