Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

The tradition system was to treat all enlisted personnel E-3 and below as single, providing no additional benefits for spouse or children. A return to this policy seems a logical step in the future, since manpower costs since the early 1980’s have risen some 80%, to a great extent attributable to junior enlisted spouse and family benefits.

Likewise, private quarters would only be provided to those E-4 and above. And minimum frustration in the ranks is created by phasing in such a program with new enlistments.

The bottom line is that cutbacks are coming, because they must come. The money is no longer there to maintain our current force structure, and cutbacks will be made based on the needs of the service, not its personnel. As was always the case.


163 posted on 11/08/2010 6:46:20 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]


To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
Likewise, private quarters would only be provided to those E-4 and above. And minimum frustration in the ranks is created by phasing in such a program with new enlistments.

You actually think that our military is actually living better than this?!? BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

During my last tour in Korea(2007-8), I arrived at Yongsan Army Garrison and found that the Garrison Commander had just dictated that all E-9's and below were required to move into barracks. And that those with families would have to relocate them back to the states.

Needless to say, even us E-6's (at the time) were sharing barracks rooms. In fact, outside of my time in the states... and this current tour in Korea, I've never had the chance to live outside of the barracks. And that's coming from a 14-year Master Sergeant.

And that's how the friggin' *Air Force*, supposedly the best service for accommodations, lived.

So what's this 'private quarters' for E-4's and up? To do that, we'd have to *INCREASE* the defense budget.

Personally, though... I'd have to say that outside of combat zones, the military should not be in the business of providing housing to any of it's members. The Defense budget already includes the total amount of BAH/OHA that is necessary for every serviceman. However, by forcing it's members into barracks, the services can then divert the difference into other projects while then going back to Congress for barracks/family housing funding.

So by eliminating the military housing business, you don't have to pay for housing construction and maintenance... and you also see the proper utilization of BAH/OHA moneys authorized by Congress in the defense budget.

And you'll see the troops have better accommodations at the same time.

170 posted on 11/08/2010 7:28:10 AM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson