Something to think about...

chuckster

IMFUBARED
Love him or loath him, he nailed this one right on the head.............

By Rush Limbaugh:

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving the country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11.

Well, I just can't let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country.

If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million.

If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed In action, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable. Next, yo u get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry.

And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.

Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.

We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.

You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad.

Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing. Make sense?

However, our own U.S. Congress just voted themselves a raise, and many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month, and most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They also do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system.

If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, you may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed you in harm's way receive a pension of $15,000 per month. I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they sta rt cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.

"When do we finally do something about this?" If this doesn't seem fair to you, it is time to forward this to as many people as you can.

If your interested there is more.......................

This must be a campaign issue in 2004. Keep it going. SOCIAL SECURITY: (This is worth the read. It's short and to the point.)

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years. Our Senators and Congressmen do not pay into Social Security. Many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. For all practical purposes their plan works like this:

When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die, except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments. For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expec t to draw $7,800,000 - that's Seven Million, Eight Hundred Thousand), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives. This is calculated on an average life span for each.

Their cost for this excellent plan is $00.00. These little perks they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Fund--our tax dollars at work! From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into --every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer) --we can expect to get an average $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we
would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one month to equal Senator Bill Bradley's benefits!

Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. And that change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from u nder the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us and then watch how fast they would fix it.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Well I guess Rush didn't nail it all accurately, reading Johndoug's link to Snopes, it pretty much debunked the information regarding Congresspersons retirement payment and their participation in Social Security (except for a few old timers who still might be covered under the CSRS).

Regardless of that, what our military members receive in pay and receive in compensation is truly sad when one considers what it is they do for each and everyone of us. I for one will be writing letters to my representatives asking that they address this issue. God bless our military men and women. You deserve better for what you give to this nation.
 

jlabsher

Sorry about that chief.
Oh man, I've always hated Rush. Came from the same part of the country as him and know some of the family dirt.... but....

I've always hated the 9/11 fund. To think that our gov't authorized a plan that pays more death benefit to richer persons than poor persons appals me. To say a stockbrocker's life is worth more than a fry cooks is wrong. "All men are created equal..."

Well, you argue, the stockbroker has bigger bills, etc. Two Words. Life Insurance <or>personal responsibility.

The other part really pisthes me off too. Sorry, W wants to give the military 4% but the civil service 2% raise. Doesn't he realize if there wasn't "his" war that many civil service would be facing more dangers than the military every day? And of course they don't get free housing, commissary, medical, day care, 3 squares a day, bigger paychecks if you're married or have a family. I've been on both sides of the fence.

Of course, it's all politics. And I don't even want to open that box up.
 
Last edited:

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Originally posted by jlabsher
The other part really pisthes me off too. Sorry, W wants to give the military 4% but the civil service 2% raise. Doesn't he realize if there wasn't "his" war that many civil service would be facing more dangers than the military every day? And of course they don't get free housing, commissary, medical, day care, 3 squares a day, bigger paychecks if you're married or have a family. I've been on both sides of the fence.
Free housing? Don't think so. If they are in base quarters they don't receive the housing allowance, in other words they are paying for it. Free daycare? Not sure, but the last I heard was that they still had to pay for daycare even if they use the limited facilities that some installations have. Bigger paycheck for being married? A small difference in quarters and subsistance entitlements and this difference helps them feed the extra mouths that they are supporting on their piddling salary.

Also, while the President wants a smaller increase in the raise for civil servants it is ultimately up to Congress to set the amount not the President. And how do you figure it is "his" war? Expand if you will, please.
 

jlabsher

Sorry about that chief.
Originally posted by Ken King
Free housing? Don't think so. If they are in base quarters they don't receive the housing allowance, in other words they are paying for it. Free daycare? Not sure, but the last I heard was that they still had to pay for daycare even if they use the limited facilities that some installations have. Bigger paycheck for being married? A small difference in quarters and subsistance entitlements and this difference helps them feed the extra mouths that they are supporting on their piddling salary.


Unless it has changed since I left 8 years ago, a married E3 onboard ship made more money than I did as a single E6.

A married E1 could live off ship, but a single E6 still couldn't (I think this has changed)

Last I checked those extra mouths didn't come along with their seabag. Anyway...

I just wish I didn't have so many skeletons in my closet. I'd run for Congress, that is a sweet deal. Of course, there are some kinds of dirt that never wash off.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
Originally posted by jlabsher
Unless it has changed since I left 8 years ago, a married E3 onboard ship made more money than I did as a single E6.

A married E1 could live off ship, but a single E6 still couldn't (I think this has changed)

Last I checked those extra mouths didn't come along with their seabag. Anyway...

I just wish I didn't have so many skeletons in my closet. I'd run for Congress, that is a sweet deal. Of course, there are some kinds of dirt that never wash off.
And where in your enlistment contract did it say you would be treated fairly? You probably pulled more duty watches on holidays while at home port then the married folk too. BFD.
 

jlabsher

Sorry about that chief.
Originally posted by Ken King
And where in your enlistment contract did it say you would be treated fairly? You probably pulled more duty watches on holidays while at home port then the married folk too. BFD.

Not whining, just replying to the post that said how little military members were paid for what they do and pointing out that they actually get some pretty good benefits. Of course, it is an all volunteer force so they have made their choice and shouldn't complain about their pay right?

Nobody cries for the cops who make less when you figure in all the benefits.

Of course I stood duty on holidays, but I usually traded them for days off in good liberty ports:blushing:
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Nobody cries for the cops who make less when you figure in all the benefits.
:howdy: I do!!! We have such warped values in this country. Actors, singers, professional sports people - all make multi-million $$. Yet our teachers, military and cops make jack. Congresspeople making all that retirement, not to mention all the graft they can get because of their position.

It's just bizarre that the people we need most, we pay the least.

And don't get me started on the 9/11 fund. :burning: I mean, I'm sorry that these people lost their lives and left family behind - but people die every day and leave families and THEY don't get big settlements. That whole thing was just an emotional knee-jerk reaction.
 
K

Kain99

Guest
Originally posted by vraiblonde
That whole thing was just an emotional knee-jerk reaction.

I'm not so sure about that. It always felt more like Government CYA money to me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top