Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Department of Defense has been trying for years to raise TRICARE fees on retirees. They will succeed this time due to the budget deficits. You can count on ALL government health programs being means tested which is to say what you pay will be based on your income, savings and other finances that you report on your tax forms. I have already been means tested out of all VA medical despite 25 years of active service including combat tours in Vietnam and Gulf War One.
It is going to depend on your financial status on what you get.
The economy is in crisis big time. Cuts are coming but everyone will not be treated the same. If you have worked hard, saved, been successful, you will pay more than others.
Standby for huge changes in our way of doing things. TFL is just one benefit that might fall by the wayside though I imagine it will remain for the bottom 25% of eligibles.
Universal Healthcare does NOT mean equal healthcare.
I came back and reread the above post, and on second view...it's unnecessarily irritable, and I apologize. I wanted everyone to realize that Barack Obama had nothing to do with this CBO publication, and that mass e-mails with an agenda sometimes are counting on us to not be too curious about their messages.
I'm certainly not a big Obama fan, but I agree in that the timing would be way off to blame him in advance for this one. Thanks for pointing it out.
I am a AD spouse and my career as a therapist depends on insurance (mainly medicare and other government programs) for reimbursement, so I read the CBO releases rather frequently.
The CBO's job is to put out memos and guidelines for suggested trimming of government spending (note that all pages contain pros and cons of what they are suggesting). That does not mean that the suggestions actually get implemented. Most all of them do not as there is usually sooooo much opposition that the lawmakers feel it is better to just continue spending money rather than upset the folks back home.
Don't you all remember last summer when the government was going to cut payments to doctors for Medicare? That was probably a very sound fiscal move (for the gov, not the docs), especially looking at the fed deficit, but people were in such an uproar that is was repealed before it actually went into effect and the free spending continues with little oversight for fraud.
A little tidbit: the GAO (government accounting office) released a study years ago warning against the use of lortab and darvocet in people over 70 because the costs outweighed the benefits due to the side effects causing other medical issues. How many doctors actually followed that advice? Who is the GAO to make medical advice, right? Well they are right in their assessment purely from a cost saving perspective but the alternatives that are safer are more expensive so docs keep giving out the stuff like candy rather than have seniors spend more on meds.
I seriously doubt we have much to worry about in the near future with major changes in Tricare. The outrage from senior and military advocacy groups alone would make the topic poison. On top of that, with the VA health care scandal still pretty fresh it would make the government look really bad as far as taking care of vets and retirees and I think the media would be all over that.
And to note, this report came from the CONGRESSIONAL budget office, I doubt anyone in the Presidential administration-incoming or outgoing- has much to do directly with the report (although I may be wrong), so give the guy a chance to prove that he wants to rape and pillage the military before we accuse him of actually doing it
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but regardless of the outcome of this specific instance with Tricare, there is a day on the horizon when DoD will have to make some serious decisions about health care/retirement benefits.
Look at the Big 3 automakers. The reason they are in the spot they are in is that the majority of money they spend is on health care and pension benefits for retirees as a part of their UAW agreements. The bailout doesn't solve the problem, it just pushes down the road a little ways. Look at the train wreck that is coming with Social Security and Medicare. Both the UAW and Social Security go back to the 30's, and now we are seeing both of those systems reach the breaking point.
Now look at the military. The U.S. has maintained a large, standing, professional military since the Cold War began. As a result, it has been dishing out benefits to an ever-growing pool of retirees, and the percentage of the defense budget that go to paying retiree and health care costs continues to expand. Well, the Big 3 and Social Security are showing us that no institution can sustain a system in which it pays a large number of people to do nothing. Eventually, there will come a point when DoD will have to make serious cuts or revise the system.
Of course, whenever someone brings up these cold, hard facts, they are met with scorn by those saying "How dare you talk about cutting benefits for our veterans. They have sacrificed so much for us!" That may be, but facts are facts, no matter how much flag waving you do.
It is also interesting that people in the military, especially officers, tend to be a conservative lot. They loath the idea of the entitlement society, execpt of course, when it comes to their own entitlements.
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but regardless of the outcome of this specific instance with Tricare, there is a day on the horizon when DoD will have to make some serious decisions about health care/retirement benefits.
Look at the Big 3 automakers. The reason they are in the spot they are in is that the majority of money they spend is on health care and pension benefits for retirees as a part of their UAW agreements. The bailout doesn't solve the problem, it just pushes down the road a little ways. Look at the train wreck that is coming with Social Security and Medicare. Both the UAW and Social Security go back to the 30's, and now we are seeing both of those systems reach the breaking point.
Now look at the military. The U.S. has maintained a large, standing, professional military since the Cold War began. As a result, it has been dishing out benefits to an ever-growing pool of retirees, and the percentage of the defense budget that go to paying retiree and health care costs continues to expand. Well, the Big 3 and Social Security are showing us that no institution can sustain a system in which it pays a large number of people to do nothing. Eventually, there will come a point when DoD will have to make serious cuts or revise the system.
Of course, whenever someone brings up these cold, hard facts, they are met with scorn by those saying "How dare you talk about cutting benefits for our veterans. They have sacrificed so much for us!" That may be, but facts are facts, no matter how much flag waving you do.
It is also interesting that people in the military, especially officers, tend to be a conservative lot. They loath the idea of the entitlement society, execpt of course, when it comes to their own entitlements.
The UAW had minimal oversight therefore it was relatively easy to keep increasing pension benefits...Military is govt run, so it's not really apples to apples...I do understand your point...I don't know if you're in the military or not, but there is so much wasteful spending that would be able to cut the military budget in half...Air Force always dries up it's PCS (change of station) fun...People just randomly get orders that they need to PCS form a west coast base to an east coast base...The questions are...Does this east coast base really NEED someone? Is there someone of equal qualifications who is maybe on 300 miles away vs 3000?
These statements appear to be false. First, this document does not have Obama's name in it anywhere. Secondly, this is Budget Options -this document appears to be options for the budget. Third, after reading the aforementioned pages it does seem to indicate that fees will increase for us NEW retirees, there is no mention that I saw of cutting the program. These fees would only apply starting in 2010 and only to some. The reasoning, as I read this, is the Active members are young and pay the bulk of the premiums and have little to no claims. The average retired TRICARE beneficiary pays something like $780 out of pocket. The average retired HMO civilian pays close to $4000. These fees are being increased to coincide with the increase in medical care costs.
The UAW had minimal oversight therefore it was relatively easy to keep increasing pension benefits...Military is govt run, so it's not really apples to apples...I do understand your point...I don't know if you're in the military or not, but there is so much wasteful spending that would be able to cut the military budget in half...Air Force always dries up it's PCS (change of station) fun...People just randomly get orders that they need to PCS form a west coast base to an east coast base...The questions are...Does this east coast base really NEED someone? Is there someone of equal qualifications who is maybe on 300 miles away vs 3000?
At the risk of getting too far off topic, I will say that there are a lot of ways the military could cut spending in other areas in order to free up more of the budget for benefits. Just look at the long list of programs like Crusader, Osprey, etc. The services are always coming up with these big, expensive programs to justify what they hope will be a bigger piece of the DoD pie. These programs can have appeal to Congressmen if a system or component will be made in his or her district. Simple things like beans, bullets, and quality training don't have enough of a "wow-factor."
Of course, like you said, there are many areas of routine business the military could do much more efficiantly and more much less money. Just look at PCS moves. Several years ago, Rumsfeld talked about a plan in which people would stay at assignments for around seven years. It never happened; the need to ticket-punch is too great. However, it not only would have provided stability for families, but it would have saved a lot of money in paying for PCS moves.
I was under the impression that once Medicare took over they no longer dealt with Tricare.
I may have been in error.
My FIL who is 92 has had Tricare for Life since he turned 65. Medicare is first payee, Tricare secondary. He was in Pearl Harbor when the Japanese bombed it. My husband served 20 years and we are now on Tricare Standard. The cost to maintain our civilian health care was $700 month when we retired, so we turned to Tricare. The administration of Tricare needs to be overhauled as it is an extremely convoluted system.
It is also interesting that people in the military, especially officers, tend to be a conservative lot. They loath the idea of the entitlement society, execpt of course, when it comes to their own entitlements.
My husband served 20 years in most major conflicts, son has served 6 years and been deployed 3 times. I sincerely disagree with your statement regarding officers and entitlements. After his retirement from military we did not use Tricare as a secondary insurance, rather used civilian employment insurance even when he had cancer. After civilian retirement we are now using Tricare. While there are benefits to those serving in the military, they are also receiving a salary considerably less than in civilian life, families are separated for long periods and they are in harm's way. I don't think you can intelligently make that kind of overall statement.
I consider any technology that helps my husband or anyother soldier money well spent. Anything that will help our men and women in uniform perform their jobs better and protect them when they are inharms way do not need to be cut.
PCS moves-
Actually, there are some families that have been in one location for 5 or more years. You have to also take into consideration that if someone re-enlists the possibility of them moving because of that re-enlistment is there too. Sometimes they re-enlist just to get out of thier current duty station.
My husband has been in for nearly 5 years. Because of his MOS, we have got to move with him while he was doing his training and have moved a total of 3 times so far. They were 63 weeks in one and 24 weeks in another. (JFTR states that if its over 20 weeks, that it is a PCS move.)
For starters (and this is medical related), they should open Urgent cares so people who need to see the Dr and cant get an appointment can go to the Urgent care instead of the ER. You would be suprised how many times I have been told to go or take my kids to the ER for a cough or something else that was NOT an emergency. Each time all I wanted to know is what I could do to help make them more comfortable. Last time I took my youngest to the ER, we waited 3 hours just to be seen. My daughter was running a temp of 104 that could not be controled and I waited for 3 hours before we were taken back, another hour before a nurse or Dr came in. In total we were there for 7 hours before we left to come home.
Quote:
Now look at the military. The U.S. has maintained a large, standing, professional military since the Cold War began. As a result, it has been dishing out benefits to an ever-growing pool of retirees, and the percentage of the defense budget that go to paying retiree and health care costs continues to expand. Well, the Big 3 and Social Security are showing us that no institution can sustain a system in which it pays a large number of people to do nothing. Eventually, there will come a point when DoD will have to make serious cuts or revise the system.
Of course, whenever someone brings up these cold, hard facts, they are met with scorn by those saying "How dare you talk about cutting benefits for our veterans. They have sacrificed so much for us!" That may be, but facts are facts, no matter how much flag waving you do.
It is also interesting that people in the military, especially officers, tend to be a conservative lot. They loath the idea of the entitlement society, execpt of course, when it comes to their own entitlements.
The vetrans and retirees that have eligibility for Tricare and other entitlements they receive from the military deserve them. My FIL who is retired deserves his. My Grandpa's deserved thiers also for fighting in WWII and Veitnam. It is the least our country can do for our men and women in uniform who dedicate 20+ years of thier life in service.
Another thing...you cannot compare the "big 3" to the military. They are compeltely different horses. You also will never see the military take out a full page add thanking taxpayers for the bailout money (like crystler did).
Monkeybutler, just a question. Are you in the military or have you ever served?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Take a breath, Folks
