05-10-2017, 03:39 PM
(05-10-2017, 03:35 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Understood. And for the most part agree. But, that $3 billion over ten years represents 0.56% of the proposed defense spending increase for 2018 alone. It is a crumb. And the wrong crumb. The GI Bill is an enlistment incentive to attract better quality recruits. Just like any other Fortune 500 company offering employment benefits vying for the most quailed potential employees. The military is only as good as the people serving in the military.
Meanwhile, the DOD is paying six figure salaries to civilian contractors. A few years ago, electricians starting pay to work in Iraq was $250K with an annual bonus of $50K for each additional year topping out at $500K annually.
There is plenty of fat to trim elsewhere in the defense budget. I find this especially irritating considering the amount of Republican politicians who signed Grover Norquist pledge not to raise taxes which are needed to pay the deficit and simultaneously pull this crap which basically amounts to a tax on the GI Bill on service members who are, probably at best, in the lower middle class trying to improve themselves.
Like any investment, whats the ROI on it? If we make them pay 100$ a month what kind of impact will it have. I think more research on the matter should exist. We know that before this system, when they had to pay something, we seemed to be staffed well enough before entering wars post 9/11. I think there is a way to approach this analytically that can give us an answer note based on emotions on the subject.
