Posted on 12/12/2013 11:24:42 AM PST by Sleeping Freeper
Edited on 12/12/2013 11:27:38 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
“It is obvious you do not see a difference between volunteer heros and welfare takers.”
There is no difference in just one respect - somebody has to make the money to pay for everything.
You don’t want to hear the fiscal truth.....so be it.
“volunteer heros”
Another problem that sort of sets the tone for different classes of Americans - the overuse of the term “hero” to refer to...well, just about anyone who works for government, including anyone in the military.
If you convince every one they are a “hero” it’s a small step to make them feel they are entitled to whatever share of other people’s money they desire.
“If it wasn’t for the military..there would be no private sector”
Actually, no, it’s the other way around. There should not be a separation between people in the private sector and the military to the extent indicated on this thread.
Without the separation, you cannot enslave to private sector to pay for pensions for government, including military, because they are the same.
This isn’t quite the place we were when the unpensioned Minutemen fought for America. They just returned to their private sector vocations.
Military retirement pay has not been “cut”.
There exists no entitlement to any specific increase in COLAs.
There have been several years where the COLA was 0, and a few that were in the 10-14% range.
And no, I am not now, nor have I ever been, paid by Uncle Sugar for anything outside of my two terms of voluntary military enlistment.
I assume then you would support funding the incurred pension benefits for all federal pensions but oppose state and local bailouts as a matter of course. This makes sense, unless of course we are outvoted and the Democrat party makes them federal obligations. The regime which should not be named will do that if they retake the House.
I do not support funding all federal pensions as incurred.
I believe we should treat our veterans separately. I have no logical problem with taking that stance. Military service imposes hardships and conditions that non-military jobs simply don’t (and I suspect you know that...:)
And when the bullets begin to fly, it is all out the window.
And welfare as well.
“The deal cuts pension cost of living raises by 1 percentage point for military retirees who aren’t disabled and not yet 62 years old.”
First, what is “disabled? What VA rating is the cut-off?
Second, comparing military service and its challenges and way of life to civilian workers is nonsense of the highest order.
Third, and most important, staying until 62 requires congressional authorization. Most all are forced out by age 55. Unless you are a general, staying past 55 is simply impossible under DOPMA rules (up or out). Many would like to stay until SS kicks in but it simply isn’t reasonable nor likely nor possible absent congress authorizing the individual to stay.
He got the Black vote, not the average serviceman vote.
And we know in military service, much like ‘civil’ service, Blacks are over-represented when compared to other occupations/professions.
Yes. That was what we were talking about. That he got the most black military votes than anyone in decades.
Hey Veterans, Drudge has an article making Ryan look good as a leading candidate. We have got to get organized and let the Republican Party know there will be consequences for this shameful break of trust for cutting veteran’s retirements. I was at Ft. Beloit this past weekend and saw many, many soldiers using canes. Many had lost a leg, arm, or hand. Paul Ryan and any Republican who thinks retired veterans are overpaid should have to look our wounded veterans in the eye when they are saying it! Let your Senators know this budget deal is anti-veteran. Tell all the Republican fundraisers you are not going to support them unless Congress restores benefits. MOAA and the VFW have looked weak on this. Write them and ask their leadership what are they going to do to organize marches this Spring and target anti-veteran traitors like Ryan. Better get ready to stand up boys and girls and fight for what you have left!
“This isn’t quite the place we were when the unpensioned Minutemen fought for America. They just returned to their private sector vocations.”
WRONG
http://vagensearch.com/AmericanRevolution/Pensions.html
This is an all volunteer force. Many of these men have permanent disabilities caused by too many jumps, too many loud noises, too many deployments. They put their families through hell for a pittance and the love of their country. They maintained the knowledge required to keep the military running effectively, even when higher paying civilian jobs were available to them. They stayed under the impression that they would be compensated over time.
Yes, there has been a rift between civilians and military. That is due to an all volunteer force and the desire of many Americans to save the day all over the world, regardless of what it does to those who go. If you disagree with those policies, fine. Change them in the future. You don’t get to look back and say, “Well, gee, I guess that was a bad idea, so now I’m not going to pay those who did the work.”
The ones making bank are the contractors who sell ancient equipment like it’s high speed stuff. My smartphone does a lot more and costs 1/100th of the cost of some of our equipment.
But you stay focused on those pensions so you can save a couple dollars off the backs of soldiers/marines/sailors/airmen.
Again, it would be interesting to know the military history of the Ryan family. Paul himself was clearly a little too good to serve in uniform.
Eh, let’s fund the myriad of absolutely unnecessary programs at zero (Vista, Americorps, Peace Corps and National Endowments come to mind) and apply the same rules to bureaucrats who retire early and then we are good. I agree with you in principle, but how much are Aunt Zeituni’s benefits being reduced?
Ryan also went after us because he has no affinity for guys who served. I don’t have to check to know that Duncan Hunter voted against this.
“Many of these men have permanent disabilities caused by too many jumps, too many loud noises, too many deployments. They put their families through hell for a pittance and the love of their country.”
Yep. The ones who have actual disabilities (not the “wink-wink” disabilities assigned at the retirement physical that are endemic fraud in the military) get priority, hopefully they’ll even get help after we reconstitute an economy after we fall off the cliff.
“But you stay focused on those pensions so you can save a couple dollars off the backs of soldiers/marines/sailors/airmen.”
We can’t afford to pay a pension to an able-bodied person. We probably can’t pay any government pension, including military ones in the long term - given that we refuse to even discuss the issue.
Like I said - repeatedly by the way, I wish we had a vibrant private sector that could afford to pay all these folks the money they think they were promised.
As it stands we don’t, and we can’t.
It’s math. You can pretend I’m advocating stealing canes from old vets, but I’m not. I’m pointing out the obvious math problem. Promises made by government backed by future revenue that will not be realized are the problem. Deal with the reality.
I think the US should pay all the money we owe, and stop borrowing against the future, and stop promising things that we can’t afford.
Sure that would inflate the currency for a bit. But active soldiers should not have COLA. They would have a choice to leave the service, and get other jobs.
SS should be closed down with every person who paid in getting a voucher or note for their share. Then we stop claiming that future contributions will lead to owning a future share. RAther, we should end the payroll tax. Same with Medicaid/medicare.
While I agree in principal to your SS proposal, that would be one worthless voucher. There’s nothing in the SS “Trust” Fund but an accounting entry for you and I and everyone else. Congress stole that money decades ago.
Cut the Department of Education, BIA, Homeland Security, EPA, OSHA, etc. etc. etc.
Let's do some math:
1 Promise made to men and women you send to war
+ 2 million men and women who go to war for you for practically no pay based on your promises
+ paid low lifes and bureaucrats who didn't serve
+ broken promises of compensation to those who went to war = X
I'll give you a hint. X does not = love and tranquility.
This issue is water under the bridge. No one promised welfare to the welfare queens. No one promised free housing, cable tv and Obama phones. Once that is cut, then you'll have a leg to stand on. Until then, pay your debts. This is compensation earned. It is nonnegotiable.
“Let’s do some math:”
Ok, we have 17+Trillion in debt, plus 90Trillion in unfunded liabilities, including all the federal spending under the sun.
“I’ll give you a hint. X does not = love and tranquility”
Ah so you think those who served (like me, by the way) will revolt? Not gonna happen - not in any significant way.
So you think you can threaten your way to solvency? You think you can whine your way to prosperity?
You think you can simply take others property because someone promised you something they couldn’t deliver?
You’re kind of an embarrassment.
When it is cashed in, they will print money to redeem it. That will lead to inflation, but still, it is the best idea I have heard of. So long at the rotten payroll tax stops, and the rotten promises don’t continue to be made.
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.