Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 motyak wrote:
Where are these charts from?

http://nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well mine was pulled off google under President's proposed 2013 budget. Only for comparison to show that only using discretionary spending is a dishonest way of portraying the budget.

It shows discretionary funds spent on the military relative to veteran's benefits which is pretty damn on-topic per the OP. There are pretty clear titles to those charts, so it's only dishonest if you can't read.

 Ouze wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well mine was pulled off google under President's proposed 2013 budget. Only for comparison to show that only using discretionary spending is a dishonest way of portraying the budget.

It shows discretionary funds spent on the military relative to veteran's benefits which is pretty damn on-topic per the OP. There are pretty clear titles to those charts, so it's only dishonest if you can't read.

I was approaching it from the angle of general government spending cuts. In which case it is dishonest to not take into account that discretionary spending is a small amount of the total budget.

I apologize for any confusion.


From that article, here is the total federal spending for 2014

 whembly wrote:

Because they offer separate healthcare as part of their benefits. (Tricare?)

So.... Obamacare isn't good enough for our troops service wise (even platinum plans, or whatever they're calling them?)

Legitimate question. I don't know.

There is no health plan called "Obamacare"...

 d-usa wrote:
There is no health plan called "Obamacare"...

Please, don't be pedantic. It's fething unnecessary. I was asking a serious question.

Are any of the PLANS covered under the PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE [HEALTH]CARE ACT not viable for our veterans?

 cincydooley wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
There is no health plan called "Obamacare"...

Please, don't be pedantic. It's fething unnecessary. I was asking a serious question.

Are any of the PLANS covered under the PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE [HEALTH]CARE ACT not viable for our veterans?

The PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE [HEALTH]CARE ACT simply codifies a minimum requirement of coverage that your health care plan has to provide and if you don't have a health insurance plan that meets the minimum requirements of the PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE [HEALTH]CARE ACT you have to pay a fine.

So with what appears to be a limited understanding of the PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE [HEALTH]CARE ACT, and not realizing why a statement like "why can't they just get ObamaCare like everyone else has to" makes you seem somewhat suspect on the subject matter, I'm just going to help you with this so you can get your answer.

But the short answer is "yes, ObamaCare is good enough for our troops" even though that question and that answer doesn't really make much sense.

I asked if there were any Plans covered under it that would be good enough? Does not demonstrate my understanding that the marketplace basically takes your information and pings multiple local insurance agencies to find a plan that fits you and the plan level you select within the parameters laid out by the PPACA?

I didn't ask for you to be a jerk about it.

I haven't investigated the minimum standards of the PPACA because I have no interest or requirement for it. I imagine much of what our vets require when they come home from war is access to mental health services as well as standard health care plans. Do plans that fit within the PPACA parameters fit that?

You know what, feth it. You're most likely going to give me another gakky, sarcastic, non helpful answer, so I'll just google it myself.

 cincydooley wrote:
I asked if there were any Plans covered under it that would be good enough? Does not demonstrate my understanding that the marketplace basically takes your information and pings multiple local insurance agencies to find a plan that fits you and the plan level you select within the parameters laid out by the PPACA?

I didn't ask for you to be a jerk about it.

I haven't investigated the minimum standards of the PPACA because I have no interest or requirement for it. I imagine much of what our vets require when they come home from war is access to mental health services as well as standard health care plans. Do plans that fit within the PPACA parameters fit that?

You know what, feth it. You're most likely going to give me another gakky, sarcastic, non helpful answer, so I'll just google it myself.

Given that the ACA just presents a minimum coverage and doesn't actually lay out plans at all, I'd assume that at least one plan that some company somewhere offers is good enough for military personnel, given that many are good enough for billionaire CEOs, etc. However, it seems a bit odd that you're so in favor of cutting benefits for troops.

 Laughing Man wrote:

Given that the ACA just presents a minimum coverage and doesn't actually lay out plans at all, I'd assume that at least one plan that some company somewhere offers is good enough for military personnel, given that many are good enough for billionaire CEOs, etc. However, it seems a bit odd that you're so in favor of cutting benefits for troops.

So I read a bit more about what the "extended coverage" would actually cover, and it seems that, among other things, it would provide family planning aid to war-injured vets and make caregiver support available to everyone, not just 9/11 vets. Family planning, it appears, includes fertility treatments and things like that, which is something Anthem seems to have on it's "well never cover" list

I was going to come up with some snarky comment about Republicans, social services, and bootstrapping, but anything I could think of came across as being in poor taste even for me.

Something I genuinely don't understand, why aren't veteran benefits a part of the military budget?

 Fafnir wrote:
Something I genuinely don't understand, why aren't veteran benefits a part of the military budget?

does it matter? it all comes from the same purse.

Department of Veterans Affair

Active Duty Military

Two different animals

Republicans are right No funding no passing. There's no clarification on where the money is going. To receive VA dental service it has to service connected. Tricare can cover you so many months after separation of service. Is it a new program or more money into the current programs.

I can a see a trade off. Crack down say...food stamp frauds and fund the program/s but still its seems its not a program for the vet's who do not have dental issue that's service connected or and expansion of coverage of Tricare to vet's

Is it cynical that my first thought was "They probably proposed that without funding expecting the Republicans to block it and end up looking bad."?

I'm actually thinking the intent was good but not thought out. It was a clean bill at that which I am surprise but I have to side with the Republicans. I'm a retired Vet recently so...take it for what its worth

 Da Boss wrote:
Is it cynical that my first thought was "They probably proposed that without funding expecting the Republicans to block it and end up looking bad."?

That's what some republicans in congress were saying. I wouldn't be surprised, both parties do stuff like this.

 Da Boss wrote:
Is it cynical that my first thought was "They probably proposed that without funding expecting the Republicans to block it and end up looking bad."?

Nope... you are very astute.

And for those veterans not covered by Tricare:

http://www.va.gov/health/aca/

I am very much so pro-veterans' benefits and the expanding thereof, however, the funding has to come from somewhere.