Can someone explain the wealthy military officer phenomenon?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got married early, earned extra for every deployment since were married. Lived cheaply on base or got the housing and family allowance (tax free) and bought houses in every state they were based. When dh was active duty, he got like $3k in housing allowance in the DC area which paid our mortgage and it was tax free.
Free healthcare for the military member, much reduced healthcare for kids, reduced cost daycare, tax free groceries and booze, VA loans (dh is considered sufficiently disabled so we get no cost refis), no student debt. Also much better to go in as officers and not enlisted.

They also earn money from renting out any houses owned outright.

Where do you think they're getting all this money to own houses outright?
The housing allowances were laid out earlier. How many houses you think we're able to buy with that? I don't understand why everyone seems to think this "great tax-free housing" is unlimited and we're buying multiple houses...the reality is most military can barely afford to buy one. I mean w.t.f.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

"Burial in Arlington Cemetery" is part of an "elevated lifestyle?" You have to be dead to be buried, and if you're dead, you have NO lifestyle, never mind "elevated."

You are being obtuse. Would they have had free housing and stipends and additional pay without the military lifestyle? In the meantime, they get to move to areas and live in places they would not have otherwise been able to live.

It is not the sacrifice you think it is. It is a choice. If they lose someone to war, yes it is certainly a sacrifice. I know, my family lost everything to war. They were given nothing for both parents working 60 hour weeks (hint: not at home). They were not paid for special assignments, et al.

I am not being obtuse. You used a benefit that you can only use once you are DEAD as an example of an "elevated lifestyle." You are being absurd.
And military members do not get "free housing." They work for it. That's like saying everyone that works a job gets "free money" in the form of a paycheck.

Poor example, but you certainly know the point. People do not join the military, even officers, for no reason. It is for the benefits. But continue being obtuse - how is that working for you?

I'm not being obtuse. Saying that someone lives an "elevated lifestyle" after they are dead is just moronic. Does anyone get ANY job, for any reason other than pay and benefits? But continue being absurd-how is that working for you?

+1 This might be one of the stupidest things I've ever read. I can't believe this poster is doubling down on the elevated lifestyle because of a burial site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

This comment is so obnoxious. 1) there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teacher and 2) officer wives tend to also be high achieving...like attracts like. The majority of officers we know have very highly educated wives.

For people complaining that officer wives act entitled, you sure aren't very down to earth with your dig at teachers!

Is it possible that your experience is valid and also not representative of all people’s experiences?

I believe you when you describe the people that you know. I have learned from you and I have adjusted my opinion to incorporate your insightful observation. But can you consider that other people have conflicting anecdotal experiences that can be equally valid?

Especially since each person’s experience with and opinion on this subjective topic will be strongly influenced by their personal career, their spouse’s career, their personal definitions of high achieving and highly educated, the branch of service, the duty stations lived on, the units served in, the specific military jobs performed, their generation (as another poster incisively posited), their year group, etc.

If you talk about the people you know, and I talk about the people I know, and others talk about the people they know, as long as we all keep adding qualifiers to our observations (and accept the limitations of dialogue with anonymous people on an internet forum) then we can gain greater insight from each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

This comment is so obnoxious. 1) there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teacher and 2) officer wives tend to also be high achieving...like attracts like. The majority of officers we know have very highly educated wives.

For people complaining that officer wives act entitled, you sure aren't very down to earth with your dig at teachers!

Is it possible that your experience is valid and also not representative of all people’s experiences?

I believe you when you describe the people that you know. I have learned from you and I have adjusted my opinion to incorporate your insightful observation. But can you consider that other people have conflicting anecdotal experiences that can be equally valid?

Especially since each person’s experience with and opinion on this subjective topic will be strongly influenced by their personal career, their spouse’s career, their personal definitions of high achieving and highly educated, the branch of service, the duty stations lived on, the units served in, the specific military jobs performed, their generation (as another poster incisively posited), their year group, etc.

If you talk about the people you know, and I talk about the people I know, and others talk about the people they know, as long as we all keep adding qualifiers to our observations (and accept the limitations of dialogue with anonymous people on an internet forum) then we can gain greater insight from each other.

No. You made a dig at just being a teacher. You were being a jerk and nothing I added is new info to you. Just own you made a jerky comment and stop the word salad.

[Anonymous]

I mean, yes, I saw this phenomenon with the 1980s younger officers. They were thrifty, spent carefully, saved their money and seemed to have a nice lifestyle. But what made it possible was thrift where it mattered. There was the officer who bought a house in Fairfax, rented it out when he got transferred out of the area, and retired in the area a decade later. He and his wife lived in the same house the last time I paid attention, likely paid off at this point, and worth >10x what they paid for it originally.

Everything is more expensive these days. Crazy expensive. This is not sustainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

This comment is so obnoxious. 1) there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teacher and 2) officer wives tend to also be high achieving...like attracts like. The majority of officers we know have very highly educated wives.

For people complaining that officer wives act entitled, you sure aren't very down to earth with your dig at teachers!

Is it possible that your experience is valid and also not representative of all people’s experiences?

I believe you when you describe the people that you know. I have learned from you and I have adjusted my opinion to incorporate your insightful observation. But can you consider that other people have conflicting anecdotal experiences that can be equally valid?

Especially since each person’s experience with and opinion on this subjective topic will be strongly influenced by their personal career, their spouse’s career, their personal definitions of high achieving and highly educated, the branch of service, the duty stations lived on, the units served in, the specific military jobs performed, their generation (as another poster incisively posited), their year group, etc.

If you talk about the people you know, and I talk about the people I know, and others talk about the people they know, as long as we all keep adding qualifiers to our observations (and accept the limitations of dialogue with anonymous people on an internet forum) then we can gain greater insight from each other.

No. You made a dig at just being a teacher. You were being a jerk and nothing I added is new info to you. Just own you made a jerky comment and stop the word salad.

Actually that wasn’t me. I was the poster that preceded the teacher post. I commented about your like attracts like observation, which I thought was good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

This comment is so obnoxious. 1) there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teacher and 2) officer wives tend to also be high achieving...like attracts like. The majority of officers we know have very highly educated wives.

For people complaining that officer wives act entitled, you sure aren't very down to earth with your dig at teachers!

Is it possible that your experience is valid and also not representative of all people’s experiences?

I believe you when you describe the people that you know. I have learned from you and I have adjusted my opinion to incorporate your insightful observation. But can you consider that other people have conflicting anecdotal experiences that can be equally valid?

Especially since each person’s experience with and opinion on this subjective topic will be strongly influenced by their personal career, their spouse’s career, their personal definitions of high achieving and highly educated, the branch of service, the duty stations lived on, the units served in, the specific military jobs performed, their generation (as another poster incisively posited), their year group, etc.

If you talk about the people you know, and I talk about the people I know, and others talk about the people they know, as long as we all keep adding qualifiers to our observations (and accept the limitations of dialogue with anonymous people on an internet forum) then we can gain greater insight from each other.

No. You made a dig at just being a teacher. You were being a jerk and nothing I added is new info to you. Just own you made a jerky comment and stop the word salad.

Actually that wasn’t me. I was the poster that preceded the teacher post. I commented about your like attracts like observation, which I thought was good.

What year is your experience from? Happy to listen to other perspectives but there are clearly people posting about really old experiences, which is about as helpful as comparing the real estate market now as it was 20 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s because the taxpayer funds a huge portion of their expenses (housing while on base, no down payment for Va loans, the list goes on). Welfare queens to the max

+1. Even one of Reagan's hires (Stockdale, I think his name may be) wrote a book a few years ago describing the US military as socialistic. But if you dare question it, you're labeled a "communist" or worse. DH has several retired military in his family, and when they start bragging about their free health care and whatnot at Thanksgiving, I say "you're welcome."

Maybe when the conversation turns to the safe and free society we live in, your retired military family members can turn to you and say, “You’re welcome.”

Oh, they do, at every turn.

Good, I’m glad you are making sure to thank them for their service.

You are thanking them, right, and that’s why they’re saying, “You’re welcome”?

Thanking them for their service is cringe. They didn’t do it for you.

This.

The elephant in the room is that many people join or stay in the military because it is their best (financial ) option.

That is not politically correct but it is true. (That is why they use bonuses to get them to re-up, not flags or the constitution!)

Come on. That's not true. Of all the officers that got to retirement there isn't a single one I know that did it for a paycheck. Many easier careers that don't totally burn your family and regularly puts you at risk.

My spouse and I both got out at 8 (dual military, both service academy graduates). The majority of our former peers that we know that are staying in until retirement are…very average. Many of them were open about staying in until retirement simply to get retirement pay. Nice people, but very average in intellect, skill, and ambition. This label is true for both the ROTC graduates and the service academy graduates that we know; only OCS and prior service officers defy this trend in my experience. They definitely don’t have many options for stable pay and benefits at the level that they have in the military, although laughably more than a few have commented that they could have been “CEO level” if they had gotten out pre or post company command. Their wives are also to this day, even post GWOT era, the most into the “I am a military spouse! Thank me and my family! We serve too!” culture, way more than the enlisted wives that I knew. There are of course exceptions to every generalization. A small minority are exceptional.

To be fair, officers' wives are typically more educated (like attracts like), so they do sacrifice more than the high school grad who marries her first boyfriend right after he graduates from basic. For the latter, the military lifestyle is a step up. For the former, it's forfeiting what could have been.

That’s a really interesting point that I hadn’t considered.

Your observation actually makes a lot of sense and explains the persistent, perceived sense of entitlement that I saw from so many officers’ wives.

Although, lol, I think maybe some of the wives are as delusional about their forfeited potential as their “I could have been CEO of a Fortune 500 company” officer husbands who choose to stay in until retirement.

+1 DP here. From what I have seen, military wives have an elevated lifestyle, compared to what they would otherwise have (had they not married an officer). Burial in Arlington Cemetery, for one. She would have had that being a teacher?

This comment is so obnoxious. 1) there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a teacher and 2) officer wives tend to also be high achieving...like attracts like. The majority of officers we know have very highly educated wives.

For people complaining that officer wives act entitled, you sure aren't very down to earth with your dig at teachers!

Is it possible that your experience is valid and also not representative of all people’s experiences?

I believe you when you describe the people that you know. I have learned from you and I have adjusted my opinion to incorporate your insightful observation. But can you consider that other people have conflicting anecdotal experiences that can be equally valid?

Especially since each person’s experience with and opinion on this subjective topic will be strongly influenced by their personal career, their spouse’s career, their personal definitions of high achieving and highly educated, the branch of service, the duty stations lived on, the units served in, the specific military jobs performed, their generation (as another poster incisively posited), their year group, etc.

If you talk about the people you know, and I talk about the people I know, and others talk about the people they know, as long as we all keep adding qualifiers to our observations (and accept the limitations of dialogue with anonymous people on an internet forum) then we can gain greater insight from each other.

No. You made a dig at just being a teacher. You were being a jerk and nothing I added is new info to you. Just own you made a jerky comment and stop the word salad.

Actually that wasn’t me. I was the poster that preceded the teacher post. I commented about your like attracts like observation, which I thought was good.

What year is your experience from? Happy to listen to other perspectives but there are clearly people posting about really old experiences, which is about as helpful as comparing the real estate market now as it was 20 years ago.

Mine is GWOT era. I entered after 9/11 and got out a few years ago. I think you’re right on the generational turnover; I specifically remember the officers and their spouses being drastically different than my peers and spouses that I currently know.

My parents, both sets of grandparents, and many uncles and aunts on both sides were also military, some got out and others retired. The generational differences observation happens to fit at every level for my family.

I think maybe the deployment optempo and the nature of the GWOT also strongly affected both the officer and the spousal dynamics in the same way the Cold War affected the officer and the spousal dynamics of my parents and their peers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got married early, earned extra for every deployment since were married. Lived cheaply on base or got the housing and family allowance (tax free) and bought houses in every state they were based. When dh was active duty, he got like $3k in housing allowance in the DC area which paid our mortgage and it was tax free.
Free healthcare for the military member, much reduced healthcare for kids, reduced cost daycare, tax free groceries and booze, VA loans (dh is considered sufficiently disabled so we get no cost refis), no student debt. Also much better to go in as officers and not enlisted.

They also earn money from renting out any houses owned outright.

Where do you think they're getting all this money to own houses outright?
The housing allowances were laid out earlier. How many houses you think we're able to buy with that? I don't understand why everyone seems to think this "great tax-free housing" is unlimited and we're buying multiple houses...the reality is most military can barely afford to buy one. I mean w.t.f.

Are all officers in one house??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got married early, earned extra for every deployment since were married. Lived cheaply on base or got the housing and family allowance (tax free) and bought houses in every state they were based. When dh was active duty, he got like $3k in housing allowance in the DC area which paid our mortgage and it was tax free.
Free healthcare for the military member, much reduced healthcare for kids, reduced cost daycare, tax free groceries and booze, VA loans (dh is considered sufficiently disabled so we get no cost refis), no student debt. Also much better to go in as officers and not enlisted.

They also earn money from renting out any houses owned outright.

Where do you think they're getting all this money to own houses outright?
The housing allowances were laid out earlier. How many houses you think we're able to buy with that? I don't understand why everyone seems to think this "great tax-free housing" is unlimited and we're buying multiple houses...the reality is most military can barely afford to buy one. I mean w.t.f.

Are all officers in one house??

I'm not the poster you quoted, but I don't understand your question.

[Anonymous]

I think OPs point is that some might be pompous and self righteous. Not all, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think OPs point is that some might be pompous and self righteous. Not all, of course.

There are pompous and self righteous people in all sorts of occupations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny multiple people have mentioned DoD contractor positions. DH is looking to retire, and the jobs he's seeing are only around $90k.

Don't get me wrong, we live fairly frugally and are happy with our standard of living, but I'm curious where this financial disconnect between us and some of his peers is.

Your dh doesn't have the right qualifications. I've lived amongst this group and people were making more than that decades ago. I made that much 20 some odd years ago working for one of the independent govt agencies. My spouse left the military decades ago and went to work for a contractor being paid that much. Both spouse and I are tech/engineer types.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny multiple people have mentioned DoD contractor positions. DH is looking to retire, and the jobs he's seeing are only around $90k.

Don't get me wrong, we live fairly frugally and are happy with our standard of living, but I'm curious where this financial disconnect between us and some of his peers is.

Your dh doesn't have the right qualifications. I've lived amongst this group and people were making more than that decades ago. I made that much 20 some odd years ago working for one of the independent govt agencies. My spouse left the military decades ago and went to work for a contractor being paid that much. Both spouse and I are tech/engineer types.

Of course, the military is a huge industry with all kinds of field. My spouse is in bio and officer with clearance, and private firms offer more. The officer and soldier class divide is pretty big.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Got married early, earned extra for every deployment since were married. Lived cheaply on base or got the housing and family allowance (tax free) and bought houses in every state they were based. When dh was active duty, he got like $3k in housing allowance in the DC area which paid our mortgage and it was tax free.
Free healthcare for the military member, much reduced healthcare for kids, reduced cost daycare, tax free groceries and booze, VA loans (dh is considered sufficiently disabled so we get no cost refis), no student debt. Also much better to go in as officers and not enlisted.

They also earn money from renting out any houses owned outright.

Where do you think they're getting all this money to own houses outright?
The housing allowances were laid out earlier. How many houses you think we're able to buy with that? I don't understand why everyone seems to think this "great tax-free housing" is unlimited and we're buying multiple houses...the reality is most military can barely afford to buy one. I mean w.t.f.

Are all officers in one house??

I'm not the poster you quoted, but I don't understand your question.

PP claimed multiple houses.