Humanitarian Government Pt 3-Military
Currently, we’ve a person whose sole mission is to consolidate as many duties under the Executive as possible, and all the power that can bring, to whomever ends up in the Oval Office in the future. I’ve issues with that and will discuss that when ‘Executive’ is being addressed.
Section 3
I will issue some warnings: this section is personal. It’s close to home figuratively and literally. I will be using language not really suited to something like this book/blog/stream of consciousness (whatever you call this), and I’m mad. Don’t expect any niceties in this section, especially when you reach the Addendum.
I’ve been asked why I separate the Military. I’m well aware of its role and how it’s managed, but some aspects of its handling also need improvement. Additionally, you could liken the Military to a city within a city, or a town with a single employer, where the primary difference for everyone is pay and the affordability of that pay.
As I said at the very beginning of things, I’m a former member of the Military. I never say ‘ex’ when anything comes to the Military unless you’ve proven that your views and behaviors are such that they are antithetical to the Constitution, even after service. Because at that point, you’re no longer supporting the very document that made this Nation. Not only that, but there is fine print stating that once you’re in, and then leave, under certain circumstances, you can be reactivated.
One, today’s world, and how the management of the Military has slowly evolved. I’m not so blind that I don’t understand that there’s a great deal I’m not aware of. That there are decisions and actions with intelligence that I’ll never have access to unless they are declassified, leaked, or otherwise put into the media. However, I do demand a minimum level of knowledge from the government and accountability at all times.
It’s been the purview of Congress to declare War since the Constitution was written. If you want specifics, it’s an interesting read: Article 1, Section 8. I highly recommend that everyone read and understand the Constitution. As I said in the last section, I believe in a mandatory Civics course.
But here’s what Article 1, Section 8 in the original text:
_____________
Section. 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
_________
OK, OK, it’s not all specifically Military-oriented. However, Article 1 primarily addresses the duties and responsibilities of Congress.
Now, there are more interesting things in this one section, but I’m focusing only on the Military right now, so be a bit focused on those parts.
So, before I go any further, let me let you in on what I’m sure you’d call a secret or two.
One is, until the 1970s, we didn’t have a full-time Congress. It was during that decade that Congress became a full-time institution. Oh wait…? What? Did I hear something about better representation? No? Damn. I’ll address some things I’ve observed over the years about Congress later.
Second, travel was somewhat of a dicey proposition. Especially across the country, and until railways extended coast to coast, it could take months to get across the country. Roads, of course, didn’t get in on the act until about 1916. Even then, it wasn’t like it is today. So, in essence, it took days to get somewhere, depending on where you lived and where you were going.
Now, we’ve the internet, planes, fairly decent roads, fast cars, and rail in some areas…so fast transit at work and technology as a backup.
Back to the Military. So, as Article 1, Section 8 states, it’s Congress’s responsibility to be responsible for the Military as just one of its jobs. OK. I get that. So why is it becoming de rigueur for Presidents to order strikes without Congress’s OK?
Because they’ve been letting that job go to the sidelines, leaving it to the Executive branch. Currently, we’ve a person whose sole mission is to consolidate as many duties under the Executive as possible, and all the power that can bring, to whomever ends up in the Oval Office in the future. I’ve issues with that and will discuss that when ‘Executive’ is being addressed.
Issue One:
Congress today is abrogating its duty, almost in its entirety. The Military is just one aspect.
The Executive branch is more than willing to assume those duties, without informing Congress, ordering military actions, and having them carried out. Frankly, recently I’ve even heard that person in the Oval Office right now states he has the right to do that as Commander-in-Chief.
OK, let’s dig deeper.
If it’s Congress that can declare War, then why is it allowed for Presidents to order military actions without their approval?
I did find some interesting answers. (1)
One, it depends on the time when a person was Commander-in-Chief. Sometimes it was interpreted broadly, and at other times, rather narrowly.
Another reason is ‘it’s not a war’ excuse. I say excuse only because anything using military action, I feel, requires a declaration of War to perform. Otherwise, our Military can become a proxy for either other nations to pull us into conflict (see the Vietnam ‘police action’) or it can also be fashioned into some sort of worldwide weapon to another nation’s throat, so to speak. If there are corporate issues involved and any position involved in needing ‘a little help’ and whoever is involved wants to become complicit, it can happen. In fact, it already has.
Another is that some Presidents have the… ‘allowance’(?) because Congress appropriated funds for the Military in the first place. Wait…what?
Yeah. So which one is it?
I’d like to know what’s going on to start with. Every American should be able to understand, at the very least, why some involvement with other nations or entities is being done. Especially, honestly and factually backed up.
I’ve several reasons for this. The number one is that whoever is sending out troops should be honest and willing to be candid on why troops should put their lives on the line for a valid reason. Also, since the upkeep of the Military is from Congress, their working budget is from Congress, and ‘To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;’ (note that word: Reprisal), to me, that means Congress is the one to call the shots on striking other nations for any reason. So, someone has to stand up, create the legal paperwork for War or Reprisal (since these are the more common today), and keep oversight. Yes, the President is the Commander-in-Chief; however, they are not the one whose job is to use the Military in any sense without authorization. It’s like a teenager saying ‘Well, I borrowed your keys with your permission and didn’t turn them back in the other night, so I took the car today and got in a wreck. I’m not responsible because you didn’t take the keys back, and you gave me permission the other day.’ The situation is similar: essentially, the Military is the key, the teenager is the President, and Congress are the parents. It just gives ways of using the Military with impunity and violating Constitutionally granted powers of Congress, leaving the Nation open to end up having picked a war for no other reason than one person’s thinking and actions.
I must say, lately, I wish we could pursue more diplomatic actions rather than military ones.
Back to valid reasons: after 9/11, the Nation was in an uproar, wanting either revenge or action for something unspeakable on our soil. The same can be said about Pearl Harbor. What emerged after the fact was that the statements made, disseminated, and used were intended to justify a war in any way possible or for some other underhanded reason.
Was either right? No. Simply no.
Look, if you’re a grown-up, can’t solve your problems without hitting or screaming, or using something said, twisting it, and using that twisted mess to do something that wouldn’t be accepted by anyone else to get something otherwise, then you’re not truly an adult. Until recently, the US had been the adult in the room (well, I would say ‘sometimes’).
I’m not going into details here. At least not go down the rabbit holes and dig deep. If you want it, please get in touch with the source from which you found this and request it. I’ll be more than happy to write about it. I do try to keep up with comment sections wherever this has been posted and that I am aware of.
However, the grown-up comment addresses how this Nation’s government has acted. Another thing? I distinguish between the government and the populace at large in every country in this way.
So, what’s my point?
Something stinks in Denmark, as the saying goes.
Solution one:
I’ll admit honest work and honest intelligence are a good start. I won’t go so far as to say the public would be told the entire truth, though. Some of that is simply because there are considerations such as operational security and national security to consider. One is that, regardless of the form a government takes, around the world and at any time, it has its own agenda and will utilize every known tool ever developed to get its population to do or think whatever it wants.
However…here goes nothing.
One, the President is supposed to be briefed every day. Currently, we have someone who (insert a shudder) doesn’t like to read, and it’s been bandied about that a certain ‘news’ organization’s format and even personalities would be used to create those briefings. So far, the last information I have is from June, that particular person attends those briefings about once a week, if that. (2) This time around, since January, when he took office, he’s only participated in twelve, based on that information. I’ll call 1.0 the previous term, and here’s an interesting fact. During term 1.0, he took in 55 for the entire first year. (2)
However, he’s not the first to miss briefings. However, his attendance is next to nothing compared with former President Biden, who took 90 in his first year, and former President Obama, who took 63. (2)
At this rate, I can see only about 36 or so briefings in 2.0 for the first year. That’s not just mismanagement or abrogating duties. It’s flat-out willful ignorance and neglect. It also means he’s running on, and this is noticeable in how he talks, his ‘feelings’ or ‘beliefs’.
I’m not talking emotions here, I’m talking about his likes or dislikes, his ‘judgment’ about persons or situations, and probably other factors I’d rather not even entertain. Not because they are ignorant, but rather that we may (cough, cough, probably ) have a compromised person sitting in the highest office who’s willing to sell the US out for personal gain. Literally.
The beliefs aren’t something like religion, faith, or personal knowledge grounded in reality or facts. No, it’s his own internal beliefs, and he doesn’t like things contrary to what he thinks is real.
I say ‘literally’ because he has stated about a ‘gold card’ for immigration. Yes, if that proves to be an active program, a cool five million US dollars will grant you a pathway to citizenship, with no need to invest or create jobs in the United States. We already have a similar program, but with the added benefits of mandatory investment or job creation, rather than a one-time lump sum: the EB-5 program. So, essentially, he’s selling citizenship or a pathway. Yet, those who are here….(trails off and huffs).
The only thing is, you do need to pass a security vetting for the EB-5. Wait… didn’t we have a person active in the government who underwent security vetting and failed? Oh yeah. Two in 1.0 that were finally over-ridden by the same person, and those two were family members who were denied in two different ways. In 2.0, it was a man who currently has or has had citizenship in three nations, holding contracts with the US government, yet was unable to receive security clearances. He also, abetted by the same Oval Office resident, allowed other unvetted persons access to sensitive, personal information collected by the federal government. Granted, that level of security was for top-secret status, but for someone who enters and wants to invest money, I’d still like to know a bit about their history. Shady dealings or a shady past raise red flags for me.
I might sound cynical, but why in hell can someone be allowed the option of overriding security concerns if they are a family member or ‘owing’ a person their position?
So…back to the Military…Gee, I need to get a grip.
So, daily briefings. I get that a sitting President is busy, traveling all over the globe at times, needing sleep and all that. But then again, I don’t.
I expect a higher standard of everything, from behavior to responsibility upkeep, in any public official.
- We’re not going to do daily briefings just with the President. The Vice President will also be in on them. I say this because the Vice President may need to step in for any number of reasons and must be on the same page.
- Those on any Congressional committees dealing with intelligence and national security, at the very least, should sit on those meetings and get the same information at the same time as the President.
- The Joint Chiefs should also join those meetings.
- Any form or group responsible for any intelligence in those briefings should also be in the room while they (even better, the intelligence gatherer-although I know that some intelligence is handled covertly and that gatherer won’t be able to. Still someone ‘low’ but able to pass on that knowledge.) give the information.
- Even if they were out of the country and only over approved, vetted, and secure methods of communication, these meetings would still happen daily. Unless an EMP wipes everything off the map electronically or something significant happens to remove a President, that is part of their job, and to do their job effectively and wisely, those briefings should happen.
A once-a-week briefing isn’t a way to ‘keep on top of things’. Too much happens in twenty-four hours alone to have a once-a-week briefing. I also know how hard it is to keep up with news as a ‘civilian’. For any heads who either run or help run a government, they should also not rely on open news sources. Rather, hard data and observation by those who honestly know what they are talking about.
So, there’s going to be a lot of people involved in all of this. Every last one should be cleared, and I’m sure those who have access to this sort of information are, as well as any other security protocols available, be put into place. Anyone considering leaking information should think twice. Not to hide what they’re doing. Just because some things can be revealed after the fact, and operational security (OPSEC) dictates that information for others should not be, that doesn’t mean the information needs to be made public. We’re talking military here: people. Lives are on the line, and people should never not be directly involved in military actions or decisions.
Issue two
Then we get to recruitment.
According to government publications, we currently don’t have enough individuals entering military service.
Well, let me tell you a few reasons why.
(You nod yes, and I continue)
One is that, historically, the US has never been one to acknowledge any negatives for active duty members. When issues do arise after the members’ service is over, problems are often swept under the rug, pushed aside, or outright denied before overwhelming evidence from a multitude of sources accumulates. Even then, it’s a matter of fighting our own government to fulfill its side of the contract(s).
The latest stunt, and yes, I will use that word, and those of you who have served might bristle at that term, was the burn pits in Iraq.
Before that, I can name Agent Orange, the various terms used for PTSD from about WWI to today, and that’s just the two most significant factors related to wartime. There are also transitional issues, secondary medical issues from exposure to toxins (mesothelioma is just one and is caused by asbestos exposure for the most part), and more. I mention all this for one simple reason: when confronted with issues stemming from War or ‘military actions’, or simply service, it’s convenient that the very government that wants people to join, then serve, gets that service but essentially ‘shafts’ those who do serve after the fact.
Are there ways to deal with issues related to military service? Yes.
The primary one is taking care of soldiers.
If those who haven’t served think that soldiers are immune from scrutiny in any way, they are sorely mistaken. In reality, from the moment you start the steps to even step into a MEPS station, your health history and current health are tracked. I point this out because when issues come up and people around you that are military or governmentally attached and medical start telling you ‘it’s all in your head’, you may want to take the costs of seeking a second opinion outside of any medical and military attached ‘insurance’ program you’re in or the military medical system entirely.
To be transparent, my husband is a retired service member, exposed to PBCs and asbestos in doing his job, and (thankfully) showing no signs of issues. Every so often, when he coughs for too long and too much without any apparent reason, I insist that he get at least a chest X-ray. He’s got the reasons for that, and since I’m formerly medical, hell yeah, I want anything caught early.
I’ve met or known people who have been exposed to Agent Orange, had PTSD from service in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even cancers from exposure to whatever in their line of service. I am also intimately familiar with Tricare, the Military’s version of health insurance, and via my husband, becoming familiar with the VA.
Frankly, when I talk to anyone about the Military, somewhere along the line, I also state that military families (significant other and children who are minors while the service member is active) are also military. I know that some will disagree. Let me clarify.
A spouse and children will (probably/usually but not all do) pick up their lives, disrupt work and school, and leave on reasonably short notice to almost anywhere, unless it’s a classified site in a remote area or if a family member is unfit for that station. They also risk that the service member gets deployed, also on short notice, the member’s possible death or capture, and, under some circumstances, equal to their spouse or parent: become exposed to toxins that might create health issues just by living in on-base/post housing.
One might say, ‘Well, you knew they were in and knew the risks. ’ Yes, but wait…..
When any military action happens, as stated, I want an honest and valid reason to put any service member into any situation that involves them risking their lives: mental or physical. Even if you’re behind the lines, as in intelligence gathering in some settings, you still take risks.
I don’t know everything my husband did. He had the clearances once upon a time; I didn’t. However, I knew more than even most active duty members at the time. I will end there. Besides, what I know beyond that point, I consider OPSEC to this day, although the information is old and outdated. Being medical and former Military means I’ve confidentiality bred into my bones. But I will say that some things are damaging despite being behind the line.
Being at risk, ‘on-the-job’ 24/7/365, isn’t the cushy life that was being held out in the 1980s. In the 1990s, even less so, and in the 2000s? I’m glad he retired when he did. ‘Nuf said.
So that’s why I think those behind a desk should relize what they are doing and realize that if they put people into the field, they need to make damn sure it’s not for other nations, corporations, or made-up BS just to get the populace riled up so that even a possibility of putting people into harm’s way is palatable.
That’s just one facet of how service men and women are shorted.
Contracts are altered or not honored after one gets out. My husband signed his that included medical, no G.I.. That medical was supposed to be ‘free’ (with good service). It didn’t last. The first change was that we had to get doctors off base/post, then it was back to base/post, off again with co-pays, back to base/post after years of being seen off-base/post, having to fight to keep being seen by the people who knew us.
Yeah. So I’m not exactly happy. No, I’m not here to “bitch”, also not being “anti-military”.
Housing is limited, mostly older, and in some areas, it fails to meet any current health code standards.
Not to mention….
I will say this in a whisper: most military sites are Superfund sites in the making, even if still in use.
In our last military housing, I discovered that our area was what I would describe as a ‘ground zero’ zone. Ever hear of PFAS? Yeah, first it was the aquifer that serviced that area and had a flight line. Later, another base in the same area conducted the same test. That, too, had a flight line. That base was across town and a different aquifer. So, that particular city now has no clean aquifers. The only thing is that now, those very same chemicals are present worldwide and cannot be cleaned up. No, the Military isn’t the only offender when it comes to PFAS, but even families aren’t exempt, and we were the last to know.
So, word has gotten out, even if not published, about how the government treats service members. Not to mention pay. Yes, there is ‘free medical’ under certain circumstances (on-base/post, and hope that any specialist you need isn’t overloaded), pharmacy is free (but can be limited and has to be on-base/post), there is commissary (groceries), gas in some areas, and BX/PX (call it a Wal-mart without the groceries).
But let me describe pay:
Currently, the basic pay for an E-5 (my husband’s rank when he separated) ranges from $2,872.20 to $4,076.40 per month. (3) If you are outside the US, you may receive a COLA, or cost-of-living adjustment. It’s to offset the impact of inflation. By definition, it is supposed to ensure that a person’s real income or benefits keep pace with rising costs. It should also not be considered when budgeting for a household.
There is also BAH, Basic Allowance for Housing. That is, if you’re not living in barracks (which means you’re not married, being accompanied, or having kids running around), and BAS, Basic Allowance for Subsistence. That’s only for the service member to help cover expenses related to food and is based on the USDA’s food cost index, which accounts for inflation. (3, 4)
So, if you have a family of anyone but a spouse, considering the price of formula, you might be out of luck.
Why do I say that?
This is the kicker.
To simply qualify for WIC or SNAP, both food programs administered by the Department of Agriculture, your gross monthly income must be at or below 130% of the federal poverty line, and your monthly net income must be at or below 100% of the poverty line. (5, 6, 7) (I know, I know, all the (#) notations. However, I do my homework, and I want you, the reader, to see that I’m not using unverified statements.)
The poverty line is updated yearly. Based on the most up-to-date information I could find, supposedly in 2023, the official poverty rate fell. (8)
But this year is 2025. And what is the amount?
I had, at the time of my husband’s service, a family of four. Continuing this scenario, everything is based on that. According to official guidelines, the poverty threshold for a family of four is $32,150. (9) That’s for the lower 48 and D.C. So…. let’s do some math. (I know, hold on, I’m trying hard to get to a solution for this section, but I need everyone to have basic information.)
For someone newly minted as an E-5, the basic pay for one year (gross) is $34,466.40. So already, you’re out of luck.
Meaning that if you live ‘on the economy’, a second income is pretty much mandatory. If you live in an area like I did, a simple two-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment (which, technically, you’re not supposed to have two children of different genders share) now costs, on the low end, about $1,700 to $1,800 per month. Remember that bottom number? I’ll put it here again: $2,872.20 per month, gross. That’s over half of one paycheck…just for housing alone and not counting taxes.
It gets better and worse for an E-5 at the top end. The gross is $48,916.80 per year. For example, a 3-bedroom, 1-bath apartment in the same area, if you’ve two kids of different genders, costs about $2,250 per month. See the picture? That’s simply just a roof over your head. Nothing more.
I won’t go into further details. Housing alone is bad enough. If you want to delve deeper into the details and not wait until I cover Economics, feel free to conduct the research.
Pay, risks for both member and family, changes in services and health care costs, potential future health-related issues, and deniability of those potential future health issues in exchange for a job that pays roughly (rounded up) $4-6 an hour for what could be called a ‘middle management’ job? How did I come up with that?
One year is 8,700 hours (minus leap days). Service members, even when on leave, can and have been recalled. It’s not like the civilian side, where you can say ‘I’m on vacation’; you have to report back. That’s where the term 24/7/365 originally came from.
So tell me, folks who haven’t served, would you take the job?
Oh, if you ask me ‘What about the G.I. Bill’? Some contracts don’t have that as an option. Over time, various elements for military service contracts have been added, removed, or modified in response to changing needs and budgets.
Solution two
First, the government needs to re-evaluate its ethics, first and foremost.
Yes, it can and should monitor for issues, allow for paper trails to be kept and evaluated honestly, and also realize that some of what it allows or condones will and has created problems, rather than pushing that responsibility off. Sometimes, to cut corners, sometimes just because it’s embarrassing to admit. There might be others; however, being part of conspiracy theories or hard to prove, I won’t go there.
Another is pay, benefits, and promises.
When one enters service, they sign a contract. However, you can’t sue the government without its permission, did you know that? At least there’s a precedent of that being standard operating procedure. So, even in breach, there are no real recourses.
Pay grade (AKA rank) is generally in there somewhere; the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Justice) has rules and regs about the ability to bust down a rank for various reasons, and all that. You might say that the Military is somewhat like a corporation that is even more highly regulated in behaviors and actions, but also less likely to fire you. Just remember, the government does expend time and money in training individuals for the jobs they will be doing. Bluntly: they want their investment back.
So, even before you start, you can find out what your pay will be like. Maybe not minutely, but in general. However, someone needs to examine the areas where the Military is stationed, evaluate them, and update them accordingly — more along the lines of having a ‘national’ or ‘worldwide’ standard rather than a completely localized cost base addition. Sometimes even more than once in a fiscal year. I know there are evaluations; however, what is given doesn’t cover inflation. Remember, most budgets aren’t entirely in effect until the next fiscal year at the earliest. The ‘OBBB’ (One Big Beautiful Bill)? Most of that won’t be felt until after midterms and even more so after the next National Election. That means that no matter what is paid extra, it is at least a year old, which means it is outdated. Let me be frank, if inflation is at 3% when it’s approved (the percentage is an example, for military pay), by the time you get that 3%, I can guarantee that inflation will be higher.
Benefits are a bit dicey, however. Commissary and BX/PX privileges are getting to the point that prices are almost to ‘on the economy’ pricing. I call that an ‘eh’ benefit. Overseas, it’s much better, and you have access to food or items not found there that you are familiar with. I know in my area, there are gas stations, and for now, the pricing is cheaper. Healthcare, I’ve already gone over. It’s not right that you have a contract in hand, only to be told what to do, then the system changes on a dime. To the powers that be, it’s usually a matter of ‘what costs less’ rather than ‘what is based on reality with what we have on hand.’ My take: ‘Make up your mind, staff accordingly, and make sure you follow the contracts you sign.’ The only sure thing is that active duty comes first (as they should) and that while on active duty, they have access, even to dental care. I’ll get into grousing about our healthcare system when I get to Economics.
In addition, according to my research, San Jose, California, not New York City, has the highest cost of living. To live there comfortably, a single person needs approximately $147,430 (10) per year, and for a family of four, the annual cost increases to $371,571. (10) If you look at the cheapest rates, a single person needs about 85k-90k per year (10), and for that four-person family, it jumps to $198,349 per year. (10)
I’m well aware that most bases/posts are in areas where, at one time, a very low income was needed to live decently, meaning that cheap land was either bought or already owned by the government, had low or lower-than-average wages required, and a reasonably low cost of living. No longer.
As stated, in various ways, and as I have even shown, military pay is not even close to the current federal minimum wage for non-contractors (this is important). That federal minimum wage hasn’t been changed for 16 years (2009 was the last time and is set at $7.25/hour, minus waitpersons and some other jobs, those go lower) and...interestingly enough: federal contractors are subject to a higher wage (currently $13.30/hour and even some contracts have a $17.25/hour requrement). (11)
In reality, there are even non-governmental publications that claim enlisted troops earn more than their civilian peers. (12) Even Google says that, or rather the AI, but I also know the AI only answers with information available to it. (13) That tells me a few things.
One is, either my math is wrong (because I used gross numbers, not net). Therefore, when it comes to non-federally taxed income, the issue becomes moot because I’m using raw data (base pay only). Even some states have laws regarding military pay and taxes, or simply a lower tax rate. Again, it doesn’t change raw data. Google must be promoting the Military as a viable and desirable occupation because it clearly states retirement benefits and high-quality healthcare. I agree that there is a retirement plan of sorts if you put in enough time (20 years or more) (13), but what about benefits? Only if you’re lucky enough to have a second or even third income. Healthcare? High quality? I’ve already gone over that; you decide for yourself. If you doubt, consider talking to service members as a first step; research is another option, and I would consider that a last resort.
Bonuses are true: hazard pay, flight pay, re-signing bonuses, and more do exist. Do they extend to all service members? No. So that I’m discounting.
However, that little jab about Google promoting the Military? (sarcastic laughing) Uh, yeah….wouldn’t surprise me in the least. Research DARPA, GOOGLE, research funding that created Google/Alphabet, and military connections. No, that isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s a fact. Recently, Google fired a section of its workforce because they didn’t support the actions or attitudes of a particular nation embroiled in a major international issue. They did a sit-in and refused to work on the software that the Nation wanted to buy. Google didn’t like the attitudes or refusal to work on something that could or would be used in ways that weren’t conducive to good human interactions and fired them. So, yeah… profit over scruples, and a silent payback, you might say. But this is going off-topic.
What I’m proposing is a significant overhaul of military pay, considering the nature of military life in general, and I think it would be worthwhile; it would also help address the issue of insufficient service members.
The next step would be to determine a median wage that allows for a comfortable living, or even a more comfortable one, anywhere in the US. Doing simple math, for a single person, I’d go as low as 90k per year. For a family of four, I would pin it at 200k. Neither is equal to or above the median pay for the high or low ends of the scale. Since we have a standing, voluntary Military, the rest of this additional yearly amount has no name--I just suggested something off the top of my head. However, if anyone wants to tax, not tax, or reduce taxes, that money is in the hands of the local and federal governments. Not to mention, for a good many people, that amount of money would be very attractive. Notably, the median household income is around $80,610 per year, even in the largest US cities, which require an income of $ 85,000 per year for a single adult.
Promises are next.
Vets, especially those who are career and served 20 or 20+ years, are still leery of the VA for the most part. Some of that is justified.
Being in a heavily military area, I’ve heard more than my fair share of horror stories about the VA. But, since my husband finally started to use the VA, those horror stories, in my experience, are less common now. That means that whatever budget they had, along with their staffing, was starting to become commensurate with the needs of those requiring its services.
Unless a black hole spat you out from a multiple-world that has perfect conditions, you probably know about DOGE and VA cuts.
I’m not talking to vets right now, though. I will also be using coarse language in this. So if you don’t like that, skip the following passage.
Whoever is part of the powers that be, and you support DOGEs actions on the ‘strength’ of an Executive Order and a person whose life has never been connected to anything but corporations and/or only recently in this county (meaning that person wasn’t born here. If you’re going to be anti-immigrant/anti-inclusive without qualifers on that stance, count yourself the list and know you’re being a hypocrite to your stances.), I have one thing to say: You are complicit in evil, and I hope you find yourself in the same situations you’ve put people into who have given up a large part of their lives, or have lost or damaged irreparably their health, bodies, and/or minds. You have done a disservice to those who gave up, voluntarily at that, to serve this country, and I will not give you any respect but will call you bitches or bastards for your actions. A small lesson to you: Executive Orders aren’t law. A person not confirmed nor wanted by a great many people has no say in our inner governmental workings nor has the power to alter, fire, dissolve, or reorganize anything without consent by or approval of legislation created by Congress. And if you haven’t served, then go and do that now for one contract. I don’t care if you’re the youngest member of Congress or the oldest member of government. If you wrote, supported, endorsed, or voted for that bill (OBBB) or to be complicit in allowing DOGE even to exist, (to those of you not of our government…warning I will be using even harsher language) you’re fucking near traitors. I can’t legally call you straight out that you’re a traitor, but turning your back on those folks, I can pretty much guarantee that some will call you that, and you deserve the same fate as other traitors—end of communication.
Issue 3
I understand we have a vast military budget. In ways, I have no complaints.
However, how it’s split up, I have big problems with.
One, straight off the top, not buried or altered in any way, should be money that cannot be used for anything but to support the care of service members (active, retired, or disabled), their housing, and whatever else is needed to support their families. This would be for making sure the members have decent housing that meets minimum health and structural codes, both on and off base/post, making sure any on-base/post schools or other 'common use' buildings other than operational (like offices) stay within building codes and such. I’m not talking about barracks being outside of this, either. If directly used for active, direct military service, buildings, such as headquarters or military hardware maintenance and storage facilities, fall under direct DoD funds for the upkeep of their bases.
Second, another swipe off the top, not buried or altered in any way, is pay equal to or above what I would call ‘the middle of the road working class’ pay. Not the ‘federal minimum wage’ crap. I’ll get into that more in an upcoming Economics section that I mentioned earlier, and also explained in the ‘Solution two’ section.
The following areas will, in reality, never even be mentioned in the halls of power.
Research and development used to be either independent, via companies that wanted to sell their systems to the government, or a half-and-half proposition. Nowadays, even if a company’s name is associated with new technology or a system, it’s not nearly as truthful as it once was.
DARPA, for all its dark and controversial history, *sigh* needs to exist, but with oversight, non-corporate leadership, and entering into beneficial contracts for R&D or even limited production of something developed.
I say this because, although the stories come out about winning a contract, it may mean that ‘so-n-so company won the contract because they helped develop something we like, but the taxpayers paid for that research, so that company will make it,’ thought. When I get to Economics, which may be my next section, you’ll see in closer detail why I put things in this perspective.
However, as of now, DARPA is murky at best. I’m proposing that companies once again pay at least half of the costs for R&D to earn the right even to produce anything that may be used in military settings. If new patents are filed, at least 10% of all funds generated by that patent for 10 years would be given to the general fund. Also? That tech needs to be made available in such a way that the civilian population can use it with less than 10 years from military development to being openly used by the public. This is essentially to pay back the funds that taxpayers have invested in all that research, rather than a hole that sucks up money, develops technology that eventually ends up in citizens’ hands, but ultimately the public ends up essentially paying twice—once for research and development, and again for the item being used commercially. For items like weapon systems, to prevent stifling development, especially for defensive purposes, I’d lower the rate to 5% for 10 years.
Maintenance would be on the same level of importance as DARPA, yet only independent, non-US-based system or item maintenance would be the only way to recoup money. Even the cost of parts, upgrades, and similar items would increase for those nations that use these systems. Not so much as to price the US out of weapons markets, just to offset R&D or to re-invest in more R&D.
Lastly, stockpiles, silos, and ICBMs. First, I’d like to take a moment to discuss ICBMs, particularly the nuclear variety. We once negotiated frequently for disarmament or drawing down the amount we have. Honestly, based on how many nations that are now nuclear-capable, it won’t matter who fires first or from where. It leads to mutual destruction for any countries involved, not to mention would poison the entire planet, if not rendering it sterile, minus a few hardy bacteria or radiation-resistant life. Like ‘water bears.’
My question is: if it’s mutually destructive, why have them?
Also, don’t tell me it’s a deterrent. If you don’t think anyone who is nuclear-capable doesn’t realize it’s not a good idea to push the red button for any reason, think again. Propaganda can only go so far. Science and knowledge go further, and even though I question the intelligence and human nature of anyone in any government, I’m fairly certain that people in that strata understand the consequences.
What to do?
One approach is to go to the tables, negotiate with all nuclear-capable or near-nuclear-capable countries, and come up with compromises, treaties, and an oversight structure that will likely be composed of representatives from non-nuclear-capable or near-nuclear-capable countries. They would also be educated enough in weapons and nuclear settings to know if those agreements and treaties are being adhered to.
Currently, the US needs an upgrade: new silos and a new generation. There are non-nuclear ways of doing things that are not quite as destructive as in power or damage area, but it wouldn’t end up killing millions, if not billions of people.
I know, a dreamer, right? I don’t think so. Every Nation ultimately pays for not only the means of launching, but also the development, maintenance, and operation of those launch systems, including the missiles. They pay for the security and maintenance of the missiles themselves, as well as the manpower to staff those stations and the fuel required for their operation. The list goes on.
Additionally, if you don’t use them, which would be a foolish move, you will end up needing to replace them. What about the warheads? Disarm and replace and/or make new ones? Still, that’s a lot of radioactive material that a nation needs to figure out how to get rid of. Then you have that cost as well. All those billions of dollars spent in the US for nuclear development, building (non-energy), and maintenance could be put to better use.
For now, what we have and the ‘dreamer’ world I’m envisaging would need to start that process right now. Draw down the number slowly, do not replace anything, and within a reasonable amount of time, disarm completely from nuclear. If a country wants nuclear capabilities…well. We can’t dictate to other countries. We can make it harder for them to get to that point, however.
One: nations with the resources that go into creating a warhead need to be approached and offered a sweetheart deal backed by all the nuclear-capable nations to keep those resources out of the hands of those wanting to develop such tech. If found to have violated that, the repercussions outlined in the finalized treaty should be fully enforced.
Two: nations that have the resources, develop independently, and are more than willing to use them. Those nations are rogue in my book, and the UN, backed by Russia, China, and ourselves, backed up by any other country in the same boat, needs to step in, force through non-warfare means to get that threat out of the air.
Three: let’s be even more of a dreamer. This will piss off people who think any sort of ‘one world government’ will be the worst thing this planet would ever experience: give the UN teeth and leave it to member nations use that platform and want peace in such a way, that the UN does step in, does use its powers, and even go so far as to drag them to the negotiations table. I’m not talking about a worldwide restructuring. Nations will still be sovereign, as well as retain freedom of religion, language use, and local law, among other rights, as they are currently established. Internationally, the UN would serve as the basis for negotiations, agreements, treaties, and the enforcement of those treaties, not just talks between nations or merely proposing votes to try to get a nation to stop doing something it shouldn’t. It’ll still be Nation to Nation, but also something like...a county seat. Towns exist and do various things that may or may not be the same within a county. However, certain things remain the same, specifically county-wide. However, the county seat holds copies of documents that municipalities produce and other relevant materials. Holds a higher step than local courts in a city. I may not be explaining it correctly, but the UN would serve as neutral ground, and hopefully, military actions will become less necessary.
Don’t mistake that I’m saying disarmament or getting rid of the Military. I’m not so stupid to think that may happen any time soon despite my thoughts about humanity growing up.
So, since we’re a violent form of life, more than even some of the fiercest predators on the planet, we find ways, even violent ways, to resolve differences from minor issues like name disputes to major concerns like governmental structure, to be settled by means other than involving civilians. Sort of ‘take it outside’ but in ways that, yes, could hurt people involved, but never to the populous at large.
However, peaceful methods, even between bitter enemies, fare better than violent methods in creating change. So, I feel that humanity is reaching a crossroads: do we mature as a species and find new ways of interacting? To find ways that create a better life for all rather than a few? To include those that may develop into great minds, brilliant entertainers, teachers, and government leaders, but aren’t like those our national leaders would like to recognize as being equals?
Or rather, we continue as we are now, fighting among ourselves like bullies, trying to stake out claims on who to bully and trying to get the most out of it. What develops a better economy, even for the top 1% of the world in general? War? Peace?
Well, I know that answer. Some will say War. However, unlike short-term thinkers, I know and realize this world isn’t made up of nations that can stand alone anymore. Even China, which is purported to be our biggest threat right now, right next to Russia, we get chips and such from them, which are literally used in our military hardware. So what’s the point?
But…I’m concluding this philosophy section. I’m hoping the muse will allow me ‘Economy’ next.
_____________
ADDENDUM
It’s still August 2025, just less than 24 hours since I finished this.
I added this like this and had to delay at least six hours to even get myself under control enough to write.
Late last night or early morning today, I found out news that not only pisses me RIGHT THE FUCK OFF, but is disturbing as hell.
This is a perfect, unwarranted, (BEEEEEEEEEEEP--censored only because there are no words bad enough to say about this) fucked up situation.
NPR (14) broke the news that our Air Force, yes…Air Force, they specified, will now deny early separation to those who served 15 to 18 years and are transgender AND fucking strip them of their retirement.
To those vets reading this. I CANNOT stress how pissed I am. I’m controlled by freezing my mind into one deeply pissed off channel and preventing that ice from melting. Otherwise, I would go deeper off the deep end than I already am.
Issue
News broke that the Air Force was preventing transgender folk that have been in 15 to 18 years early separation, and they are…get this fucking shit: striping them of their retirement.
Yes, you read right, and I swear to the Heavens above it isn’t right, to say the least.
Part one defined what I believe ‘human’ means. Nothing specifies anything related to gender, gender identity or anything else. I did that for one purpose: what does it matter to anyone else on what you do behind closed doors or how you do your job in whatever form your body is in?
ABSOLUTELY NONE.
Every imaginable sick, twisted, evil thought and action doesn’t belong to any one group. One cannot use a brush, paint broadly any sort of thinking or actions, and think you’re being correct or right for that group of people you're targeting.
YOU ARE VERY FUCKING WRONG.
Each person in the world has to make their own way in life. You make your decisions, good or bad, and you have to live with, move on, and deal with the consequences of those decisions. THAT is what I call accountability.
THIS DECISION—THIS FUCKED UP SHIT IS EXACTLY WHY I SAY CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN BROKEN AND ALSO WHY RECRUITMENT IS DOWN.
It’s true. Younger folk than I, people who have been in and seen how their fellow soldiers are treated when they start coming up with issues from their service and are swept under the rug or ignored, the even darker history of things that have gone on without consent or knowledge....those younger folk have listened. They also have their eyes and ears open. I won’t say all, but a great many do.
Retirement benefits are classified as mandatory spending, taken out of DoD funding, therefore under a budget bill and needed approval from Congress, and the delay of most budgets of at least six months to a year minimum means, even in the best of scenarios: this is an illegal move similar or is Impoundment (which is illegal). The only reason I can think of for preventing a service member from leaving is a ‘stop-loss’ order being issued. It happened after 9/11. I’ve lived through this, so yeah, I know it well.
So, this shit has come from someone, and to be very clear and blunt, very non-impartial, and if anyone not living under what we are now facing in America, I will say who. Not just dance around a name, so you can rest assured this is deadly serious and show how over the top (fill in the blank with EVERY word known to man in every language about being mad here) I am: Donald John Trump.
Let’s be very, very clear. This is the same, dare I say, man who states that he had bone spurs when he was supposed to be drafted into the Military during Vietnam. Would it mean him definitely going there? No. Would it have been a possibility? Yes, that’s what military service is about. If sent there was there a guarantee he’d come back? No, but that too is part of military service. So, he managed to avoid doing the very thing he had been thinking about: mandating men to join the Military through an active draft (and possibly women, as I had heard they might expand military registration to include women). Hypocrite much?
Not to mention his previous actions and statements about the Military in general: WWI/II soldiers who lost their lives after volunteering and serving? ‘Losers and suckers’. A light rain during a day of remembrance in France for the fallen? Ducked out because of the rain.
Demanding money from DoD budgets and even FEMA to do his pet projects, even though he says we as a nation can’t afford to feed people because they’ve been either priced out of food, or no longer have or get a job because of his policies either directly from his Executive Orders or via the members of his party doing his bidding without question. Or give healthcare when he gets hair-tip to toe-tip health care on tap.
This same man has spent more than half of his already short term golfing and yet, he says he’s always working.
Well…don’t get me wrong…taking in illegal Emollients is hard work.
I’m disappointed in hearing an Executive Order, any Executive Order, being acted upon that is clearly illegal and/or against the Constitution from this…man.
But this? This needs attention for ALL service members, especially those who are approaching a renewal of contracts or just wanting to get in. I won’t say ‘don’t do it’ because I know there are many circumstances that military service is warranted or even the best option for a person. But be aware of what this means.
If you don’t fit into a mold that conforms to only one persons’ thinking or approval of such that came from someone else, cuts a person out from their livelihood and earned benefits, and you aren’t exactly in that mold (pssst! Ever hear the saying ‘everyone is different’?), then you aren’t immune or safe. Especially the moment you say something that might have even a remote possibility that it could be considered contrary to that one person. THAT’s how authoritarians work.
Whew! Still pissed as hell, but needed that off my chest.
Solution
A reminder or reminders to those who have the position and power to halt or even stop these actions cold.
They want to say ‘We’re not racist. We’re not discriminatory.’ That’s their option because, despite how big a pain in the ass Freedom of Speech is at times, you do have the option to lie.
But not with impunity, nor without consequences.
Society shutting down a person by saying something other than what was touted that person, or shunning them because of their actions or behaviors, through fact-checking, and in any other way of not harming a person or group, but still in whatever way possible, saying ‘You’re not behaving/thinking socially acceptable’ isn’t ‘cancelling’. It’s a time-honored way of gently telling the person, ‘You need to stop, take a breath, think, and look around. You’re behavior/thinking is coming under question, and you need to rethink possibly.’ At least in this day and age. Shunning has been used in religious communities to punish those who don’t conform completely to their accepted behaviors or thinking for centuries.
I don’t necessarily have the skills to dig deep enough. But every person on the planet, minus newborns, has skeletons in their closets. (Corrections: a medical oddity: there are some pregnancies that start out as multiple, but end up single births. Some of those undergo some bizarre processes and, even further yet, are born to have ‘tumors’ found later with teeth and/or hair in some cases. This is known as Vanishing Twin Syndrome or Twin resorption. Not related in any way to my point, but to break the tension or valid ‘pissed-off-ness’.) Some of those skeletons are just more obvious and have been treated in such a way that they may have been public knowledge at one time, but have slipped from public minds or even memories because life is life and we can’t remember everything.
What I’m proposing isn’t a violation of the Constitution, or an abridgement of laws unless they change them on Monday and that means ill for all.
Finding things that are public isn’t a crime, at least not yet.
Exposing those hidden things isn’t a crime, at least not yet.
To those of you with the skills to find the information, I applaud you and hope you will continue to do so. I also ask that you spread that information, but please ensure it can be verified from multiple credible sources.
To those of you who know how to create ways of making short vids, memes, or simply posting with a short comment, take that information and do your thing. Make it a point to show everyone what is going on. But legally, and don’t abridge the facts. Don’t embellish.
Also, a brief history lesson. Make sure you understand something critical:
Historically, surgery of the magnitude of changing genders is relatively new.
Historically, there have always been homosexuals, transgendered, and any ‘abnormal’ (in today’s socio-religio-political right-wing conservative thinking) persons.
For that statement alone: why does the book of Leviticus in the Christian Bible mention that, if it is a ‘new’ thing as it’s either implied or touted by those some socio-religio-political right wing conservatives? Besides, between translations, social thinking drift, even drift in translated languages, and more, the concept of 'homosexuality" is a new invention. Neither Hebrew, Aramaic, nor Greek texts of the Bible have that specific term. There is also scholarly debate about whether it was 'same sex' that was being condemned or if it was anything like temple prostitution or same gender exploitation. Since the New Testament is the general area of Jesus and Jesus’s life, it’s also noted that it’s not mentioned by Jesus. I bring this point not to denigrate religion or tell Christians they 'dumb' or some such. It’s to explain and clarify to those who espouse the ideas that homosexuals are aberrant and also use the Bible to justify their views that they need to look closer and know the origins of that book. It’s still being debated on who it was specifically for (one argument is that it was for the Israelites priesthood and then widened out). I can also explore some additional thinking/espousing/behavior arguments, but this isn’t specifically for religion.
However, I will leave a thought provoking question: if God created humanity, and all children are from God, and God is a perfect being…based on that belief system and thinking, doesn’t that mean that if a person is ‘different’ in any way that you’re saying that God is imperfect, wrong, and abnormal? Again, not putting down religion: this is focusing on publicly touted forms of religion from those who say they’re Christians and obviously haven’t picked up their Bible to really read it recently.
Finally, a nail:
The Greeks, and this has been documented, had a dedicated unit in their Military that was, indeed, fully homosexual. It was called the 'Sacred Band of Thebes' and consisted of 150 male couples. They were renowned for their fighting skills and successes. If homosexuals, and therefore even transgender individuals, because they fall into the same ‘difference’ category (sorry to use that kind of wording, I can’t think of any other way to put it), can and have existed in military capacity, why persecute them?
Also, the fact that two, or even more, same-gendered persons have intimate interactions doesn’t mean shit. What do Vikings, Greeks, Romans, and various other proto-Indo-European groups, Middle Eastern peoples, and Far East mentalities, in most cases, have in common?
They all have had times and social conventions that literally allowed behaviors or existences that are abhorred by a vocal and active minority in this country.
When a woman’s husband is set to leave for parts unknown, for however long or forever, and is able to pick out their ‘buddy’, who allows you to dictate that that is wrong? That ‘buddy’ wasn’t just a battle buddy to keep their backs safe, either. It’s been in various cultures.
So, in a short and final comment, another person can have the opinion that something is wrong, they can even say it. However, if they go down a path that denies human nature (because physical love and the ability to feel comfortable living better lives are, to me, part of human nature or even biologically wired into us), and history. This means willful ignorance and the inability to realize that nature hasn’t made these issues, issues. Many species, especially those in ocean life, undergo a process of literally changing genders.
This is not new.
This isn’t a human thing.
This isn’t something so widespread that it will ‘make humanity extinct’ either.
Get a grip for those who don’t like gender or sexual differences.
I also suggest that you examine why you don’t. You might be surprised.
_____________
FOOTNOTES
(2) https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-daily-intelligence-briefings-2080737
(7) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/applicant-participant/el
(8) https://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/applicant-participant/eligibility
(10)https://smartasset.com/data-studies/salary-needed-live-comfortably-2025