Obama '08?

I wanna know why none of you seem to object to the Obama plan of having wounded vets pay for their own service related healthcare?
In a nutshell, Obama wants all combat wounded vets to use their own private insurance to pay for treatment of those wounds.

None of you seem to object to that?
Why not?

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

I wanna know why none of you seem to object to the Obama plan of having wounded vets pay for their own service related healthcare?
In a nutshell, Obama wants all combat wounded vets to use their own private insurance to pay for treatment of those wounds.

None of you seem to object to that?
Why not?

I object to this. But I want to see a formal plan put forth before getting my hackles up about it.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

So its ok for the Obama admin to plan it, but until they enact it you wont complain or care?

Is that what you are saying?

If people dont complain now, it WILL be enacted and then it will be to late to change it.

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

So its ok for the Obama admin to plan it, but until they enact it you wont complain or care?

Is that what you are saying?

If people dont complain now, it WILL be enacted and then it will be to late to change it.

I haven't seen them announce that they plan on doing this; I just saw one guy mention it as something they are looking into. So no, I'm not going to get all pissy about it yet. But you can feel free to.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

Quote:

I wanna know why none of you seem to object to the Obama plan of having wounded vets pay for their own service related healthcare?
In a nutshell, Obama wants all combat wounded vets to use their own private insurance to pay for treatment of those wounds.

None of you seem to object to that?
Why not?

It looks like my objection went un-noticed or misunderstood. What I meant was that there would be rioting in the streets here led by H.M. Queen if such a proposal was made seriously. It could be classed as treason because it cannot but destroy morale in the services.

And even mentioning it goes some way to that.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

It looks like my objection went un-noticed or misunderstood. What I meant was that there would be rioting in the streets here led by H.M. Queen if such a proposal was made seriously. It could be classed as treason because it cannot but destroy morale in the services.

And even mentioning it goes some way to that.

In the UK, the NHS [National Health Service] AND the Defence Medical Services (DMS) provide treatment and healthcare for Service personnel. (There's a concordat between the Department of Health and the Ministry of Defense, renewed in 2004 the last time, as far as I could find out.)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Right now, the VA charges for nonservice-related treatments (e.g. a flu shot).

I'm not totally sure, but the plan may be for a charge for service-related illnesses IF the vet has insurance. Thus, the insurance, not the vet, would be paying.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Quote:

I'm not totally sure, but the plan may be for a charge for service-related illnesses IF the vet has insurance. Thus, the insurance, not the vet, would be paying.

And since I pay my own insurance premiums, that means that I would be paying for treatment of service related wounds.

BTW, the report doesnt say service related illness, it quite clearly says "service related injuries"

Quote:

Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance.

That means any wounds I received that are service related,as in combat wounds.

0 Replies

Vets started to have co-pays for health care when Bush cut their benefits. I don't understand why they would have to pay for non-combat related health services - like flu shots - that are covered under most insurance plans.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Vets started to have co-pays for health care when Bush cut their benefits. I don't understand why they would have to pay for non-combat related health services - like flu shots - that are covered under most insurance plans

And I dont know a single vet that has complained about that.
BUT,now the Obama admin is considering charging me for combat related wounds?

That isnt right.

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

No, it's not that you personally have not heard of anybody complain, but you're not the best source for such info. Anecdotal experience does not even come close to reality for many for most areas of human experience.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

Show us the regs where Obama is planning to charge for combat-related wounds?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Anecdotal experience does not even come close to reality for many for most areas of human experience.

Better tell Lightwizard that ci. And you might try to remember it yourself.

He's got the richest guy in Orange County, who he says is a homosexual, giving "some" money, how much isn't specified, to a charitable foundation amidst a fanfare of trumpets and probably a ceremonial presentation in which he is the centre of attraction as if it is conclusive proof that homosexuals are wonderful and compassionate citizens.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

Your question is without merit; show us Obama's plan on vet's health care.

From Fairfield Weekly:

Quote:

Co-Pay and the VA
Local veterans?some returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, some discharged decades ago?find themselves fighting again
Comments (0)
Thursday, July 03, 2008
By Rachel Slajda
Herb Morrison (left), Burt Weinstein and stacks of paperwork from the VA

Herb Morrison, a World War II Navy veteran and retired engineer, went to the Veterans Affairs hospital in West Haven in October 2006 to get his pacemaker replaced. Had he gone to a private hospital, Medicare would have paid for the surgery. But at the VA, Morrison says, “I’d have to pay, but I didn’t care because they were so good.” The charge? A $900 co-pay.

What followed is a disturbing saga of incompetence, dysfunctional bureaucracy and outright violations of Veterans Health Administration policy as the VA tried to force an aging vet to pay nearly $1,000 for a surgery they screwed up.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

mm, Show us where Obama/Biden will be reducing veteran's benefits.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/veterans/

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/10/veterans.health.insurance/index.html

Read it yourself.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

That was an idea proposed by General Shinseki that has zero probability of it passing congress.

According to Obama (before and after his election), he will support veteran's benefits to which they deserve.

Any more scare crows in your closet?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

That was an idea proposed by General Shinseki that has zero probability of it passing congress.

The same General that is now Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki.
He could propose any plan he wanted when he was in uniform, but now as a member of the cabinet he has the authority to act on that plan.
And the fact that you think its ok for the admin to even consider such a plan tells me quite a bit about you and how you really think the military should be treated.
And even if the plan has no chance of passing congress, the fact that the admin would even consider such a plan tells me that Obama does not "support veteran's benefits to which they deserve".
This plan would force those vets injured in Iraq or Afghanistan to pay for their own medical care, instead of getting veterans benefits and hospitalization.

Quote:

According to Obama (before and after his election), he will support veteran's benefits to which they deserve.

According to Obama, there would be no lobbyists (current or former) serving in his admin, but there are at least 2 already.
So for you to believe everything that comes from the Obama admin shows that you are just as much of a koolaid drinker as you like to accuse conservatives of being.

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

Oh? Is that so; please tell me how I think our military veterans should be treated?

Talking points before they become law has no teeth. Shinseki does not approve the budget nor create new regs without the approval from congress and the president.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

According to Obama, there would be no lobbyists (current or former) serving in his admin, but there are at least 2 already.

Obama has broken so many promises, and backpedaled so many times, his word has become virtually meaningless. He says next time, no earmarks. Sure sure, Obama, I believe you, ha. And a clear and open administration, what a joke. And he says to the states, I will "call you out" when the states don't spend the money wisely. There are already tons of examples of wasteful spending, and does he care, obviously not, or his idea of wasteful spending is certainly different than most peoples. I suppose giving money to ACORN is money well spent according to Obama. Ha ha, what a laugh. Does anyone take him seriously anymore?

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know