A Truly Universal Issue…
Posted on | June 21, 2004 | 15 Comments
A friend sent this little gem in so I added it and with the comments… hmmmm
From: Tim McNees
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 9:06 AM
Subject: A Truly Universal Issue…
Love him or loath him, he nailed this one right on the head………….
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. SOCIAL SECURITY: (This is worth the read. It’s short and to the point.)
Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years. Our Senators and Congressmen do not pay into Social Security. Many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die, except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments. For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000 – that’s Seven Million, Eight Hundred Thousand), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives.
This is calculated on an average life span for each.
Their cost for this excellent plan is $00.00. These little perks they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan.
From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into — every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer) –we can expect to get an average $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one month to equal Senator Bill Bradley’s benefits!
Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. And that change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us and then watch how fast they would fix it.
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve. WE, each one of us… can make a difference..
How many people can YOU send this to?
Comments
15 Responses to “A Truly Universal Issue…”
Leave a Reply
June 21st, 2004 @ 10:17 am
From: Nabil Pike
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 09:38:04 -0700
Subject: RE: A Truly Universal Issue…
Well, this one is partially true. The part about average compensation of 9/11 familes is true.
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/military.htm
He fails to mention the that military personnel are automatically insured (unless they decline the coverage) under the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI http://www.insurance.va.gov/sglivgli/sgli%20faq.htm ) program, which pays $250,000 to the families of servicemen killed while on active service.
The bit about Congressmen getting lavish retirement insurance is actually bogus in its entirety. They actually do pay 6.2% of their salaryinto the social security fund and and 1.3% into their FERS (Federal Employees Retirement System) As of 1998 the avg annuity for retired
congressmen was about $50K a year. More details on this part can be found below.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp
Finally, just because Limbaugh irritates me as a self-important blowhard, an interesting an true tidbit about his Vietnam draft deferrment.
http://www.snopes.com/military/limbaugh.htm
June 21st, 2004 @ 10:18 am
From: Philip M Devin
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: A Truly Universal Issue…
And two more cents…
The 9/11 or the Oklahoma or any family member or person killed in a tragic and untimely way should not be compensated by the Gov
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:48 pm
Gee….thanks. However, in re-reading your first paragraph, I
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:49 pm
It comes down to a sense of false feelings of entitlement.
Why does there have to be a person at fault or a person to pay. In some cases, yes, willful wrongdoing and knowingly duping others for personal gain can and should be punished, so I can see this on a case by case basis.
However, a tornado wipes out half of Kansas, a plane falls from the sky killing all on board, an evil act by misguided individuals causing harm to innocent bystanders, a drunk driver running over someone, working office and it exploding, an earthquake, a hot cup of coffee… All are actually inherent acts of risk that we take in the act of living and breathing. Falling in the shower or waking up on the wrong side of the bed should not have a person to blame or a person writing me check for the acts of God (Allah or whomever if you will), Mother Nature, or the acts of humans who make mistakes that cause lives to be lost (a plane mechanic who forgets the last quarter turn of the bolt on the cross member of the tail strut) or the acts of humans who perform evil acts and harm innocents.
Its ridiculous that the tobacco companies are being sued and asked to pay for the product they sell. As a company, they produced a product, marketed the product, found a demand and exploited that demand. That what companies do, that is called economic growth and marketing. No one really needs an SUV, anything the Sharper Image sells, Prada shoes, Tiffany silver, a personal website or anything a little pop up pushed during my web surfing to excess.
If a person decides to smoke for what ever reason they claim (and I don
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:51 pm
And the choir says…amen. Your point is very well made and, in my humble opinion, accurate. I was unclear from you first paragraph which side of the issue you were coming down on. I also could rant on an on about tort reform and excessive damage awards as well. The next question is…what do we do about it?
I heard over the weekend about a bill in the Washington state legislature limiting punitive damages for any case to $1M. For punitive damages, this may be appropriate, but it seems somewhat arbitrary. Consider the number of doctors, especially OB/GYNs , moving out of the state or shutting down their practices because malpractice insurance premiums are out of control. We all know why they are so high….excessive awards. I seriously doubt there are that many incompetent physicians out there.
Back to P
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:52 pm
i can KIND OF buy into the cigarette companies getting sued, that example is one where they are borderline criminally liable for actually CONCEALING information about their products. It’s like Ford getting sued for accidents caused by a known problem that they failed to fix. Reasonable liability. What chaps my ass is when people that have smoked for 20+ years are crying that they can’t quit and that cigarette companies MADE them keep smoking. Take some freakin responsibility for your own life and quit. People get off much harder drugs than Nicotine. It seems like they should be held MORE liable for hiding second hand smoking information since it is then the non-smokers that are being exposed.
Me, I could care less about second hand smoke dangers, but that is a choice I am making for myself.
Tim your point on malpractice insurance is a good one, but it highlights how complex the issue can be. In many states where insurance premiums are sckyrocketing, year over year malpractice claims have actually been declining. Found a quick search on the topic that NJ and Penn are both states where this has occured.
Many doctors blame the insurance companies for their problem as much as they blame the lawyers. Interestingly enough, even states that have capped malpractice claims and benn trending down on awards have had premiums rise as much as 50%! NJ is the staet I am thinking of in this case.
Found this really good paper on the issue. http://consumeraffairs.com/news03/med_mal.html
I think it highlights problems in the insurance company where a suspect biz model is startign to show its spots.
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:52 pm
Interesting point on the biz model. Now you
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:52 pm
I LOVE the idea of punitive damage awards going to someone other than the victim, in whole or in part. I think it would definitely help avoid the "get rich" mentality of some lawsuits while still performing the desired deterrent.
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:56 pm
Gentlemen: Now you get to hear from and "Old Guy". For those on this thread who don’t know me, I am an old friend of Tim’s. I mean old in the sense of my age because I have only known Tim since 1989 when he became a DUCK !!! Anyway, the following statement is not quite true:
"He fails to mention the that military personnel are
June 21st, 2004 @ 9:57 pm
Ron, you rock!
June 26th, 2004 @ 10:08 am
P – Gee….thanks. However, in re-reading your first paragraph, I
June 26th, 2004 @ 10:08 am
It comes down to a sense of false feelings of entitlement.
Why does there have to be a person at fault or a person to pay. In some cases, yes, willful wrongdoing and knowingly duping others for personal gain can and should be punished, so I can see this on a case by case basis.
However, a tornado wipes out half of Kansas, a plane falls from the sky killing all on board, an evil act by misguided individuals causing harm to innocent bystanders, a drunk driver running over someone, working office and it exploding, an earthquake, a hot cup of coffee… All are actually inherent acts of risk that we take in the act of living and breathing. Falling in the shower or waking up on the wrong side of the bed should not have a person to blame or a person writing me check for the acts of God (Allah or whomever if you will), Mother Nature, or the acts of humans who make mistakes that cause lives to be lost (a plane mechanic who forgets the last quarter turn of the bolt on the cross member of the tail strut) or the acts of humans who perform evil acts and harm innocents.
Its ridiculous that the tobacco companies are being sued and asked to pay for the product they sell. As a company, they produced a product, marketed the product, found a demand and exploited that demand. That what companies do, that is called economic growth and marketing. No one really needs an SUV, anything the Sharper Image sells, Prada shoes, Tiffany silver, a personal website or anything a little pop up pushed during my web surfing to excess.
If a person decides to smoke for what ever reason they claim (and I don
June 26th, 2004 @ 10:09 am
And the choir says…amen. Your point is very well made and, in my humble opinion, accurate. I was unclear from you first paragraph which side of the issue you were coming down on. I also could rant on an on about tort reform and excessive damage awards as well. The next question is…what do we do about it?
I heard over the weekend about a bill in the Washington state legislature limiting punitive damages for any case to $1M. For punitive damages, this may be appropriate, but it seems somewhat arbitrary. Consider the number of doctors, especially OB/GYNs , moving out of the state or shutting down their practices because malpractice insurance premiums are out of control. We all know why they are so high….excessive awards. I seriously doubt there are that many incompetent physicians out there.
Back to Phil
June 26th, 2004 @ 10:09 am
I can KIND OF buy into the cigarette companies getting sued, that example is one where they are borderline criminally liable for actually CONCEALING information about their products. It’s like Ford getting sued for accidents caused by a known problem that they failed to fix. Reasonable liability. What chaps my ass is when people that have smoked for 20+ years are crying that they can’t quit and that cigarette companies MADE them keep smoking. Take some freakin responsibility for your own life and quit. People get off much harder drugs than Nicotine. It seems like they should be held MORE liable for hiding second hand smoking information since it is then the non-smokers that are being exposed.
Me, I could care less about second hand smoke dangers, but that is a choice I am making for myself.
Tim your point on malpractice insurance is a good one, but it highlights how complex the issue can be. In many states where insurance premiums are sckyrocketing, year over year malpractice claims have actually been declining. Found a quick search on the topic that NJ and Penn are both states where this has occured.
Many doctors blame the insurance companies for their problem as much as they blame the lawyers. Interestingly enough, even states that have capped malpractice claims and benn trending down on awards have had premiums rise as much as 50%! NJ is the staet I am thinking of in this case.
Found this really good paper on the issue. http://consumeraffairs.com/news03/med_mal.html
I think it highlights problems in the insurance company where a suspect biz model is startign to show its spots.
June 26th, 2004 @ 10:09 am
Interesting point on the biz model. Now you