members of the military are "inherintly socialist"

[Aunt Sponge]

"And are disconnected from financial reality."

Someone said that on a another forum and before I could post my poignant response and viciously assert that he's the one who shows a disconnect from the military-reality the forum went down for maintenance.

So let's debate that here, shall we.

[Alexandra]

I guess I kind of see what he's saying, but I don't see that as a negative but a positive. I've had socialist leanings for way longer than I've been married to the military.

[Aunt Sponge]

I will state to him that if everyone was inherintly socialist then we wouldn't be having such things as DADT (Don't Ask Don't Tell).

And to his point about us being financially disconnected from the struggles of hte rest of society - I will point out that the majority of soldiers get menial or average pay in comparison to non-civilian sectors because the majority are privates and E5 or below.

[Alexandra]

I don't see what DADT has to do with socialism? I hate DADT but it's not really connected to an economic ideology.

Soldiers getting "menial or average" pay but having zero worries about how to afford housing or medical care, regardless of family size, is precisely what IS socialist about the military. Socialism doesn't mean everyone gets paid a lot, it means people get less take home pay but have all of their basic needs covered by the gov't.

[Fidzy]

Originally Posted by Alexandra I don't see what DADT has to do with socialism? I hate DADT but it's not really connected to an economic ideology. Soldiers getting "menial or average" pay but having zero worries about how to afford housing or medical care, regardless of family size, is precisely what IS socialist about the military. Socialism doesn't mean everyone gets paid a lot, it means people get less take home pay but have all of their basic needs covered by the gov't.

I agree.

[eelo]

I don't think I'd go so far as to say that members of the military are inherently socialist, but I do think that the military lifestyle is a socialist one, for the reasons already mentioned.

I also think it's ironic that some people in the military claim to be SOOOOOOO against socialism as a way of life or as a means of governing and/or redistributing wealth, but they are more than happy to reap the benefits that system provides. In fact, many feel "entitled" to it.

For example: the Exchange is not a socialist organization: everyone pays the same $9.95 for that shirt, $24.99 for those shoes. However, the daycare center is socialist because the payment is income-based: higher earners pay more than average costs (although still lower than what one would pay in a civilian facility) and lower earners pay lower costs. That's classic "...from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Same for housing: Higher earners 'pay' more (in terms of giving up a larger chunk of change) and lower earners pay less, while the actual size qualification is determined by family numbers, not by wealth, earnings, or ability to pay.

[His*PITA*]

Originally Posted by Alexandra I don't see what DADT has to do with socialism? I hate DADT but it's not really connected to an economic ideology. Soldiers getting "menial or average" pay but having zero worries about how to afford housing or medical care, regardless of family size, is precisely what IS socialist about the military. Socialism doesn't mean everyone gets paid a lot, it means people get less take home pay but have all of their basic needs covered by the gov't.

Originally Posted by eelo I don't think I'd go so far as to say that members of the military are inherently socialist, but I do think that the military lifestyle is a socialist one, for the reasons already mentioned. I also think it's ironic that some people in the military claim to be SOOOOOOO against socialism as a way of life or as a means of governing and/or redistributing wealth, but they are more than happy to reap the benefits that system provides. In fact, many feel "entitled" to it. For example: the Exchange is not a socialist organization: everyone pays the same $9.95 for that shirt, $24.99 for those shoes. However, the daycare center is socialist because the payment is income-based: higher earners pay more than average costs (although still lower than what one would pay in a civilian facility) and lower earners pay lower costs. That's classic "...from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Same for housing: Higher earners 'pay' more (in terms of giving up a larger chunk of change) and lower earners pay less, while the actual size qualification is determined by family numbers, not by wealth, earnings, or ability to pay.

[Nittany]

i can see where someone from the outside might think that military members are disconnected from financial realities. when my companies was going through layoffs, DF didn't have to worry that he would lose his job or his paycheck. he is active duty, and i know some reserves have faced cutbacks, but not having the burden of wondering if you're going to have a job tomorrow does isolate you from financial reality.

[Sophie♥Hatter]

Originally Posted by eelo I don't think I'd go so far as to say that members of the military are inherently socialist, but I do think that the military lifestyle is a socialist one, for the reasons already mentioned. I also think it's ironic that some people in the military claim to be SOOOOOOO against socialism as a way of life or as a means of governing and/or redistributing wealth, but they are more than happy to reap the benefits that system provides. In fact, many feel "entitled" to it. For example: the Exchange is not a socialist organization: everyone pays the same $9.95 for that shirt, $24.99 for those shoes. However, the daycare center is socialist because the payment is income-based: higher earners pay more than average costs (although still lower than what one would pay in a civilian facility) and lower earners pay lower costs. That's classic "...from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Same for housing: Higher earners 'pay' more (in terms of giving up a larger chunk of change) and lower earners pay less, while the actual size qualification is determined by family numbers, not by wealth, earnings, or ability to pay.

I agree with all except for an E-6 the base daycare now costs more than what I pay for Kindercare out in town (by about 50 bucks). It was a big reason why I went off ase instead of placing Jacob at the CDC. When I was an E4 and E5 the CDC was a life saver though.

[antenney]

I am one of those people who are very against socialism but part of the military community. The military was not my choice--it was my husbands. When we got married, he was in school to be an accountant, so this is definitely not what I had planned. That being said, after 3 years of being the sole money-maker in the household, I am EXTREMEMLY grateful he now has a job and that the pressure is off of me. Maybe it's because of that, but I never feel "entitled" to what we get. Blessed, grateful, thankful, maybe. But never entitled.

That being said, I can see why someone would say the military is socialist, and all those aspects of this life make me stronger in my belief that I do not want this for our whole country. I'm new to this, but we've already struggled big time with lack of efficiency. There was even a month where we didn't get one of his paychecks! If the government can't get it right with one group of people, I don't see it improving by adding more people to the system. I will be happy when DH is done.