A home fit for heroes

[Skunk]

No, I wouldn't call the food stipend payment for any injury. I would call the monthly disability checks he will receive for the rest of his life payment for the injury. That check and the checks his wife and children get will be the payment. Of course nothing can replace his foot, but he will be compensated. It's just that the compensation won't come in the form of a food allowance.

I don't think that there is anyone who has seen combat and seen his friends fall in action who couldn't help but be upset with this. There are no extra cheques for 'pain received' while recuperating from loss of limb. There are no extra cheques for the terror that a soldier feels when he is injured on the battlefield.

I suppose that the soldier in question could always sell his Purple Heart to help pay for the costs - clearly his government doesn't place much value on it, so why should he?

[Ronn_Bman]

[quote]Originally posted by Skunk:

I suppose that the soldier in question could always sell his Purple Heart to help pay for the costs - clearly his government doesn't place much value on it, so why should he?

Or maybe he could just use the $253 dollars they gave him for food to pay the $253 bill for food?

[Skunk]

I guess so, the high numbers of wounded coming out of Iraq co-inciding with massive cuts in veterans benefits has led to a flood of Purple Hearts on the market, so he'd be lucky to hawk it for more than a dollar anyway...

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Skunk: I guess so, the high numbers of wounded coming out of Iraq co-inciding with massive cuts in veterans benefits has led to a flood of Purple Hearts on the market, so he'd be lucky to hawk it for more than a dollar anyway...

Look, I'm not defending the crappy cut in Veteran's benefits, but lets call a spade a spade, ok? This brave soldier was given money to pay for his food during a certain period of time, and afterwards, he was given a bill for his food during that exact same period of time.

That payment was the exact amount of the bill, so the fact that this soldier actually paid NOTHING for his meals means this particular story amounts to nothing substantive, despite your very unusual aggrandizing. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 09-13-2003, 09:25 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Skunk]

Ronn_Bman,
I know that you're not defending Bush's defence cuts and that your saying that the soldier was treated fairly because he's only being charged for money that he shouldn't have been paid.

But, the pay of a private in the US army is so low that, without such payments, it isn't high enough for a soldier to support his family on. As such, the soldiers merely see this payment as part of their regular income (and eat far cheaper than the $8.10 food allowance that it provided to them).
They have to, there is no way to provide for a family on the salary of the lower ranks.

I understand that the food bill does have legal basis - I'm challenging the morality of it, that's all. Coming out of hospital with a hefty bill around your neck is really an unpleasant way to begin your recuperation, esp. if your injuries were sustained fighting for your country...

[Davros]

I think you are off beam on this one Skunk. Looking at this post, Ronn has demonstrated that :
1) The rules are like that so as to recoup a food allowance that is otherwise included as part of the soldiers pay.
2) No one has said that they support the treatment of the guy in regard to the shoddy timing on the payment notice and the collection notice. Never the less, both morally and legally the government has a right to recoup the overpayment.

Apart from that timing issue, there is nothing in what has been discussed or presented in that article that proves that the average US soldier is poorly treated or that they need to sell their purple hearts. You may hold that opinion, and I am sure you will not be alone (I myself agree that life is not all "beers and skitles" in the US military at the moment), but the argument you are trying to put forward does not get bourne out by the facts of this case. I think you will need to spread your net wider if you wish to substantiate the points that you are arguing.

[Skunk]

I concede the legal argument of course...anyway, despite the rights or 'supposed' wrongs, let's hope that these soldiers are able to pick up their lives once more, esp. those who have sustained permanent injuries in the line of duty.

[Chewbacca]

How can there be a viable legal argument when the rules are bent in one circumstance but not in another? That lacks what is called consistency.

Legally all the troops on the ground in the combat zone should get a bill for the food stipend they aren't using.

I think it is fair to argue that those same troops who were injured in the combat zone ought to have the rules bent for them during their hospital stay for those injuries.

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: How can there be a viable legal argument when the rules are bent in one circumstance but not in another? That lacks what is called consistency. Legally all the troops on the ground in the combat zone should get a bill for the food stipend they aren't using. I think it is fair to argue that those same troops who were injured in the combat zone ought to have the rules bent for them during their hospital stay for those injuries.

It's an accepted practice for the police to ignore drivers who exceed the speed limit by less than 5mph. Try arguing to a judge that since another driver was allowed to go 58mph in a 55mph speed zone without being ticketed that you should be able to drive 70mph in that same zone. Argue that if 1 extra mph is allowed for anyone then there should be no speed limit for anyone else. [img]smile.gif[/img]

No one said it isn't fair to argue the guy shouldn't have been allowed to keep the money, but the truth of the matter is that it's not accepted practice to allow anyone to keep the food pay while they are being provided food unless they are in a combat zone.

The point of this story was to show how badly the US treats it's soldiers, and I'll reiterate that it does nothing of the sort.

[ 09-15-2003, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Skunk: let's hope that these soldiers are able to pick up their lives once more, esp. those who have sustained permanent injuries in the line of duty.

Indeed! [img]smile.gif[/img]