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.
Love him or loathe 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 our 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 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, you 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 milli on 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 a s 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 US Congress voted themselves a raise. 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 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, they
may
receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed
them in harm's way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.
I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and
join ranks before they start 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.
It's not only congress. Bush and his administration strongly opposed a 3.5 percent raise for 2008 and follow-on increases, calling extra pay increases “unnecessary.â€
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. ....
However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. 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.
Wow... when you say " Rush nailed it" I assume you mean shooting himself in the foot.
First, the "9/11 victims money" came from an agreement not to sue the airlines September 11th Victim Compensation Fund - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in addition to the money from private donations, the Bono concert, etc (just because Rush forgot about that doesn't mean it didn't happen). Second, the troops also get the SGLI, a subsidized life insurance policy that pays $250,000 (reciently increased to $400,000) and if your smart like I was when I was in, you can get an "extra" policy that pays $400,000 for about $20/mo. I agree that the troops should get an extra benefit... If Rush used his celebrity to organize a donation drive, I will gladly give to the cause.
Second, the pension thing is about as true as the Legend of Bigfoot. Congressmen pay into a pension plan just like everyone else, and get earnings based on the years they contribute. Disgraced Republican Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham had about 20 years of service, and draws a pension of about $64,000 from his jail cell. Again, the military (just like everyone else) should get more, but an E-7 that retires after 20 years (keep in mind they may be as young as 37 years old) will get a retirement income between $1,500 - $1900 a month (it increases from 40% to 50% with 2% a year increases) PLUS free medical/dental PLUS Base privileges (Commissary privileges alone can save you $300 - $600 a month on groceries). Also consider that the "base salary" of the E-7 is less than a third of the congressman's.
here is the link showing congressional pensions: The Blotter
If you really want to complain about pensions, take a look at CEOs. The reality of THAT inequity is far worse than the lie about Congress.
Rush is a perfect example of the "fact-free zone" that many Conservatives now seem to be living in.
Last edited by Evlevo; 05-29-2007 at 12:23 PM..
Reason: added VCF link
I really hate the "fact-free zone." So do you know, evlevo, if whilst serving in Congress SS is paid or not by those elected. The statement that they are exempt was in Mr. Limbaugh's statement. It sounds wrong?
I really hate the "fact-free zone." So do you know, evlevo, if whilst serving in Congress SS is paid or not by those elected. The statement that they are exempt was in Mr. Limbaugh's statement. It sounds wrong?
If Rush said it, what do you think?
Of course Congress pays SSI and has since at least 1984
Some government employees (city, county, etc - but NOT Congress) can elect to put the same amount SSI requires into a different account (a state pension plan, for example) and draw money from that instead of from SSI, or get a "lump sum". It's not quite the "get SSI without ever paying for it" scenario it's painted as... it's more like invest and draw money from plan B instead.
BTW, the "Rush" article cited at the beginning of the thread was originally written in 2002..... Five years and no retraction?
Some government employees (city, county, etc) can elect to put the same amount SSI requires into a different account (a state pension plan, for example) and draw money from that instead of from SSI, or get a "lump sum". It's not quite the "get SSI without ever paying for it" scenario it's painted as... it's more like invest and draw money from plan B instead.
BTW, the "Rush" article cited at the beginning of the thread was originally written in 2002..... Five years and no retraction?
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.
Rush lies again
