Bruce Fleming saga cont.

HopefulDad3210 said:
He sleeps under the blanket of freedom these kids provide and then questions the manner in which they provide it. I’m sure they’d rather he just said “thank you” and went on his way.
Click to expand...
These kids get hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars invested in them to do a job that they volunteered to do. Choosing to get a free education and guaranteed job isn't some honorable choice deserving of thanks. The military is a job, and service academy graduates are compensated very well for doing that job.

If someone thinks that the government is wasting tax dollars that Americans as a whole paid, they should bring attention to the issue.
 
It costs 4 times more to produce an officer at a service academy compared to through ROTC. It costs 8 times more to produce an officer through ROTC rather than OCS.

Is there any evidence that suggests service academy graduates are significantly better at their job than OCS officers? In order to justify paying 32x more money for something, there needs to be a significant difference between the two products. And even if there is a significant difference, it is questionable if it is worth spending so much money on a "luxury" product when there are other important things taxpayer dollars could be used for.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Military_Academy_alumni

This page lists notable USMA grads. You'll notice that there aren't many people on the list who graduated within the last 40 years. Might suggest that USMA, and all of the service academies, no longer produce the same level of value for society that they used to. Graduating classes have gotten much bigger, while the number of notable graduates per year and shrunk significantly.
 
Firstie2020 said:
It costs 4 times more to produce an officer at a service academy compared to through ROTC. It costs 8 times more to produce an officer through ROTC rather than OCS.
Click to expand...
.
You are mixing fruit. Go look at the Accounting Books at UVA and any other comparable education. In terms of operating costs per student, the SAs are not any more expensive than these comparable public and private institutions. Tax payers, Institutional funding & investment accounts, and to smaller extent, tuition, keep all these places going.

It ain’t cheap anywhere you go. Stop distorting the truth.
.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Strange Love said:
Firstie2020 said:
It costs 4 times more to produce an officer at a service academy compared to through ROTC. It costs 8 times more to produce an officer through ROTC rather than OCS.
Click to expand...
.
You are mixing fruit. Go look at the Accounting Books at UVA and any other comparable education. In terms of operating costs per student, the SAs are not any more expensive than these comparable public and private institutions. Tax payers, Institutional funding & investment accounts, and to smaller extent, tuition, keep all these places going.
.
Click to expand...
Taxpayers are not spending $400,000 dollars to send a kid to UVA. If that were true UVA would be costing tax payers nearly 7 billion dollars a year ($400000*16777 students = $6710800000). Find a stat that suggests this to be the case. There are hundreds, if not over a thousand, colleges in the United States. If every school cost $400,000 in tax payer dollars to produce one graduate, then more than the entire national budget would be going towards sending kids to school, and we still wouldn't' have enough money send everyone to school.
 
.
Compare the Operations & Maintenance costs on a “Per Student Full-Time Equivalent” basis. It is not much different for all these places. Every student is subsidized to some degree.
.
 
There are also the intangibles of a service academy. That cannot be valued monetarily. Foreign dignitaries, international goodwill, American pride, historical significance, ambassadors for our military. They are living, breathing museums of our history. I personally can’t imagine them ever doing away with the service academies.
 
So many variables... Does it really cost the taxpayer $400,000 for a USNA education, or is that estimated value? Should the monthly stipend be included? After all, it is compensation, not scholarship money. Medical costs---what's the estimated value vs the real dollar cost to taxpayers? What about taxpayer subsidies given to civilian colleges? Is that cost added to the value of an ROTC education in these reports? After all, that is still a real cost to the taxpayer. How many civilian colleges have a yard patrol?

As far as the USMA notables listed in the Wikipedia page... Are we to judge 'notables' by their post-military accomplishments? The purpose of a SA is to produce top-notch officers, not famous people.

How many SA grads go URL vs ROTC? Maybe it is the same. I do not know.

It's almost impossible to make an apples-to-apples comparison.
 
justdoit19 said:
There are also the intangibles of a service academy. That cannot be valued monetarily. Foreign dignitaries, international goodwill, American pride, historical significance, ambassadors for our military. They are living, breathing museums of our history. I personally can’t imagine them ever doing away with the service academies.
Click to expand...
People on a service academy forum likely value those things far more than the average taxpayer. Most of the civilians I've talked to have never even heard of West Point, much less care about its continued existence.

You can't put a precise monetary value on those things, but you can certainly say they are not worth a certain monetary value. Would you disagree that all of those things you mentioned are not worth $100 trillion dollars a year?
 
brewmeist said:
So many variables... Does it really cost the taxpayer $400,000 for a USNA education, or is that estimated value? Should the monthly stipend be included? After all, it is compensation, not scholarship money. Medical costs---what's the estimated value vs the real dollar cost to taxpayers? What about taxpayer subsidies given to civilian colleges? Is that cost added to the value of an ROTC education in these reports? After all, that is still a real cost to the taxpayer. How many civilian colleges have a yard patrol?
Click to expand...
Can't speak for USNA, but below is a quote from the USAFA website.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/commitment/

"An Academy education is valued at more than $416,000, yet we offer it at no cost to our cadets. All that is required in return is your commitment to serve as an officer in the Air Force."

It doesn't matter how many variables there are if it is blatantly clear that the academies are far more expensive than OCS. Sure, the true cost of sending a person to the academy might be $416,000 +/- $100,000. It still doesn't matter. OCS is 32x cheaper, barely costing over $10,000 to produce one graduate. Unless you are arguing that the cost of producing a service academy graduate is $416,000 +/- $406,000, then there is no overlap between the costs of these two commissioning sources. OCS is cheaper every single time, and because that is the case, it does not matter if I cannot give you an exact true cost of sending someone to a service academy.

brewmeist said:
As far as the USMA notables listed in the Wikipedia page... Are we to judge 'notables' by their post-military accomplishments? The purpose of a SA is to produce top-notch officers, not famous people.
Click to expand...
If you want to judge officer by their military accomplishments, then service academy grads fall short of OCS and ROTC grads. Service academy grads have lower retention rates because they have more lucritive options in the civilian sector than their OCS and ROTC counterparts. There is also no evidence to suggest that service academy grads outperform their OCS and ROTC counterparts. ROTC and OCS officers are staying in longer and performing just as well as service academy grads.

“Recent studies suggest service academy graduates have lower junior officer retention rates than other officer commissioning sources,"

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...duates-could-see-longer-military-obligations/

Additionally, the people on that list are not famous people for contributing nothing to society. If you win a become the chief of staff of the Army you end up on that list. If you earn a medal of honor you end up on that list. Look at the categories on that wikipedia page. The vast majority of the people on the list are famous for significant contributions to society, whether that be in the military, as government officials, or significant leaders in the private sector. The people on that list are not akin to the Kardashians who haven't done anything meaningful for our country. The people on that list are notable for doing great things, and in the past 40 classes, not many USMA grads have done great things compared to the classes prior.

brewmeist said:
How many SA grads go URL vs ROTC? Maybe it is the same. I do not know.
Click to expand...
What is URL?
 
URL is a Navy term for Unrestricted Line, the pure warfare communities (branches): surface, sub, aviation, SEAL, etc.
Restricted Line are highly specialized communities in which officers serve pretty much their entire career, and are “restricted” from operational command at sea: Intel, Cyber, Public Affairs, Engineering Duty Officers, Oceanographic, etc.
Staff Corps Officers are the usual medical, nurse, medical service, supply, civil engineering, JAG, etc.

I think the comment related to both SA and ROTC expected to produce primarily warfare officers, “URL.”
 
Firstie2020 said:
brewmeist said:
So many variables... Does it really cost the taxpayer $400,000 for a USNA education, or is that estimated value? Should the monthly stipend be included? After all, it is compensation, not scholarship money. Medical costs---what's the estimated value vs the real dollar cost to taxpayers? What about taxpayer subsidies given to civilian colleges? Is that cost added to the value of an ROTC education in these reports? After all, that is still a real cost to the taxpayer. How many civilian colleges have a yard patrol?
Click to expand...
Can't speak for USNA, but below is a quote from the USAFA website.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/commitment/

"An Academy education is valued at more than $416,000, yet we offer it at no cost to our cadets. All that is required in return is your commitment to serve as an officer in the Air Force."

It doesn't matter how many variables there are if it is blatantly clear that the academies are far more expensive than OCS. Sure, the true cost of sending a person to the academy might be $416,000 +/- $100,000. It still doesn't matter. OCS is 32x cheaper, barely costing over $10,000 to produce one graduate. Unless you are arguing that the cost of producing a service academy graduate is $416,000 +/- $406,000, then there is no overlap between the costs of these two commissioning sources. OCS is cheaper every single time, and because that is the case, it does not matter if I cannot give you an exact true cost of sending someone to a service academy.
Click to expand...
Your valuation of OCS is totally an apples to Antifreeze comparison. Some time ago when something like this ended up in print, the onion was peeled back a bit and the ack of comparability was astonishing. The Service Academy cost was the TOTAL PAYROLL FACILITY cost associated with USNA and the Naval Station since (of course), they were all there to support the Naval Academy. On the other hand, the OCS cost was just the cost of the actual OCS payroll and costs that could be shown to be OCS like King Hall itself. This leaves out lots of expenses that are not directly attributable to OCS such as Ney Hall (dining), the gym, pool, medical facilities, etc which are shared with the other activities in Newport. Admissions for USNA are included in the USNA cost while Admissions for OCS are part of Navy Recruiting Command and not easily connected. Of course, OCS is cheaper, it is twelve weeks as opposed to four years.

By the way, your comment that retention is lower is based on one sentence in an article with zero backup. I've seen many other analysis in the past that conflict with this which makes it appear that there is some cherry picked data. A fairly substantial number of officers are commissioned via the LDO program and they have very high retention rates - largely because they are much closer to retirement. Go ahead and give side by side specifics for OCS, ROTC and USNA and you'll see a different result. Also, in the vein of cherrypicking, there is a big difference between looking at 7 or 8 yrs after commissioning versus how many stay to 20 and beyond between USNA, OCS and ROTC.
 
Firstie2020 said:
What is URL?
Click to expand...
I find it somewhat shocking that a First Class Midshipman would not know what URL was.

0*Wv5rHUzi5-61HcCw.jpg
 
In his defense, he is at West Point. I'm not sure if URL is an Army term. I still disagree with everything else he posted.
 
OldRetSWO said:
Firstie2020 said:
brewmeist said:
So many variables... Does it really cost the taxpayer $400,000 for a USNA education, or is that estimated value? Should the monthly stipend be included? After all, it is compensation, not scholarship money. Medical costs---what's the estimated value vs the real dollar cost to taxpayers? What about taxpayer subsidies given to civilian colleges? Is that cost added to the value of an ROTC education in these reports? After all, that is still a real cost to the taxpayer. How many civilian colleges have a yard patrol?
Click to expand...
Can't speak for USNA, but below is a quote from the USAFA website.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/commitment/

"An Academy education is valued at more than $416,000, yet we offer it at no cost to our cadets. All that is required in return is your commitment to serve as an officer in the Air Force."

It doesn't matter how many variables there are if it is blatantly clear that the academies are far more expensive than OCS. Sure, the true cost of sending a person to the academy might be $416,000 +/- $100,000. It still doesn't matter. OCS is 32x cheaper, barely costing over $10,000 to produce one graduate. Unless you are arguing that the cost of producing a service academy graduate is $416,000 +/- $406,000, then there is no overlap between the costs of these two commissioning sources. OCS is cheaper every single time, and because that is the case, it does not matter if I cannot give you an exact true cost of sending someone to a service academy.
Click to expand...
Your valuation of OCS is totally an apples to Antifreeze comparison. Some time ago when something like this ended up in print, the onion was peeled back a bit and the ack of comparability was astonishing. The Service Academy cost was the TOTAL PAYROLL FACILITY cost associated with USNA and the Naval Station since (of course), they were all there to support the Naval Academy. On the other hand, the OCS cost was just the cost of the actual OCS payroll and costs that could be shown to be OCS like King Hall itself. This leaves out lots of expenses that are not directly attributable to OCS such as Ney Hall (dining), the gym, pool, medical facilities, etc which are shared with the other activities in Newport. Admissions for USNA are included in the USNA cost while Admissions for OCS are part of Navy Recruiting Command and not easily connected. Of course, OCS is cheaper, it is twelve weeks as opposed to four years.

By the way, your comment that retention is lower is based on one sentence in an article with zero backup. I've seen many other analysis in the past that conflict with this which makes it appear that there is some cherry picked data. A fairly substantial number of officers are commissioned via the LDO program and they have very high retention rates - largely because they are much closer to retirement. Go ahead and give side by side specifics for OCS, ROTC and USNA and you'll see a different result. Also, in the vein of cherrypicking, there is a big difference between looking at 7 or 8 yrs after commissioning versus how many stay to 20 and beyond between USNA, OCS and ROTC.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that you critique me for using an article that has "zero backup", yet you provide "zero backup" behind any of these statements.

Can't find any recent studies, but here's a quote from a study that was done in 2004 titled "An Analysis of the Effect of Commissioning Sources on Retention and Promotion of US Army Officers"

"We conclude that Academy graduates have the lowest retention rates, whereas OCS graduates have the highest
retention rates. Among male officers, retention rates are higher for ROTC graduates than for those with Direct Appointments;
among female officers retention rates are higher for Direct Appointments than ROTC graduates. The Promotion to O-4 Model
indicates that the effect of commissioning source is different within gender, race and marital status groups. The results of the
promotion to O-5 model contrasts with those of the O-4 models. Academy graduates are more likely to be promoted to
Lieutenant Colonel than those from other sources, followed by ROTC graduates and then Direct Appointments."

I guess it could be argued that a higher O-5 promotion rate is an indication that service academy grads that do stay in are performing better. But this might be mainly due to the fact that a person who is capable of gaining admission into a service academy is on average going to be better than a person who is capable of getting into ROTC/OCS. Thus, it is unclear if the service academy experience is causing officers to perform better during their field grade time, or if it is simply due to the average person who can get into a service academy being more qualified to be an officer than those who can only get into ROTC/OCS.

Would be interesting to see a more in-depth study that accounts for all of these variables.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 
So @Firstie2020, how are you enjoying your time as USMA? Are you excited about commissioning?
 
Firstie2020 said:
Can't speak for USNA, but below is a quote from the USAFA website.

https://www.academyadmissions.com/commitment/

"An Academy education is valued at more than $416,000, yet we offer it at no cost to our cadets. All that is required in return is your commitment to serve as an officer in the Air Force."
Click to expand...

I have a letter from the USNA Registrar (for tax purposes) that states the per year estimated cost of education for USNA for 2019 is $54,294 (including room and board) The official number becomes available in May. FWIW This is the same cost as attending our local state school for a non-resident (i.e., a student whose attendance has not been subsidized by state taxes).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top