Love him or loath him, he nailed this one right on the head............

Brutuskend

Lifer
Apr 2, 2001
26,558
4
0
By Rush Limbaugh:

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving the country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I just can't let the numbers pass by
because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country. If you lost a
family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a
minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7
million.

If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action, the first check you get is a
$6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable. Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for
each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt. Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.

We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.
You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement
politics in this country. It's just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they
usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while
their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing. Make sense?
However, our own U.S. Congress just voted themselves a raise, and many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month, and most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They also do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system.

If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, you may receive a pension of
$1,000 per month, and the very people who placed you in harm's way receive a pension of $15,000 per month. I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.

"When do we finally do something about this?" If this doesn't seem fair to you, it is time to forward this
to as many people as you can. If your interested there is more......................
This must be a campaign issue in 2004 Keep it going.
If enough people are made aware of this, maybe a seed will be planted and maybe good changes will
evolve. WE, each one of us... can make a difference!
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
I agree completely with those comments. The sense of entitlement by many in this country is appalling and does not bode well for the future of our nation.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Putting a price on someone's life is very tricky and difficult business. I guess you can say the military personnel knows the risks he or she is getting themselves into. The 9/11 victims had no way of knowing. Keep in mind there's a certain degree of legal liability when civilians are killed. The WTC, the airlines, even the government could be sued. Those settlements had to be big or the families would simply take their cases to the courts and could potentially end up with much more. We're a nation of laws - remember? The families of 9/11 victims had every right to sue.

I don't consider it an issue of "entitlements," rather it's a product of our legal system.
 

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
I believe our military personnel should be covered by a much larger death benefit in case they are killed in hostile action since most insurance policies won't pay if death occurs because of an act of war.

I also believe that the surviving families of those killed on 9/11 should have received zilch, except for whatever life insurance they were covered by.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I believe our military personnel should be covered by a much larger death benefit in case they are killed in hostile action since most insurance policies won't pay if death occurs because of an act of war.

I also believe that the surviving families of those killed on 9/11 should have received zilch, except for whatever life insurance they were covered by.

Just my 2 cents.

In all fairness, he isn't mentioning Serviceman's Group Life Insurance, which most service members carry. Most people have SGLI that pays out $250K.

That said, there is a lot to be said for Rush's points. I definitely think it's a disgrace what junior enlisted members are paid, and this carries over to what their families receive on their death.
 

HappyPuppy

Lifer
Apr 5, 2001
16,997
2
71
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I believe our military personnel should be covered by a much larger death benefit in case they are killed in hostile action since most insurance policies won't pay if death occurs because of an act of war.

I also believe that the surviving families of those killed on 9/11 should have received zilch, except for whatever life insurance they were covered by.

Just my 2 cents.

In all fairness, he isn't mentioning Serviceman's Group Life Insurance, which most service members carry. Most people have SGLI that pays out $250K.

That said, there is a lot to be said for Rush's points. I definitely think it's a disgrace what junior enlisted members are paid, and this carries over to what their families receive on their death.



I wasn't aware of the SGLI, Don_Vito, thanks for the heads up.

The rest of my still stands, though.
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
I believe our military personnel should be covered by a much larger death benefit in case they are killed in hostile action since most insurance policies won't pay if death occurs because of an act of war.

I also believe that the surviving families of those killed on 9/11 should have received zilch, except for whatever life insurance they were covered by.

Just my 2 cents.

In all fairness, he isn't mentioning Serviceman's Group Life Insurance, which most service members carry. Most people have SGLI that pays out $250K.

That said, there is a lot to be said for Rush's points. I definitely think it's a disgrace what junior enlisted members are paid, and this carries over to what their families receive on their death.



I wasn't aware of the SGLI, Don_Vito, thanks for the heads up.

The rest of my still stands, though.

Agreed, I was not aware of SGLI. Good points from both of you.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Although I partially agree with the premise of what Rush is saying and wholeheartedly agree with what Don_Vito said about junior enlisted pay it is only right that the usual errors exist in Rush's argument be exposed:

1. E-7 over 20 retirement is more than $1000/mo. I officially retire on Mon. at the E-7 over 20 payrate and my gross retainer check will be $1540/mo. COLA's are applied yearly.

2. The immediate death benefit is $12000 not $6000 and I believe it is all tax free.

3. No one term Congressman will get $15000/mo. pension.

4. Congressman pay into SS and have since 1987 when the federal employee pension plan changed.


I'm sure there are other errors, these are just the ones I know off the top of my head.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
The whole payola scheme is a travisty of justice. What about OKC people? What about Atlanta? Why not extend these benefits to ANYONEs family that's murdered in these United States? Are these families any less effected by thier loved ones death? Rush is also forgetting the millions these 911 victims recieved from private orgs like Red Cross et al. which other victims never see.

I do find it ironic Rush advocating growth of size and scope of governement though. Just shows he never meet a spending bill he did'nt like thats punitive (prisons, war, FBI etc), but intervention is a no no.
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
I don't know if 9/11 victims should or shouldn't get as much as there getting. What I do know is there's a big difference between dying in uniform and unexpectedly getting killed by terrorists in the nastiest terror attack of all time. The people on those planes and in the WTC never knew what was coming. They never bargained for it.

Soldiers bargain for risk when they sign up, especially in a volunteer army. I'm not saying they shouldn't be treated well, but it's not fair to compare the two. Maybe if you gave the 9/11 victims guns and sams it might have been comparable.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Didn't the 9/11 families get their money from donations?

That's what I thought, too.

They're getting that money from private donations, not the gov't.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Originally posted by: Infohawk

Soldiers bargain for risk when they sign up, especially in a volunteer army. I'm not saying they shouldn't be treated well, but it's not fair to compare the two. Maybe if you gave the 9/11 victims guns and sams it might have been comparable.

If anything I tend to think this is why military members deserve more, not less.

No disrespect meant toward 9/11 victims at all, but they just had the misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The folks who apparently helped bring down the plane in Pennsylvania are heroes, but in general the people who died on 9/11 are fundamentally no different from other murder victims from my perspective. I'm not convinced theie families are morally entitled to large cash payments just because of the date and circumstances of their deaths.

Military members who die in combat, as you said, know there are grave risks involved, and serve regardless. This kind of self-sacrifice is laudable IMO.

Now, that said, I don't think the payments made to military families when a loved one dies are necessarily unreasonable. If we could cost-effectively give each family millions, that would be great, but we obviously can't. It would be nice if the military would foot the $16/month bill for SGLI, but beyond that I think the payments are pretty fair.
 

rchiu

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2002
3,846
0
0
Well, 911 victim's families are not the only one benefited from the tragedy. Just look at the current Admin, without 911, Bush won't have as high a rating he is having now. Without 911, he won't be able to push his little war in Iraq, that cost hundreds of billions US tax dollar.

And the same thing goes with Limbaugh, even though I am not a listener of his show, I am sure at one time or another, he uses 911 to push his right wing agenda, justify his support on this war, or simply as a discussion topics to draw audience to his show.

There are many people in this society benefited from the tragedy of 911. But for Limbaugh to criticize the victim's family and not looking at himself, he becomes a hypocrite.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Didn't the 9/11 families get their money from donations?

That's what I thought, too.

They're getting that money from private donations, not the gov't.


They settled with the government and in exchange agreed not to sue anyone.
 

SViscusi

Golden Member
Apr 12, 2000
1,200
8
81
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Didn't the 9/11 families get their money from donations?

That's what I thought, too.

They're getting that money from private donations, not the gov't.

I think most of the money is coming from insurance policies.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: UltraQuiet
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Didn't the 9/11 families get their money from donations?

That's what I thought, too.

They're getting that money from private donations, not the gov't.


They settled with the government and in exchange agreed not to sue anyone.

Link?
 

MidasKnight

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2004
3,288
0
76
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Putting a price on someone's life is very tricky and difficult business. I guess you can say the military personnel knows the risks he or she is getting themselves into. The 9/11 victims had no way of knowing. Keep in mind there's a certain degree of legal liability when civilians are killed. The WTC, the airlines, even the government could be sued. Those settlements had to be big or the families would simply take their cases to the courts and could potentially end up with much more. We're a nation of laws - remember? The families of 9/11 victims had every right to sue.

I don't consider it an issue of "entitlements," rather it's a product of our legal system.

Very well said.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
95% of the victim's families have settled with the 9/11 compensation fund and waived their right to sue. You know those remaining 5% are going to court. Wonder how much they'll end up with and whether it will exceed the average settlement? Of course, it'll take years for these cases to wind their way through the courts . . .