There's a plan in Congress to start charging troops for their GI Bill benefits

Congressional staff estimate the move would bring in about $3.1 billion over the next 10 years, while total GI Bill spending is expected to total more than $100 billion over the same decade.

First that's 10 billion a year.

Second.

As written, the draft bill would cover only new enlistees, and would not charge the $2,400 eligibility fee to troops already in the ranks.

ONLY new enlistees.

And ONLY after making to the senate, getting passed there, and signed in to law by Trump.

So when Trump says winning we now know he means it its in a Charlie Sheen sort of way,preposterous especially as the US is damn now near a military junta with all these appointments.

is the government really that desperate for money that they think $100 a month from new enlistees is going to help>

a 4 year enlistment times $100 a month is only $4,800 how is that going to help offset the cost of any G.I. bill benefit?

The ONLY reason they want to do this is so that in the future they can continuously raise the monthly amount, start small so nobody objects and then once the deal is carved in stone start raising the monthly amount every year, have we learned nothing from obamacare?

There are about 11 million millionaires in the U.S. since the government seems to need that extra $1,200 a year from each new enlistee how about each millionaire in the U.S. pays an extra $1,200 a year in taxes?

if each millionaire paid that extra $1,200 a year we could have an 11 million person military before any soldier had to start paying that $1,200 a year out of their own pocket.

as I said though, this isn`t about that $1,200 a year this is about getting a foot in the door to so they can really screw new enlistees in the future.

if the politicians can`t afford a military and G.I. benefits then maybe they should stop creating so many wars.

a reply to: Tardacus

Meanwhile Lockheed Martin gets 5000 for a bolt you can get at home depot for 7.50

a reply to: Swills

Agree 100%.

a reply to: neo96

Maybe we should stop creating vets eh?

a reply to: Tardacus

Corporations should start paying a military tax, especially defense contractors... they're why we're always creating enemies.

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: Tardacus

Meanwhile Lockheed Martin gets 5000 for a bolt you can get at home depot for 7.50

Lockheed and others don't get those prices.

The inflated line items in the budget is book cooking to hide black budget items through various expenditures.

a reply to: Kali74

The fact that someone actually considered doing this shows how deeply America is in decline.

The TPTB is having US troops fight abroad in useless wars (Syria and soon to be North Korea) for the almighty $$$$$ while screwing them over at home.

a reply to: Kali74

Funny K.

How bout taxing politicians since they are the ones that start wars.

a reply to: neo96

Instructed by corporations to start wars you mean.

Is this ontop of the fee you already pay when you enlist? GI bill was never free to begin with you paid a fee to join. I think it was 1000-1200? You paid it up in installments the first year. But the new plan is over the entire enlistment? That is 24000 from a 20 year enlistment. 4800 for your average 4 year... not sure how this is going to off set costs....

I payed $1200 total for mine.

a reply to: Pyle

It's for the Post 9/11 GI Bill which is:

Currently, the post-9/11 GI Bill offers full tuition to a four-year state college (or the equivalent tuition payout for a private school) plus a monthly housing stipend to any service member who spends at least three years on active duty, and to reservists who are mobilized to active-duty for extended periods. Troops wounded while serving are also eligible.

Military Times

This GI Bill is supposed to be a total give.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Kali74

Funny K.

How bout taxing politicians since they are the ones that start wars.

I think this is about the 3rd or 4th time I've ever agreed with you, Neo.

How about they produce a Bill to cut Congressional benefits?

a reply to: Kali74

Did we not agree as a nation that people that serve in the military especially in combat would be taken care of when they get home?

They were led to believe a lot of things... waging unjust wars in foreign lands for Corporate America for one. They are 'taken care of' just as long as they are 'serviceable'.

Lied to going in , lied to coming out.

Maybe we should start investigating why the cost of tuition is so high and we'll come back around to the government writing blank checks via student loans.

Perhaps we should start our cutting there?

I hate to sound like an ass looking for the silver lining, but perhaps this is for the better, even if it's merely debated and never makes any progress -- show people the military & it's "employment perks" aren't actually as good as the patriotic sack-lickers make it out to be & we may downsize the military (and thus it's expenses) somewhat naturally over time. Prospective recruits may think "who TF wants to work for crumbs in a job that dangerous?"

You wanted a businessman. It's just business cost cutting to make sure the politicians can enjoy their tax supported health care and sweet pensions.

fas.org...

a reply to: Kali74

If they look at the ultimate cause of why the GI Bill costs to much, which is the rising price of college, maybe some more people will get on board with trying to address the issue in a reasonable way.