View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 05-27-2008, 09:57 AM
Herkdriver's Avatar
Herkdriver Herkdriver is offline
Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,968
usa
Herkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond reputeHerkdriver has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 6,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
excellent example of cranial-rectal inversion there 12th

you object to soldiers being able to qualify to further their education, potentially leaving the service to do something more enriching

while at the same time objecting that others - who did not serve - cannot qualify for that same educational benefit

lay off the partisan kool aid for a while and your capacity to think clearly may eventually return
The Military invests a lot of tax payer's dollars to train folks. I think the idea here is to get a return on the investment of the training rather than just 3 and out and get the bennies.

The average military pilot, for example, has an investment in training and education at well over One million dollars $1,000,000.00

For Operational training the total investment can be close to $5,000,000.00

That is not a typo.
That's 5 million dollars.

For this investment the DoD is looking for a return in service. The USAF pilot owes a minimum of 10 years of active duty.

I think it is fair that the DoD gets a return on what it invests in the troops.
I agree our Veterans should get all the benefits they have earned, but it is tricky not to make it too appealing for them to leave the Service after a short stint.

Last edited by Herkdriver; 05-27-2008 at 09:58 AM.
Reply With Quote