Skip to comments.Congress double-crosses military retirees
Posted on 12/14/2013 3:25:15 AM PST by SkyPilotEdited on 12/14/2013 4:31:16 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Editor's note: Rebekah Sanderlin is an Army wife, Military Spouse of the Year finalist, and a writer who focuses on military issues. She, her husband and their three children are stationed at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. She is an advisory board member of the Military Family Advisory Network.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I know I'm going to get bashed for this but this is exactly the same as federal workers. It's interesting how "promises" for military are "entitlements" for federal workers.
I see nothing wrong with cutting either just as long as they also cut the entitlement programs. We can't spend more than we have.
But they won’t, will they. They never cut entitlements and federal workers have unions. No. They only ask for sacrifices from those who have already given plenty. It’s bulls**t.
Too many military retirees vote Republican.
We cannot continue on the current course and have a good ending. Though the sequestration hurt, I saw it as the best option.
My hope, though not likely, is that the Senate will ask for significant changes and the House will stand fast causing a shutdown. Which will force the press to admit that the House tried. OK, it is a fairy tale, but I like a good story.
Military members deploy where the country sends them, at great bodily risk to them and emotional risk to their families. Civilian employees don’t.
Military members pack up and move their families every two to three years.. Civilian employees don’t.
Military members are required to sign a contract for specified numbers of years of service with no option to abrogate that contract, regardless of the perverted social engineering experiments the government foists upon them... Civilian employees don’t.
So no... military retirees and their civil service counterparts are quite different.
Just how many federal workers do you know of who were asked to put their lives on the line in the performance of their duties? You don’t know a damned thing about what it is like to have your ass shot at, willingly I might add, because of a sense of duty and not just a federal paycheck. A pox on your house!
But stripping pay and benefits from those who have already served is, at least, unethical. Congress has done so for at least 50 years. Never have COLA adjustments met inflation. Benefits have diminished year by year.
Trying to start a new occupation at 45 or even get a job at 75 can prove impossible for many without civilian skills.
I’m with you. It never fails that when the immediate danger dies down, the non-serving among us start calling for reductions for veterans. When the fight gets going, they’re all out there waving flags with tears in their eyes but when the perception of danger drops off, we’re “too expensive”.
It used to be a conservative value to serve in uniform and take risks for your country but that may not be true anymore.
1. All for cutting the RATE OF INCREASE by 1% if:
a. It's across the board and all federal employees RATE OF ANNUAL INCREASE is cut the same.
b. The operating budgets of all federal agencies are also cut 1% RATE OF INCREASE.
Notice a theme? It's RATE OF INCREASE from the previous year. Ya, ya, I know about inflation and loss of buying power. If above "a." and "b." are done its almost a step in the right direction.
The step in the right direction is to have ZERO annual rate of increase and cut 1% from the previous years amount for all above "a." and "b.". It's called the Penny Plan. Do it every year for about 5 years and at least the annual deficit will get to zero. The national debt reduction will require "nuclear elimination" by legislative powers of whole agencies and departments, turning then into microscopic advisory councils to congress (2/state for each subject). Also tax cuts to increase revenues taken in the the FedGov must happen. Tax cuts spur business growth, thus hiring more people and business for paying taxes. (quantity of contributors submitting less overpowers crushing fewer contributors)
Congress and the President should set the example and go first. But, they won’t. Like the Pelosi said they too should embrace the “suck”
Before you make such a statement you should know your audience. I was in the military for 8 years and am a Viet Nam vet.
It's part of the job. This is just like fireman complaining of risky situations - they signed up for it!
I agree— while on Active duty I spent from Sept.69— early in 71 at Ft.Carson. —and the longest I was stationed anywhere was in the Canal Zone Dec.74— Aug.76 Everything else was ruck up and move out every 9-11 months.
I agree. I don't believe people who are promised pensions should find their pensions cut after they retire or when they're preparing to retire.
Were you drafted or draft induced?
> Before you make such a statement you should know your audience. I was in the military for 8 years and am a Viet Nam vet.
Especially thankful for your service. I have heard from many VV what they had to endure. From what I’ve heard It was like no other war and the threat level was ever present. I would not want to endure it voluntarily.
here is an idea, lets stop giving free money to people that don’t work and lets make food stamps good for milk, bread, peanut butter, and baby formula only.
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.