Where do you expect US generals to get jobs?
Foreign militaries?
McDonald's?
Blackwater?
I understand the military-industrial complex, I just don't know if senior military officer job selection is really the thing to be surprised about or get upset over.
This seems to answer your confusion about why they are concerned about this.
The article also seems to suggest that they aren't trying to ban former Generals from getting jobs, they would just like to regulate it better, the first two proposals seeming to be pretty important:
- Bar four-star officers from going to work for companies that receive $1 billion or more in contracts with the Pentagon annually.
- Extend “cooling off periods” before retired officials can go to work for the arms industry to four years. This would ensure that key contacts or key information that the official may have been privy to while serving would not provide an outsized advantage.
McDonald's?
> These are retirees, they have pensions
The fact is that defense contractors are not employing them for their transferable skills. They just want a direct line into the pentagons (i.e. the public’s) pockets.
If they have enough energy to not stay idle, then certainly they don't need these arms jobs? If they're worn out and can't do anything else, then we should give them pensions enough so they don't feel forced to work for arms manufacturers.
Point is - it’s common for people in public service to get gigs in private sector after their stint
Why not? The article provides a few cases of this situation leading to wasteful spending. Limiting this revolving door can eliminate waste.
> Where do you expect US generals to get jobs?
I'd pay them not to work. Same for retired Congress members. You get 100% of your salary for four years to help close the revolving door. That's the deal you make for taking the job. This can be enforced on military officers, but would probably be deemed unconstitutional for Congress.