Fix for the VA? Let 'em out!

[Zeke]

In addition, we need to be more selective (over about the past decade) of the number of folks in the military (all branches and services) as well as how we use them.

Less on the front end means less expense on the back end.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Zeke

In addition, we need to be more selective (over about the past decade) of the number of folks in the military (all branches and services) as well as how we use them.

Less on the front end means less expense on the back end.

I can agree with that. Keep the incentive to serve high, but keep the numbers down when they are not needed. In fact, prior to the Cold War, this is what we did. It's maintaining a massive standing army that gets so expensive. I recall my Dad telling me that after WW2 a lot of guys were simply told to "take a hike". During the war they needed all the grunts they could get to throw at the enemy. Afterwards? 'Thanks for your service, young man! Now, scram. Go back to South Bend and assemble Studebakers.'

I don't get where anyone thinks that simply joining the military entitles them to a career. Only the best and brightest should be allowed to hang around for a pension. Let the rest go make their way in the civilian world.

Dave

[sheltiedave]

Don't worry, the vets know how to involve the VFW, American Legion, DAV, PVA, and the other smaller orgs that represent them. Private doctors will not accept all the multitudes that don't have private insurance. The VA lines, long as they are, are shorter than most private specialties that are required to put a major dent in the backlogs.

[sheltiedave]

Here is an article with better balance...

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/g...064bc97d6.html

[sheltiedave]

Come on people, this is a real article with a fair amount of investigative digging. It hits close to the spot, and no one has a comment?

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Come on people, this is a real article with a fair amount of investigative digging. It hits close to the spot, and no one has a comment?

Sorry Dave . I'll read it right now.

edit - First takeaway is that Gen. Shinseki got a raw deal along with our vets. This stupid idea that heads must roll within the VA when it is congress who has failed the system is frankly conterproductive.

[mpholland]

Hard to comment on problems that big and complicated. That is why I don't comment much in threads like this or the ACA threads. Fixing one area usually leads to more problems in another area.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Come on people, this is a real article with a fair amount of investigative digging. It hits close to the spot, and no one has a comment?

Well most of what the article said was rather obvious to anyone who stopped to think. Shinseki fell on his sword because the real culprits refused to accept the blame and demanded a human sacrifice.

[Oerets]

I also read the article. Though a good telling of the history leading up to current events. So just why should the VA be alone in it being top heavy on management? An all to common practice in the private sector too.

Made me keep wondering if anything will really get fixed? They need to ramp up staffing to administer services. Or funds, but if taxes need to be raised to pay for the injured!!! The same injured, injured as a result of wars started without much thought of the costs. Well the hens have come home to roost! Payup! Settle up and do the right thing, before starting another war and creating even more needing care.

Because it is the same ones beating the drums of war right now who stop the adequate funding of the VA. Hell stop proper funding it it will raise taxes, except their own raises!

Barney

[Pio1980]

Conservatives want a great country but refuse to fund it, Libertarians won't fund anything that doesn't directly benefit themselves. Clear enuff?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk