Birdlives Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=4652517&page=1 Can someone please explain to me how expanding this veterans benefit is not a good thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Seems like its explained pretty well in the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 this particular expansion of the Gl bill seems pretty dumb to be honest with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKINS@THEGOALLINE Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 There's concern that too many people will opt out of the military for an education, instead of re-enlisting, stretching an already thin military even further. McCain looks like the bad guy once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=4652517&page=1Can someone please explain to me how expanding this veterans benefit is not a good thing? I thought the article did fairly well. Was expanding the prescription benefit a good thing,or a good idea done wrong? You must consider outcome and effects of the methodology used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted May 24, 2008 Author Share Posted May 24, 2008 There's concern that too many people will opt out of the military for an education, instead of re-enlisting, stretching an already thin military even further. McCain looks like the bad guy once again. Sorry, but, total BS. If you're in and you want to reenlist you will, that incentive will still be there when you're done. Also, it certainly will help as an incentive for new enlistees. Not to mention the fact that what they're saying is essentially, if you get college fully paid for you won't want to sign back up. So they don't want soldiers to have something better to do than serve. "Hey, it's either stay in the military or go back to piss poor benefits and a wage slave job, so why not serve again?". It's all basically crap if you ask me. If you serve your time you deserve the gov't picking up your education bill, period. Since when is educating people ever a bad thing? Not to mention the veterans who came before and got exactly this incentive. Those returning home from both WWII and Vietnam had a full ride to college. Why shouldn't the current veterans get the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted May 24, 2008 Author Share Posted May 24, 2008 I thought the article did fairly well.Was expanding the prescription benefit a good thing,or a good idea done wrong? You must consider outcome and effects of the methodology used. I don't know how you can compare the two. Giving a free college degree to those who serve this country should be of huge benefit to this country. It's not just money off, it produces a better group of people. Instead of coming home and going back to work it allows veterans the ability to get better jobs and contribute even more to society. Not to mention that this was a poicly of ours in the past. Not some newly developed program to adjust to the times. Both WWII and Vietnam Vets got this benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 I can understand the reasoning. I disagree with it, but it's not impossible to believe. Me, I'd think that, if the possibility of getting killed (if not being tortured to death or beheaded) isn't enough to make our current military "cut and run", then I don't think a bigger subsidy for college will, either. Somehow, I chose to believe that very few of our military are in uniform because their other job sucked worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Sorry, but, total BS.If you're in and you want to reenlist you will, that incentive will still be there when you're done. Also, it certainly will help as an incentive for new enlistees. Not to mention the fact that what they're saying is essentially, if you get college fully paid for you won't want to sign back up. So they don't want soldiers to have something better to do than serve. "Hey, it's either stay in the military or go back to piss poor benefits and a wage slave job, so why not serve again?". It's all basically crap if you ask me. If you serve your time you deserve the gov't picking up your education bill, period. Since when is educating people ever a bad thing? Not to mention the veterans who came before and got exactly this incentive. Those returning home from both WWII and Vietnam had a full ride to college. Why shouldn't the current veterans get the same? So Gates is full of BS since he differs from your view? And no,it is not the same benefit..it is a expanded one. Is this your opinion below,or simply a view you support? So they don't want soldiers to have something better to do than serve. "Hey, it's either stay in the military or go back to piss poor benefits and a wage slave job, so why not serve again?". McCain simply supports a different proposal http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0501/p02s04-uspo.html Personally I don't support either proposal and I have two kids enlisted that would benefit. Nice reasoning Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Well, for one it has a ton of extra spending attached to it. Murtha is up to his earmarking tricks again as well Maybe if the Dems think it's so important, they can float it out there by itself and see how many Dems vote for it then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 24, 2008 Share Posted May 24, 2008 Well, for one it has a ton of extra spending attached to it. Murtha is up to his earmarking tricks again as wellMaybe if the Dems think it's so important, they can float it out there by itself and see how many Dems vote for it then Only 10 billion or so ,that's pocket change to Congress critters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted May 25, 2008 Author Share Posted May 25, 2008 Well, for one it has a ton of extra spending attached to it. Murtha is up to his earmarking tricks again as wellMaybe if the Dems think it's so important, they can float it out there by itself and see how many Dems vote for it then Happens with every bill, not anything new. Both sides routinely earmark stuff. Not enough of a reason to think the bill doesn't have merit. Considering it passed 75-22 you can take either point of view on this. Either the rest of the Senate thought this was a valid bill, or the more cynical side. None wanted to be perceived by the public as opposing something that benefits our soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted May 25, 2008 Author Share Posted May 25, 2008 So Gates is full of BS since he differs from your view?And no,it is not the same benefit..it is a expanded one. Is this your opinion below,or simply a view you support? So they don't want soldiers to have something better to do than serve. "Hey, it's either stay in the military or go back to piss poor benefits and a wage slave job, so why not serve again?". McCain simply supports a different proposal http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0501/p02s04-uspo.html Personally I don't support either proposal and I have two kids enlisted that would benefit. Nice reasoning Larry :doh: WTF are you talking about. Every opinion after my original statement was regurgitated from the article. And please with the McCain just has a differing bill to offer. That's what they call damage control. As for you not supporting the allowance that let's your own children get a college benefit. We obviously have very different views on what we want for our chidren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 Do they have to serve the three years first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#21Taylor4Ever Posted May 25, 2008 Share Posted May 25, 2008 I also think veterans should be able to let their spouses and children utilize their GI Bill. I am presently under Chapter 31(Voc Rehab) and have yet to even touch my GI Bill, yet my wife has to stay at her present job just so they'll pay for her LPN cert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.