Skip to comments.Still paying for the Civil War
Posted on 05/09/2014 10:36:45 AM PDT by Theoria
Veterans' Benefits Live On Long After Bullets Stop
Each month, Irene Triplett collects $73.13 from the Department of Veterans Affairs, a pension payment for her father's military servicein the Civil War.
More than 3 million men fought and 530,000 men died in the conflict between North and South. Pvt. Mose Triplett joined the rebels, deserted on the road to Gettysburg, defected to the Union and married so late in life to a woman so young that their daughter Irene is today 84 years oldand the last child of any Civil War veteran still on the VA benefits rolls.
Ms. Triplett's pension, small as it is, stands as a reminder that war's bills don't stop coming when the guns fall silent. The VA is still paying benefits to 16 widows and children of veterans from the 1898 Spanish-American War.
The last U.S. World War I veteran died in 2011. But 4,038 widows, sons and daughters get monthly VA pension or other payments. The government's annual tab for surviving family from those long-ago wars comes to $16.5 million.
Spouses, parents and children of deceased veterans from World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan received $6.7 billion in the 2013 fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. Payments are based on financial need, any disabilities, and whether the veteran's death was tied to military service.
Those payments don't include the costs of fighting or caring for the veterans themselves. A Harvard University study last year projected the final bill for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars would hit $4 trillion to $6 trillion in the coming decades.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Looks like no cost-of-living escalator.
More importantly, what did those who collect on it ever contribute toward building this country or maintaining its freedom's?
Remember, the obama administration took contract law, and threw it out the window, with GM, Chrysler, bailouts, etc.
Well, .gov tends to underestimate some of the costs prior to entering into such agreements, ObamaRomneycare, Iraq War, etc.
That’s it for me, too. At least the veterans actually did some sort of service for the nation. What about all the others who receive money simply for being born in the USA? What exactly has a welfare mom done to earn her payments? How does giving birth to a bunch of illegitimate children compare to dying on a battlefield? If it comes down to cutting, shouldn’t those who never contributed be the first cut?
The last photo I have of my great grandparents dates to 1912. My great grandfather was 70 by that time. The 84 year old woman in this story would be my father's age. My great grandfather would have been 88 at the time of my father's birth (and the woman in this story). Fathering a child at age 88 seems a bit "odd".
‘Fathering a child at age 88 seems a bit “odd”.’
Not to those who are able!
I love stories about how young our Republic really is. President john Tyler (1841-1845) actually has two living grandsons.
"The promises of President Abraham Lincoln are being delivered, 150 years later, by President Barack Obama, " Secretary Shinseki said in a speech last fall. "And the same will be true 100 years from nowthe promises of this president will be delivered by a future president, as yet unborn."
This administration has absolutely zero shame.
That comment doesn’t even belong on this thread.
Did you read the article? It doesn’t sound like that at all.
This is what our country owes those who gave their lives on its behalf. Its families deserve our esteem and support.
That's an easy one - she voted for it!
Isn't universal suffrage great!!!
well, if she is 84 years old, born in 1930, 65 years after the end of the Civil War??? Her father, if he was 20 in 1865 at war’s end, would have done his part in conceiving her at age 84. Well, sounds like he was active and full of life as a senior citizen.
Fathering a child at age 88 seems a bit odd.
I guess if you were sleeping with a 16 year old girl
it WOULD be possible...Probable even.
He could have been even younger during the war so
it’s not impossible, would need to see a picture of
the wife to determine guilt or innocense...
OK, I'll be contrary. I've got to question the need for the United States to continue to pay people money for something they didn't even do. THe person in question with the article is a daughter born 65 years after the end of the war in which the man served. What exactly is the point of that?