Military being paid too much?

[kgbsquirrel]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/12/03/escalating-military-pay-under-scrutiny.html?ESRC=dod.nl

For example, an Army corporal would earn regular military compensation of $50,860 after four to six years of service. That total includes $27,200 in basic pay; a nationwide average housing allowance of $14,280, although the actual amount paid varies depending on where the soldier lives; and tax-free allowances or benefits that amount to $4,660.

Ummm, come again? Unless military pay rates have gone up significantly in the last few years.

Me, E-5 (one paygrade higher than this fictional corporal), in the 4-6 year pay bracket.

Base Pay: 2,247.30

Now lets subtract about 18% for SS, FICA, income tax....

Actual Base Pay: 1,842.79

My BAH, Denver metro area: 950.00

My BAS (food): 280.00

Total monthly: $3,072.79

Total yearly: $36,873.48


So how is it Corporal Skippy is making over $50k a year?

But no, lets not talk about first term, never been in office before, the equivalent of E-1 congressmen who get paid 174,000 a year. (And yes I know, there's far fewer of them than the military, perhaps we should also take a look at the distribution of government employees on the GS pay scale.)

[RoadKingLarry]

it isn't even about the money, it's about  tearing down this country. Gutting the military by any means possible is just one step.

[kgbsquirrel]

In my friends words....

If I made $27k in pay over 6 years, plus benefits, and people told me I was paid too much I'd go apeshit. And I don't have a tank.

[Fitz]

Regular military compensation is a figure that takes into account housing and food perks, along with tax benefits

There's a calculator online to see it

It's also total horseshit

[RoadKingLarry]

Regular military compensation is a figure that takes into account housing and food perks, along with tax benefits

There's a calculator online to see it

It's also total horseshit

People see stuff like that and those that aren't in the know look at based on a typical civilian 40 hour base work week.
Break it down to a more realistic 90-100+ hour work week and show it in hourly compensation for time worked.

[Hawkmoon]

Now lets subtract about 18% for SS, FICA, income tax....

No, let's not.

Salaries and wages are always cited before SS and FICA are taken out. It's unfair to deduct those from yours when comparing to other wage/pay scales.

That's not to say that I think our military are being overpaid ... but please compare apples to apples.

[kgbsquirrel]

No, let's not.

Salaries and wages are always cited before SS and FICA are taken out. It's unfair to deduct those from yours when comparing to other wage/pay scales.

That's not to say that I think our military are being overpaid ... but please compare apples to apples.

This year, 2012, an E-4 with between 4 and 6 years of service has a base pay of $2267.

The 2012 BAS rate for Enlisted is $348.

The 2012 BAH for the Denver area is $1041.


So, using the same tax rate of 18%...

1,859 + 348 + 1,041 = 3,248.

Or, ~$38,975 a year.

E-5 pay in 2008: $37k
E-4 pay in 2012: $39k

Still well shy of the claimed +$50,000 that this claimed Corporal was receiving.

Even if I did not count the deducted taxes the difference for Corporal Skippy here is $5k. Again, still well shy of the claimed amount.

Was that close enough apple wise?

[dm1333]

Military pay is a drop in a bucket compared to some of our other government programs.  Comparisons between the military and "matching" civilian job is often an apples and oranges comparison.  Going to work for a salvage company would be like a vacation for me when you consider some of the stuff I have to deal with as a military member.

[AZRedhawk44]

This may be an unpopular perspective, but I respond to complaints about military pay the same way as I do to complaints about teacher pay.

Suck it up.

No matter how much you pay military, it's never enough.  You could pay these guys $250k a year, and you still have to deal with the liability that you are sending them into harm's way to kill or die in defense (or offense) of this country.  How much is "enough" for that?


Warriors, by and large throughout history, have always been paid poorly.  Cults of austerity, stoicism and minimalist lifestyles grow around soldiers, and for a reason.  The more disposable income a soldier has, the more property he owns.  This makes it that much harder to transport him from one battlefield to another, or to empty his mind of detachment to his things back home.

Mercenaries are paid well.  Government-sponsored warriors, not so much.

There is a path to greater wealth for soldiers who want more money.  They can work for Blackwater, or whatever they're called now.  But they'll have FAR more accountability for their actions.

[Fitz]

This may be an unpopular perspective, but I respond to complaints about military pay the same way as I do to complaints about teacher pay.

Suck it up.

No matter how much you pay military, it's never enough.  You could pay these guys $250k a year, and you still have to deal with the liability that you are sending them into harm's way to kill or die in defense (or offense) of this country.  How much is "enough" for that?


Warriors, by and large throughout history, have always been paid poorly.  Cults of austerity, stoicism and minimalist lifestyles grow around soldiers, and for a reason.  The more disposable income a soldier has, the more property he owns.  This makes it that much harder to transport him from one battlefield to another, or to empty his mind of detachment to his things back home.

Mercenaries are paid well.  Government-sponsored warriors, not so much.

There is a path to greater wealth for soldiers who want more money.  They can work for Blackwater, or whatever they're called now.  But they'll have FAR more accountability for their actions.

I'm not advocating increasing soldier pay.

I'm saying that there's no good reason to decrease it.

I also agree with the bit about the cults that grow around soldiers, and think it's a good thing. Pay them too much, and you get people in there for the reasons.

Hell, we already have a significant number of "soldiers" in the military who are there for job training and education money first, service a distant second

It's an interesting observation I've made over the years. The number of soldiers in the infantry for whom service in the military is a last ditch effort to dig themselves out of financial or social trouble is quite low.

Other support MOSs whose skills translate directly to the civvie world? That's where you'll find your hardship-escaping folks

[Chuck Dye]

The pay breakdowns posted fail to include food stamps, which all too many military are, or at least have been, eligible for. 

[Fitz]

The pay breakdowns posted fail to include food stamps, which all too many military are, or at least have been, eligible for.  

I don't have too much sympathy there. A single soldier gets free food.

If an E-1 with their abysmal pay CHOOSES to get married and have several kids, that is their own fault.


If i was emperor, soldiers would not be allowed to get married prior to E-5 or so.

I'm tired of hearing lower ranking soldiers complain about their crappy pay and the fact that it's tough to provide for their families.

Tough. No one forced you to have kids when you knew your income was low.


And don't even get me started on these dependapotamuses they marry. Scum of the earth, many lower enlisted military wives

[erictank]

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/12/03/escalating-military-pay-under-scrutiny.html?ESRC=dod.nl

Ummm, come again? Unless military pay rates have gone up significantly in the last few years.

Me, E-5 (one paygrade higher than this fictional corporal), in the 4-6 year pay bracket.

Base Pay: 2,247.30

Now lets subtract about 18% for SS, FICA, income tax....

Actual Base Pay: 1,842.79

My BAH, Denver metro area: 950.00

My BAS (food): 280.00

Total monthly: $3,072.79

Total yearly: $36,873.48


So how is it Corporal Skippy is making over $50k a year?

But no, lets not talk about first term, never been in office before, the equivalent of E-1 congressmen who get paid 174,000 a year. (And yes I know, there's far fewer of them than the military, perhaps we should also take a look at the distribution of government employees on the GS pay scale.)

Yeah, I'll grant that it's been a while, but let me trot out some relevant figures again.

My last full year in service, I was an E-5 in the Navy drawing pro-pay (as a qualified reactor operator/shutdown reactor operator) and sea pay, with 5 years of service - housing pay was explicitly *NOT* authorized, since I was single, though I could live off-ship if I wanted, paying for it out of my munificent base pay. For this, I was working far more than a 40 hour week, just as pretty much everyone onboard was.

I ***GROSSED*** not quite $21K that calendar year. I *TRIPLED* that my first year as a non-qualified control-room operator for Dominion VA Power. And I wasn't physically at sea for 10.5 of the 12 months of that first year at Dominion, either, the way I was that last full calendar year in the Navy.

Yeah, go ahead and tell me that the enlisted personnel are being paid too much... 

There certainly are places in our national budget which ought to be cut, in some cases significantly. Enlistee pay is not one of those areas.

[Jamisjockey]

Another thing to consider is what many enlisted military members are doing.  Many are in technical fields earning a fraction of what their civilian counterparts earn, with the constant threat of deployment hanging over them.

[AZRedhawk44]

Another thing to consider is what many enlisted military members are doing.  Many are in technical fields earning a fraction of what their civilian counterparts earn, with the constant threat of deployment hanging over them.

And getting free training for that job, then coming out and earning 6 figures as nuclear power plant engineers and such.

Risk, reward.

[Fitz]

And getting free training for that job, then coming out and earning 6 figures as nuclear power plant engineers and such.

Risk, reward.

Although I agree with your sentiment, that's most certainly not the norm for servicemembers. Very few come out making significantly more than their military salary, particularly if they're infantry, artillery, etc.

[dm1333]

And getting free training for that job, then coming out and earning 6 figures as nuclear power plant engineers and such.

Risk, reward.

That free training really isn't free.  You fail to consider the time given up to deployments or being underway, injuries, death, family stress, and on and on and on.  Plus the fact that the majority of service members aren't getting out and stepping right into jobs that are paying 6 figures.

[AZRedhawk44]

Note I addressed Jamis' "technical fields" portion of his post.

Sub engineers, naval ship engineers, nuke ordnance techs, aircraft repair techs... all these guys are coming out with zero educational investment and finding great jobs in the civilian side of things that pay pretty dang well.

That free training really isn't free.  You fail to consider the time given up to deployments or being underway, injuries, death, family stress, and on and on and on.  Plus the fact that the majority of service members aren't getting out and stepping right into jobs that are paying 6 figures.

Nope, I addressed that in my first post where I said that $250k wasn't enough for those situations.  Is a million?  Is 10 million?  Money is never enough.  There's no fixing that, at least by means of money.

[longeyes]

This may be an unpopular perspective, but I respond to complaints about military pay the same way as I do to complaints about teacher pay.

Suck it up.

No matter how much you pay military, it's never enough.  You could pay these guys $250k a year, and you still have to deal with the liability that you are sending them into harm's way to kill or die in defense (or offense) of this country.  How much is "enough" for that?


Warriors, by and large throughout history, have always been paid poorly.  Cults of austerity, stoicism and minimalist lifestyles grow around soldiers, and for a reason.  The more disposable income a soldier has, the more property he owns.  This makes it that much harder to transport him from one battlefield to another, or to empty his mind of detachment to his things back home.

Mercenaries are paid well.  Government-sponsored warriors, not so much.

There is a path to greater wealth for soldiers who want more money.  They can work for Blackwater, or whatever they're called now.  But they'll have FAR more accountability for their actions.

+1

When schoolteachers, bus drivers, accountants, and lawyers want to risk their lives, they can complain.  Military personnel, especially combat military, are vastly underpaid.  My view is they should be compensated with perquisites in the name of Honor.  Free air travel, that sort of thing.  

The Left has been trying to repeal reward for risk--all risk, including investment risk--all along. The idea is to level, destroy all existential distinctions.

[wmenorr67]

Another thing to consider is what many enlisted military members are doing.  Many are in technical fields earning a fraction of what their civilian counterparts earn, with the constant threat of deployment hanging over them.

Another thing to think about is that some of the "free" training is better than what their civilian counterparts get but yet the military training isn't always accepted in the civilian sector.

[brimic]

This year, 2012, an E-4 with between 4 and 6 years of service has a base pay of $2267.

The 2012 BAS rate for Enlisted is $348.

The 2012 BAH for the Denver area is $1041.


So, using the same tax rate of 18%...

1,859 + 348 + 1,041 = 3,248.

You are still using 'teacher's union math'
I get ($2267 + $348 + $1041) * 12 = $43872

rant

This is the real number- the number before taxes.
The 18% of your base that you removed is not money not being paid to you, its money being confiscated from your hard work- right off the top. Never forget that. I won't even get into the the % earnings that you'll never see on on piece of paper that is taxes away as part of SS/FICA that is paid by your employer.
Whatever the pay rate is, remember, you are providing one of the very few legitimate services that the Federal Government is mandated to do by the US Constitution.
For giving up a part of your life, for whatever horrors you might have seen, that 18% was taken right off the top to pay some lazy POS who doesn't want to work,  or maybe the salary of some leftwing *expletive deleted*bag on the government payroll who does not provide any kind of legitimate, let alone useful service or product and is criticizing you for making too much.

/rant

[zxcvbob]

IMHO, the whole "Mounting deficits and escalating costs have some budget hawks posing a provocative question: Are we paying our servicemembers too much?" question is a diversion to get everybody riled-up so they don't look too close at the total military budget and where the big money is really wasted.

They do the same thing squeezing starting teachers, but we never hear anything about how much a tenured teacher makes, or all money spent paying assistant superintendents at the district office.

[dm1333]

IMHO, the whole "Mounting deficits and escalating costs have some budget hawks posing a provocative question: Are we paying our servicemembers too much?" question is a diversion to get everybody riled-up so they don't look too close at the total military government budget and where the big money is really wasted

FTFY.

[kgbsquirrel]

You are still using 'teacher's union math'
I get ($2267 + $348 + $1041) * 12 = $43872

rant

This is the real number- the number before taxes.
The 18% of your base that you removed is not money not being paid to you, its money being confiscated from your hard work- right off the top. Never forget that. I won't even get into the the % earnings that you'll never see on on piece of paper that is taxes away as part of SS/FICA that is paid by your employer.
Whatever the pay rate is, remember, you are providing one of the very few legitimate services that the Federal Government is mandated to do by the US Constitution.
For giving up a part of your life, for whatever horrors you might have seen, that 18% was taken right off the top to pay some lazy POS who doesn't want to work,  or maybe the salary of some leftwing *expletive deleted* on the government payroll who does not provide any kind of legitimate, let alone useful service or product and is criticizing you for making too much.

/rant

The part that always tweaked me is why was I paying income tax on income that was provided from taxes to start with? Might as well have just lowered my base pay by that amount and saved me the trouble of filing every April. Same with the SS payments people receive. Taxing money that just came from taxes is just a way to lower benefits without visibly lowering benefits.

ETA: Anyone laying odds on how long until congress gets the bright idea to regard VA disability payments as taxable income as well?

[Hawkmoon]

For anyone interested, Military.com just released the full 2012 and 2013 military pay scales. You have to register to see them and I decline to register, so I can't tell you which figures from above are supported by the official version. If you're interested, here's the link:

http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/charts/2011-military-pay-charts.html?ESRC=mrvr.nl

They also have links to historical pay charts,Those can be viewed by anyone, and they cover 1949 thru 2011. I found it interesting to look up my own pay scale. My last year of active duty was 1968 and I was an E-5. Base pay was $226.20 per month. I was single, so I lived on post and had no dependents. I was also in Vietnam for almost all of 1968, but the chart covers base pay only, not combat pay. So the base pay multiplies out to $2,714.40 per year.

When I got out, I took a month off and then landed a job that paid $3.50 an hour for a 40-hour week. That equates to $7,280 per year, or slightly better than 2-1/2 times what I was earning in the Army.

Fast forward to 2011 and as the same E-5 I would have earned $2,090.10 per month, or $25,081.20 per year. That ain't a lot. Compared to a standard 40-hour week, that equates to $12.06 per hour. Slightly above minimum wage, but not enough to live on ... at least, not in many parts of the country.