I would say that there is a free lunch, but I think that limiting the "cost" to a purely monetary figure completely understates it. Obviously there is the ultimate cost borne by both the servicemember and their family, but cops & firefighters may also pay this cost in providing safety and security.Originally Posted by jonSlack
The cost we pay comes in the perceived lack of stability in our lives. I am currently stationed in an area that has a very small military presence (less than 100 active duty). I was completely surprised that most of the people I come across say that they could not deal with moving around every few years or have their spouse gone alot. Being a military brat, I know no other life (never been anywhere more than 4 years and that was only once), but this is something people actually fear and that cops and firefighters, etc. do not do. Moreover, we miss family time not just when we are at work, but also for a full number of days (weeks, months, etc) when we're TDY or deployed. This is a cost many are unwilling to accept. And as long as we have folks like us that are willing to pay that cost, I'd say that we continue to let the rest of America have a free lunch and maybe we can all feel a little proud that we help provide it.
One other thing on this: whether the public views us safer or not because of Iraq, or the war on terror is irrelevant. The military continues to provide safety and security from those that might do us harm.
Tequila:
Although I nearly fell out of my chair when I read this quote, as a lawyer, its nice to know someone thinks of us as providing a public good. Maybe we can get rid of the lawyer/shark comparisons.Howeover, this argument could also apply to any employment sector which provides a "public good", since I an unaware of any major tax exemptions for doctors, teachers, lawyers, police, engineers, sewer workers, emergency response, etc.
Bookmarks