Non-Partisan, is keyword here

[psijac]

The CBO claims that military members get paid better than Civilian counter parts. Studies like this would pop up in the past but they were used to convince you to stay in and used to cut your benefits and they never made a ridiculous claim like 75%

http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2 ... reers-b.nl" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[snorri]

When I hear complaints about comparisons like this, I have to think maybe the solution is to give the military a pay bump (cash compensation) and significantly slash the benefits (noncash and deferred benefits) especially dependent benefits. That would lower the total cost to the tax payers and, if you believe the complaints, it would make the people serving in the military happier with their compensation. That sounds like a win-win solution.

Also, the study doesn't say the military is paid 75% more. It says the median military compensation more than 75% of the comparable civilian government employees. What that means, as a pure hypothetical, is if civilian government employee compensation is evenly distributed between $30k and $70k, with a $50k average, then military with comparable experience and education would have a median pay of $60k.

[baldeagle]

Non-partisan and CBO is an oxymoron. They produce the reports their consumers want. If you don't believe me Google healthcare debate and CBO. They reported what the Democrats wanted them to report.

[Dragonfighter]

I don not know who they talked to in the military, but I and those I knew were well aware of the actual tax free pay in food, shelter, clothing...etc. Even the seprats folks knew they had it good.

[Texas Dan Mosby]

The CBO claims that military members get paid better than Civilian counter parts.

In some cases this may very well be true, however, there are many duties that have no civilian counter parts, namely the shooter types who actually fight for a living, and those that directly support them. Even duties that have civilian counterparts would be hard to compare for the simple fact that the mission and military leaders establish the hours of the duty day, and there is no over time in service. Our mechanics and admin folks worked until their leaders said they were done, or the mission was complete. That doesn't apply to the DA civilian, and we have literally had to schedule training and operations around civilian time schedules on base, and during deployments.

I deployed a Rifle Company to Iraq twice, and both times I did so being about 1/3rd under strength. Apparently the compensation must not be viewed favorably enough by potential volunteers to swell the ranks of the Rifle Companies. Go figure.

For those that would believe our shooters are "over payed", I would ask them to grab a rifle, don some armor, and walk with the boys into harms way for a tour or two....or three. I feel pretty confident they may adopt another view after the first MEDEVAC request, taste of high explosive, or automatic small arms fire.

[Heartland Patriot]

The CBO claims that military members get paid better than Civilian counter parts.

In some cases this may very well be true, however, there are many duties that have no civilian counter parts, namely the shooter types who actually fight for a living, and those that directly support them. Even duties that have civilian counterparts would be hard to compare for the simple fact that the mission and military leaders establish the hours of the duty day, and there is no over time in service. Our mechanics and admin folks worked until their leaders said they were done, or the mission was complete. That doesn't apply to the DA civilian, and we have literally had to schedule training and operations around civilian time schedules on base, and during deployments.

I deployed a Rifle Company to Iraq twice, and both times I did so being about 1/3rd under strength. Apparently the compensation must not be viewed favorably enough by potential volunteers to swell the ranks of the Rifle Companies. Go figure.

For those that would believe our shooters are "over payed", I would ask them to grab a rifle, don some armor, and walk with the boys into harms way for a tour or two....or three. I feel pretty confident they may adopt another view after the first MEDEVAC request, taste of high explosive, or automatic small arms fire.

Spot on, spot on...as someone who started out turning wrenches for the USAF and later led those who turned wrenches, I can say that I would have LOVED to see some of our DOD civilian counterparts work some overtime without extra pay the way we did (I do NOT count the ARTS--Air Reserve Technicians--in that statement)...or get held over day after day just because the work wasn't done yet, the aircraft were too broke to fly the scheduled sorties the next day and too many folks were deployed...or to go on said deployments WHEN you were told to, not when it was convenient for you to go and to come back home WHEN they told you it was your turn, not just because you spent a certain number of days gone...I never went anywhere people were shooting at us and make no claims of being a hero, but some of the locations still wouldn't be considered fun by 99% of the US population (And I know EXACTLY what you are saying having to fit military necessity training into DOD civilian schedules)....these ridiculous "studies" never take any of the extra stuff GIs put up with in the course of their day into account. Yes, I did it of my own accord, and I'm glad I did...but getting made to look like a bunch of overpaid slackers by bureaucrat bean-counters doesn't make me feel all that warm toward them or their cooked numbers.

(Edited because I enjoyed working with the Air Reserve Technicians, no matter what airframe it was...they jobbed out right beside us.)