Military benefits target in cost-cutting talks (officers, veterans, soldier, deployed)
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 question nobody has asked is do we even need a standing military to begin with? Draw down the active duty to little more than a skeleton crew to keep all the equipment in working order and act as master trainers for the guard and reserve (which would then get ramp up to provide quick response standing military potential). Supposedly the guard and reserves are just as good as Active Duty, right?, so we shouldn't have a problem with them becoming the major component of our military. This would give us the potential to throw the weight of our military into something should the need arise, but while that's not the case we're just chilling as part-timers.
A) it'll cut costs BIG TIME
B) it'll create a political shift that would facilitate keeping our noses out of fights we don't belong in due to the much smaller military
The question nobody has asked is do we even need a standing military to begin with? Draw down the active duty to little more than a skeleton crew to keep all the equipment in working order and act as master trainers for the guard and reserve (which would then get ramp up to provide quick response standing military potential). Supposedly the guard and reserves are just as good as Active Duty, right?, so we shouldn't have a problem with them becoming the major component of our military. This would give us the potential to throw the weight of our military into something should the need arise, but while that's not the case we're just chilling as part-timers.
A) it'll cut costs BIG TIME
B) it'll create a political shift that would facilitate keeping our noses out of fights we don't belong in due to the much smaller military
Your completely right...
50k army + 20 guard divisions....
Marines at 180 to 220k...
Navy and Air force to close the sea lanes we don't need much else..
They are self supporting, paid for by the troops, you will not save a penny, you will waste money. Why are you trying to destroy a system which has operated well for over 100 years. Roughly two-thirds of AAFES’ earnings are paid to Morale, Welfare and Recreation/ Services programs. In the past 10 years, $2.4 billion has been contributed by AAFES to military MWR/Services programs to spend on quality of life improvements, including youth services, Armed Forces Recreation Centers, arts and crafts, aquatic centers, post functions and golf courses.
I've heard enough. Don't even want to see the rest of the plan....
Rich
AMEN! And example of someone talking out of their arse.
I really don't thni that there is much suport for cuts in military budget even from CBO who has repeeally said that its reamined close to 4% since cliton and isn't the problem or solution. If they try just look at the fight when they tried base closing that the army wanted closed. Heck;even when a plne the military doesn't weant is proposed the democrats stopped that . No the militray budget is most goig to civilian workers and industry really .
If you listened to the President's speech last night, there are going to be cuts. Gates has already targeted where he feels he can make the cuts.
And I still stand by my original statement earlier in this thread, that unfortunately, this may be the year the Pentagon and the White House finally get the increased Tricare premiums they have been pushing for working-age retirees.
But I'm hoping they leave the commissary and Class Six alone!
no need to cut military pay or reduce benefits, just cut waste and fraud in the defense industry.
I agree. I think the problem in this country and with the politicians on both sides of the aisle always use the excuse "Oh, that will only save a few million dollars and we have to save trillions." If only fixing our country's financial problems could be found in one program.
The military, just like families all over the country, needs to make thousands of small cuts that will add to a huge savings. This "all or nothing" approach is dumb. To save money, my family could sell everything and move in with my parents, or we could give up our cell phones, refinance our mortgage, cut back on cable and turn down our thermostat to save $10 here, $5 there and eventually it adds up to a hundred dollars or more each month in savings.
The problem is that as soon as anyone mentions the military having to make some cuts, the military immediately declares that our troops will be without body armor. They imply that every single dime is thoughtfully and sensibly paid and the only thing left on the table is to put our troops in harms way.
As a retired military spouse who worked as a civilian and was the secretary to various commanders, including a Wing Commander, a Fighter Group Commander, a Medical Group Commander, etc, I could easily spell out where those offices alone could save money without any "pain" at all. Do the Fighter Squadrons really need 50 inch plasma screens to post their flight schedules? No...but the end of the fiscal year was coming and if they didn't spend the same amount of money this year as they did last year, they'd get the budget cut (God forbid), so they needed to spend about $50,000 in one order. Cue to the plasma screens. Up until then, all of the sorties managed to get underway by posting them on paper. I know...talk about prehistoric! How could they possibly find out which flight they were going to do if they had to look for it on a 8x11 sheet of paper tacked to the board?
After living at Ramstein, I could cut lots of money. Do we really need all of the Local Nationals who smoke for 6 hours of their 8 hour workday? Did you know that the Germans pay them to work on our bases and then they send the bill for their salaries to the DoD who cuts them a check? I didn't until I worked for the Personnel Officer at Ramstein. I prepared the paperwork every month from the German personnel office. Do we really need 50,000 troops at Ramstein? Don't get me wrong...I loved my time there. It was a 2 1/2 year vacation (would have been 3 but that pesky 9-11 had to go and ruin my travel plans!), but to say Ramstein is "lean and efficient" is simply untrue. There are some offices that are so full of personnel that they work out a 3 or 4 day workweek for their staff so they can go and enjoy Europe. I worked at the CE office at USAFE and got to witness the Wing Commander's wife at Lakenheath refuse to move into her home until a garage door could be installed. Seemed she didn't want to have to get out of her car to lift the door herself like the other wives had done for decades. Her husband made my office find a loophole so they could drill an electrical system for a garage door into a 100 year old brick home to the cost of $45,000. Yes...you read that right.
Don't even get me started on MacDill where it's so Top Heavy that there are 3 special VIP Lounges that are fully stocked with goodies, completely refurbished every 2-3 years, etc.
So, instead of gutting one big program, why don't we tell each command that their budgets will be cut by 10% compared to last year? Not too painful, but when you add up all of the bases around the world and they all are treated equally, you can make a huge change without cutting body armor, veteran's benefits, etc.
unfortunately, this may be the year the Pentagon and the White House finally get the increased Tricare premiums they have been pushing for working-age retirees.
A few weeks ago, we had to go to the Tricare office to update our records and sign up again for our benefits and the person we spoke to told us that it is all but certain that the benefits will be going up in price. I suppose it's inevitable. He did say there is a "cap" on what they can charge, but $460 for a family of 4 to have Tricare Prime for the year IS cheap. My husband works for the City of Denver and when he showed up for his first day of work and attended the benefits briefing, a decent medical plan for our family would have cost us more than $1000 per month. Makes our $38.34 a month seem pretty awesome. My husband declined the City insurance and we have Tricare exclusively.
The problem they run into is that you've got a lot of older retirees who are on a very limited income and wouldn't be able to afford it.
There will have to be some true leadership here and just like the military retirement system, will have to be "phased in". That means someone just retiring from the military will have to pay more for Tricare and they should just expect that. Those who retired within the last 10 years should be given a modest increase because very few of them were able to retire fully without getting another job. Those who have been retired for a while should be left alone because they were told when they retired what their benefits would be and that commitment should be honored. The key is to make the increases apply to those who are retiring now or about to retire. It doesn't have to be huge, but if someone retires and they know what it's going to cost them to get benefits, they can adjust their budgets. It doesn't have to go from $460 per year to $5,000 per year. But anyone retiring now or recently should hardly "balk" at a $150 per month for a family of 4 health care benefit. If they did a little research, they'd find that their coworkers who don't have Tricare are paying thousands of dollars each month and probably not getting as good of care.
The key is to stop talking about it and implement it. The longer they procrastinate, the more retirees will begin living on the budget they have. If you tell someone who has their retirement papers in hand that in order to have Tricare Prime, he/she will pay $150 per month (this is just an example), then they can plan for that. Change that after 15 years of retirement and you will start to get some serious pushback because if they're like my family, we have a budget that we live on and our benefits are part of the equation. If my husband retired and they told us it would cost $150 per month for healthcare, I would have budgeted things that way.
A few weeks ago, we had to go to the Tricare office to update our records and sign up again for our benefits and the person we spoke to told us that it is all but certain that the benefits will be going up in price. I suppose it's inevitable. He did say there is a "cap" on what they can charge, but $460 for a family of 4 to have Tricare Prime for the year IS cheap. My husband works for the City of Denver and when he showed up for his first day of work and attended the benefits briefing, a decent medical plan for our family would have cost us more than $1000 per month. Makes our $38.34 a month seem pretty awesome. My husband declined the City insurance and we have Tricare exclusively.
The problem they run into is that you've got a lot of older retirees who are on a very limited income and wouldn't be able to afford it.
There will have to be some true leadership here and just like the military retirement system, will have to be "phased in". That means someone just retiring from the military will have to pay more for Tricare and they should just expect that. Those who retired within the last 10 years should be given a modest increase because very few of them were able to retire fully without getting another job. Those who have been retired for a while should be left alone because they were told when they retired what their benefits would be and that commitment should be honored. The key is to make the increases apply to those who are retiring now or about to retire. It doesn't have to be huge, but if someone retires and they know what it's going to cost them to get benefits, they can adjust their budgets. It doesn't have to go from $460 per year to $5,000 per year. But anyone retiring now or recently should hardly "balk" at a $150 per month for a family of 4 health care benefit. If they did a little research, they'd find that their coworkers who don't have Tricare are paying thousands of dollars each month and probably not getting as good of care.
The key is to stop talking about it and implement it. The longer they procrastinate, the more retirees will begin living on the budget they have. If you tell someone who has their retirement papers in hand that in order to have Tricare Prime, he/she will pay $150 per month (this is just an example), then they can plan for that. Change that after 15 years of retirement and you will start to get some serious pushback because if they're like my family, we have a budget that we live on and our benefits are part of the equation. If my husband retired and they told us it would cost $150 per month for healthcare, I would have budgeted things that way.
I disagree. We worked for years in poor conditions, lifestyles, poor pay, and got shot at. And in some of our cases ruined our bodies for the rest of our lives.
We did this with the prior agreement that if that were the case our medical bills would be covered as part of the 'deal'
Now, AFTER we have been used up and tossed away...
They are 'going back on the deal'
WHY Should we not be pissed?
-I see that conveniently you are (in your little plan) allowing yourself not to be affected. Perhaps you need to study the Words of Patric Henry a little more.
Hang together, or hang separately. It seems you have made your choice!
I agree. I think the problem in this country and with the politicians on both sides of the aisle always use the excuse "Oh, that will only save a few million dollars and we have to save trillions." If only fixing our country's financial problems could be found in one program.
The military, just like families all over the country, needs to make thousands of small cuts that will add to a huge savings. This "all or nothing" approach is dumb. To save money, my family could sell everything and move in with my parents, or we could give up our cell phones, refinance our mortgage, cut back on cable and turn down our thermostat to save $10 here, $5 there and eventually it adds up to a hundred dollars or more each month in savings.
The problem is that as soon as anyone mentions the military having to make some cuts, the military immediately declares that our troops will be without body armor. They imply that every single dime is thoughtfully and sensibly paid and the only thing left on the table is to put our troops in harms way.
As a retired military spouse who worked as a civilian and was the secretary to various commanders, including a Wing Commander, a Fighter Group Commander, a Medical Group Commander, etc, I could easily spell out where those offices alone could save money without any "pain" at all. Do the Fighter Squadrons really need 50 inch plasma screens to post their flight schedules? No...but the end of the fiscal year was coming and if they didn't spend the same amount of money this year as they did last year, they'd get the budget cut (God forbid), so they needed to spend about $50,000 in one order. Cue to the plasma screens. Up until then, all of the sorties managed to get underway by posting them on paper. I know...talk about prehistoric! How could they possibly find out which flight they were going to do if they had to look for it on a 8x11 sheet of paper tacked to the board?
After living at Ramstein, I could cut lots of money. Do we really need all of the Local Nationals who smoke for 6 hours of their 8 hour workday? Did you know that the Germans pay them to work on our bases and then they send the bill for their salaries to the DoD who cuts them a check? I didn't until I worked for the Personnel Officer at Ramstein. I prepared the paperwork every month from the German personnel office. Do we really need 50,000 troops at Ramstein? Don't get me wrong...I loved my time there. It was a 2 1/2 year vacation (would have been 3 but that pesky 9-11 had to go and ruin my travel plans!), but to say Ramstein is "lean and efficient" is simply untrue. There are some offices that are so full of personnel that they work out a 3 or 4 day workweek for their staff so they can go and enjoy Europe. I worked at the CE office at USAFE and got to witness the Wing Commander's wife at Lakenheath refuse to move into her home until a garage door could be installed. Seemed she didn't want to have to get out of her car to lift the door herself like the other wives had done for decades. Her husband made my office find a loophole so they could drill an electrical system for a garage door into a 100 year old brick home to the cost of $45,000. Yes...you read that right.
Don't even get me started on MacDill where it's so Top Heavy that there are 3 special VIP Lounges that are fully stocked with goodies, completely refurbished every 2-3 years, etc.
So, instead of gutting one big program, why don't we tell each command that their budgets will be cut by 10% compared to last year? Not too painful, but when you add up all of the bases around the world and they all are treated equally, you can make a huge change without cutting body armor, veteran's benefits, etc.
GREAT post. The politicians today are really out of touch. If cost cutting is the number one concern then lets get serious. Lets pay DOD contractors or civilians, but not both. How about more facilities on base, and less reliance on the public economy.
i.e. when I was in Guam, the locals would charge a special military rent of $1200. But the locals would probably get the same place for $600. Why the difference? Because the locals know the housing costs, and they know that the military member can afford it. More housing on base would cut down on the wasted money!
At Andrews AFB, they closed 1 of the dining halls on base. So now all the airmen crowd that one and it sucks. A waste of time and money!
I'm sure that others have similar examples of fraud, waste, & abuse.
It is time that we fire Gates, and get a real SECDEF in there that will tell Obama what is really going on! OR... We can elect a military friendly pres in 2012!
A few weeks ago, we had to go to the Tricare office to update our records and sign up again for our benefits and the person we spoke to told us that it is all but certain that the benefits will be going up in price. I suppose it's inevitable. He did say there is a "cap" on what they can charge, but $460 for a family of 4 to have Tricare Prime for the year IS cheap. My husband works for the City of Denver and when he showed up for his first day of work and attended the benefits briefing, a decent medical plan for our family would have cost us more than $1000 per month. Makes our $38.34 a month seem pretty awesome. My husband declined the City insurance and we have Tricare exclusively.
The problem they run into is that you've got a lot of older retirees who are on a very limited income and wouldn't be able to afford it.
There will have to be some true leadership here and just like the military retirement system, will have to be "phased in". That means someone just retiring from the military will have to pay more for Tricare and they should just expect that. Those who retired within the last 10 years should be given a modest increase because very few of them were able to retire fully without getting another job. Those who have been retired for a while should be left alone because they were told when they retired what their benefits would be and that commitment should be honored. The key is to make the increases apply to those who are retiring now or about to retire. It doesn't have to be huge, but if someone retires and they know what it's going to cost them to get benefits, they can adjust their budgets. It doesn't have to go from $460 per year to $5,000 per year. But anyone retiring now or recently should hardly "balk" at a $150 per month for a family of 4 health care benefit. If they did a little research, they'd find that their coworkers who don't have Tricare are paying thousands of dollars each month and probably not getting as good of care.
The key is to stop talking about it and implement it. The longer they procrastinate, the more retirees will begin living on the budget they have. If you tell someone who has their retirement papers in hand that in order to have Tricare Prime, he/she will pay $150 per month (this is just an example), then they can plan for that. Change that after 15 years of retirement and you will start to get some serious pushback because if they're like my family, we have a budget that we live on and our benefits are part of the equation. If my husband retired and they told us it would cost $150 per month for healthcare, I would have budgeted things that way.
regarding healthcare: I think that messing with the military cost of TRICARE is like blaming whole milk for the US obesity problem. When everyone else is eating deep fried twinkies.
The thing that we should be doing is cutting the "overall cost" of healthcare in the US. Drug companies and insurance companies are scamming us big-time. The cost of illegals and uninsured is also killing us! We need to tackle the root cause of our problems. Attacking the military health care is not the answer, and it is bad policy!
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.
