Methinks you are reading too much into it. IF, indeed this is a BIG IF, Obama did make any kind of statement concerning giving Veterans a choice between va and private healthcare insurance, then that goes to say that yes those that chose to keep the va insurance would still be covered by it.

However, the funny thing is, the va health insurance is already set up that if you do NOT have a service related health concern, then you can only qualify for the va, if you either do not have insurance already, or do not have enough. You HAVE to use health insurance other than VA FIRST, unless it is directly linked to your service in the military, or you have some other stipulation granting va coverage (for example your retired from the service).

I know this from personal experience, because when a veteran fills out the yearly financial forms, several of them are specifically used to determine your financial qualifications. If you make so much per year, you can still choose to use the va, but you pay a higher premium, and copay, which personally is only reasonable IF your health issue is not service connected (for example you simply have the flu). Now, personally if it is service related, your finances, other insurance, etc etc etc should not even be taken into account at all, it should be automatic from VA, full coverage, no copay, etc; but only for service related (and retirees of course)


Daniel,

If I remember correctly, don't the vets that didn't serve in a war only partial coverage on top of what you're saying?

I know, too, that if my ex owes the VA any money, they deduct it from his income tax return before he even sees the check.

ha nothing to do with whether you were in war or not; I think it used to yes, but not anymore (at least when I registered it didn't). It is based off of whether or not the reason you are in there is because of something that happened while you were in service. For example, Ihad a major ski accident and was ran over while in Germany. I have two bad knees from running too much. If I ever start having problems with my back, hips or knees (could probably get my neck in on it too lol), basically anything that can be traced back to the ski accident, being ran over, or too much wear and tear on my knees, then I can get full coverage (minus copays, etc). Anything NOT related to when I was in service, has to be sent to my primary insurance first; And I get charged a higher deductable based on my personal income.

Does this help?

oh and yes, if you owe uncle sam any money at all he WILL garnish your taxes eventually. Not neccesarilly the first year, but definitely soon thereafter.

And the only exception I am aware of to the above healthcare policy are those that retired from service. They get whatever percentage medical coverage they were offered upon retirement (used to be %100, upon retirement; now it is something like %35 I think)

Another example: Say a soldier loses their leg while in the army (again doesn't have to be war-related). They will qualify for a certain percentage of disability, which then dictates how much coverage the va will give you over and above the missing leg. Anything to do with the leg, whether it be infection, pain, mental health (yeah right lol) or even the prosthetic leg (fake leg), will be completely covered by VA. But anything else, only a certain percentage is covered and you have to pay the rest (or your private insurance). And if your private insurance and the va combined do not cover the total cost, then you have to pay the differance.


Also dependant family members can qualify for va healthcare if the veteran does as well, but again it varies on how much is covered.

So the Indians took it from the Indians.....
\
too friggen funny!!!!

That happens all the time in L.A....

you've got the crips on one side of the traintracks, and the bloods on the other side of the traintracks.

Come on babe.

Its not an "IF"!!!!

I watched the speech on T.V!!!..

And he covered his @ss by not saying anything either way...

just that they would have a choice.

He never said what the consequences would be either way.

I WATCHED AND HEARD IT WITH MY OWN EARS...I dont talk out my @ss.

I wouldnt be so passionate about anything that was hearsay...

I heard it myself.

You said it yourself. You did not hear any consequences. IMO you shouldn't create consequences out of thin air, just because you haven't "heard" of any prior. My personal opinion is that you are assuming a whole lot, and I am sure you know what it means to assume, right?
There is nothing available to say that we (the vets), would lose anything by choosing to keep the VA coverage, and there is nothing to suggest we would gain by choosing the private insurance path. In reality, veterans are already required to get private insurance even when going through the va, unless it is a service-related issue to begin with. Even those who retire do not receive full health benefits anymore. This is sad yes, but it is a fact all the same.

I find it Ironic when Veterans are upset if somebody tries to mess with their "Government Provided" Health Care.

I find it Ironic when Seniors are upset if somebody tries to mess with their "Government Provided" Health Care.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/o/obama-veteran-insurance.htm

seniors and veterans paid for their health care

can you live on what the average veteran gets paid (i doubt it)

it should not be permitted to be reduced for those all ready on it or that have been paying for it for years

if they want to make reductions it then they should only effect those not in the plan already

maybe all the elected and appointed federal office holders should be required to obtain their own private insurance coverage

after all they are overpaid for the job they are doing anyway





http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=U.S._Army/Salary/by_Years_Experience


Congress: Rank-and-File Members' Salary
The current salary (2006) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $165,200 per year.


Senate Leadership
Majority Leader - $183,500
Minority Leader - $183,500

House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $212,100
Majority Leader - $183,500
Minority Leader - $183,500


http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/aa031200a.htm


it appears congress members could afford to pay for their health care much easier than those in the military

The only problem I am seeing adj, and it may be because I am reading the graph wrong, is that the graph for the military seems to average out the yearly pay for ALL enlisted personnel, instead of taking into account that their pay grossly differs dependant upon their rank. I know it has changed for the better since I was in, but my third year in service, when I filed taxes for my second year of service, I only grossed about 22k for the year. Don't get me wrong, I was a bachelor with absolutely no bills or expenses; my housing and meals were all provided for me. However, with that said, showing a graph that suggests the average enlisted service member received 40k per year is outrageous at the least.

well i would guess it is the enlistment bonuses and such that raise it (for the specialized stuff)

i was a bit surprised as well

but hey it is a govt site (so they want to make it look good to get new enlistments

http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp


that is a link to the actual military base pay rates (this does not take into account hosing allowance and food allowance for those who have dependents, but that varies depending on where you are stationed as it is based off the local housing costs.

As you will see, a brand new Leutenant makes over 9k per month and the lowest private makes 1400 per month. the rank of sergeant first class in the army, E-7 only makes 2500 per month if they have been in the military less than 2 years. I dont know of any e-7 that has been in less than at least 8 years, unless they were formerly an officer, and even then they would have to have so much time in the military in order to attain the rank of e-7 after giving up their commision.

But my point is, the scale you show gives an average of ALL enlisted personnell, not taking into account the very different amounts of pay.

yep that looks more like i thought it should be

I just did the math using ALL the enlisted ranks at lowest numbers given and that came out an average of 36-40k per year. So yes, the chart you show, gives the average of the lowest pay to all enlisted members per year, and this is just their base pay of course. What they get for simply being in the military.

yes that is one pet peeve of mine that the government makes it look like a recruit will get MUCH more than they will actually get, without actually coming out and saying either way. They say this is the average, but they don't tell you what they are throwing into the equation in order to get that average. On a side note, don't try telling a vet they should have gotten more on average than they actually did; especially notby this much of a differance cause if we find out it is true, the government WILL go bankrupt as we collect unpaid benefits lol.

Well, I have to get going for church, so I can have the sanctuary ready in time. I will see you all again later.

Thanks! I couldn't find info. on it.

Well I don't know where those figures came from and I doubt that the pay has raised that much.

In 1998 I was an E-5 And I made $18,698 with 5 years in service. You can't take an average of all enlisted because you have more lower ranking soldiers than higher ranking and the years in make a diference on what your pay is also.

And I have yet to find a soldier who joins for the money.

Tjn,

I've known people in small towns that joined because there weren't any jobs in their area. Does that count as joining for the money?