President Obama Signs Executive Order to benefit his whole veteran community.

#41
Point is the inordinate amount of time some waste criticizing the USA would be better spent lobbying for better programs for British veterans, American veterans are pretty well covered!

As GB pointed out families of service personnel are covered medically, as are the spouses of retired US veterans.
Families of British service personnel, spouses of retired veterans and random bloke down the pub that once read an Andy McNab book are already covered by a little thing called the NHS. How will lobbying for a VA system improve on that?
 
#42
Since you brought it up, why didn't Bush do it 11 years ago when he decided he was going to set fire to the CENTCOM area?
Bush Increased DVA funding to the highest levels it ever had. 115% since 2001.

FY 2009 funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) totals more than $97 billion, nearly double the level of funding when the President took office and the highest level of support for veterans in history.
I wonder if there is some correlation in the increase in funding and the US having a rather large surge in WIA post 2001, perhaps with the latter necessitating the former?
No, that can't be it: Bush was clearly a visionary that loved the military, whilst Obama is just using cynical ploys to aid his re-election.
 
#43
I wonder if there is some correlation in the increase in funding and the US having a rather large surge in WIA post 2001, perhaps with the latter necessitating the former?
No, that can't be it: Bush was clearly a visionary that loved the military, whilst Obama is just using cynical ploys to aid his re-election.
Are you retarded? of course there's a correlation, but you didn't see LBJ throw huge amounts of funds into the VA during Vietnam. There are thousands of things you can blame Bush for- rightly and wrongly. Increasing the funding for Veterans overall and Iraq/Afghan war veterans in particular isn't a bad thing.
 
#44
FFS you really just want to play stupid and argue don't you?

Bush did more for the VA than any president before or Since with funding and initiatives. His funding ended FY2009 with ths Highest finding in VA History.

Now in 2012, 3 years later Obama issues an order that helps improve the initiatives Bush started with 3 years hindsight. It isnt earth shaking changes. Again if you bother to read it, but of course you wont read it.
You're still avoiding the question. Had President Bush already done the thing that Obama's just done?

I'll explain it in very simple terms: if the answer is yes, you get some lovely new ammunition to slate Obama with; if it's no then you are criticising Obama for doing something too late that Bush didn't do at all.
 
#45
I wonder if there is some correlation in the increase in funding and the US having a rather large surge in WIA post 2001, perhaps with the latter necessitating the former?
No, that can't be it: Bush was clearly a visionary that loved the military, whilst Obama is just using cynical ploys to aid his re-election.
Are you retarded? of course there's a correlation, but you didn't see LBJ throw huge amounts of funds into the VA during Vietnam.
No, but this isn't a thread about LBJ, or the treatment of the WIA of a war that finished 40 years ago.

There are thousands of things you can blame Bush for- rightly and wrongly. Increasing the funding for Veterans overall and Iraq/Afghan war veterans in particular isn't a bad thing.
Obama has increased VA funding far above that of 2009, but I see you've neglected to mention that. If Bush hadn't have been quite so keen to start a rather unnecessary and unadvisable second war there would have been less need for him to have made the increases he did.
 
#46
No, but this isn't a thread about LBJ, or the treatment of the WIA of a war that finished 40 years ago.



Obama has increased VA funding far above that of 2009, but I see you've neglected to mention that. If Bush hadn't have been quite so keen to start a rather unnecessary and unadvisable second war there would have been less need for him to have made the increases he did.
VA Funding in 2009 was US$97 Billion, today it is US$120 Billion was there a Need to mention it? was it hidden from you? your so angry you cant eve n acknowledge Bush did a good thing by increasing the funding.

As to increases yes there still would have been the need with Millions of aging WWII and Korean war, Vietnam War veterans

22.7 Million veterans
9 million are age 65 and over
2.1 Million WWII Veterans
2.6 Million Korean War veterans
 
#47
Out of the 22.7 million Vets, I wonder how many need or want any assistance and indeed how many of the total never left the States or were REMFS in a safe environment?
 
#50
Families of British service personnel, spouses of retired veterans and random bloke down the pub that once read an Andy McNab book are already covered by a little thing called the NHS. How will lobbying for a VA system improve on that?
Well considering there are no military hospitals in the UK, stories of wounded service personnel being harassed by muslims in NHS hospitals. The number of posts on here from injured personnel and others complaining of inadequate rehab' facilities, and half assed after care, the fact limbless veterans have to rely on charities to supply them with decent prosthetics. Organisations like SSAFA, RBL, H4H, Regimental Associations (all of which I subscribe too), and the myriad others who collect money to aid our former service personnel suggest a properly funded and well organised UK VA system just might benefit former service personnel.

I also believe the UK should enact a GI Bill. What's wrong with that? Those who pour scorn on an effective, properly funded Veterans Administration and a Bill of Rights for service personnel have probably never served.
 
#51
Only immediate I think.
Alib, you really must do some research - or come over here, become a US citizen and put all our problems to right, then you can post on ARRSE and tell the Brits they are doing things all wrong - everyone that is, except that nice Mr Milliband (don't you just wish he was black)? or whoever the socialist leader may be.

Back on track. The dependents of serving US military personnel are covered by their spouse's benefits.
Spouses of retired military personnel (had to have been married while their spouse was serving) are also covered by their retired spouse's plan.
I know an old widow, very ill, who was married to a retired veteran of WW2, Korea, and Vietnam, she is receiving the best of treatment courtesy of her deceased husband's plan.
 
#52
While we are singing the praises of socialistic big government intervention in the economy now that the UK has substantial university fees one aspect of the GI bill the UK should take a look at is encouraging further education. This would be a good use of expensively created human capital and might to something to address the less than stellar performance of British management which officers often end up having a second career in.

Actually the British army isn't even much good at encouraging study when officers are serving especially when compared to the academic excellence of their US peers.
 
#53
Out of the 22.7 million Vets, I wonder how many need or want any assistance and indeed how many of the total never left the States or were REMFS in a safe environment?
Probably, proportionately, the same number as the UK in conflicts since WW2 (I regarded BAOR as a home posting).

REMFS in a safe environment? Well those who fall into that category who post on ARRSE and have served in AFG will hastily tell you the front line is all around you, and you know, judging by the number of AFG military personnel who blow themselves up in barracks and turn on their allies, I'd be inclined to agree with them - to an extent (that was hard to say being a former infantryman). Chances of being mortared, rocketed, etc in 'safe' areas in Vietnam were probably just as real, I wasn't there I hasten to add, no, during that era I was in the likes of Borneo and Aden - where REMFS really, really WERE remfs!
 
#54
Alib, you really must do some research - or come over here, become a US citizen and put all our problems to right, then you can post on ARRSE and tell the Brits they are doing things all wrong - everyone that is, except that nice Mr Milliband (don't you just wish he was black)? or whoever the socialist leader may be.

Back on track. The dependents of serving US military personnel are covered by their spouse's benefits.
Spouses of retired military personnel (had to have been married while their spouse was serving) are also covered by their retired spouse's plan.
I know an old widow, very ill, who was married to a retired veteran of WW2, Korea, and Vietnam, she is receiving the best of treatment courtesy of her deceased husband's plan.
Butt that's just dependents, families are rather larger beasts, there are grandchildren and even parents, siblings etc. Where you draw the line up or down the relatives would have to be sorted out politically, there's plenty of room for organic growth of a state service that seems to be performing very well.

Expanding the VA's socialized system isn't my idea, it came from a couple of experts. There was a VA critic on a political podcast about the treatment of PTSD patients I recall at the time of the healthcare debate. After lambasting it for sometimes denying vets the care they need, turned round, said he didn't want to give folk the impression that the VA was crap and proposed just this, expanding VA coverage to about 20% of the US population and if it works (delivers good care at a lower cost) maybe further. The guy who was sent by the VA to offer a defense on the program approved, they are both probably partisans of the VA but it stuck in my head. Last I heard of the idea, you ended up with Barry's dumb ass insurance reform bill. There is an argument against expanding the VA here.

I think if the VA had a bigger slice of the business the competition with the dysfunctional market based system might actually correct it. I don't know if it is practical to scale it up but from what I hear it's possibly the most cost effective healthcare organization in the US.

I only know about the VA obliquely as I have a professional interest in the US healthcare market, it's were we rake off by far our biggest profits. We aren't big on cost effective customers in Pharma. We naturally like the the more typical US operations that dole out our over priced drugs like sweeties. I talked this over briefly with a colleague who lobbies for Big Pharma around the world. He went a bit white, at the thought of a bigger VA and the profits we'd probably lose if the US market started to have a really large rational actor focused on cost to patient not milking out profits. Same chap is rather pleased with the Barrycare deal as am I. If Mitt gets in and completely unchains the market we'll be cracking open a crates of Dom PĂ©rignon.
 
#55
A national health service is morally right thought to rush into a half assed version just to satisfy Barry's socialist vanity is wrong. The USA also can't afford it right now. Had the Obama political machine made the economy their priority, reduced unemployment, set to work on blowing life into a tired, dog eared infrastructure, and induced businesses to return to the USA they would have had moderate republicans eating out of their hands. Then a bi-partisan study of a national health care system would have been probable and successful.

I'm fortunate as I have a really good health and dental plan, Obama would describe it as a Cadillac plan and intends to tax it as income! Now I had the presence of mind (being a cautious person) to choose a career that offered good benefits with their (contributory) retirement plan, and I resent being penalised because I worked damn hard.
 
#57
Out of the 22.7 million Vets, I wonder how many need or want any assistance and indeed how many of the total never left the States or were REMFS in a safe environment?
26% have disabilities that are Service Connected.


Service Connected isnt just for Bayonet wounds in Hand to Hand combat. It can be for the sailor working on a radar dish who falls and breaks his Pelvis in 1966 at Subic Bay, the Artilleryman with tinnitus who spent 2 years at Wildflecken or Graf in 1958. the Marine who was in a Jeep which rolled over in 1980 and got a fractured skull.
Benefits Fact Sheets - Benefits - Veterans Benefits Administration
 
#58
I am concerned that by comparison to the American approach British Government's efforts are pathetic.

British government's rely far too much on charity's to do the job government should be doing.

I have always believed in the morale principle "why should Britain's ill and wounded service people have to rely on charity" ??

We are the only country in the English speaking world NOT to have a dedicated veterans governmental department.

This sort of standard is simply inadequate and is unacceptable in the 21st century in my opinion.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top