Should we pay soldiers more?

[Georgy Zhukov]

I was reading an article about (United States) troop morale, and it talked about how troops were getting demoralized because their Private military counterparts were making like a few thousand dollars a day doing the same job or less, while they were making like 12,000 dollars a year on deployment trying to prop up their families at home.

So should we pay our troops more?

[nightwar]

Hell yes!

[hellheaven1987]

Great, time to increase tax!!

You do realize that pretty much all nations today have understrength military because this "lets pay soldiers more" idea?

[Azog 150]

Definitly yes. I believe the average British squaddy recieves £16,000 a year. Call centre workers earn more....

It should at the very least be equal to that of police officers and firemen (Which it currently isn't)

You do realize that pretty much all nations today have understrength military because this "lets pay soldiers more" idea?

Not really. Britain has a massive problem with squaddies leaving the army as soon as their four years is up. Pay increase might pursude a few to stay on.

[Tiberios]

In Denmark, absolutely.

[Holger Danske]

In Denmark, absolutely.

Nah, rather have it so deployed troops don't pay taxes as they do now. ( Which is massively lame! )

[priam11]

Don't we need to also take into consideration food, clothing and housing?

Leaving the family aspect aside for a bit, if all of that is paid by the government, it is not as bad as it seems. I believe that the average person spends roughly a third of their income paying for a roof over their head.

If I am wrong on that amount, let me know.

Now Cops, that is a different story.

[Razor]

Not really. Britain has a massive problem with squaddies leaving the army as soon as their four years is up. Pay increase might pursude a few to stay on.

I'd rather go for conscription. Most likely there will be plenty of "stickers" who turn out to like military service after all. And it will do society good IMO. And: no need to increase payment.

[Rolling Thunder]

I'd rather go for conscription. Most likely there will be plenty of "stickers" who turn out to like military service after all. And it will do society good IMO. And: no need to increase payment.

So instead of paying 100,000 men £16,000 a year, your solution is to pay 300,000 of them and have them never, ever gain any kind of experience, hate the military, refuse to serve, be inept, cowardly and scared when called upon to actually fight, leave at the soonest possible moment, die in droves and generally up.


God, I hope you aren't in management.

[Razor]

So instead of paying 100,000 men £16,000 a year, your solution is to pay 300,000 of them and have them never, ever gain any kind of experience, hate the military, refuse to serve, be inept, cowardly and scared when called upon to actually fight, leave at the soonest possible moment, die in droves and generally up.


God, I hope you aren't in management.

Not yet.
At least in my country the military lacks personnel (or lacked; quite a few run the risk of losing their jobs so I've heard because of the over-expensive mission in Afghanistan). It would IMO therefore better to re-introduce conscription and make the army more popular rather than raising wages to attract more people to the military. Additionally serving the army has to become something of a duty to your people and country and more honorable and part of one's upbringing rather than simply hated and/or a job. Anyway, more a matter of a change of mentality, that along with right comes duty.

A professional army runs the risk of becoming alienated from society whom they serve and protect. Mixing the two would lessen or even erase that divide.

[Rolling Thunder]

Not yet.
At least in my country the military lacks personnel (or lacked; quite a few run the risk of losing their jobs so I've heard because of the over-expensive mission in Afghanistan). It would IMO therefore better to re-introduce conscription and make the army more popular rather than raising wages to attract more people to the military. Additionally serving the army has to become something of a duty to your people and country and more honorable and part of one's upbringing rather than simply hated and/or a job. Anyway, more a matter of a change of mentality, that along with right comes duty.

A professional army runs the risk of becoming alienated from society whom they serve and protect. Mixing the two would lessen or even erase that divide.

*Sigh*.

A professional army is used when one wants an army that is competent. A conscript army is used when one wants to do silly social engineering bollocks with the youth of your country. A professional army is what you want if, say, you ever want to fight a war, even in Iraq or Afghanistan. They will go in and get the job done. A conscript army, well...

Look how well that worked in Vietnam. A conscript army is a vast, unwieldy force that acts as nothing more than a measure for fighting a traditional war of annihilation. Put bluntly, it's militarily useless save if the Russians invade. If you want to have an adaptable fighting force, you have to pay for a professional army. Which means that, in, say, Britain's case, you would have to pay for two armies, instead of one.

And with right does not come duty. Stop reading Heinlein. 'Rights' are not something handed down by society, they are inherent to each and every man, woman and child in the world and society happens to acknowledge them. 'Duty' is as silly a concept as 'honour'.

[Poach]

It should at the very least be equal to that of police officers and firemen (Which it currently isn't)

While I think £17k (they bumped it up a grand) a year starting salary (and that's not including operational allowance or heavily subsidised living [How many 18yr olds have a house and family to keep?]) is pretty decent for blokes that age, that does annoy me. Especially policemen: firemen ok, their job is genuinely dangerous, but policemen? Not to detract from policemen but their job isn't particularly dangerous, nor is it as stressful or demanding as a soldiers'.

While we're on the subject, a prisoner in the UK enjoys a higher standard of living than a soldier on a UK base. That's a disgrace.

[Burnum]

While I think £17k (they bumped it up a grand) a year starting salary (and that's not including operational allowance or heavily subsidised living [How many 18yr olds have a house and family to keep?]) is pretty decent for blokes that age, that does annoy me. Especially policemen: firemen ok, their job is genuinely dangerous, but policemen? Not to detract from policemen but their job isn't particularly dangerous, nor is it as stressful or demanding as a soldiers'.

While we're on the subject, a prisoner in the UK enjoys a higher standard of living than a soldier on a UK base. That's a disgrace.

Knowing what I know about the Police and the Armed Services, I'm going to have too disagree. If anything, it can be even more stressful. A front line police officer deals with a level of depravity that Soldiers mostly will never even see.

edit: Soldiers should be paid more.

[JP226]

Definitly yes. I believe the average British squaddy recieves £16,000 a year. Call centre workers earn more....

That's the british military historically, they've never been paid well.

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/...y/blsalenl.htm

Here's some charts. It's compatiable at the market level for the most part.

[LegionnaireX]

Actually, looking at JP's charts, enlisted men in the US get paid extremely well for a job not requiring a college degree. How would you like to go from a broke high school student to making 30,000 +?

It isn't all about the money, though. The military gets some excellent benefits which increase the amount of disposable income they recieve. Not to mention the respect from the general population.

That said, I'd rather take a higher paying private job than any government job. The government could afford to pay soldiers more if they eliminated a lot fo the wasteful spending and ineffective programs they operate.

[Georgy Zhukov]

Actually, looking at JP's charts, enlisted men in the US get paid extremely well for a job not requiring a college degree. How would you like to go from a broke high school student to making 30,000 +?

It isn't all about the money, though. The military gets some excellent benefits which increase the amount of disposable income they recieve. Not to mention the respect from the general population.

That said, I'd rather take a higher paying private job than any government job. The government could afford to pay soldiers more if they eliminated a lot fo the wasteful spending and ineffective programs they operate.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp

The lowliest private makes 12,000 dollars a year.

[hellheaven1987]

Another thing is that soldiers generally have no need to pay for rent and food expense by themselves, which can save a lot of cash in term.

[LegionnaireX]

http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp

The lowliest private makes 12,000 dollars a year.

That number actually makes more sense from what I've seen before, but whats up with the payscale on JP's post? There is a large difference between 30,000 and 12,000.

Still, its not like low ranking military members are in poverty. Many of their living expenses are free. You can't really compare civilian pay with military pay.

[JP226]

http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp

The lowliest private makes 12,000 dollars a year.

I don't know where on earth your 12k is coming from. A E1, which I think you are automatically an E2 coming out of bootcamp gets paid 1,447 at the base. And obviously that's more than 12k. Then you get all of your allowances for housing, subsistence and then the incentive pay for things while deployed. Living off base without a dependent plus subsistence, you are looking close at 26 or 7 out of the gate.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/mili...PayTable34.pdf

[DisgruntledGoat]

Actually, looking at JP's charts, enlisted men in the US get paid extremely well for a job not requiring a college degree. How would you like to go from a broke high school student to making 30,000 +?

It isn't all about the money, though. The military gets some excellent benefits which increase the amount of disposable income they recieve. Not to mention the respect from the general population.

That said, I'd rather take a higher paying private job than any government job. The government could afford to pay soldiers more if they eliminated a lot fo the wasteful spending and ineffective programs they operate.

Pay is usually not based on education but risk and responsibility. For example at my steel mill most don't have post secondary education. Yet the guys working the more dangerous jobs get paid better than I do as a highly educated engineer.

If you can die doing your job you should get paid more. Plain and simple. And in the military you are expected to die...