American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for Tre

[ChefChiTown]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Chef....

The result of the Obama proposal is this....

If the private insurance companies have to pay the VA back, then the Veteran treated will be billed by the insurance company. The VA is not a standard practicing hospital. It does not require the Veteran to pay 100%, only in some cases a VERY small percentage.

This will also force the insurance companies to raise medical insurance premiums across the board. Which means everyone paying for Med Ins. will have their premiums hiked.

Ok, I might've been reading that wrong then. I thought that the proposal would be forcing the private insurance companies to pay for a wounded veteran's medical care, even if their care wasn't covered under their individual insurance policy.

 

[stampede2873]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Ok, I might've been reading that wrong then. I thought that the proposal would be forcing the private insurance companies to pay for a wounded veteran's medical care, even if their care wasn't covered under their individual insurance policy.

Well, a Veteran (some who is prior service, but no longer currently active) does have to pay a nominal fee. As I did when I had surgery on my arm. My insurance company was not billed, but I did pay a percentage of the total bill, something like $5000

Under Obama's plan, I would have had to pay for the whole damn surgery, which was $120,000.

Now, my injury was NOT related to my active duty service, so that's why I had to pay.

However, if I LOST my arm while on active duty, then no, I would not have to pay for medical treatment resulting from that injury. As of this moment, the money that pays for this comes out of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs Office.

However, under Obama, if I had a missing arm any medical attention I recieve, such as a prosthetic arm - I would be required to pay my insurance company because they would be billed by the Federal Government.

What Obama is doing is telling Veterans that have been injured in the service of their country is that you are not good enough to recieve benefits. Thats why Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion was so pissed.

 

[calpoon]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

why should the government aka. the tax payers, have to pay for your medical procedures that are not incurred in the line of duty and are not insured? If I don't have insurance and I break my leg in a mishap with some spilled KY jelly, then should the government pay for it? maybe in a socialist "hell", but not in America. what's the difference? Veterans should get free benefits for life? I am not sure, but I don't think that is part of the deal.

I think a lot of these people have a chip on their shoulder and they make me sick. I hear so many people saying that they want to join the military so they can get free college and all these benefits. I say what's the difference between you and a crackhead on welfare? What ever happened to 'ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?" If you really believed that you were fighting for freedom, you should do it for free- get it?

I'm all for cutting spending on the wasteful pissing match that is the US military, and maybe it will keep a bunch of dumb 18 year olds from joining up and getting blown to shit in the middle east.

But for the veterans that were already promised those benefits, especially for the ones that were drafted and forced to fight, they really should be paid and it would be wrong to deprive them.

 

[stampede2873]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

why should the government aka. the tax payers, have to pay for your medical procedures that are not incurred in the line of duty and are not insured? If I don't have insurance and I break my leg in a mishap with some spilled KY jelly, then should the government pay for it? maybe in a socialist "hell", but not in America. what's the difference? Veterans should get free benefits for life? I am not sure, but I don't think that is part of the deal.

I think a lot of these people have a chip on their shoulder and they make me sick. I hear so many people saying that they want to join the military so they can get free college and all these benefits. I say what's the difference between you and a crackhead on welfare? What ever happened to 'ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?" If you really believed that you were fighting for freedom, you should do it for free- get it?

I'm all for cutting spending on the wasteful pissing match that is the US military, and maybe it will keep a bunch of dumb 18 year olds from joining up and getting blown to shit in the middle east.

But for the veterans that were already promised those benefits, especially for the ones that were drafted and forced to fight, they really should be paid and it would be wrong to deprive them.

Okay... let me explain how the G.I. Bill works. Assuming the G.I. Bill has been opted for... the Servicemember during their first year in will have money taken from their paycheck and put toward the G.I. Bill.

Once the Servicemember gets accepted to college the money placed in the G.I. Bill is used, but with matching funds from the Government.

So, they ARE paying for their own college. Except for maybe a sign-on bonus, I don't recall any other benefits that an 18 year old would sign on for.

The goofballs that want to join the military for those selfish reasons, I try to discourage from enlisting. They are joining for the wrong reason and will have one HELL of a wake up call.

Cal... Please do not dismiss or dishonor those of us that have served or are currently serving in the Armed Force by calling it a "wasteful pissing match that is the US military".

The 9 years I served as a US Marine were some of the proudest moments of my life.

 

[bodie54]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

On the surface this sounds ill considered to me, but I need to do more reading/research to fully understand the dynamic. Obama's budget includes a $25 billion increase in VA funding over the next five years.

Now the CHANGE is obvious. Less money for the vets, more money for some welfare mom with six kids and her baby's daddies.
And thats reality.
He is an extremist with no experience , nice gamble.
But you voted him in.

I fear next he will cut services for children with physical and mental disabilities as well.
funding for special schools and programs and teachers.
because who cares about them, they'll never be able to vote democrat right?
As long as Lekiesha, Shaniqua, and Tanqueray get their families first card recharged each month and their nice, recently increased "Tax Credit" each year, people like Obama will keep getting votes.
Fuck that country.

:wtf:

Nice leap there, Mr P.

To suggest that Obama's constituency is primarily black welfare recipients, and that they are his top priority, is so grossly stereotypical and out of touch with reality it's not even worth addressing.

Maybe instead we should focus on the hundreds of white people that were beaten and killed in the LA riots

 

[General Warcock]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

I was being sarcastic.

As for Veterans in general, they are always forgotten. I am ashamed by this. Combat Veterans faced great hardships and losses for this country and they are sometimes shunned or treated indifferent.

Your last comment... I'm not sure what your saying there. Could you elaborarte?

What I meant is once you've been used by the government for whatever purpose you become disposable.

There's a great movie called Dead Presidents that deals with the economic, and psychological hardships that veterans face in the U.S.

All about money, always has been, and always will be.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

What ever happened to 'ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country?"

:thumbsup:

One of the things that I always think of when issues like this become popular again is this...

What qualifies someone for being considered a "veteran", in the sense of receiving federal benefits and care?

Technically, a person who serves in the US Armed Forces for 2 years is considered a veteran. They get to call themselves a "veteran", just like a person who has served in the US Armed Forces for 25+ years. Is that fair to the person who served for 25+ years?

What if the person who served for 2 years never engaged in battle? Why should they still be considered a veteran? What if the person who served for 25+ years was engaged in battle for most of their tour? Why should those two soldiers be considered equals, in the eyes of federal benefits?

My father served in the US Navy for 20+ years. He has pretty good coverage as far as insurance goes. The government HELPS pay for his medical coverage (when it relates to his on duty injury, which was his back) but they certainly don't pay for ALL of it. My father still has to pay a deductible, just like everybody else. Why should some 18-20 year old kid, who served for 2 years, get the same exact medical benefits as someone like my father, who served their country for over two whole decades?

That's what I don't understand about people who drive for veterans to receive fully compensated medical care. I know that some people will argue this, but when you join the US Armed Forces, you are accepting that as your job. At most jobs, you have to put in time in order to receive better benefits.

But, if all veterans receive fully compensated medical care for "on duty" injuries, than the 2 year veteran who never engaged in battle is getting the same exact benefits as the 25+ year veteran who was in constant battle. How is that fair to the 25+ year veteran?

:dunno:

 

[Will E Worm]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

So, people who volunteer to join the military should be charged for their injury's?

But...people should get money for not working when they can?
OR, more money for every child they have on welfare?

America has to stop treating its veterans and military personnel like farm animals.

One more reason to elect someone else in four years.

 

[Baill Inneraora]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

If an insurance company willfully insures a member of the military and then later that person gets injured, why in the world should the VA NOT try and recoup some of the costs of the care for that vet from the insurance company?

It doesn't hurt the veteran, but nice try Stampede.

 

[stampede2873]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Okay.. I will try this again.

Chef... I'm sorry but I'm gonna use your Dad as an example.

My father served in the US Navy for 20+ years. He has pretty good coverage as far as insurance goes. The government HELPS pay for his medical coverage (when it relates to his on duty injury, which was his back) but they certainly don't pay for ALL of it. My father still has to pay a deductible, just like everybody else.

^^^This is the current system^^^

Obama wants to stop this. Under his plan people like Chefs Dad will have to pay in full for medical relating to injuries sustained while on active duty. Meaning your Father will be paying MORE out of pocket for treatment.

Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion believes this to be a slap in the face to all Veterans.

If an insurance company willfully insures a member of the military and then later that person gets injured, why in the world should the VA NOT try and recoup some of the costs of the care for that vet from the insurance company?

It doesn't hurt the veteran, but nice try Stampede.

No. Read the article again.

or better yet, look up how the VA operates.
Then you can come at me with "nice try".

 

[Torre82]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

In all these systems.. they arent working. We're paying too much for medical care. Noone should get a break. Basically apply some of the stigmatized socialism practices to insurance. Everyone is equal.. equally paying. So you better use it whether it's preventative health or fixing up your ailing old ass. Like a flexible spending account.. use it or lose it. Feck off if ya lose it!

 

[pikachar]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

I spent my time in the U.S. Army. 91Whiskey, combat medic.

Somehow I knew you were a medic, as I think you know I am as well

 

[ChefChiTown]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Obama wants to stop this. Under his plan people like Chefs Dad will have to pay in full for medical relating to injuries sustained while on active duty. Meaning your Father will be paying MORE out of pocket for treatment.

My dad does pay out of his own pocket. He is responsible for paying for his insurance bills (deductible). Since he spent so much time in the Navy, he qualifies for additional benefits for his extended time of service. One of those benefits is assistance with his medical bills, when they are related to on duty injuries. It doesn't cover the entire cost of the bills, just a portion.

The point I was making is that he spent enough time to qualify for additional benefits. Some 19 year old who has been serving for 2 years shouldn't be entitled to the same benefits as people like my father, who have spent over two decades in the service.

In reality, tax-paying United States citizens are paying for the medical care of veterans. That includes some "rookie" that has been in the service for 3 months, who slices his arm up on some barbed wire. Why should we (as tax payers) have to pay for that?

 

[pikachar]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

In reality, tax-paying United States citizens are paying for the medical care of veterans. That includes some "rookie" that has been in the service for 3 months, who slices his arm up on some barbed wire. Why should we (as tax payers) have to pay for that?

Here's what I see that "rookie" being broken down into...

A) Is he a vet, or was he some fucking fobbit in some damn outpost doing nothing but play xbox, and eat at a DFAC?

B) Did someone bluf his medical records in a CYA (Cover Your Ass) type scenario, making something that take only 2-55 sutures to fix become some style of dismemberment, all because some fobbit decided to get booze, get liquored up, and walk into concertina wire?

See I believe whole heartedly, that your disability should be what's covered if it's Direct Line of work type accident... Example... You drive in a Humvee, get blown up, and shrapnel pierces your body, causing Visceral and Cutaneous wounds... then yes, I believe since we've upgraded our gear, then the VA should pay. I also believe if you sprain your ankle on a 6 mile road march in Ft Whatever, That State, poor fucking you, you pay, not the VA. All injuries should be taken into consideration, was it line of duty in combat, or wasn't it. Navy would make out like bandits then because I know "blue tours" are considered combat tours... Army would too, same with Marines because of current deployments.

Now with the disability thing... if you get 100% disability, then whammo... free medical care, because you cant work! One thing I think that is stemming from the VA now of days is that wonderful PTSD, and MTBI... We'll be in a world of fucking hurt if both of those get huge "free care" benefits. Should they get benefits, yes... God knows how many times I've been in IED blasts, and I'm not the PTSD type, it's not my personality... except when drunk. Oh hell, since you know I'm a medic now, I'll even tell you how I could even minutely be in that category... ::Start of story, 7 y/o female, she died while working on her, end of story:: Now since you know I'd possibly fall into both of those categories, why would I wave the Bullshit Flag, and say don't pay them... One reason, not enough documented information on what happens, and it's easy to bullshit and wade through the red tape. See where my "world of hurt" line comes from.

Well that's my rant, and I'll stick to it, torrie, what's you take on mtbi/ptsd?

 

[ChefChiTown]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Here's what I see that "rookie" being broken down into...

A) Is he a vet, or was he some fucking fobbit in some damn outpost doing nothing but play xbox, and eat at a DFAC?

B) Did someone bluf his medical records in a CYA (Cover Your Ass) type scenario, making something that take only 2-55 sutures to fix become some style of dismemberment, all because some fobbit decided to get booze, get liquored up, and walk into concertina wire?

See I believe whole heartedly, that your disability should be what's covered if it's Direct Line of work type accident... Example... You drive in a Humvee, get blown up, and shrapnel pierces your body, causing Visceral and Cutaneous wounds... then yes, I believe since we've upgraded our gear, then the VA should pay. I also believe if you sprain your ankle on a 6 mile road march in Ft Whatever, That State, poor fucking you, you pay, not the VA. All injuries should be taken into consideration, was it line of duty in combat, or wasn't it.

A soldier is stationed in Africa. That soldier's responsibility is to guard the ammunition. While standing at his post, the soldier catches the flu, due to the rainy weather.

Should we, as tax payers, pay for his medical care?

Technically, his illness occured because of his on duty responsibility, so it would qualify as an on duty illness. Why should our tax dollars pay for somebody's flu medication? Everybody can get the flu, not just soldiers.

:2 cents:

 

[pikachar]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

A soldier is stationed in Africa. That soldier's responsibility is to guard the ammunition. While standing at his post, the soldier catches the flu, due to the rainy weather.

Should we, as tax payers, pay for his medical care?

Technically, his illness occured because of his on duty responsibility, so it would qualify as an on duty illness. Why should our tax dollars pay for somebody's flu medication? Everybody can get the flu, not just soldiers.

:2 cents:

My :2 cents:

That SOB should have taken his Flu shot that is Mandated, instead of saying, oh I get sick from flu shots.... God I hate those MF's that duck out of shots....

Also, yeah I'd have to agree/disagree... why pay for it... medical is one of those perks, because of one thing... A sick and dying soldier, can't return fire on an enemy position. Dental, and Vision... yeah I can see being able to eat (without pain) and see would be nice. I'd consider the Medical Package to be just like vehicle maintenance, without it you'd just have piles of shit all over the place doing nothing.

Now once you get out, different story all together. Honestly, if you want to compare the Army to say being a Cop, it's like oil and water. The Cop is bound by local laws, and never really goes to far away from home. The Soldier is bound by the Constitution, and is a part of the Executive Branch. The Soldier will defend his Constitution against anything, and is willing to get paid less, just to go somewhere where he could get killed. Now on duty, guess what... I pay taxes, I pay medicare, and I pay for Medical. So not everything comes out of the taxpayer's pocket... we pay for some of it too.

 

[ChefChiTown]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

My :2 cents:

That SOB should have taken his Flu shot that is Mandated, instead of saying, oh I get sick from flu shots.... God I hate those MF's that duck out of shots....

Also, yeah I'd have to agree/disagree... why pay for it... medical is one of those perks, because of one thing... A sick and dying soldier, can't return fire on an enemy position. Dental, and Vision... yeah I can see being able to eat (without pain) and see would be nice. I'd consider the Medical Package to be just like vehicle maintenance, without it you'd just have piles of shit all over the place doing nothing.

Now once you get out, different story all together. Honestly, if you want to compare the Army to say being a Cop, it's like oil and water. The Cop is bound by local laws, and never really goes to far away from home. The Soldier is bound by the Constitution, and is a part of the Executive Branch. The Soldier will defend his Constitution against anything, and is willing to get paid less, just to go somewhere where he could get killed. Now on duty, guess what... I pay taxes, I pay medicare, and I pay for Medical. So not everything comes out of the taxpayer's pocket... we pay for some of it too.

Soldiers are bound by local laws too. Soldiers can't just do what they want when they're "home". They are still bound by local, state and federal laws, just like police officers.

I think I just have a very different point of view on this topic due to how I was raised. Even though my father spent 20+ years in the Navy, he always urged me to NOT join the US Armed Forces. One of those reasons was because of the bullshit politics that are involved and he didn't want me fighting for hypocritical purposes.

To continue with that for a brief second, he actually did compare police officers to soldiers at one point. Law enforcement officers are employed by their respective jurisdicition (city, county, state, federal). Soldiers are employed by the United States (federal). As US citizens, our tax dollars pay all of those salaries.

Our tax dollars are also used to help pay for the medical care of veterans who suffer an on duty injury. But, our tax dollars are NOT used to help pay for the medical care of police officers who suffer an on duty injury.

:dunno:

My father just found it to be hypocritical for our government to aid soldiers who fight overseas to preserve our freedoms (veterans) but not the soldiers who fight at home to preserve our freedoms (police officers).

Personally, I agree with him.

:2 cents:

 

[pikachar]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Soldiers are bound by local laws too. Soldiers can't just do what they want when they're "home". They are still bound by local, state and federal laws, just like police officers.

My father just found it to be hypocritical for our government to aid soldiers who fight overseas to preserve our freedoms (veterans) but not the soldiers who fight at home to preserve our freedoms (police officers).

Personally, I agree with him.

:2 cents:

I meant more like uphold and protect (or something to that sort)... but yeah we're bound by even more than that. Add in SOFA's, UN Mandates, NATO treaties, Geneva, and a dash of Local Laws (to include host nation laws), it's late over here... Also, I'm tired... long day in the office.

I will agree with you on the cop thing, it is a shame that they don't have some of the same care we have. I'd also like to expand that to Fire Fighters and EMS. See I'm Irish, I come from Army, Cops, and Fire Fighters... it's what we do. I can trace my family back to the Mexican-American war...

Oh yeah and it's St. Paddy's Day... they dye our river green yet, or does it have the same color from last year still??

Back to topic.. yeah it is a shame, but that's all on States and Counties to provide that... comes down to the proverbial cash camel (or was it a walrus... dunno??) of the federal budget. Federal can cover it, and states could, but down at city level... I don't think they could afford it unless they had outlandish taxes.

Sad but true, at the end of the day, it's the mighty dollar that screws you in the end.

 

[Ravenholm]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

Does anyone need any more reasons not to sign up to army life?.

It would be better to stand on a landmine and start singing Soprano when the smoke clears. It would save money as the army and goverment wouldn't need to use medical personnel on you then. Just a bucket and spade.

 

[sidewinder101]

Re: American Legion Strongly Opposed to President's Plan to Charge Wounded Heroes for

I'm actually inclined to agree with this. The VA spends massive amounts on veterans healthcare. I knew the spending was extraneous even before I met the last veteran I made friends with.. with all the vycodin, oxycontin and xanax he was getting for free, he became a pill dealer and made a killing off his free prescriptions. While that's perfectly fine in a capitalist way.. I just havent met an honest veteran. The military is like being incarcerated and behind bars. It halfway teaches you to respect authority, halfway teaches you to evade authority. In an economy like this? No free rides! You sign up to get shot at and ruin your body at the cost of possible long-term pain? There ya go.

What happens if people stop signing up then they draft you and you get shot up ? Still no free ride ?