Don't you LOVE how THE GOP SUPPORTS THE TROOPS by CUTTING THEIR PAY?!?

Question

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_whitehouse_opposeraise_070516w/
White House opposes 3.5 percent pay raise

By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday May 16, 2007 17:47:40 EDT

Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization bill.

The Bush administration had asked for a 3 percent military raise for Jan. 1, 2008, enough to match last year’s average pay increase in the private sector. The House Armed Services Committee recommends a 3.5 percent pay increase for 2008, and increases in 2009 through 2012 that also are 0.5 percentage point greater than private-sector pay raises.

The slightly bigger military raises are intended to reduce the gap between military and civilian pay that stands at about 3.9 percent today. Under the bill, HR 1585, the pay gap would be reduced to 1.4 percent after the Jan. 1, 2012, pay

Congress proposed a certain pay level, TO HELP THEM KEEP UP with inflation, and the GOP WANTS TO CUT IT.

REMEMBER, MANY TROOPS ARE ON FOOD STAMPS BECAUSE THERE PAY IS SO LOW.

Answer 1

absolutely mind boggling and disgusting, isn't it?
we live in a friggin' nightmare.
god help us.

Answer 2

The "pay gap" is based on base pay and does not fully take into account all the other benefits/pays those in the military receive. My last year in the Navy, retired in Dec 2006 as E-9, my total base pay was about 60K or so but my actual income for 2006 was $108,000...after taxes. The Congressional Budget Office issued a report two weeks ago that raised doubts about the existence of a pay gap. We all would like to see more pay and 3% may be sufficient - I am personnaly predicting a compromise of about 3.2%, even created a chart about it http://www.navycs.com/08militarypaychart.html

Answer 3

You obviously never looked at the pay raises the Democrats gave the troops.

Or you would know, the pay gap grew every single year Clinton was President, because he refused to give the military anything but tiny pay raises.

Actually Bush didn't knock any part of the pay raise off.

The US military normally gets 1/2 a percentage point above the " cost of living " increase.

This is to lower the " Pay Gap " between the military and civilians that occured in the 1990's.

This year, that means a 3.0% pay raise, which is what Bush proposed.

The House decided to offer a 3.5% pay raise.

Bush said it wasn't needed.

But Bush didn't kill it, he hasn't threatened to veto an additional raise.

And if you look at the previous military pay raises over the last 15 years, you will see who supports the troops and who doesn't.

Year/Pay Raise.......Pay Gap

1994 2.2%............... -12.0%
1995 2.6%............... -12.5%
1996 2.4%............... -13.0%
1997 3.0%............... -12.8%
1998 2.8%............... -13.3%
1999 3.6%............... -13.3%
2000 6.2%............... -11.4%
2001 4.1%............... -10.5%

2002 6.9%............... -7.7%
2003 4.8%............... -6.5%
2004 4.1%............... -6.0%
2005 3.5%............... -5.1%
2006 3.1%............... -4.6%
2007 2.2%............... -4.0%
2008 3.0%............... -3.4%

And whats not mentioned, is most of the last 7 pay raises also had targeted pay increases above the basic pay raise.

So some ranks have been getting 6% or 8% pay increases.

Answer 4

Do you know that all thru the 70s the military was lucky to get any pay raise at all. The Democrats in charge didn't think we needed the money. The Republicans are not cutting the military pay, thats what dems do. They are raising pay, you may not like the percentages, but it is a raise. And one the services usually get.

Answer 5

Obama in elementary terms did the undesirable issues, somebody else did each and every of the stable issues. i'm enormously pissed off with Republicans, Fox information, and something. the rationalization i'm going to vote for the Republicans even nevertheless i'm not satisfied, is right here. a million. The stimulus bill ought to have had extra tax breaks and much less government spending. lots of the stimulus bill became handouts to those who help democrats. i'd have made it a hundred% approximately economics, and not in touch politics. 2. The Democrats weren't designed to be in a hundred% administration. The Democrats have been designed to stability out the Republicans. There must be some stability. 3. i don't in elementary terms like the politically impressive schedule of the democrats. Many Democrats have the desire to make it the place in case you're making relaxing of a minority you get placed to dying, yet once you're making relaxing of a white male it truly is okay. There seems to be some component of severe hatred in direction of white adult males interior the democratic party. i for my section think of each and every person must be dealt with the comparable. 4. i think like Democrats created lots of ability blaming issues on Republicans that weren't likely the Republicans fault, and that they weren't political subject concerns. there are lots of stupid Republicans and numerous folk Republicans ought to distance themselves from, yet there are some stupid democrats besides.

Answer 6

There is a BIG difference between cutting pay and not giving a raise.

But then again, I can't expect the intelligence required to discern that from a far-left nutroot.

Answer 7

How is not asking for a bigger raise equate into a pay cut? Must be some lib math. By the way, doesn't pay come from congress, which is controlled by the dems now?

Answer 8

A 3 percent raise is a pay cut? Your question does not make sense.

Answer 9

I'm confused. How is raising my pay by 3 percent cutting my pay? According to John Kerry, I'm not too bright, so you might have to explain that one a bit.

Answer 10

You gotta coagulate your feces on this pay raise/ pay cut thing.

Re-read your rant and see if you can find the fallacy of your logic.

Answer 11

is it cutting their pay or not approving a larger pay raise, I'm confused?