Military members..MUST READ!!!!!!!!!!

[Amazon 7]

I would posit that YOU are not the one who needs educational assistance. The kids that do join for the promise of a better future are the ones who need it.

Personally I think they deserve everything that this country can give them for being the ones who stepped forward to serve this country.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Retention is a completely different topic than this flawed bill.

Concur. This bill may address some issues that relate to the larger retention issues; one bill will not alone address the larger issue.

Quote

The officer corps typically earns far less than their civilian counterparts,

If you're commenting on contractors, I concur. The typical salaries w/which I am familiar (i.e., retired O-5/O-6/GO, many w/PhDs or MDs, and civilian PhDs w/active clearances) are 2-5+x greater when one goes to work for a contractor.

If one compares the 2008 officer pay rates to 2008 GS pay rate, uniformed service pay rates exceed GS pay rates.
E.g., min/max O-2 $71k compared to GS-11, which is $48K/$63K,
and min/max for O-6 is $117K/$140.5K, whereas min/max for GS-15 (the comparable GS level) is $95K/$124K.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Their service is still real - and this bill is still overly generous to an already well-compensated military.

I'm sorry, I've read all of your responses since making this statement and I strongly disagree with you on every point with the exception of the noted delta between civilian and military compensation for doing the same job. Some people stay in for reasons that are not motivated by pay.

I don't know which military you are in, but in MY Army, the average soldier embraces the suck more often than not and is IMO entitled to a lot more than we currently receive during and after our service. Officers have the opportunity to do degree completion and attend higher learning during their career progression that enlisted personnel are not entitled to. I know officers who have spent more time in class rooms than doing their job or in the field where they supposedly lead from the front. I don't care if they're a 93Y or a 11B, todays enlisted soldiers deserve a lot more than they currently get. Let us not forget who comprises the backbone of the Military and who wise officers more often than not listen to.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[TheAnvil 0]

Disagree with me if you so desire. I stick around for reasons other than pay and assume many other folks do the same.

It seems the opportunities the officer corps get for further education is an issue for you. Officers do frequently get the opportunity for higher education - and there's one HELL of a payback the government gets for that investment, else those opportunities wouldn't exist. GE and several other companies also invest $$ for the higher education of their mid-senior level managers. Crotonville was one of Jack Welch's greatest success stories.

What payback would the government get by taking enlisted folks out of their career track and sending them through a bachelor's degree? Think about it. The fellow would either apply for a commission (programs exist for that now, actually) or come back way out of touch with his/her rate and an education equivalent to junior officers. He could also come back to have one of his classmates from undergrad be his new boss' boss. Not really good for keeping talent within the enlisted ranks and nurturing it, eh? Many service schools are at or near the equivalent of an associate's degree already - any Nuclear trained electronic technician will have that. What's the benefit to DoD or the government buy getting these folks bachelor's degrees while they're in service? College is not a right - it's a privilege.

What payback is the government getting by paying for 3 years of tuition + E-5 housing after a service member departs Active duty? I don't want any pansy/bullshit 'we've earned it' type of answer - we've earned a paycheck, health care, 30 days of vacation/year (on the off chance we get to take it), current VA benefits, Montgomery GI Bill benefits, and many other benefits while serving - including the attendance at military schools that have equivalent civilian credit. I want the benefit to the government by expending funds in that manner. What is it?

The bill as written is far to liberal and unfocused. If you disagree, then you disagree, but please answer my questions posed above.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[TheAnvil 0]

I don't like the GS pay scale as compared with the military for several reasons. Even in the new NSPS era - which I like from my experiences with it so far.

I heard David Gergen give a talk at the Jacksonville Council on Foreign Relations a couple of years ago and though I disagreed with him on a few things - we spoke afterwards, actually - he had one great point (among several others). That point being that the U.S. needs to invest far more in it's professional government employees education wise. He pointed out how well the military does that, actually. I thought he had a very good point.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[GaryRay 0]

Quote

College is not a right - it's a privilege.

how do you figure. so those 18yr olds who just got out of high school and would love to go to college but missed out on a scholarship for 1 reason or another and there parents are to poor to send them through it so they have no choice but to get a job, so what do they do...join the military for hopes of a better future, serve there 4 or 5years to get a GI bill that comes short paying for a full-time tuition which happens more times than not if you ever known anyone using the GI Bill to put themselves through school.

answers to your questions b/c your obviously were never enslited...
1) payback. Marine (or other) serves 5 years honorably goes to college and then goes on being a positive member of society. or he can sell drugs contributing to the criminals. 1 less person for the government to worry about, never mind the fact that most enlisted guys serve hard time not office time there entire enlistment.

2) lets start off with this, most of those "Credits" we get from military schools are worth jack shit. they are not accredited for any school besides pheonix university or the other online school that dont teach you shit. and i bet you dont want any "pansy/bullshit" we earned it answers because you just dont understand what it means to earn something like that. weve earned a sub-standard paycheck (sacrifice), sub-standard health care (2nd Lt. still learning how to sew a persons wound up). 30 days of vacation (i have 75 days on books because i have no time to use it) VA benefits arent bad but they wont help you get any higher learning, old GI Bill works but still kind of sucks, dont expect to get through 3years of school without taking out any loans, even if you are living at home now paying for rent.

so all in all im just really happy i dont work for you.

JewBag.
www.jewbag.wordpress.com

[TheAnvil 0]

Most interesting.

- virtually anyone that wishes to get into college can finance it through student loans - very few exceptions.
- I don't feel those people - civilian or military - that do not go to college will become drug dealers. If you do, then you disagree with me. Think as you like.
- Obeying the law is not payback, it's a requirement expected of anyone, military, civilian, or veteran. That's no answer and you know it
- Your credits depend on the school. Several are quite good - the technical ones, predominantly.
- my own experience with military health care has been pretty good, with few exceptions. I've heard some horror stories from friends elsewhere in the military (Army guys), but I've also heard far worse stories about the civilian system as well.

Think as you like. I always do. Best of luck - and don't lose sleep over the bill. It's probably going to pass with much fanfare, despite my own dislike of it as a taxpayer.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[GaryRay 0]

Quote

Most interesting.

- virtually anyone that wishes to get into college can finance it through student loans - very few exceptions.
- I don't feel those people - civilian or military - that do not go to college will become drug dealers. If you do, then you disagree with me. Think as you like.
- Obeying the law is not payback, it's a requirement expected of anyone, military, civilian, or veteran. That's no answer and you know it
- Your credits depend on the school. Several are quite good - the technical ones, predominantly.
- my own experience with military health care has been pretty good, with few exceptions. I've heard some horror stories from friends elsewhere in the military (Army guys), but I've also heard far worse stories about the civilian system as well.

Think as you like. I always do. Best of luck - and don't lose sleep over the bill. It's probably going to pass with much fanfare, despite my own dislike of it as a taxpayer.

your right, obeying the law is not payback but a person (civ or mil) who goes to college is less likely to screw up there life than someone who did the required 10 years and stopped. and i dont want to limit it to drug dealing, as there are plenty of other promiscuous activities that one can partake in to make lots of money.

student loans are worse than buying a house, sometimes they will stay with you until well after you have established yourself in a career. depending on how much college you have, so if thats the case why force the veteran to have a huge financial problem after he has served his time.

requirements to get into college are set so everyone has a goal to meet, if someone wants into that specific college than they can get in. will everyone strive to succeed if the bar is set low? colleges want people who try and try hard.

JewBag.
www.jewbag.wordpress.com

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

It seems the opportunities the officer corps get for further education is an issue for you.

It's not an issue for me, it's a reality of the way the system works and may explain why you think this new GI bill is too generous. You obviously cannot relate since you will be or have been given the opportunity to further your education while still in the military. Officers also get all of the other benefits(security) of being in the military while furthering their education. Typically, enlisted soldiers are on their own and no longer in the military by the time they put the GI bill to work and don't have the security that is afforded to officers. Why shouldn't enlisted soldiers been afforded that opportunity AFTER, they complete their service?

Quote

What payback would the government get by taking enlisted folks out of their career track and sending them through a bachelor's degree?

I never suggested that enlisted soldiers should be taken out of their career track and allowed to attend further education.I am saying that enlisted soldiers should be well taken care of under the GI bill when they decide to use it. How does that benefit the Government? The same way bonuses do. It's an incentive for soldiers to join and or re-enlist. Soldiers are more willing to take a bite of the shit sandwich if they know in the end they will be taken care of.


Many service schools are at or near the equivalent of an associate's degree already - any Nuclear trained electronic technician will have that. What's the benefit to DoD or the government buy getting these folks bachelor's degrees while they're in service?

Quote

You're joking right? If not, you are not in touch with the truth of the matter or your troops. Unless you have a Nuke job( or similar, and very few do) the average service schools that a soldier accumulates barely add up to an associates and thats after they have put at least 6-10 years in and have been in a MOS that has allowed them to progress. You think thats fair for the soldier who has been in the supply, admin, cook,rigger or mechanic field where progression is typically slow?

College is not a right - it's a privilege

Quote

And if the soldier signed up, did their duty, didn't object to going into the box or taking a bite of whatever shit sandwich the military threw at them, they have earned that privilege when they get out and should be afforded the means to attend college in todays and tomorrows economy.

What payback is the government getting by paying for 3 years of tuition + E-5 housing after a service member departs Active duty?

Quote

They are getting at least 3, if not more, years of thats persons life to do the things no one else in society wants to do or will do for the given pay and or associated risks up front. The Government gets paid first when that soldier enlists, it's only fair that the soldier get paid when it's his turn.

The bill as written is far to liberal and unfocused.***

Care to explain why you think that way? Is it because it gives more money and resources to the soldier? The way I see it, that bill is written with a bit of fat on it because those who wrote it know there will have to be a compromise and if they asked for what they wanted up front they would wind up with less after all was said and done.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Their service is still real - and this bill is still overly generous to an already well-compensated military.

I'm sorry, I've read all of your responses since making this statement and I strongly disagree with you on every point with the exception of the noted delta between civilian and military compensation for doing the same job. Some people stay in for reasons that are not motivated by pay.

I don't know which military you are in, but in MY Army, the average soldier embraces the suck more often than not and is IMO entitled to a lot more than we currently receive during and after our service. Officers have the opportunity to do degree completion and attend higher learning during their career progression that enlisted personnel are not entitled to. I know officers who have spent more time in class rooms than doing their job or in the field where they supposedly lead from the front. I don't care if they're a 93Y or a 11B, todays enlisted soldiers deserve a lot more than they currently get. Let us not forget who comprises the backbone of the Military and who wise officers more often than not listen to.

I concur, they deserve it.

Opportunity in education should not be decided on ones pay grade.

I am now being reinstated for the educational benefits that were stripped away from me in the mid 90's due to cutbacks.

My own counselor stated that if those like me did not deserve the benefits, then who does?

(meaning service-connected disabled veterans)

Not whining, I consider myself one of the lucky ones.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

The vast majority of non-federal positions, i.e., contractors and private industry, make more than either civilian or uniformed federal positions for similar skill sets. One doesn't pursue uniformed or civil service to become wealthy, unless you're planning on doing something less than legal.

Yes, and no. My salary is roughly comparable to the lower tier of qualified GS employees for the type of work that I do. I do *NOT* have the accessibility to educational benefits, pension benefits or medical benefits that GS personnel do. I also do not have the job security that GS personnel do.

SRB's and the like have been around for decades. I know from experience they were existing at least back into the 70's from discussions with family members that were in the military at the time.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[TheAnvil 0]

There's a saying in the Navy - choose your rate, choose your fate. It's quite true. There are PLENTY of non-nuclear rates that have superb in-service schools - perhaps you should learn a bit more before making a statement to the contrary. These folks weren't hired to give them a degree - rather to perform a service. Those who don't go into such rates made the choice not to do so or were not qualified to do so. Make the choice, accept the consequences.

I have been given the opportunity for graduate education - I earned it. I earned it by making choices and excelling academically. Tell me - why should anyone who didn't make similar choices and didn't excel academically have the same opportunity I or other officers had? Anyone who makes the right choices can have that security. Again - why should those who did not go down that path reap identical benefits? I'll answer - they shouldn't.

You're an Army fellow - should everyone wear a RANGER tab even if they didn't go through RANGER school? No way in HELL. They didn't make the choice, they didn't go through it, they don't get it. Pretty similar.

I don't think enlisted folks or officers should be given three years of tuition plus E-5 housing pay as a post-service benefit because I don't think college is a right, first and foremost. I think it's a privilege - that's why admissions standards exist. If it's given free, then it should be earned via academic excellence and not for doing a job for X # of years. College isn't about service - it's about academics and learning.

Secondly, as stated previously, there is no direct return on investment for the government by giving away that $$. Those using that money won't come back and work for the government (necessarily; some might). It's no strings attached and a SIGNIFICANT chunk of change compared to what the old system offered. In case you haven't read the budget recently - we're broke.

I asked for a real answer and didn't get one - we did a job and deserve it is what your answer boils down to. Guess what? Look around you. There's an all volunteer force recruited without that benefit. Amazing, eh? This extra incentive isn't needed to recruit, though it most assuredly will help.

How would I make that bill better? Hmmm...

- do a multiple on the GI bill benefits today with no change to the buy-in amount by the service member
- exclude officers, except warrants and LDO's, unless they pursue a degree in mathematics, hard science, or critical languages and agree to teach in the public schools or use that in federal service. Mandate a 2.7 minimum GPA if they do.
- mandate a 2.5 GPA or benefits go away
- provide an extra multiple for benefits for non-officers agreeing via contract to re-enter federal service or earning degrees in mathematics, science or critical languages and agreeing to teach in public schools. Mandate a 2.7 GPA or benefits disappear for these folks.

Among other things. Not really germane, as I think the current bill is destined to pass. As a taxpayer, I don't like it.

Think as you like - I always do.

Discussed this at the office today out of curiosity - about 70/30 among the O's, 70% with me and 30% with you. The 30% gave answers virtually identical to yours (i.e. nothing substantive) and we agreed to disagree (not the first or last time there).

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[mnealtx 0]

Thanks for the post, Vinny - I see more clearly now where you're coming from with it.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

There's a saying in the Navy - choose your rate, choose your fate. It's quite true. There are PLENTY of non-nuclear rates that have superb in-service schools - perhaps you should learn a bit more before making a statement to the contrary. These folks weren't hired to give them a degree - rather to perform a service. Those who don't go into such rates made the choice not to do so or were not qualified to do so. Make the choice, accept the consequences.

I have been given the opportunity for graduate education - I earned it. I earned it by making choices and excelling academically. Tell me - why should anyone who didn't make similar choices and didn't excel academically have the same opportunity I or other officers had? Anyone who makes the right choices can have that security. Again - why should those who did not go down that path reap identical benefits? I'll answer - they shouldn't.

First off, your confusing what MOS people choose with the topic at hand which is GI bill funding a soldier AFTER his service. There really isn't any relevance in comparing the 2 as it is 2 different topics. I went to college first but since joining I've been doing this job for about 20 years now, I think it's fair to say I have a good idea of what MOSs are out there and what kind of credit certain MOS's are given by most colleges; it's a senior NCOs and a SGM's job to look out for their troops regardless of which job field they are in.

When I went through the basic Infantry course, besides myself, there were 4 others in my platoon that had college degrees, two were PhD holders. So I don't buy the choose your rate,choose your fate explanation as justification for funding a soldiers college education AFTER his service is up. I didn't have to go infantry and I chose not to become an O like the other 4 college Grads in my platoon because it's not what we wanted to do. To infer that a soldier doesn't have a right to furthering his education AFTER his service because he chose to be a cook, truck driver or admin clerk is an elitist attitude and a reprehensible way to view those soldiers/sailors who work for you in those positions. If everyone thought as you do there would be no one to fill those jobs in the military. The type of job a person fills while in the military is irrelevant to whether or not they should receive funding for college and that's what this discussion is about. People in higher pay grades than both of us have seen the logic in offering everyone who joins the military the opportunity to further their education after their service if they so choose.

Quote

You're an Army fellow - should everyone wear a RANGER tab even if they didn't go through RANGER school? No way in HELL. They didn't make the choice, they didn't go through it, they don't get it. Pretty similar.

I don't think enlisted folks or officers should be given three years of tuition plus E-5 housing pay as a post-service benefit because I don't think college is a right, first and foremost. I think it's a privilege - that's why admissions standards exist. If it's given free, then it should be earned via academic excellence and not for doing a job for X # of years. College isn't about service - it's about academics and learning.

There is no similarity in your Ranger school comparrison to this topic. Again people in higher pay grades have seen fit to offer a GI Bill to all service members for serving in the military. It seems your issue is with the whole concept of the GI Bill and not just the proposal to increase the benefits. How exactly is the GI Bill free? Last time I checked service members contributed to the GI Bill out of their pocket in monthly allotments from their LES. How is the college free? Once out the soldier has to pass the same classes as you and I did in order to get that piece of paper. The GI Bill is a service members monetary means to attend college once they separate from the service. Apparently those in DC see this different than you as they clearly have no problem with helping service members with college for doing a job for X # of years.

Quote

Secondly, as stated previously, there is no direct return on investment for the government by giving away that $$. Those using that money won't come back and work for the government (necessarily; some might). It's no strings attached and a SIGNIFICANT chunk of change compared to what the old system offered. In case you haven't read the budget recently - we're broke.

There is an immediate return as the Government gets a body to fill a job in the military that it might have a hard time filling and or isn't as appealing as other MOSs. It's an incentive to get people to join and some people recognize that and take advantage of the opportunity to further their education be it enlisted or Officers.

Quote

I asked for a real answer and didn't get one - we did a job and deserve it is what your answer boils down to. Guess what? Look around you. There's an all volunteer force recruited without that benefit. Amazing, eh? This extra incentive isn't needed to recruit, though it most assuredly will help.

Wait a second, the GI Bill is set up so that you do your time, pay into the fund and when you get out you can use the GI Bill. That's as real an answer as you can get and thats how the GOVERNMENT designed it, so yes it is a real answer to your question. Again, if you have issue with that answer you ultimately have issue with the GI Bill and the Government. If you believe the extra incentive isn't needed I will wager you have never sat in on or read the Pentagon reports on recruiting and retention.If it wasn't needed, it wouldn't be offered.

Quote

How would I make that bill better? Hmmm...

AHH, if I was king for a day. First off the military has a program to transition soldiers from the military into teaching jobs, it's been around for years. What you propose would probably scare away most people who want to further their education. Furthermore, who do you prose in the military would manage and keep track of all of those people and their grades and track them after they separate from the service and move into their federal jobs?

Quote

Among other things. Not really germane, as I think the current bill is destined to pass. As a taxpayer, I don't like it.

Think as you like - I always do.

Discussed this at the office today out of curiosity - about 70/30 among the O's, 70% with me and 30% with you. The 30% gave answers virtually identical to yours (i.e. nothing substantive) and we agreed to disagree (not the first or last time there).

As I stated, I think there is some intentional fat on the bill that they know will be trimmed in order to get an increase approved by those opposed to it, simple salesmanship tactics between seller and buyer.


I discussed this bill with my peers as well,both officers and enlisted. The break down was 6 officers( 2 full birds, 2 LTCs, 2 Majors) 6 enlisted ( 2 SFCs , 3 Master Sergeants and 1 Sergeant Major) all of them in the Special Operations community. None of them had any objection to the increase in benefits as long as the service member served their obligation and didn't turn into the "I just joined for the college" guy when faced with deploying overseas into the box.


Overall, I don't think you will find too many service members objecting to receiving better benefits for their education after military service,especially all those who contributed to the GI Bill.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[TheAnvil 0]

They are two different topics - and you brought it up, not I.

I don't just infer that anyone who has served shouldn't have the right to a free ride for three years + E-5 housing pay - I state that belief outright. Anybody who desires to enter college has the right to do so - provided they meet all the entrance requirements - be they civilian or veteran of any MOS/rate. The right to the government paying for it free and clear doesn't exist in my book. What exactly is reprehensible about that?

If you'd read the details about the new bill, you'd realize that it requires no buy in Clicky

If you've been in 20 years and don't know many ratings/MOS's other than nukes that have incredible in service schools, then that's probably an effect of a very stove-piped career. Nothing wrong with that, but your assertion is far from correct. I've never asserted that any one rate or MOS has more of a right than any other to post-service benefits and wonder where you got such an inference. I DO state unabashedly that some MOS/ratings get better education benefits than others due to the nature of their individual rate/MOS's - choose your rate, choose your fate.

What I propose - just the tip of what I would desire, actually - shouldn't scare ANYBODY scared to work, i.e. worthy of getting gov't $$ expended on their behalf. If they aren't ready to meet such a minimum requirement, then why the hell should the gov't expend those funds in the first place? Of what benefit is fund expenditure without QA to the taxpayer?

What i'd like would be a piggy-back on/bastardized version of the troops to teachers program, just with a little more icing and pizzazz, as I'd like to see those skills funneled elsewhere within gov't as needed in addition to the ranks of teachers. WRT who would administer such a program, whom do you think would be administering the new GI Bill benefits? The Cookie Monster? Who do you think administers the program now? It's not the Easter Bunny, rest assured. Adding another feedback loop wouldn't be hard at all.

A boost to recruiting would be about the ONLY benefit this bill brings to the government. I don't like it, but it will probably pass. That's an indirect return at best. There's an all volunteer force currently recruited without the additional benefits.

But, think as you like. I always do.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[Icon134 0]

Quote

I don't just infer that anyone who has served shouldn't have the right to a free ride for three years + E-5 housing pay - I state that belief outright. Anybody who desires to enter college has the right to do so - provided they meet all the entrance requirements - be they civilian or veteran of any MOS/rate.

where is this free ride... the "buy in" if you will is serving for 3 years during an active conflict voluntarly.

Anyone who choses to use this would still have to be accepted to a degree program like any other person on the street this merely gives them a means to pay for their education. Some people don't have the ability to pay for education out of pocket (or had the grades upon graduating High School to get scholarships.)

Yes, the US has an all volunteer force... but if the government can aquire volunteers by offering a means to pay for some of your college then what's wrong with that?

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

They are two different topics - and you brought it up, not I.

No, you made mention of it in post #29 and I quote:

Quote

Many service schools are at or near the equivalent of an associate's degree already

.
.
.
.

Quote

I don't just infer that anyone who has served shouldn't have the right to a free ride for three years + E-5 housing pay - I state that belief outright. Anybody who desires to enter college has the right to do so - provided they meet all the entrance requirements - be they civilian or veteran of any MOS/rate. The right to the government paying for it free and clear doesn't exist in my book. What exactly is reprehensible about that?

What is reprehensible is the attitude and outlook you have on soldiers/sailors who choose MOSs that you feel are below your standing as stated in your previous post.


Perhaps you should go back and re-read what you wrote. Your words :

Quote

I have been given the opportunity for graduate education - I earned it.

You were GIVEN an opportunity, why shouldn't others who choose a different path be afforded the same opportunity? How is the way you earned it more deserving than others/everyone else?

Quote

If you'd read the details about the new bill, you'd realize that it requires no buy in Clicky

And why do you think that is? HMMMM, perhaps a recruitment and retention incentive?

Quote

If you've been in 20 years and don't know many ratings/MOS's other than nukes that have incredible in service schools, then that's probably an effect of a very stove-piped career.

Was that statement an attempt to take a stab at me? If it was, I am further disappointed in your replies as I expect better,especially from a Commissioned Officer.

Perhaps you missed where I stated in my last post : I think it's fair to say I have a good idea of what MOSs are out there and what kind of credit certain MOS's are given by most colleges; it's a senior NCOs and a SGM's job to look out for their troops regardless of which job field they are in.

Quote

I've never asserted that any one rate or MOS has more of a right than any other to post-service benefits and wonder where you got such an inference.

You made those assertions in your previous post:

Quote

Those who don't go into such rates made the choice not to do so or were not qualified to do so. Make the choice, accept the consequences............why should anyone who didn't make similar choices and didn't excel academically have the same opportunity I or other officers had? Anyone who makes the right choices can have that security.

Quote

What I propose - just the tip of what I would desire, actually - shouldn't scare ANYBODY

Putting the fact that your ideas are not germane to the topic at hand aside, the answer to that statement is that what you are describing is pretty much asking someone to become an indentured servant. Besides, we are discussing DoD issues, not any of the other acronyms out there that have authority over those types of follow on jobs.

Quote

If they aren't ready to meet such a minimum requirement, then why the hell should the gov't expend those funds in the first place? Of what benefit is fund expenditure without QA to the taxpayer?

Why should the gov't expend the funds it has or will expend on you? What makes you or another like you so special that the Navy's fleet would sink if you didn't show up for work? Are you going to become a teacher or fill a federal job when you get out or are you just going to get out and use that college education you earned in the Navy for personal use?

Quote

Adding another feedback loop wouldn't be hard at all.

Oh, and I bet you think there is nothing wrong with using taxpayers money for that?

Quote

A boost to recruiting would be about the ONLY benefit this bill brings to the government...... There's an all volunteer force currently recruited without the additional benefits.

I don't believe it, you just answered your own question of " ...what is the direct return on investment for the government?".

So are you proposing that the Gov't just hose those currently in and only give these proposed benefits to new service members?


At the end of the day, the powers that be in the puzzle palace are going to do what they feel is best for the force whether you or I agree or disagree with the new proposed GI Bill. So carrying this line of discourse on further will only serve as a means of mental masturbation and you know what they say about arguing on the internet.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[TheAnvil 0]

The choose your rate choose your fate concept eludes you.

The fact that education is not a right eludes you.

The fact that an all volunteer force exists without these new benefits eludes you.

The concept of graduate education payback the officer corps is forced to pay eludes you.

The concept of government oversight on expenditure of funds eludes you.

It is clear you're a testament to the brilliance of whatever philosopher (Hegel I think) said that truth has no greater enemy than convictions. Your conviction that education is a right and not a privilege has blinded you to the above.

This garbage:

Quote

If you've been in 20 years and don't know many ratings/MOS's other than nukes that have incredible in service schools, then that's probably an effect of a very stove-piped career.

Was that statement an attempt to take a stab at me? If it was, I am further disappointed in your replies as I expect better,especially from a Commissioned Officer.

And I expect anyone not to selectively quote as a means to malign someone. The phrase - nothing wrong with that appeared afterwards. Why ever would you leave that out I wonder?

You've embarrassed yourself, blatantly insulted me, made false inferences and statements about my attitudes towards many people I happen to like and respect, and stated nothing substantive. 'I've worked hard and deserve more and it will help recruiting' is about it.

Think as you like - I always do. And I don't have to make false statements, selective quotes, or make insultingly false inferences to make my point.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

The ........eludes you.

Quite the contrary, none of those things elude me as you claim, I understand what you are saying. Just because I don't buy into your attitude and perspective of what our nations military members should receive doesn't mean those topics elude me.

Quote

Your conviction that education is a right and not a privilege has blinded you to the above.

Your conviction is that YOU have a fundamental problem with the GI Bill(and the proposed changes), which happens to be DoD policy, and have no problem publicly stating as much. You still haven't answered my question on how you "earned" the right more than everyone else.

Quote

And I expect anyone not to selectively quote as a means to malign someone. The phrase - nothing wrong with that appeared afterwards. Why ever would you leave that out I wonder?

Even with the full statement , it's still a back handed compliment and you and everyone who read the post is aware of that. I'll take the higher road and move on past such sophomoric statements as it just leads to playground antics.

Quote

You've embarrassed yourself, blatantly insulted me, made false inferences and statements about my attitudes towards many people I happen to like and respect, and stated nothing substantive. 'I've worked hard and deserve more and it will help recruiting' is about it.

Now you have really made me laugh. Your statement is a classic use of "Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter accusations" if I have ever seen it. I simply called you out on your skewed views of the GI Bill (and the proposed bill) and used your own words to prove my points. You don't have to agree with me or with my stated reasons and you can go on about how you earned it and how they don't deserve it but you will have to uphold the decisions of those appointed above you as you have sworn to do so, which subsequently supports the current and future GI Bill.

Quote

And I don't have to make false statements, selective quotes, or make insultingly false inferences to make my point.

Do I need to go back up a few posts and point out where it is YOU that has done this(again)? Again, I digress, continuing this discussion with you is a moot point as it is just arguing on the internet and will have no effect on what happens in the real world with this proposed bill.

In the end I think what will pass will be a scaled down version of the proposed bill with tighter requirements and lower compensation(s). Then there is also the possibility it will be shot down entirely.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Amazon 7]

ONe way to help make sure it goes is to lobby.. perhaps King George will want to fight this less if more people take an interest. He is the one who sent our people into harms way and he needs to honor them by helping them be more productive citizens for their service to the Bush Doctrine.

http://tomudall.com/GI_Bill_Letter?tag=gbremailcoreg

You can at least show support for it.

[TheAnvil 0]

Maybe YOU can tell us why this is a good deal for the taxpayer since LouDiamond obviously can't.



Maybe my boss can retire (again) and then go snag a degree in Polynesian Languages at the University of Hawaii, tuition covered, drawing E-5 housing pay. Hope not - I like the guy. I would buy him a Mai Tai at Duke's if I came to visit, however.

Thing's going to pass 99% likelihood.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[DARK 0]

i dont know the ins and outs of the bill your talking about or the gi bill

BUT

my country started paying for everyones college education in around the mid 70's around 15 years later we were at the beginning of a massive economic growth that is only now evening out to rates of growth equal with eu levels(we have greatly surpassed them constantly since then)

i am now in the states and have to say that ANYTHING that helps more americans go to college is a good thing for american people in general

with the amount of money your government wastes on military spending in the first place i would have thought that the benefits of thousands of enlisted men getting a full college education to the economy would be most desirable

[TheAnvil 0]

The average level of American education is so screwed up it's not even funny, true enough. I think the answer to that is enforcing standards in the lower levels of education.

You're from Ireland, I take it? Different scale, culture, economy, and etc altogether. Can't argue that the Irish Miracle did occur.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[DARK 0]

Quote

The average level of American education is so screwed up it's not even funny, true enough. I think the answer to that is enforcing standards in the lower levels of education.

You're from Ireland, I take it? Different scale, culture, economy, and etc altogether. Can't argue that the Irish Miracle did occur.

it is different and the affects may not be as immedietely pronounced as they were in ireland but there is no downside to easily accesible college education.

since i have been here i have also heard that each child is apparently not treated equally when it comes to education at a younger age with people from cities etc having more money spent on each child then those from rural areas if that is a fact then it is a ridicolous state of affairs.

having said all that i am loving america at the moment and iv robably gone off topic

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

it is different and the affects may not be as immedietely pronounced as they were in ireland but there is no downside to easily accesible college education.

As a general statement, agreed

Quote

since i have been here i have also heard that each child is apparently not treated equally when it comes to education at a younger age with people from cities etc having more money spent on each child then those from rural areas if that is a fact then it is a ridicolous state of affairs.

Not ridiculous at all - schools are funded by property taxes. A higher density of property (cities) equates to more funds available to the school system.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706