3 ms·
Astronauts aren’t doing it for the money. The government doesn’t pay it’s people well for risk. Contracting with the government is much more lucrative in this
by poof131 11y ago
Astronauts aren’t doing it for the money. The government doesn’t pay it’s people well for risk. Contracting with the government is much more lucrative in this regards. Military can often pay less than $50k a year[1] to people taking a ton of risk when a contractor taking significantly less risk is making $1000 a day. This is one reason privatizing so much of the military is corrosive.
http://www.militaryrates.com/military-pay-charts-e1_e5_2016 http://www.militaryrates.com/military-pay-charts-e1_e5_2016
- fapjacks 11y agoYes, but that number goes up when you're getting shot at. Your point about contractors stands, though.
- falsestprophet 11y agoLike everything in life, it is a matter of supply and demand. At the height of the Iraq war, there was a suddenly increased demand for the services of private military contractors relative to their supply. Now, the demand is reduced and the market rate for private military contractor services is much less expensive.
- icebraining 11y agoWhy is that corrosive? Increasing the cost of going to war sounds great to me.
- bryondowd 11y agoIt would be great, if that cost reigned in our willingness to go to war. However, it just provides even more incentive for all the people making money off it directly or indirectly to support the war.
- linkregister 11y agoThose pay charts obscure the near-match of base salary for Basic Assistance for Housing (untaxed!) and free medical, $300/mo grocery allowance, etc. That E-5 is earning comparably to $65k or so, depending on the locality.