Posted by Tina
According to IJ Review money cannot be used as an excuse for the lack of timely care given our veterans. The budget increased 173% from 2000 to 2012:
Whether you adjust for inflation or not, the increases for the V.A. budget have exceeded inflation and the increase in the number of patients. The dollars involved have increased from $45 billion in 2000 to $124 billion in 2012. The spending for 2013 was $139 billion, $154 billion for 2014, and the request for 2015 is $165 billion. There have been no cuts, that’s for sure. (See chart)
What we have is a massive amount of overpaid bureaucrats administering and shuffling the paperwork that represents mounds of red tape. Government doesn’t work because it has no profit motive. Government spends other people’s money; it has an unending supply because it can raise taxes and it can print more cash. There is no incentive to be efficient and deliver the best product.service for the best possible price. There is tremendous incentive to grow and create complex systems and procedures that require more people and on and on in a vicious cycle.
The VA hasn’t worked for decades and money is not the cause of inefficiencies. So throwing more money at this problem won’t solve it. We need to face the fact that big government just does not work. Government cannot do what the private sector can do and do very well. It’s time to give our vets vouchers to use in the private sector for their medical needs. We can do it as part of the process for dumping Obamacare and replacing it with policy that uses free market principles.
Now go look up by what percentage the population served has increased in that time.
It’s a shame you don’t listen to real news. I’ve heard a lot of very good suggestions for eliminating a lot of that which is hide-bound in the VA.
And sackings do figure into it.
But the best thing was where soldiers are signed up with the VA when then commence their service (not end it), and an intake physical is a part of their record. Any health changes noted during the exit physical are put to the VA’s charge.
Simple, honest, quick, and expensive. But if you say they are entitled, you won’t crab.
Look at the chart, epic fail boy, even when inflation is accounted for there is still plenty of money. Money is not the problem.
Also, you hate everything, everyone except you is wrong, and you are obsessed with Wall Street.
I get it.
Libby: “Now go look up by what percentage the population served has increased in that time.”
It doesn’t matter. As the article informed, “…the increases for the V.A. budget have exceeded inflation and the increase in the number of patients.
“It’s a shame you don’t listen to real news. I’ve heard a lot of very good suggestions for eliminating a lot of that which is hide-bound in the VA.”
And your evidence that the news you get is superior?
“But the best thing was where soldiers are signed up with the VA when then commence their service (not end it), and an intake physical is a part of their record. Any health changes noted during the exit physical are put to the VA’s charge.”
Amazing that the military does not already have these records! Don’t know how signing up at induction will help with double record keeping, making veterans wait for care, sometimes for years, or keeping authorities from awarding bonuses for a terrible performance record.
“Simple, honest, quick, and expensive.”
Just like all the rest of the unworkable red tape.
“But if you say they are entitled, you won’t crab.”
You think I should crab? Sorry but our vets deserve the best care we can give them; it’s the least we can do for their service. (Not exactly the same as a low life whose capable of working and doesn’t because you will award him with freebies!)
Maybe we should scrap the VA system and go for vouchers! Good idea! As it is, the VA is too expensive and fraught with endless problems. Why can’t we issue vets an insurance card so they can go where they want? We can’t give everyone who served a few years in the military lifetime medical, but we should give retirees or disabled vets the insurance card until they turn Soc. Security age. That would be better for them and better for the taxpayers too.
Dewey please explain the alternative you prefer to the private sector.
Jack, thank heavens, a voice of sanity.
Is Dewey one of Chris’ students or is he simply Chris on drugs?
This is a glimpse into the future of Obamacare.
Re: “What we have is a massive amount of overpaid bureaucrats administering and shuffling the paperwork that represents mounds of red tape.”
Yup.
The bizarre parallel universe that Blame The Victim Libby lives in isn’t even interesting anymore.
Pie at #’s 9,10,11 and 22…thank heavens a crazy voice of sanity enters the fray.
Tina: “Sorry but our vets deserve the best care we can give them; it’s the least we can do for their service.”
Then why did Republicans block a bill to expand veterans’ healthcare?
I’d have to look into it Chris…or you could rather than simply takig that cheap shot.
I imagine it was either economically unsound (The money already allocated is sufficient) or it was loaded with other garbage that Republicans could not support.
You know how this works Chris, don’t be stupid.
Do,do,do,do
Do,do,do,do
We’re in the Twilight Zone.
“Amazing that the military does not already have these records! Don’t know how signing up at induction will help with double record keeping, making veterans wait for care, sometimes for years, or keeping authorities from awarding bonuses for a terrible performance record.”
This is supposed to mean something?
Tina, this would be my answer to your well made point.
Mr. Harry Reid’s conscientious control over the process is my answer
.
Mr. Reid dismissed all Republican proposals as unacceptable and then proposed his own deal.
Reid has repeatedly done this with bills on energy and unemployment, as well as over 90% of all bills amended by the GOP.
Shocking, naw, It’s basically business as usual under Reid’s command (obstruction is a better Term)
The the maneuvering of Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats have violated the ages-old rule allowing the minority party to offer amendments to bills under consideration.
Harold, the amendment added to the vet bill by Republicans was about sanctions on Iran. It had absolutely nothing to do with the bill under consideration, and Republicans knew Democrats wouldn’t vote for it. It could be argued that it was a deliberate attempt to block the bill. Why would Republicans do this? Is it so important that they NEVER compromise with Democrats, that they would purposely sabotage a bill they actually agree with?
Republicans would “do this” because it was a bad bill!
Don’t preach about compromise Chris unless you know what the hell you are talking about! Look at the overall evidence.
Liberals (progressives…hard core socialists) have been winning the argument (incrementally) for seventy or more years. Our nation is much more a nanny state than it was seventy years ago. It didn’t get that way because Republicans refuse to compromise. Republicans HAVE compromised over and over and over again. Democrats do not give an inch. Harry Reid is the perfect representation of the block wall that has been the radical Democrat stronghold of non-compromise in America for decades. Wake up you absolutely ignorant, unthinking fool! I realize you are young but nearly six years of failure after failure should be a wake up call for you…at the very least it should create some openness and curiosity about how others think.
Harold you are exactly right. Good answer!
One Tea Party group has demanded through legal channels that Harry Reid be held accountable for ethics violations in the Senate for his targeting of the Koch brothers.
Good for them; his behavior has been horrid!
Dewey you have resorted to bumper sticker pronouncements again.This isn’t the conversation you claim to want.
I’ll bet you find yourself quite clever. Surest sign that you are not.
In my opinion a combo of utilizing both the VA hospitals and voucher for private care would be the solution.
VA hospitals are excellent in providing rehab and psychological care for our wounded and those suffering from PTSD. Turn all VA facilities into care centers for the primary care service related injuries.
Give vouchers to vets who need normal health care not related to a service injury.
Conservatives make sense…liberals, nonsense.
#28, amen to that one! : )
Ref Tina #24, additionally I’ll add that “Negotiating with Reid is like playing chess with a pigeon….
the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, poops on the board and then struts around like it won the game.”
Tina: “Republicans would “do this” because it was a bad bill!”
In what way? You said yourself you haven’t looked into it. Are you just assuming the bill must have been bad because Republicans blocked it?
“Liberals (progressives…hard core socialists) have been winning the argument (incrementally) for seventy or more years. Our nation is much more a nanny state than it was seventy years ago.”
Yes, and our nation also pays a much lower top marginal tax rate than seventy years ago. There’s your “compromise:” conservatives have (reluctantly) agreed to liberal demands that we expand welfare programs, while liberals have (reluctantly) agreed to conservative demands that we lower taxes.
That has been a recipe for disaster. Our historically low tax rates cannot sustain our historically high demand for welfare. The liberal solution is to raise tax rates on the wealthy. The conservative solution is to cut programs for the poor (as if eliminating the programs would reduce the need). I know which one I’d choose.
“Conservatives make sense…liberals, nonsense.”
What a divisive, closed-minded way to view the world. I am a liberal, but I know plenty of sensible conservatives, as well as nonsensical liberals.
You should get out more.
At #30 Harold re Pigeon poop and Reid stomping around…apparently unaware that he stinks from the dirt on his shoes.
Chris: “In what way? You said yourself you haven’t looked into it. Are you just assuming the bill must have been bad because Republicans blocked it?”
I’m assuming nothing…I surmised that a vote against it could be based on something in it that was unsupportable. I call that sound reasoning…and you are being ridiculously picky for a person who supports the party of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
“Yes, and our nation also pays a much lower top marginal tax rate than seventy years ago.”
Chris you really believe you have stumbled upon the perfect argument. It only shows how naive and inexperienced, not to mention ignorant, you are.
Tax rates are lower but in most of those years revenues have been higher and spending just increases…no matter how much the private sector sends them it’s never enough for the spendthrift liberals. Not only have they spent but their plans are structured poorly so that debt is growing by leaps and bounds. Also the various ways that government has devised to collect money from the American people has exploded in seventy years. Do some basic research. Americans keep a lot less of what they have sewn now. Seventy years ago there were not hundreds of programs, federal, state,and local…there were not hundreds of different fees, assessments, and taxes being added to property, energy, utility and consumer goods. There was not the enormous cost of compliance that is associated with all of this collection and regulation. the cost of the bureaucracy to oversee it has exploded. Seventy years ago the money you earned was what you took home. Today, government continues to take from you even after the need for the assessment has been met. Government grows but without giving a greater benefit in return. Government costs us money but is not self correcting or efficient. Government is wasting and spending your generation into poverty and you argue with me. Are you insane? Shared poverty is not a model I would think you’d support.
“Our historically low tax rates cannot sustain our historically high demand for welfare.”
Listen to yourself. Welfare as a “demand”?
Ask not what your country can do for you…ask what you can do for your country.
How about asking what you can do for yourself first!!!!!
Welfare should be the last resort…humbly “requested” with assurances that the money will not only be used on a temporary basis but will be used wisely and in some cases will be repaid.
“The liberal solution is to raise tax rates on the wealthy.”
Only because they have decimated the middle class and created high poverty rates. Your liberal policies have made the wealthy wealthier…Wall Street is making money in this lousy non-recovery under liberal policies but the middle class, the poor, the young and minorities are being screwed!
“The conservative solution is to cut programs for the poor”
Chris the conservative position is to eliminate the need for welfare by empowering the poor with opportunities to work and keep what they earn. The conservative position is that the best scenario is a society where welfare is barely required. the conservative position is to reform entitlements that are creating massive debt. Regarding SS we suggest reforms that would allow young people the option to put some retirement money into a private account (like congress has) while maintaining the current system for those who no longer have earning power. The work to welfare program helped a lot of people get off welfare; I think we could improve on that reform.
What we have been doing is not working for many reasons one of which is that we have made people too dependent and grown the number who are dependent to an unsustainable level. There are better ways to handle our economy and manage programs that empower people rather than growing government. Our education system needs reforms as well…we are not serving the least of our children well at all.
I would really appreciate it if you would stop falsely characterizing the conservative position.
“What a divisive, closed-minded way to view the world.”
What a silly response to a remark obviously meant to be humorous…you make similar statements about conservatives why the sudden sensitivity?
“You should get out more.”
You should lighten up.
Seventy years ago we also had a much higher poverty rate. Clearly, social welfare programs are doing something right.
#36 (Chris) “Seventy years ago we also had a much higher poverty rate. Clearly, social welfare programs are doing something right.” Chris
Once again Chris you are victimized by your own bias! Seventy years ago the [world] had a much higher poverty rate…did our welfare programs do that too? It’s basic human nature to want progress and to climb the ladder of economic success and absent unusual interventions that’s exactly what humans will do. Democrats and liberal didn’t invent this anymore than our welfare did to create it.
Clearly? Ha!
Trillions have been spent in the “war on poverty”…trillions spent and America still has a huge poverty problem.
Additionally some of the programs we have keep people just barely above the poverty line, which means the poverty rate is deceptively low.
If you think this is a successful program I hate to think what needs to happen for you to recognize failure.
Success in my estimation after seventy years and trillions of dollars would be a poverty rate that is difficult to measure…hardly worth mentioning.
Education in poor neighborhoods has been dismal for decades…liberals/democrats stick with union protection schemes and refuse to offer parents opportunities to get their kids out of failing schools.
You will never convince me that Democrats create policy from a position of compassion for the less fortunate OR from the position of fiscally workable solutions. Democrats are about growing the size of government and democrat power and control. They could give a rats behind whether poverty programs work to lift people OUT of poverty. Their message to the poor? You can’t make it without us.