Obama to cut medical benefits for active/retired military, but not union workers

[jlj3184]

Don't come into this thread and bring these silly "facts" and "logic"...down with Obama!

This shouldn't be a political issue, which was a point I didn't really make but should have. There is a HUGE discrepancy between what veterans pay for their health care and what the rest of the country pays. This rate increase doesn't change that fact, it just shrinks the discrepancy while saving the government a decent chunk of change in the process. People are always complaining about the high budget/deficit (on both sides of the aisle) and then when something actually gets done to save money, it's automatically a terrible idea unless it's cutting government programs (Right) or raising taxes (Left).

[bob2the2nd]

Someone who retires today as an O-5 after 20 years will be making $4,100/month or $49,200/year at the age of 42 (20 years after college graduation). They'll pay about 4% of their annual salary for health care. The average family paid $13,375 for health care in 2009 and I'd imagine it's closer to $15k annually now.

An E-7 retiring at 20 years will be making $2,128/month or $25,536/year at the age of 37 or 38 (20 years after enlistment). They'll pay about 6% of their annual salary for health care.

Most people who retire from the military don't "retire", either. It usually leads into a high-paying job as a CIVILIAN DEFENSE WORKER or a government contractor.

Again, article makes it out to be way worse than it actually is.

and this, they try to make an example out of a retired colonel who is paying all of 450ish dollars/year for his family to have health insurance and complaining it could go up to 2000, quite frankly, im glad its changing.

My job centers around working for either current or former military, you want to know what everyone's goal in the military is? to get to 20 years and retire, so they can "double dip". They retire from the military, collect that pay and immediately become a govt contractor or govt civilian. i work with a retired colonel who is now the civilian equivalent of a 1 star. his salary at his current job runs between 150-200k, his retired salary is in the 50-75k range. i have absolutely huge amounts of respect for all of these people that have served, but they can and should pay a lot more than 400 dollars a year in health insurance

edit i know a guy that is triple dipping. did 20 years military then retired, 20 years govt civilian then retired, now he is a part time govt civilian (you can work up to 1000 hours in a year and still be considered a retired govt civilian).

[InBoobieWeTrust]

My main concern here is that when deciding to cut defense spending, I really don't think cutting healthcare funding for any current or former military should be targeted so early. Surely there are a ton of other things we can cut in terms of military besides frieken health care benefits.

[Randolphkeys]

My main concern here is that when deciding to cut defense spending, I really don't think cutting healthcare funding for any current or former military should be targeted so early. Surely there are a ton of other things we can cut in terms of military besides frieken health care benefits.

In many ways, I agree. There are plenty of older veterans who will feel this financial change the most: likely Korean War and Vietnam War vets.

One logical progression that tends to turn my stomach in debates such as this is, "Well, why do the __________ get to have this? The average American in a low-level corporate job doesn't have _____________, so why should they?" I know I have a brother-in-law who is just about to leave active duty in the Marines... and the health benefits were one reason he risked his life for the past four years in a war zone. It's like if suddenly the G.I. Bill was cut to cover only 70% of tuition. I'm sure someone would stand up and say, "Hey, I was an assistant manager at a Speedway for four years and I had to pay my own way in college and struggled with health insurance. Why does the veteran get all the perks?" Ummmm, because the perks are the reason he joined the armed forces.

So that said, I understand that everyone has to tighten their belts in this economy. I just hope that the corporations can start building the economy back up so that all these working stiffs can get back what we are giving up. If all the savings from these moves - the unions making concessions and military giving up benefits they risked their lives for - continue to keep the standard of living high at the top of the tax bracket, the changes are a waste.

[Chris]

and this, they try to make an example out of a retired colonel who is paying all of 450ish dollars/year for his family to have health insurance and complaining it could go up to 2000, quite frankly, im glad its changing.

My job centers around working for either current or former military, you want to know what everyone's goal in the military is? to get to 20 years and retire, so they can "double dip". They retire from the military, collect that pay and immediately become a govt contractor or govt civilian. i work with a retired colonel who is now the civilian equivalent of a 1 star. his salary at his current job runs between 150-200k, his retired salary is in the 50-75k range. i have absolutely huge amounts of respect for all of these people that have served, but they can and should pay a lot more than 400 dollars a year in health insurance

edit i know a guy that is triple dipping. did 20 years military then retired, 20 years govt civilian then retired, now he is a part time govt civilian (you can work up to 1000 hours in a year and still be considered a retired govt civilian).

I don't care what the fuck you do if you serve 20 years in the military and retire. It's evil that they give 20 years of their life to service of this country and then come out and make a lot of cash?

Good lord.

[MDLT]

LOL @ this article. It's the Washington Examiner for Gods sake. For any who doesn't live in Washington, it's the print version of conservative talk radio that they pass out on the subway. It doesn't even remotely touch on any of the complex and massive budget issues that are hitting DoD and the rest of the federal government right now.

[KCOTT]

i think some of you guys are under the impression that 20 years is an easy thing to come by

nowadays we have force shaping boards and people getting let go if they don't get an EP on their eval (early promote), more and more people are having less of an opportunity to reach 20 years

[bob2the2nd]

I don't care what the fuck you do if you serve 20 years in the military and retire. It's evil that they give 20 years of their life to service of this country and then come out and make a lot of cash?

Good lord.

the point















......








you

[KCOTT]

My main concern here is that when deciding to cut defense spending, I really don't think cutting healthcare funding for any current or former military should be targeted so early. Surely there are a ton of other things we can cut in terms of military besides frieken health care benefits.

I agree. And there are areas that can be cut, but I don't feel like getting into it here on this forum.

[jlj3184]

I agree. And there are areas that can be cut, but I don't feel like getting into it here on this forum.

Let's start with the Navy

[OptimusPrime]

Barack is disgusting. The men and women they shipped off to fight their imperial wars are the ONLY people the government should make sure are getting taken care of.

[KCOTT]

And also, the military fucking sucks for anyone who doesn't know. For the ground pounders, aside from the possibility of getting killed any day that you work (be it actually in battle, or joe smuckatelli flagging you with his armed rifle), most of the times your quality of life sucks, too and you get paid shit to work long hours. I don't know how my two younger brothers do it. They're enlisted and I probably make twice the amount they do and they probably do just as much, if not more work. Maybe my brother will post here and you can ask him personally. I've only done 3.5 years so far, but I have a hard time seeing myself doing anything past my 10 year commitment. I have a cool job, but the long hours, constant studying, dealing with bullshit, constant moving, being away from family, doing more than what you actually get paid for really starts to take its toll. Especially since I know I can take my TS clearance and million dollars in flight training and run away with it and make twice the amount I make now in the civilian/private sector. Contract flying pays a ridiculous amount of money in Afghanistan. And who knows if I'll even get the opportunity to reach the highly acclaimed 20 year mark. More and more people are being let go, not because they suck or anything, but because that's how the economy is and we just don't have the money to retain everyone.

Point that I'm trying to make, is that people who actually reach 20 years fucking deserve the perks that go along with it. And the double-dipping, triple-dipping phrases, aka shit I've never heard of used in this context is absolutely absurd. You're telling me if you put all that time into this country, and when it was all said and done, you wouldn't turn over your military uniform to a civilian uniform the same way that they do? It's like that one interview I saw on youtube where a CEO asked an Occupy Wall Street protester, "Wouldn't you want to be part of the 1%?" and the protester kind of froze before eventually saying yes. Not saying that the military is the 1% or anything, but if given the same circumstances you would do the same thing. It would be stupid to throw away all those years and not take advantage of it. If it seems unfair, well guess what, you also had the very same opportunity to do the same thing that guy did.

20 years is a tough plateau to reach. It's not as easy as just waiting it out and eventually you'll get there. For me, 20 years means I went on 2-3 deployments during my JO tour, 1 during my disassociated sea tour, 1-2 during my department head tour, 1-2 during my XO tour, and possibly 1-2 if I made CO. That's only a potential 60 months of deployment, or essentially 5 years that I missed out on being in the U.S. or with my family. And for someone in a more dangerous area of the military than myself, who even knows if you survive those first few deployments.

So yeah, 20 years of pain in the ass work, potentially 5 of it not even in the U.S., shit pay for the first half of it (comparatively speaking), the potential to be killed, long hours you'll never get back, being separated from your family, numerous missed holidays and birthdays, you definitely deserve something when it's all said and done. So in a nutshell, raising the costs of health care, especially when there are literally MILLIONS that can be cut elsewhere within the DOD is a little ridiculous.

Start with getting rid of the fucking F-22's we don't need.

[KCOTT]

Let's start with the Navy

Or we can start with the Department of Transportation who happens to carry guns.

[KCOTT]

Someone who retires today as an O-5 after 20 years will be making $4,100/month or $49,200/year at the age of 42 (20 years after college graduation). They'll pay about 4% of their annual salary for health care. The average family paid $13,375 for health care in 2009 and I'd imagine it's closer to $15k annually now.

An E-7 retiring at 20 years will be making $2,128/month or $25,536/year at the age of 37 or 38 (20 years after enlistment). They'll pay about 6% of their annual salary for health care.

Most people who retire from the military don't "retire", either. It usually leads into a high-paying job as a CIVILIAN DEFENSE WORKER or a government contractor.

Again, article makes it out to be way worse than it actually is.

Cool, I'm glad it's still okay and affordable for the 20 year folks. Let's compare the ratio of those who retire with 20 years to those who are actually still active duty or didn't get 20 years. Just because it works out or is reasonable for less than 5% of the sample, doesn't mean the other 95% should suffer increased premiums and less benefits. I have enlisted sailors under me who still use payday loans to make ends meet, or have trouble making rent. The last thing they need is increased premiums or more expensive prescriptions. Although it may be less of a hike than what media outlets are portraying to be, ANY INCREASE in costs or DECREASE in benefits is outlandish and SHOULD NEVER BE ACCEPTED when there are many, many other ways to cut money elsewhere.

The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions.

This is also the understatement of the year.

[Chris]

the point















......








you

I'd probably say that too if some guy just pretty much told me off for making an asinine post. Please, go back to telling us how people who spend 20 years defending our nation shouldn't be entitled to "double dipping" or ... GOD FORBID!!!! ... "triple dipping" when they reach their senior citizen years.