"Who will survive in America?"-- Gil Scott-Heron.
Kanye West included this speech at the end of his song, "Lost in The World" and that is the question that Americans should be asking due to the state of the economy. There is a rumor that the U.S. Military is even being downsized and that they are forcing those serving to take an early out or ending jobs--ironically, a lot of these jobs have gone to private contractors, which has always baffled me: construction that used to belong to Seabees.
From what I understand, those who are approaching their 20 year contract ending--which equals full retirement--have been the main target. Isn't this breach of contract? The military has been the one sector that emphasized job security and benefits. Now, they--and I am not even sure who they are--but I'm guessing they are not military are changing the agreement.
I can guess "they" are those that a lot of the conservative military types support: tea party and others who benefit from privatization of anything and everything. Due to the networks that military members form (high-ranking officials specifically) they are able to receive better paying jobs upon their exit or retirement. Isn't this a conflict of interest? Insider trading? I am too logical.
Teachers have always been paid horribly and lacked benefits but the military was--for the most part--well compensated for their work. If the traditional retirement were to end, it would be and should be treated as a breach of contract.
Kanye West included this speech at the end of his song, "Lost in The World" and that is the question that Americans should be asking due to the state of the economy. There is a rumor that the U.S. Military is even being downsized and that they are forcing those serving to take an early out or ending jobs--ironically, a lot of these jobs have gone to private contractors, which has always baffled me: construction that used to belong to Seabees.
From what I understand, those who are approaching their 20 year contract ending--which equals full retirement--have been the main target. Isn't this breach of contract? The military has been the one sector that emphasized job security and benefits. Now, they--and I am not even sure who they are--but I'm guessing they are not military are changing the agreement.
I can guess "they" are those that a lot of the conservative military types support: tea party and others who benefit from privatization of anything and everything. Due to the networks that military members form (high-ranking officials specifically) they are able to receive better paying jobs upon their exit or retirement. Isn't this a conflict of interest? Insider trading? I am too logical.
Teachers have always been paid horribly and lacked benefits but the military was--for the most part--well compensated for their work. If the traditional retirement were to end, it would be and should be treated as a breach of contract.
No comments:
Post a Comment