Next Time You Consider Your Retirement Pay!

[SASless]

I am at a loss for words after reading this article.

There are some questions i would like to ask for sure.

When I consider the latest Congressional Action to cut Retired Pay for our Military Troops who retire prior to Age 62....including those Retired following catastrophic Wounds and Injuries received in Combat.....I find this situation morally repugnant.

Military brass immune to pension rate cuts | Army Times | armytimes.com (http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140108/BENEFITS05/301080005/Military-brass-immune-to-pension-rate-cuts)

[The Old Fat One]

"It's the same the whole world over,
It's the poor what gets the blame,
It's the rich what gets the pleasure,
Isn't it a blooming shame?"

[johnnypaveway]

I cannot imagine any situation where a senior officer in receipt of an elevated pension whilst those under his or her command are financially penalized could ever pass the 'having to look at yourself in the mirror test'.

This is the very worst combination of blurring the morals of politicians and the responsibilities of senior military command.

Shame

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I am surprised you are surprised SASless.
Look at almost any business/profession and you will see a clear division point between the We're-alright-Jack rich bastards and the You'll-do-as-you're-bloody-told-and-like-it plebs.Much of middle management is now in the latter category, if they still have a job at all.
Even more concerning is that all semblance of regard for real health, safety and just plain consideration for other human beings is largely gone. Fill the paperwork in and don't get caught is the attitude.

[jimjim1]

This is almost sure to create disagreement since there will be people reading this on both the upside and the downside of the observed trends who may have differing views - tin had on:-)

The US and UK (and no doubt others) have both been pursuing a path of increasing rewards for the already well off and reducing income (after inflation) for the poorer of us for 30 or so years. The US military pension trick, of cuts for most and no cuts for the top few, mentioned above is not in any respect exceptional in our society now.

e.g.
Congressional Budget Office finds that, between 1979 and 2007, income grew by:[1][2]
•275 percent for the top 1 percent of households,
•65 percent for the next 19 percent,
•Just under 40 percent for the next 60 percent, and
•18 percent for the bottom 20 percent.

This is after tax and government benefits. I have not bored in enough to find out if this is after or before inflation however I think it must be before since I am sure than the bottom 50% have got poorer over the last 30 years in real terms.

e.g. UK. The economy is "recovering" FTSE100 is at record highs, most people are being told to expect pay rises of 0%-1%. Rail fares rise 3%, the rate of inflation. FTSE 100 Executive Directors get a 14% rise.

e.g. UK. University Vice Chancellors (CEO) are getting 12% as lecturers (professors in US) get 1% or less even as inflation is 3%.


Further reading:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/16/opinion/krugman-why-inequality-matters.html?ref=paulkrugman&_r=0

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/we-are-not-all-in-this-together/


[1] http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/disinformation-on-inequality/
[2] CBO | Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007 (http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42729)