The United States Military = Welfare?

Over the years that I have worked in directly and indirectly in the private non-profit field, I've heard some folks say that the United States military is another form of welfare that doles out just as much money as any other social program that is set up to provide financial aid and assistance to people.

I would tend to disagree with that type of rational. While I can see why some would classify it as welfare given the numerous benefits associated with enlistment in the military, the big difference that I see is that these benefits are more compensation for voluntary work performed by people who volunteer to enlist and work for the defense of the people of the United States.

What do the rest of you think about the US military being a welfare type of institution or program?

Absent documentation, this sounds like KIRK Making Shit Up.

are military benefits so much more than the benefits in an average job, say like at a bank?

Some of garamet's ideological brethren over at the Huffington Post seem to agree with that assessment:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kelly/prominent-democrats-back_b_107277.html

I would say yes. The retirement plans alone are far better than what I've seen people receive from banks after working for them for a thirty years.

Not for the people, but it's one HUGE corporate welfare system.

I really doubt they are far better. If they left a bank after 30 years and didn't have a good retirement they must have been a simple clerk for 30 yrs.

Privatize it!

If people could stand the idea of the Second Amendment meaning what it says, we might not need such a big military. That and having the rest of the world to defend...

Since when is the US Military a corporation dear old Nazi Cass?

I don't know about that. I don't consider the 401K's they offer in combination with the social security plan to be all that great. This was with Bank of America. They also were only low level management as well. I have no idea what your retirement is, but from what I've seen most any government agency has better retirement plans. One thing that is definite, they do not run out. Once the employee's contributions have been used up the government then picks up the remainder of their retirement until their death.

Privatize the military? Doesn't that equal mercenary?

Kindly provide evidence that connects me with a website I have never even read.

I call them private armies.

Hell of a good idea.

Well most big banks match the contributions made up to a certain percentage in 401ks. Plus a separate bank paid retirement fund. Formerly a pension.

The military one might be better. But not so much more. Cops get good retirements too. I just don't think you can say its so extremely better.

The 401ks are in addition to the banks or most other company retirement plans.

I'm not a banker, but I am retired military. So here goes - Active duty:

free medical (me + my family) free dental (some locations), 30 days paid vacation + holidays, housing allowance, discount shopping,.........and cake.

Retired you get a pension that varies, but mine is 55 percent of my highest paygrade for the rest of my life. It comes out to 1,450 (after taxes) monthly - so this amount is added to my current, civilian job income.

I also keep the discount shopping, medical costs 400 per year (unlimited care)....and cake.

Welfare? No. Constitutionally justified function of governmetn? Yes!

Sounds good. But just not so much more than a guy who puts in 25-30 yrs in one company.

Cops tend to retire out at about 90% of their highest earning year plus continue to have the same medical plans they have while working. They also see annual increases. One of the local agencies here see a 5% increase annually. That is a hell of a lot better than most any retirement plan or for that matter 401K. Generally with those there is no guarantee of lifetime income either.

You don't really understand 401k and private retirement plans. Its is quite easy to calculate life expectancy and fund needed for that time.

That lifetime money you speak of is an amount per month. If person x has x amount of funds in his 401k he only uses the x amount per year till expected end of life.

In the cop or military deal they get what they get without any planning on their part. The 401k holder usually makes contributions that will achieve a projected amount upon retirement. When they start to use that money they have a good idea what to use per year so that it last the long run.

But the plus on the military and cop deal is that they can receive it directly after retirement regardless of age.

That is the major plus and what takes it over the aver age retirement. Maybe they want to cut down on that aspect and withhold until 59 1/2 yrs of age.

Archangel hates that I have a job.

Thank you for that wonderful condescending description Mewamet. You obviously are missing the point. Not a shock or surprise. There is a significant difference between having to plan out ones retirement and not having to worry about because they know they are guaranteed a retirement for as long as they live with annual increases included.

All the cops I've known have planned out their retirement because they are aware of their drop programs and how much extra money they get monthly by allowing a portion of their retirement to earn higher rates of interest.

I think anyone who puts in 25-30 years at a business should get a good retirement. Especially a bank, where you made them a lot of money over the years.

Yes there is but what doe sit have to do with the military pension being so much better.

Its just better.

You make it seem like the guys with 401ks are fucked. And it also seemed like you thought that a 401k was all they got. Oh and social security.

Exactly. So I don't see a military guy being so over the top in comparison to a guy retiring from a private company.

This would of course vary from state to state.

You don't think a guaranteed income source for as long as you are alive is better?

Apparently not since you keep asking the same question over and over again.

No problem. How about an answer to the initial question. Do you think that that it is an accurate statement if it is said that the military is the same as welfare?

No, actually it varies from agency to agency.

Archangel dislikes the character you play on WF...shifting between trying to act like a gangsta type in any thread about police...to big business type in threads about jobs....to that run together sentence fake accent you do in between.

No, I don't think its any part welfare.

You said it again...guaranteed income source. If a guy has 250k in a retirement account he can make it last his lifetime.

How come you don't get that?

This lifetime money is based on the life expectancy of the person in question. You think its just an unlimited suppy of funds they just pull from????

Does anybody else think he uses text templates to post? strg-c (empty right wing commonplace), strg-f (random flame), strg-n (name, real if known even if requested not to use it), strg-? (pseudo-honest 'question').

I can be both those people nimrod.

Whadayagonnadoo?!