Reply to White House 'Strongly Opposes' Proposed 19.5% Pay Hike for Junior Enlisted Troops

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "White House 'Strongly Opposes' Proposed 19.5% Pay Hike for Junior Enlisted Troops"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Im not sure I understand what the issue is....they are doing a military wide compensation review and want that completed BEFORE signing a 19.5% pay hike correct?

"While Tuesday's statement from the White House suggested Congress should wait until the administration's review is done to make any significant changes to military pay, the senior enlisted leaders for all the military services earlier this year urged lawmakers to act immediately to boost service members' pay.

Additionally, a House Armed Services Committee staffer told reporters last month that a 15% raise for junior enlisted service members is among the options the administration's review is considering.

The White House's statement Tuesday cited cost as a concern with the House's plan. A Congressional Budget Office analysis released Monday estimated the increase in pay for junior enlisted troops would cost $24.4 billion from 2025 to 2029.

The administration also argued that service members have already received significant raises in recent years, citing the 5.2% troops got this year and the 4.6% increase last year.

"If the president's FY 2025 request is enacted, service members will have received a 15% basic pay increase in just three years," the statement said, though it would actually add up to 14.3%."

[/quote]

Senior military leaders recommend this. They know lower enlisted troops are struggling.
Bipartisan leadership in the House Armed Services committee recommends this. They have examined the issues.

[b]Lower enlisted troops can’t afford housing[/b]. How do you think that’s not  problem?[/quote]

Then housing allowance should be adjusted. Let the formal review be completed and then push this forward. This is all delayed from previous administrations.

Ill also add that the bill the House Committee is trying to push through REMOVES MARIJUANA TESTING FOR RECRUITMENT AND ENLISTED!!!!!

[/quote]

Do you have a citation that this was delayed by previous administrations? [/quote]

[url]https://www.navycs.com/charts/[/url] [url]https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/12/07/2023-military-pay-raise-will-be-largest-20-years.html[/url]
You can see year by year. President, year, increase. It usually matches fed increases.

Obama recession, no one got raises. Clinton balancing the budget- no one got raises. But Bush and Trump both pro-military and the raises were eh.

And you are uneducated if you think that the base pay is all they get. [url]https://www.navycs.com/military-pay.html[/url] And most of the allowances are untaxed. So when you talk about 2000 BAH you need to increase it to what it would be for taxed rate because its untaxed.

[/quote]

Dude I retired after 27 years. I am shocked Biden talks about his son and Dr. Jill talks about military families needing support and lower enlisted are struggling to pay their rent.

[/quote]

They arent struggling to pay their rent. They are struggling because the bases are in HCOL and the government doesnt properly adjust for COL. The government also wont regulate housing and who is purchasing housing. The Ft Carson example was talking about people wanting to buy homes because of VA loans and equity but buying a home isnt a guarantee and shouldnt be what we are increasing pay towards. They have 26000 personnel but only 3100 housing units. Why was base personnel expanded without housing expanded? The base command is now advocating for reduction in builder liability so that they can get more condos built......they are all over the place. And then commenting about how some of the families have to have dual incomes to survive........ermmm yes so do most families. I didnt realize that being an enlisted meant you got a SAHP. Are we subsidizing that now?

Id love to see the numbers on how much base housing costs the military to run versus BAH

[/quote]

Correct that this quote was about PURCHASING a home, which should not be an expected entitlement.  The vast majority of high-school educated Americans, who are in their early 20s, with a spouse (who often does not work) and a child or two - is not looking at purchasing a home.

In addition, the other skeleton in the closet is when DoD decided to start "privatizing" military housing. That means that corporate greed set in.  Countless stories of privatized military housing which was/is substandard, lack of maintenance, yet the contracts keep getting renewed.

When DoD "owned" all the housing, it also had problems but at least they could be managed internally. If there was a problem with your housing unit, and it wasn't getting fixed, you could go to your commander and get some resolution. Good luck trying that with a contractor raking in millions without having to lift a finger. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics