This is very true. As you mentioned, while some retired military are highly trained and can use those skills towards other careers (cops, fire fighters, pilots, medics, engineers, air traffic controllers, logisticians, nurses, contract lawyers, etc). But many possess warfighting skills that do not easily translate into civilian jobs, especially in this economy.
Certain members of the media have simply been dripping with venom per their coverage of this issue the last 3 months. Many speak of "retirement at age 38" - as if all retirees entered when they were 18 years of age. Most enlisted are in their mid-40s by the time they reach retirement. Officers, even those who were commissioned at age 22 or 23, will typically serve 25 years and be in their mid-40s or early 50s.
Recruiters are not breaking down the doors of most 50 year olds today to given them multiple job offers.
As I mentioned before, the few (17%) of do make it to at least 20 years do not come through the experience without some scars, physical or otherwise.
Many military veterans are wounded, but many others have blown knees or battered limbs that simply was a consequence of the job. Some caught diseases from some 3rd world hell hole. I know people who worked through the Tsunami relief effort who contracted horrible diseases that they are still contending with. Tens of thousands of veterans have lost some or most of their hearing. Some unfortunate veterans have broken minds or spirits, or have struggled with the monster of addiction.
On top of all of that are the painful memories. Some have seen horrible, horrible things. People mention friends dying, but dealing with death on such a first person basis even when it involved the enemy or the civilian population is a nightmare all by itself.
The splinter in the heart that haunts many veterans is the price their families paid for their service.
Some of my most painful memories are not what I experience in terms of hardship, but watching those I love suffer. Tears when I told them we had to move again, away from their new found friends or school. Or the day before Christmas eve that I packed my bags to head to the air base as I left (yet again), and my young daughters each held onto one of my legs and flightsuit pockets, sobbing and pleading uncontrollably, as I tried to walk out the door with tears in m eyes - knowing I would not be home for over a year.
Paul Ryan can pay me and my fellow warriors back for all of that anytime he wants. I won't hold my breath.
Forget the plight of the retiree for just a moment, as that is a emotional argument, not a conservative one. Not that I’m not saying its invalid, just move to the legal argument.
In my humble opinion, we need to keep our focus on the fact that the government made a CONTRACT with us that they’re trying — or were trying— to change on us AFTER our end of said contract was fulfilled.
Feel sorry for retirees or not, we had a promise in writing. Are COLAs part of that? I would argue they are, because if it explicitly said in the contract that they were not then that would have influenced many of us at a far earlier time NOT to make the career commitment.
If any of us had failed before retirement to do everything that was required of us we would have got the boot—no retirement. I had a good friend at the SNCO Academy in Alabama—we were both attending—who went down to Tyndall AFB in Florida on the weekend and got caught going through the gate with a BA of .218. AND he rarely drank. But that one time, he was with old friends at the golf course clubhouse after 18 holes and tied one too many on being merry and reminiscing.
He was booted out at 22 years for that. No one felt too sorry for him—he broke the rules. BUT that is the punishment for not holding up your end of the contract.
What penalty for the government to renege on the SAME contract?
Despite Ryan and Murry’s stupid deal, and the House and Senate rolling it back, how can the government get away with essentially breaking the legal contract with us? NO ONE in the whole argument has yet to explain or argue THAT.