Compare the salary of, say, a general or E-9 responsible for the leadership of a large unit & compare that to the typical salary for a corporate division or regional manager.

If you're comparing based on responsibility, I'd agree that there can be some disconnect. They're just doing it on the basis of education, though, and the E-9 probably just has "some college" and the general likely has the equivalent of a master's degree in political science. Those in highly technical fields, though, may have more marketable degrees and the proficiency pay they get tends not to be enough compensation.

As you go up in rank/education level however, that will naturally diverge - there are legal limits on how much the military can be paid, and no such limits on civilian wages. Compare the salary of, say, a general or E-9 responsible for the leadership of a large unit & compare that to the typical salary for a corporate division or regional manager.

One thing is true, tho - as health care gets harder to get & more expensive, the civilian equivalent of that military benefit will make active service significantly more attractive...

It’s more akin to trade school

An apt description, since trade school grads tend to get paid more than those who don't attened such schools.

Still, this discussion reminds one rather vividly of the comment from John Kerry, about how people who are in Iraq are those who didn’t study hard, didn’t do their homework, and just aren’t doing well because they aren’t smart, at all. If they were, they wouldn’t be “stuck in Iraq”. A lack of Education, ya know. I know you didn't mean that, but it seems a short hop from one to the other.

As I said at the time...to say nothing on insensitive, it seems to me an out of touch comment, to begin with.

Last stats I can access from here, (I'm at work) date back a few years, and are from the Air Force.

99.9 percent of Air Force enlistees have high school diplomas; while 73.3 % have some college credit, 16.2 % have an Associates degree, 4.7 % have a Bachelors degree.

There are other requirements than education of course. For example, you must be fit, phisically.
No drug or alcohol problems allowed.
You can’t have any visible tattoos.
If you have ever been addicted to a substance, or trafficked in one, you are not eligible for enlistment. No criminal record. You can't be a single parent, no financial issues, and so on.

On the basis of these alone, you're already cutting by 80% the number of people qualified to enlist, and at the end of the day, you'retalking the cream of the crop for prospective employers, even before we start talking about the educational aspect of it all, and are talking about a higher pay rate to attract such folks.

Are we to discount the training given by the military, to such people? Certainly, advanced education.

Training isn't education. Certainly, I wouldn't consider the several months I spent at Ft. Sill for my officer basic course and MLRS cadre course to be "education" in any meaningful sense. It's more akin to trade school.

The senior NCO academies and advanced officer courses combine training and education and some even award civilian education credentials. For example, the War Colleges all award master's level degrees. But their peer group would then be people with master's degrees.