While I am glad that the new GI Bill addresses the fact that the old GI Bill failed to keep up with the aims of the Bill as originally implemented I can't help but acknowledge the concerns of the opponents that this will hurt retention.

I am curious what other members of this forum have to say in regards to this. I am Active Duty Green to Gold and while this is one of the best programs in the Army I am only slightly better off under this program than I would be under this New GI Bill, from a monthly economic standpoint at least...

Stars and Stripes said it will hurt retention only slightly, and boost new enlistments at the same time. Plus, if you have been enlisted for 6 years and commit to 4 more, you can transfer your GI bill benefits to your spouse. And after being enlisted for 10 years you can transfer it to a child.

I don't think anyone can argue that the old GI Bill was better.

if they want to keep up retention rates, then they should give higher re-up bonuses instead of giving new privates 60 grand for 4 years... i cant even get 5 grand to re up for 4...the priorities are all wrong. They are losing experienced soldiers because they dont care about them... im all about the new gi bill...1 more year and im done!

Retention rates have been and continue to be some of the best in decades ... don't ge tthis confused.

The numbers of Soldiers actually reenlisting to transfer the GI Bill benefits remains in the single digits for percentage ... this will not hurt retention at all.

quote:

Originally posted by 11BIN3ID: they should give higher re-up bonuses instead of giving new privates 60 grand for 4 years.

I completely agree.