Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Retiree Benefits for the Military Could Face Cuts
NY Slimes ^ | 18 Sep 11 | JAMES DAO and MARY WILLIAMS WALSH

Posted on 09/19/2011 3:42:14 AM PDT by SkyPilot

As Washington looks to squeeze savings from once-sacrosanct entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, another big social welfare system is growing as rapidly, but with far less scrutiny: the health and pension benefits of military retirees.

Military pensions and health care for active and retired troops now cost the government about $100 billion a year, representing an expanding portion of both the Pentagon budget — about $700 billion a year, including war costs — and the national debt, which together finance the programs.

Making even incremental reductions to military benefits is typically a doomed political venture, given the public’s broad support for helping troops, the political potency of veterans groups and the fact that significant savings take years to appear.

But the intense push in Congress this year to reduce the debt and the possibility that the Pentagon might have to begin trimming core programs like weapons procurement, research, training and construction have suddenly made retiree benefits vulnerable, military officials and experts say.

And if Congress fails to adopt the deficit-reduction recommendations of a bipartisan joint Congressional committee this fall, the Defense Department will be required under debt ceiling legislation passed in August to find about $900 billion in savings over the coming decade. Cuts that deep will almost certainly entail reducing personnel benefits for active and retired troops, Pentagon officials and analysts say.

“We’ve got to put everything on the table,” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said recently on PBS, acknowledging that he was looking at proposals to rein in pension costs.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cuts; military; pensions; retirements; tricare; veterans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
Illegals, do-nothings, the lazy, Section 8 housing, Food Stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, SSDI, and Obamacare.

All "untouchable" - but our nation's heroes are on the block again, and again, and again under this Administration.

1 posted on 09/19/2011 3:42:21 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Obamma will not cut social security or medicare, but he will screw the military without a care in the world!


2 posted on 09/19/2011 3:44:32 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawhide

Please............this is the NY Times admitting that scaring the elderly hasn’t worked.

Now, they’re going to try to scare vets.


3 posted on 09/19/2011 3:46:14 AM PDT by swpa_mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks SkyPilot.
...if Congress fails to adopt the deficit-reduction recommendations of a bipartisan joint Congressional committee this fall, the Defense Department will be required under debt ceiling legislation passed in August to find about $900 billion in savings over the coming decade... "We've got to put everything on the table," Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said recently on PBS...
We need to cut PBS, NPR, and the so-called arts funding. And thanks, Panetta, for letting everyone know just where you stand on this.




4 posted on 09/19/2011 3:54:10 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

It’s time people realize that EVERYTHING should be on the table. That includes SS, Medicare, federal workers, farm subsidies, the military...everything. Are we willing to borrow more money from China to pay for military retirements at 20 years? Conservative republicans need to go toe-to-toe over social programs but if they start trying to “protect” their interests we will never rescue this economy.

And, yes, I’m a vet and a federal worker. We simply can’t afford all this.


5 posted on 09/19/2011 3:56:53 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

He’s rather cut a retired Sgts. pension than a retired sh-thead politican or their staff. Peeelosi comes to mind.


6 posted on 09/19/2011 4:04:45 AM PDT by Waco (Nominate Palin or forget 2012 you lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

How can military pensions be growing when we have cut our military?

Clinton cut them, Bush cut them, Obama cut them and the pension problem is growing? How can that be?

Let’s cut the Congressional Pensions, and cut about half of the Secret service agents we have guarding people who don’t need guarding.


7 posted on 09/19/2011 4:07:57 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Let Warren Buffett fund it. He says he ain’t paying enough. . . . . . .


8 posted on 09/19/2011 4:12:22 AM PDT by DeaconRed (Cold War Veteran. . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I have a son with just over 10 Yrs Svc who is a Major in SF. He told me yesterday that if they take away his 20 Year retirement benefit, he is gone. I suspect there would be a lot more and it would decimate our Officer and NCO ranks.


9 posted on 09/19/2011 4:12:54 AM PDT by Old Retired Army Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

If military benefits are on the table then the benefits for every other government worker should face the same cuts.


10 posted on 09/19/2011 4:14:35 AM PDT by SoJoCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Everybody wants something ELSE cut. And here we are.


11 posted on 09/19/2011 4:28:34 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy

Better to find out now while he as time to move on. As we’ve seen, there’s nothing to stop them from reneging on pension promises after you’ve put in all of your time.


12 posted on 09/19/2011 4:30:16 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SoJoCo

Including “our” representatives and bureaucrats.


13 posted on 09/19/2011 4:42:49 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
When my father passed, I went to the local, Midwestern SS office to return a check issued after his death.

I was the only gray hair in the office that didn't work there. The rest were wearing the hijab!

I sensed a problem...

14 posted on 09/19/2011 4:43:38 AM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (How will the Rats keep power? They cheat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Only a liberal fagrag like the Slimes would term the military retirement system a “social welfare program.”


15 posted on 09/19/2011 4:46:15 AM PDT by ScottinVA (With "successes" like the Libya adventure, who needs failure?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I am retired military. There is probably a good way to accomplish this without harm. Privatizing military pensions might be a good way and might also provide more than the traditional does now. Even a modest gain over 20 years could give the retiree more in pocket.

Perhaps a lump sum is invested the first day of boot camp. That money vests fully over 20 years. If a person stays beyond 20 then more is added to the pot. Let the enlistee choose the investment mix. I bet it could probably be done with as little as 100 thousand at enlistment.


16 posted on 09/19/2011 4:52:25 AM PDT by msrngtp2002 (Just my opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom
Now, they’re going to try to scare vets.

They are not going to scare the vets -- they are going to piss them off against Obama and the Dems.

17 posted on 09/19/2011 4:53:59 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (When you've only heard lies your entire life, the truth sounds insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: msrngtp2002

You might have a good idea, but they need to grandfather current active duty people.


18 posted on 09/19/2011 5:02:49 AM PDT by Old Retired Army Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
another big social welfare system

These people EARNED it defending your sorry asses, ya miserable worthless bastards ! ! !

FU NYT

19 posted on 09/19/2011 5:03:09 AM PDT by tomkat (para bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Didn’t read the whole article but it didn’t mean cut benefits of those already retired, did it? I figure they will trim those retiring in the future, and all programs should be on the table.

When all federal workers’ benefits are cut, when all welfare benefits are cut, when ALL share in the paring down of government costs, then and only then should cuts to those who defend this country be considered.

Something I’ve always wondered.....Since our veterans have the VA for their health care, why don’t the poor have a health clinic system, with a co-pay, like veterans?


20 posted on 09/19/2011 5:04:51 AM PDT by jch10 (I stand with Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

The trouble is active duty personnel and Vets weren’t going to vote for Obama and Dem.s anyway and the Dems. know that.


21 posted on 09/19/2011 5:04:51 AM PDT by Old Retired Army Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy
The trouble is active duty personnel and Vets weren’t going to vote for Obama and Dem.s anyway and the Dems. know that.

But now he's given them yet another reason to actively organize AGAINST Obama and the Dems. And military people know a bit about how to organize an operation.

22 posted on 09/19/2011 5:13:07 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (When you've only heard lies your entire life, the truth sounds insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jch10
Didn’t read the whole article but it didn’t mean cut benefits of those already retired, did it?

Yes, you should read the article.

They want to cut military retired pay for those veterans already retired. The administration also wants to compare the military TRICARE system to what civilians pay and receive.

We have to remember here that the NY Slimes is basically on the Obama payroll. These are shills for the administration. Case in point, there is a book by a former liberal that was discussed on Bill Bennett's morning radio program. The book is titled "Class Warfare - America's Failing Schools."

The NY Slimes book reviewers didn't even read it, but attacked it using the "people are saying" argument.

The NY Slimes is "floating" this proposal of slashing current military retirement and TRICARE under the guise of "fairness."

Don't buy any of it.

If it were a question of "fairness" - we would not be comparing retired disabled veterans who served their nation in multiple wars for over 20 years with illegal aliens whose anchor baby was born for free in a California ER and who now get Food Stamps (SNAP ATM cards), SSDI, AFDC, in state tuition, and possibly unemployment checks for 99 weeks.

It seems the proposal "floated" previously to hand our current serving troops the promise of a lousy 401K instead of a 20 year military retirement went over like a lead balloon.

That is why the NY Slimes, Democrats in Congress, and the Obama administration is "floating" an attack on current military retirees.

23 posted on 09/19/2011 5:19:42 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

I am more optomistic than ever. NY9 should have taught us all that the media can no longer manipulate the masses with scare tactics.

As long as we don’t defeat ourselves.


24 posted on 09/19/2011 5:29:17 AM PDT by swpa_mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
"How can military pensions be growing when we have cut our military?"

Because we have renegged on the unspoken understanding that we were to have the common courtesy of dying young.

After all, they used to provide cigarettes in the C-Rations. We were never supposed to survive the wars. We weren't supposed to take those retirement offers seriously.

Bottom line, those who avoided service are now in charge and getting even with those of us who did serve, while they ridiculed us for doing so.

25 posted on 09/19/2011 5:52:15 AM PDT by Redleg Duke ("Madison, Wisconsin is 30 square miles surrounded by reality.", L. S. Dryfus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Here in Illinois public service pensions are “untouchable” and cannot be cut!
Some are generous beyond belief!
See Stroger’s secretary and many others.

Lawyer: ‘Welching’ on public employee pensions not an option

The people who wrote the 1970 Illinois Constitution knew they were guaranteeing public employees that their pensions would not be reduced once they started working, according to a new legal analysis by the Senate Democrats’ top lawyer....

http://www.sj-r.com/top-stories/x1512113740/Analysis-Illinois-constitution-delegates-intended-to-guarantee-public-employee-pensions

My father was career Navy and collected past the age of 91 (Smile)!
My mother still receives some.


26 posted on 09/19/2011 6:12:18 AM PDT by DUMBGRUNT (The best is the enemy of the good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

The FIRST pension to be reduced should be that of CONGRESS and the ADMINISTRATION who has caused this mess. Always amazes me in the private sector, some blowhard makes it to the top, wrecks the company, then walks away with a few million in pensions for his efforts. The military should be the LAST cut for pensions. The ONLY function of the US Gov allowed by the constitution is to PROTECT and DEFEND the citizens. And they cut that one first ... what a mess.


27 posted on 09/19/2011 6:15:14 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I don’t click on the NYT site, ever......but thanks for the explanation.

Our veterans’ benefits should never be cut. Dems won’t be that stupid, well, they are pretty stupid.


28 posted on 09/19/2011 6:21:19 AM PDT by jch10 (I stand with Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom

Scare the vets? Friend, they HAVE ALREADY STARTED to cut our benefits and increase all our payouts back to the government. It started years ago and continues to increase every year. EVERY year they increase our health care and cut the benefits of it.


29 posted on 09/19/2011 6:26:57 AM PDT by RetiredArmy (EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY mouth shall say: Jesus Christ IS LORD!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Lord I despise and hate this administration as much as is possible to do. The military pensions are the LAST PENSIONS in the USA that should be cut. The only people who have actually DONE something FOR our country!!! It just makes me ill to hear of this. I wish I could do more than vote in every election (which I do) for the right side.


30 posted on 09/19/2011 6:32:14 AM PDT by marychesnutfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom
I know that the Federal government needs to reduce spending, but if it drastically cuts military spending its priorities are very misplaced. Today, military spending represents about %5 of GDP. This is much lower than the approximately 10% of GDP maintained on military spending throughout the 1960s. The real growth areas in spending for the federal government have been non-military entitlements and healthcare costs.

If you believe that the primary function of government is national defense, then I think most people would say we should not significantly cut our spending in this area. Shouldn't we first consider cuts in other less essential parts of government?

The current retirement system is the glue that keeps our current all-volunteer professional army together. If you do a away with it, you had better have something very attractive to replace it or we will lose some of the best and most experienced personnel. This would greatly reduce our military readiness at a time in world history when this would be very dangerous.


31 posted on 09/19/2011 6:56:54 AM PDT by 3Fingas ( Sons and Daughters of Freedom, Committee of Correspondence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

OK, so maybe NOW the troops won’t allow themselves to be used by O’bummer and his pathetic wife for photo ops...
Just say NO!!!!!!


32 posted on 09/19/2011 6:58:59 AM PDT by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: msrngtp2002

“I bet it could probably be done with as little as 100 thousand at enlistment.”

At historical rates of return in the stock market, say 7% real rate of return, $100K would become nearly $400K in today’s dollars ($387K) by the time 20 years was done. Assuming an enlistment age of 18, a 48-year old could buy a lifetime annuity of $1885 monthly with no inflation protection or $1623 monthly with a 3% inflation rider.

I have no idea how these figures compare to the standard annuities given to military retirees, but if they waited until age 65 to collect it, it would grow to $1.2 million in today’s dollars. That amount could generate an annuity of $6,600 monthly without an inflation rider or $5,251 with a 3% rider. Again, I don’t know what the norm is, but these strike me as reasonably generous guaranteed retirement income amounts—especially if they also qualify for a Social Security benefit (do they? Sorry, I have no idea).

Anyway, your proposed amount could be adjusted as needed so that the results better matched whatever retirees now can count on from the system. What I like about pre-funding in the fashion proposed is that we could allow those who leave before 20 years to obtain a pro rata share of the amount vested. For example, if they retire after 10 years, they’d be entitled to half of the $100K plus whatever earnings had been generated to date. So even if the back end benefit were not quite as generous as it is today, I would assume this restructuring might be attractive since I believe military can’t collect their retirement until/unless they’ve served 20 years.


33 posted on 09/19/2011 7:22:54 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
"...another big social welfare system..."

Stopped reading this tripe right there.

Deferred military compensation is not "welfare".

FU NYSlimes

34 posted on 09/19/2011 7:23:09 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten

Calvin Coolidge
35 posted on 09/19/2011 7:43:44 AM PDT by wasp69 (space for rent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: msrngtp2002

A long time ago, it was possible to have part of your military pay withheld by the Treasury, and kept at interest until discharge. Possibly it’s time to revive this?


36 posted on 09/19/2011 7:50:40 AM PDT by Mountain Troll (My investment plan - Canned food and shotguns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Old Retired Army Guy; ScottinVA
A few things are emerging about this article.

1. It is clear to me that the NY Slimes purposely used explosive terms like "social welfare" and others to describe military retirement, and for one reason. The "C" word. That word is Contempt. The NY Slimes, and whoever in the Obama Administration who colluded on this article, does not even use the word "WELFARE" to describe Welfare Programs!

2. The NY Slimes could not even get anyone in the article to endorse this fiasco proposal, except members of the "board" of hatchet libs who were on it. Even the officer who served a few years and didn't retire would not support the 'give them a pittance too' justification for gutting military retirements.

3. Liberals in Congress and the Administration are definitely hoping and trying to see if this stinking pile of manure will be bought as perfume. I think they will be sorely disappointed. Look at the link below, and the comments. This is DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND - which is as liberal as you can get. The comments, from liberals, look like they could have been written by Conservatives. They are outraged at this proposal. This is amazing to me.

DU Link - Retiree Benefits for the Military Could Face Cuts

________________________

"I find it appalling that we cut these benefits, these promises we made. Our word to our military should be kept. I am thinking we can find plenty of other places to cut. We should look at each lobbyist office on K street, look at their special programs, any money that goes toward their agendas and start cutting there first. When people give huge chunks of their lives for our country or in a job where they are promised benefits when they retire, we owe it to them to make sure the promises are kept."

______________________________

"Our word to any of our citizens should be kept especially the military. My father is retired military and he put in his time. The people proposing these cuts only care about using the military to show military might but don't give a damn about them after they have served their purpose. You see, you have to look at the "job makers" broken promises to retirees. That was the map to attack military retirees and veterans...no one was paying attention...."

_______________________________

"Why are they lumping health care costs for current military folks . . . in with the retiree benefits? That reminds me of the way politicians like to lump Medicare costs with Social Security costs and then say that both of them have to be cut, even though Social Security isn't the problem. That said, there are two obvious partial fixes. One: the annual premium hasn't changed since 1995, and it's reasonable to at least increase it according to inflation. Second, if military retirees have other jobs but prefer to use Tricare, and if those jobs offer health care benefits, then the employers should reimburse the Federal government by the amount that they would normally pay for health insurance."

_________________________

"Since when is a military retiree's health and pension benefits a "welfare system"? Great spin on that. These brave men and women risked their lives, their families, their mental health for people like 7 deferment Cheney and no-show bush, and now we call that welfare???? Losing limbs, minds and lives for our country is now considered welfare. Yet when GE pays 0 taxes and gets billions in a refund we call that good business? I find this spin of risking your life in battle and considering it welfare to be beyond disgusting. I guess the RepubliCON congress supports the troops only when they need them. When they are no longer of any use they kick them aside and force promised benefit cuts on them.

37 posted on 09/19/2011 8:13:24 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Old Retired Army Guy; ScottinVA
A few things are emerging about this article.

1. It is clear to me that the NY Slimes purposely used explosive terms like "social welfare" and others to describe military retirement, and for one reason. The "C" word. That word is Contempt. The NY Slimes, and whoever in the Obama Administration who colluded on this article, does not even use the word "WELFARE" to describe Welfare Programs!

2. The NY Slimes could not even get anyone in the article to endorse this fiasco proposal, except members of the "board" of hatchet libs who were on it. Even the officer who served a few years and didn't retire would not support the 'give them a pittance too' justification for gutting military retirements.

3. Liberals in Congress and the Administration are definitely hoping and trying to see if this stinking pile of manure will be bought as perfume. I think they will be sorely disappointed. Look at the link below, and the comments. This is DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND - which is as liberal as you can get. The comments, from liberals, look like they could have been written by Conservatives. They are outraged at this proposal. This is amazing to me.

DU Link - Retiree Benefits for the Military Could Face Cuts

________________________

"I find it appalling that we cut these benefits, these promises we made. Our word to our military should be kept. I am thinking we can find plenty of other places to cut. We should look at each lobbyist office on K street, look at their special programs, any money that goes toward their agendas and start cutting there first. When people give huge chunks of their lives for our country or in a job where they are promised benefits when they retire, we owe it to them to make sure the promises are kept."

______________________________

"Our word to any of our citizens should be kept especially the military. My father is retired military and he put in his time. The people proposing these cuts only care about using the military to show military might but don't give a damn about them after they have served their purpose. You see, you have to look at the "job makers" broken promises to retirees. That was the map to attack military retirees and veterans...no one was paying attention...."

_______________________________

"Why are they lumping health care costs for current military folks . . . in with the retiree benefits? That reminds me of the way politicians like to lump Medicare costs with Social Security costs and then say that both of them have to be cut, even though Social Security isn't the problem. That said, there are two obvious partial fixes. One: the annual premium hasn't changed since 1995, and it's reasonable to at least increase it according to inflation. Second, if military retirees have other jobs but prefer to use Tricare, and if those jobs offer health care benefits, then the employers should reimburse the Federal government by the amount that they would normally pay for health insurance."

_________________________

"Since when is a military retiree's health and pension benefits a "welfare system"? Great spin on that. These brave men and women risked their lives, their families, their mental health for people like 7 deferment Cheney and no-show bush, and now we call that welfare???? Losing limbs, minds and lives for our country is now considered welfare. Yet when GE pays 0 taxes and gets billions in a refund we call that good business? I find this spin of risking your life in battle and considering it welfare to be beyond disgusting. I guess the RepubliCON congress supports the troops only when they need them. When they are no longer of any use they kick them aside and force promised benefit cuts on them.

38 posted on 09/19/2011 8:13:41 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: swpa_mom
If you have ever read anything previously by these two Liberal reporters, you would not be surprised at this spin.

JAMES DAO and MARY WILLIAMS WALSH

These two are to the left of Stalin.

39 posted on 09/19/2011 8:16:51 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
It’s time people realize that EVERYTHING should be on the table. That includes SS, Medicare, federal workers, farm subsidies, the military...everything.

The problem with that thinking, HarleyD, is that "EVERYTHING" is not on the table - and under the Democrats in Congress and with Obama in charge of the Executive branch, they won't be.

Entitlement programs were exempt from cuts under the debt deal - and that includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all welfare spending (to include unemployment, Food Stamps, and everything else).

The "Super Committee" will meet, and if the Republicans don't agree to tax increases, and the Democrats won't agree to any real cuts, then 50% of the cuts come out of the DoD (which will devastate our defense and our economy) - and the other cuts from discretionary spending, BUT - they only want to cut things like what providers are paid for out of Medicare/Medicaid - meaning they want to screw the hospitals and health care workers out of money. Congress still wants the teats to keep giving milk, they just don't want to pay for it.

All of this is looming to be a disaster.

Entitlements (the real "Welfare" to use the NY Slimes language) have to be cut.

It is the only way to save our nation from certain disaster and meltdown.

40 posted on 09/19/2011 8:23:07 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

You are so right. I served for 31 years now my retirement is akin to welfare. WTH.


41 posted on 09/19/2011 8:44:01 AM PDT by OldGoatCPO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DUMBGRUNT

It is called Survivor benefit plan. Your father paid a monthly insurance on his retirement pay. I currently pay $179 per month so my wife will get 50% of my retirement if I die first. It is not a freebe your Dad planned. Ahead and paid for it.


42 posted on 09/19/2011 8:59:04 AM PDT by OldGoatCPO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke

I think you have a very valid point.


43 posted on 09/19/2011 9:10:45 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

“...another big social welfare system...”

I personally find this statement to be insulting and demeaning.


44 posted on 09/19/2011 9:24:06 AM PDT by ops33 (Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

No chit. They already cut our benefits. No Cost of Living Allowance for the last three years. Reason: The cost of living in the US has not gone up the last three years. I am wondering is there are two United States because the one I live in all the prices has risen ovet the last few years.


45 posted on 09/19/2011 9:35:42 AM PDT by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy

I’m sure they have legions of homos waiting to take thier places.


46 posted on 09/19/2011 9:38:06 AM PDT by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Not to mention the billions or is it trillions we have spent on foreign aid and defending nations that not only hate us but are wealthy. What have we got out of it? loss of lives of our military...now they want to cut them again? look at Kuwait...we saved their asses and when we asked them to invest in our economy they said NO...they are investing in Asia!!!!!!!!!! retirees colas have been frozen and prescriptions have gone up by 2 dollars additional on each one...btw...MEDICAID has a huge amount of fraud and some pop out one baby after another on the taxpayer dole...get foodstamps, wic, etc on top of that...at least medicare is paid into by the recipient. We have tricare and still pay 1300 a yr deductible on medicare..we dont consider it an entitlement...24 yrs and 3 tours in Korea and 2 in Nam...with the lower wages and earned pension


47 posted on 09/19/2011 10:28:07 AM PDT by katiedidit1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Yes, I’m a military retiree so I have a dawg in this.

I can see them raising the Tricare for life premiums and that saving a lot of money. That’s probably fair. None of us signed up for that benefit. Quite frankly, when I signed up, there wasn’t a monthly payment for healthcare so it was never talked about. However, they shouldn’t mess with the pay!! That was something promised to us. We did our part in fighting this countries wars, now it’s time for them to do their part. I also don’t understand how they want to do this 401k thing in the future how that will save money. When they’ll be paying this out to everyone who signs up, be it for 20 or 3 years. Unless people signing up for 3 or 4 years get practically nothing.

What did anyone collecting SSI before 65, or Medicaid or foodstamps or housing do to deserve their “benefit”? Cut there first!!! Also, if you’re going to ask us to sacrifice, how about raising your own premiums? How about cutting the benefits to the union workers in the government?


48 posted on 09/19/2011 10:44:42 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrC
"if they also qualify for a Social Security benefit (do they? Sorry, I have no idea)"

In a word, yes. Social security and Medicare is taken out of your pay in the military and you are entitled to those benefits upon making it to 65. At that age, your tricare goes to tricare for life and it's a supplement to your medicare. Just like how most people on medicare have to buy an insurace supplement to augment medicare, tricare for life is our insurance supplement to pay for things medicare doesn't cover.
49 posted on 09/19/2011 10:58:09 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

No, everything should not be on the table. We can afford it if we implement the right economic policies to spur growth, increase revenue, and cut where we dont need to spend. A poster before me laid it out well.


50 posted on 09/19/2011 11:16:58 AM PDT by Protoss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson