Pentagon could cut thousands more employees, save $50 billion, says study by former chiefs

[MADem]

10. No, I'm not. In the end--and I see nothing wrong with this practice, but it is a fact--the vet

ends up getting a retirement "leg up" over those entering civil service from the civilian sector. S/He does less work over the course of a career in civil service for a larger pension that the nonvet gets. That same vet, had he not entered civil service, wouldn't be getting a dime from the government unless he or she had retired from the military.

So it does end up costing the USG more. A contractor is hired, paid for the time they work, and dumped with no further obligation or association with the government.

That's how it is supposed to work, in practice. The problem comes when Congress buys stock in some of these contracting businesses and have an interest in writing them lucrative contracts that keep them stuck to the ship of state like a fervent barnacle. In those instances, these "temporary" contractors can make money hand over fist for many years and, if they're fiscally prudent, can end up doing very well for themselves and feather their old age nest at the same time.