View more polls
April 11, 2013 - 3:10pmPermalink
To reduce retiree benifits is a breach of contract, if they are going to start reducing benifits lets start with our state Rep, Seniators, and any member of goverment that gets full retirement benifits after one term.
April 11, 2013 - 3:20pmPermalink
Hell No! That being said I believe each person can conduct an honest assessment and determine if they truly need the benefits. If not, they can opt out of the program. Most military/retirees are true givers and if it is feasable they would give up theri benefits for the betterment of the nation.
April 11, 2013 - 4:31pmPermalink
Military retirement benefits are fair game for cost reduction, but only on a forward-looking basis. That will allow those enlisting or being commissioned on or after a future, publicized date to decide whether the guaranteed benefits are worth the risks and sacrifices of a military career.
April 11, 2013 - 5:24pmPermalink
The government should not be looking at military benefits as a way to reduce current costs. Besides the fact that military retirement benefits were part of a contract with those collecting these benefits, the government has no business altering this contract. If they decide to change their retirement policies for new enlistees than that would be fine because the enlistee would know going in that they would be receiving certain retirement benefits based on when they enlisted. You can't go back and change the rules for those already in the system. There are hundred and thousands of useless, wasteful government programs that should be eliminated before anyone even looks at military retirement as a means to cut the budget.
April 12, 2013 - 8:24amPermalink
Trying to correct the budget on the backs of the vets is not the place to go, such as droping over 174,000 Retired Veterans from Tricare Prime to Tricare Standard, come October 1 2013. With my wife being in poor health, all it will do is add an extra burden on us. Now I have to try to find a Supplement to help the cost of her medical bills.
April 12, 2013 - 5:15pmPermalink
I am a 100% disabled retired US Army veteran. I need the money that I get for disability to live on and to pay my bills. If the gov't wants to save money, then they should quit giving PAKISTAN ALL THIS MONEY BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PLAYING US FROM THE BEGINNING, AND OUR FEARLESS LEADERS DON'T HAVE THE SENSE GOD GAVE A LOONY GOOSE. But that's the DAM REPUBLICANS. THEIR MOTTO IS THAT THERE ISN'T ANYTHING YOU CAN'T FIX, JUST THROW MORE MONEY AT IT. The best thing that Obama has done is to get out troops out of Iraq, a place we should have finished off the first time we were there. All because that LIAR BUSH WANTED TO PLAY WAR. He didn't have the guts to serve himself. For the gov't to cut the benefits of the men and women who have honorably served this great country is LUDICROUS.
April 13, 2013 - 1:45amPermalink
For God's sake, Military Retirement should be allotted lots of funds for the veterans and early retirees. The Federal Government should analyze this very carefully. It is no joke to offer your life for country;s safety and honor. The United States, typically thought of a first-world nation, is rapidly losing its standing if one thinks about the security and life-style of its average citizens after retiring from the work force. According to a brand new study, the U.S. ranks low in relation to retirement security and even lower in health care. plus, they even buried military men and retirees even buried their selves to military loans just to support their families. Military hard works should be paid fully in accordance with their duty. Read more here:
More information about text formats