Why would anyone not support a GI bill?

Of all the voting groups John McCain will target this fall, none would seem like more of a sure thing than this country's war veterans. So why is the celebrated Vietnam War hero and POW bracing for a potentially bad week with so many men and women who have served in uniform?

Does McCain Have a Vets Problem? - TIME

McCain is absolutely correct, and here's why...

The Democrats are pushing a bill that gives two things that are more detrimental to the government than helpful...

1) If someone in the military becomes eligible for college tuition but dies, the tuition can be transferred to that person's wife or kids...

Bullshit!...Being a member of a military family (while honorable) is not the same a being a member of the military...This would cost the government millions (billions) for an education to people that didn't even sign up...

And MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more important...

The Democrats are pushing for FULL college tuition to people who've served in the military for as little as 3 years...

Pushing costs aside for a second, do you realize what that would actually DO to the military??????

No. one. would. want. to. STAY!!!!!

Doing this is giving every person in the military an incentive TO LEAVE THE MILITARY!!!

Why on earth would a military person WANT to stay in the service of their country when their country is giving away free degrees to the private sector?!?!?!

This crap will cause a DESERTION from military members who would otherwise stay and move up the ranks...That will cause a complate lack of qualified officers within 10 years and a major negative turn in the amount of people who re-enlist...

America loses...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

We survived the GI bill before. And BTW we are still to this day living off of the results of educating all of those soldiers. How many times in my life I have heard a famous successful person say they owe it all to the GI bill.
And if McCain has a better GI bill he is a senator right now. So instead of whinning why not develope your own plan.

You know something else? This is my problem with McCain. He is half a maverick. He is good at acting like he is middle of the road. He doesn't take a stand when it really matters. Just like with Rummy. It was more important to him to support his party and President then to protect the troops.
He could have joined with the Dems and stop Rummys mismanagement early. But he kept saying that the President has to make that choice. Even far after we could all see the POTUS wasn't capable of handling that job either. I think we could have had a better grip on the situation a year and a half earlier had someone from across the aisle stood up. But they didn't.

Ummm...the Republicans DID create their own plan...and McCain is a supporter of it...

So why didn't theirs come to a vote?...

Because Congressional bills coming to the floor are decided by Democrats...

They said "Nice bill Republicans...We'll just throw it in this little wastebasket and put OURS up for a vote and not yours."...

GI Bill Sparks Senate War

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Why didn't they produce one when they had the power? Its like when the right attacked Hillary for trying to deal with Health care issues. They all said they had a better plan then hers. Wonder where it went. It was gone as quick as Hillary's.
And I might ad that it shows what the future will hold with McCain. He attacks Obama saying basically he is too stupid to understand this high falootin stuff. Isn't he the one who was going to bring down the hyperbola. Wouldn't this be a good time to show some of that bipartisan effort. Especially when it pertains to our men and woman in service.
I personally don't see how anyone could have a problem with the child receiving the education benefits of a soldier who has given their life for their country. We owe something to that child.

I love this "millions (billions)" line.
I guess that's just part of the problem with killing off soooo many American soldiers. Pesky benefits to the survivors.
They should be thankful their loved one died for their country instead of being a Senator safe in his home...

But seriously, the GI Bill benefits come in a couple of ways.
1) The military member PAYS MONEY IN to get the GI Bill. Hopefully we aren't too woeful over an idea that we don't get to keep that money just cause we managed to kill off a military member who had hopes for investing in his future...

2) This bill specifically discusses a military member serving three years of active duty.
I can't help but think that WILL BE an incentive for some people to sign up.
But then if we manage to get them killed off in this "war", then all was for nought...
I'm sorry, but shifting the benefit to a "people that didn't even sign up", when that "people" happens to have just SACRIFICED A FAMILY MEMBER FOR THIS COUNTRY is a small price to pay.

Except possibly for "support our troops" Republicans who are more in lines with "support our Republican party war"...

And I can't help but think that if Kerry had said what you just said, somehow you'd be trying to turn that into a pretense of him criticizing the troops...


I think you're missing a bigger picture.
That is an EXISTING problem.
Part of the benefit of this package will be in GETTING MORE PEOPLE IN to the military.

I can see possibly extending that to 5, or maybe even 7 years, but TWELVE years is what McCain is advocating???
That's unreasonable.


Military pension.
Serving their country.
All the things that CURRENTLY get people to "want to serve their country"?

I would hope that you wouldn't believe their support is that flimsy.
I mean geez! We CURRENTLY have an incentive to leave the military of NOT GETTING KILLED in the Iraq war.
Maybe we should figure out a way to stop THAT "incentive to leave", huh?


Chicken Little: The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Currently, we have a situation where the military member pays in, and then can get his benefits out in the G.I. bill

We are spending TRILLIONS on Iraq, but millions (which I'll put "(billions?)" after it to make it seem larger) is just too much.

Too many points...don't feel like making a 2000 word response, so I'll be general...

First, you have a keen fascination on pointing out the deaths of the military...

Do you know what the percentage of this bill will affect those death compared to ALL of the military?...

Let's see...4,000 deaths....in a miltary of 2.8 million...

Let's get out my calculator...

.001%

Now how many will be able to receive tuition for serving 3 years and then up and leaving?...

99.999%

As far as saying this...

You must've forgetten what I bolded AND colored red in my previous post...Let's see it again...

Sliding scale my friend...It's not that they don't get anything until the 12th year...

Here's a personal anecdote...

My dad was a fireman for 30 years...he COULD'VE retired after 25 years...Why didn't he?...

Because those extra 5 years bumped up his retirement benefits...staying that extra time not only gave him a paycheck while working, but gave him an INCREASE during the time afterward when he wouldn't be working...

He was RETAINED by the Fire Department for an extra 5 years instead of having them bring in a new recruit to start from scratch...

And that's the very same plan McCain wants...he wants people in the military service to have incentives to STAY and not incentives to LEAVE...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

That was one of the points that YOU brought up, so I am only talking about what YOU brought to the table.
I find it rather ghoulish to attempt to lure people to enlist with the promise of college assistance, but then give absolutely nothing if the military personnel involved dies in service of his country.

So if you WITHDRAW your ghoulish argument, I will be happy to withdraw pointing out how ghoulish it is...


Quite frankly, this argument works AGAINST you as you were complaining about the deaths costing the U.S. money in benefits that would go to the survivor instead.
YOU were the one who claimed "millions (billions)" off of the survivor benefits aspect of the bill. Remember???

So while you point out how "few" deaths there are, I welcome that assessment as it points out how meaningless your original complaint was.
Capisce?


"able to" is significantly different from "will do".
Quite frankly, the military paid for a couple years of my college AND MORE.
All they asked for was five years, then I could leave.

And as far as enlisted paying in to the G.I. bill, and quitting afterwards, "3 years" is a CURRENT possibility.

I don't think you get how close our current military is to exactly that situation.

As far as saying this...


So John McCain is "willing" to give only partial $$$ to those "serving 3 years and then up and leaving" then?
I guess then the scenario you describe will still exist, just with less money, right?


What you describe already exists on BOTH sides.
I already described the CURRENT workings of the GI Bill, which gives an incredible rate of return. And the military personnel would be eligible after those scant three years.

And let's not forget the incentives to stay in. The military has a retirement package set for the 20 year mark.
I believe there is a lesser one at 17 or 18 years or something like that.
Those that WANT the "incentive to stay in" already have it, and they will continue to have it.

Those that want in for the "short-ride" and the economic bump, ALREADY HAVE plans in place which can serve that desire.

I don't know about you, but I can't help but keep coming back to the fact that we are asking these people to sign up to go into harm's way.
Benefits for the survivors? Seems like at least in part a decent acknowledgement in compensation for the fact that the Bush administration has INCREASED THEIR RISK in recent years.

And if the military personnel are truly not just the "left behind" for the college bound, like some claim Kerry claimed, then we shouldn't have to worry too much about turn-over, right?
After all, if these guys already CHOSE (instead of having no choice) to not go to college once, then it shouldn't be that much of a problem when they have additional options for college.
Right?

Nope...

I mentioned it ONCE...Here was my acual quote...

Now let's see how many times YOU mentioned it in the response...

You are equating my ONE comment "someone in the military...dies" with your comments such as "just cause we managed to kill off a military member" and "we manage to get them killed off in this "war"...

I'll leave my comment stand and let those who read it decide who's being "GHOULISH"...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

So let me get this straight. We can't give people in our military the opportunity for education because they will leave, right?

Isn't that like saying that we should keep them poor so that we have a military. That doesn't sound like a very good recruiting plan.

I think this stance means that McCain is more worried about retention than recruiting. Maybe if we paid the military better they would be inclined to stay.

__________________
Wine is fine, but whisky's quicker....--Ozzy