Saw one today- “Love my Marine, Hate the Corps.”
Fuck you, you stupid bitch.
If it’s Kirk’s shirt, you’re gonna have to change a word. 
No kidding. I also made less than married personnel junior to me because they were getting paid for being married and having kids. I still see no legitimate way the fact that they had family members dependent on them translates into them getting paid more for less work.
And perhaps you should’ve paid attention to all of my post. After all, you quoted it. You would then have seen that I’m not the only one who thinks it’s a bogus system. The solution, of course, is to pay the person a realistic wage for the actual work done.
I can’t see a novel entitled “The Four Bumper Stickers” or “The Four T-Shirts” becoming a literary or cinematic classic, somehow. 
No snark intended, but I’m curious what your objection is to “with dependent” pay. I had a soldier once that felt that it was unfair that I got with dependent pay when I got married and he didn’t.
When I got married my expenses increased. I had to move off post and find a place to rent, my wife (who wasn’t working at the time, she had just gotten out of the military) has to eat too. I have to clothe and feed her don’t I? Even back then I wouldn’t have been able to really afford it (especially in that area…I was working at the pentagon) on E-5 pay. (I was an E-5 when I got married). If we had kids it would have been even more expensive.
Now I freely admit that if I hadn’t gotten married it would have been great to make that extra money, but thats what it would have been. Extra money. I could have lived off “without dependent” pay as a single guy, even if I moved off post. Hell, before I got married I toyed arround with moving out of the barracks on Fort Myer into an apartment. It would have cut my free spending cash a bit, but I could have done it. (I didn’t because, honestly, I would have gotten lonely. I’ve been on my own before and didn’t like it as much as having friends around me in the barracks).
I’m just trying to understand why you think people with dependents don’t need to get dependent pay. I’d be the first to tell you that servicemembers should all be paid more.
But back to the OP, T-shirts with sayings like hte ones mentioned don’t bother me too much. I’ve had people ask me for army t-shirts when I was a recruiter that had no interest in the army at all. That bugged me more than a military spouse wearing some slogan on a shirt. I did see a guy with a T-shirt I liked though. It said “I’m off duty, leave me alone.”. I need to get one of those. 
I wonder how common it was to wear t-shirts with one’s name on it? So that if you’re standing next to someone with those t-shirts it would say:
I'm With Stupid Fred
That’s the only way it would make sense to me.
I’m not the person this is directed to, but I would agree with them. Your marital/parental status shouldn’t be relevent to your salary in any job. If I found out my coworkers made more because they were married or had kids I’d be pissed.
It’s an extremely lame-ass firefighting T-shirt.
Firefighters fight grizzly bears! Sweet! Thanks, dudes!
Again, no snark intended Antiro, but it is a different circumstance in the military. Single people are expected to live in the barracks, thus they don’t have rent or utility bills to pay. Granted, in some situations they are allowed to move off post and when they do they are given a housing allowance. (The commander can give a single troop permission to live off post)
Also if a married guy and his spouse “break up” the dependent pay goes to the spouse. Its given to help with the costs of dependents so the soldier isn’t entitled to it if his spouse leaves. Its not exactly fair to compare dependent pay to a civilian job, since most civilians make more than a troop does. Does it kind of suck? Well, hell yeah, when I was a single joe living in the barracks I sure wished I had more cash in my paycheck. I wish I had more cash now. But I didn’t starve or anything. I had a place to live (with no utility bills), I was fed on the governments dime and my entire paycheck was mine to spend on what I wanted to spend it on. (with the exception of a car payment and a bank loan I had to pay off.) I don’t want to sound like I’m being a jerk but I only hear the complaint of dependent pay from single troops who simply want more money. I don’t blame 'em, who wouldn’t want more money? Its just silly though to expect that a married person doesn’t deserve the dependent pay. If you’re a single troop and you think you ain’t getting paid enough, how could you expect a troop with a spouse/child/ family to make it with the same pay?
Some folks in the military also get paid more than another person in the same rank if they have more time in service. Or in an expensive area. (for instance in Europe we get COLA (Cost of living Allowance). Or in a dangerous area you get combat pay. Should all of these guys and girls not get it because someone else that isn’t in the area/situation doesn’t?
Like I said, no snark intended. I know you weren’t the one that made the post about it, I am just explaining the reasons for it.
Well, not being a Socialist, of course I find it unfair. After all, I really don’t buy into the “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” crapola. Whether you are married or not has exactly nothing to do with your skill set and your level of employment. In other words: it’s your problem, not your employer’s.
So what? Other jobs don’t pay people to get married or have kids. It’s your choice to get married. The simple solution is to pay each person a routealistic wage for the actual work performed instead of pretending the 2 or 3 bedroom on-base housing is equivalent to a 3x3x6 bed on a ship.
And did you not notice that the without dependents rate is lower than the with dependents rate? Again, that is irrelevant to the job, the level of performance.
But you’re also saying that married personnel should get paid more than single personnel just because they’re married. That’s ridiculous. Pay everyone a realistic rate and then let them decide if they want to get married and have kids and pay for it. You know, just like the civilian folks must do with their paychecks.
And since the government’s paying you more just because you’re married, why then do they not continue that payment after you leave the service? After all, she still has to eat and live, doesn’t she?
T-shirt slogans don’t bug me in the least. I figure they’re either advertising or a joke. If I don’t like the advertising, I won’t buy the product. If I don’t like the joke, I won’t laugh.
Don’t get me started on COLA. If it were a simple percentage, then the forumula would be valid. It’s not. It’s also predicated on marital status and number of dependents. Malarkey.
Anyway, I see the “Navy wife: toughest job in the Navy” as a joke. And I laugh at it.
A housing allowance I could see, since I would consider the barracks housing as part of your overall compensation.
This one I’m confused on. If they get divorced, the non-service member spouse still gets paid?
Then the US government is the only employer I know of that would give a rats ass. My ability to support myself plus others is not my bosses concern, what my job is worth is.
These are all things that apply directly to the job and make sense.
It isn’t really my concern one way or the other, just giving my opinion.
Interesting hijack.
I have never heard of this extra pay for dependents thing but it does seem sensible to me. Unlike most civilian jobs I can think of, it would seem to me, partners of military folks have quite a lot less agency with which to live their own lives. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems they don’t get to live where they want to, or carry out the careers they might have - they very much have to arrange their lives according to their partner’s military career. In that sense they absolutely are “earning” their pay, in the sense that they’re giving up quite a lot of their lives for an employer. Just because it’s not their employer, but rather their partner’s, doesn’t make it any easier. If anybody is going to have so much control over my own life’s earning potential, they’d damn well better pay me for it.
Do partners of diplomats (and other professions who are moved around the world at their employer’s discretion) get dependent pay too?
I expect it would be the same with professional athletes but when you get into the ranges of salary that many of them play for, it would be a lot harder to defend.
Would it be too trollish to answer “suicide bomber”, if confronted with one of these?
The US military, you mean. Big diff. Considering that a military contract expressly voids several fundamental American rights, it’s only fair that the government also does the bare minimum necessary to make sure your family survives.
Whether you buy into it or not, thats the way the system is set up. I don’t have a problem with it now, and I didn’t when I was single. Its late here so I don’t have time to go look up the history, but I’m willing to guess that one of the reasons its that way is retention. Joe Snuffy joins the army. He’s single. After a few years Joe gets married. Now he’s got more expenses. It would probably cost more for the army to have to recruit and train someone to replace Joe should he leave the army when his term is up, than to offer him more money to take care of his family. I’m just guessing at that reason, but as a former recruiter I can promise you that retention is a big deal to the military. Heck, I almost didn’t reenlist a few years ago and they offered me station of choice just to keep me…and i’m just a cog in the machine.
Have you ever been in the military? (I’m not being snarky, just asking). They’d rather have a troop stay in than leave after recieving training. I’d be happy if they decided to pay more, but it isn’t that simple. I’m overseas now, so the military pays me COLA (which is wonky, I agree with you there) and the other stuff. Why would I stay if they didn’t at least offer me more money to feed my family. Keep in mind its not a lot of money either. My BAS is under 300 dollars and I’m an NCO with 18 years of active service. Its not like pay with dependents is a giant windfall.
Yep, I know that. When I was a single troop on my first overseas assignment it didn’t actually make that much of a difference. If I wanted to go, say from Germany, (where I was then and actually am now) to spain on a trip, or buy some clothes I had the money for it. When I got married and wanted to do those things it costs more. Why wouldn’t the rate be more?
But we’re not civilian folks. Your boss doesn’t expect you to do the things that a soldier, sailor, airman or marine does. You can quit if he tells you to put yourself in harms way. And civilian folks probably make more money anyway. So for less pay a troop is expected to put their neck on the line and all of the other things that go with being in the military (long work days,separated from family, danger, etc) and not have the option to marry? Unless you’re a cop or something, no one can order you to risk your life and make your spouse a potential widow or widower…and cops get married without the potential threat of being sent overseas to fight. I know they used to say something like “The army/navy/marine corps/air force/ didn’t issue you a wife” (or husband) in the old days, but thats unrealistic.
Huh? If you aren’t working for them anymore why would they pay you? Unless you retire after 20 years or get hurt im the line of duty. I don’t expect them to pay me or take care of my family when I get out. Well, I do, actually, since I’ll retire in a little under 2 years. But then, I earned that. You may not agree with that, but 20 years of being on duty all of the time, it seems fair to me. The military doesn’t get paid by the hour…my boss can call me right now at 0130 and tell me to come in and I gotta do it.
Cowgirl, to answer your question, if a servicemember gets divorced they won’t get the with dependents pay. Thats why I used the words “break up”. I should have said “split up” I guess. They’ll still have to pay child support though, if applicable. If I divorce my wife I won’t get dependent pay when the divorce if final.
I don’t want to derail this thread anymore than its been hijacked. If you want to continue this discussion I suggest we take it to great debates.
Rationalize all you want, Jolly Roger, but I’m still not buying it. And, FYI, I’m retired Petty Officer First Class, US Navy.
Actually, your rationalizations above are mostly insults directed against single members and me. They really don’t carry much weight in the substance department.
And what are we doing letting prisoners of war just drive around, anyway? Shouldn’t they be in Guantanamo or something? :eek:
I never insulted you. As a matter of fact I believe I said I wasn’t trying to be snarky, I just wanted to know your opinion. You’re going out of your way to find offense. Why would i bother insulting you in the first place? Or single military members?
I don’t care if you don’t “buy” it, since that doesn’t have any effect on anything. My rationalizations are at least reasons for why the system may work the way it does. If I were more thin skinned I could rationalize that you were insulting me by dismissing my opinions with “I don’t buy it”.
Not that its all that important in the first place. You don’t like the system, fine. There are plenty of things about the military we can all bitch and moan about. Enjoy your retirement.