uh oh, sounds like it's time for another 'let's go around the room and tell me how great i am' meeting
Since they are so appreciated why don't we just discharge them?
I'm sure he tweeted it. So it's in the record and official (per Trump standards).
I don't think the military should be paying for sex reassignment surgery or necessarily accepting (or necessarily not accepting - I have no firm beliefs either way) openly trans recruits, but seems to me that paying for transgender troops' medical treatment should be part of the decision whether to keep them. If a transgendered person has a work history and institutional knowledge which make that person worth keeping in the military, then I don't see how not paying for normal hormone treatments and non-specialist medical expenses is reasonable any more than deciding not to pay for cholesterol medication. I can certainly understand why funding very expensive sex reassignment surgery or such specialists from the military's limited and scarce funding isn't appropriate any more than penis enlargement or breast enlargement surgery, but refusing to fund any transgender medical treatment doesn't seem kosher. If a trans person is worth keeping in the military, surely such medical care as can be rendered by the branch's physicians should also be covered.
That's a reasonable assessment. For my part, I put all such operations in the realm of things people do to make their bodies ones in which they can be comfortable. It's all elective surgery, just driven by varying degrees of urgency. However, if we make the very expensive surgery part of the military's function, then we are going to attract people whose sole reason for serving is to have that surgery. In a profession where one's very life may hang on the efficiency and dedication of service members one will never even see, I don't think that is wise or ethical.
If busting the budget for POTUS to fly home to FLA almost every weekend is ok why fight treatments for a few soldiers who put their lives on the line for the country. I doubt people aren't joining the military just to get the treatments. After all trump can stay in the WH weekends to save money. That money could offset treatment costs.
Not to mention that POTUS is a draft dodger and anything he says in reference to the military falls on deaf ears with me.
Did I read this part right? Are we still talking about the US military here?
That's certainly a reasonable argument. If the benefits were for after one's service ended, it would be a better comparison, but the cost is probably similar. (Although point of fact, the GI bill caps at something like $20k a year, whereas sexual reassignment is typically more expensive.) But it's certainly close enough that it's a fair point. http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/31/health/transgender-costs-irpt/index.html
That's a different budget; Trump flying home does not remove money for soldiers needing modern body armor. Although philosophically I wouldn't object to Congress establishing financial limits on how often POTUS vacations in areas other than Camp David or similar areas with standing protection details.
That's certainly a valid point. I highly doubt the ratio would be a mere 2:1 if the military becomes an employer that not only funds sex changes but also pays you while recuperating, but it's still likely to remain a very small percentage of health care spending.
Facebook
Twitter