05-10-2017, 02:30 PM
I disagree with the proposal. Before I read down to the tax talk I already thought this amounted to a tax, except they're calling it a "buy in." They claim it will prevent future cuts to the program, it won't. As evidenced by the decades long erosion of veterans benefits. They claim it will expand services, it won't. It will pay approximately $3 billion towards a $100 billion bar tab. If the bartender gives you a $97 billion dollar tab instead of a $100 billion dollar tab, you can't buy more. You're just in debt less. Creating two concurrent GI Bills sends the message that some service members service was more valuable than others. Trump's budget calls for a defense spending increase of $54 billion for one year. If the politicians truly want to do something about the cost of the program they can pay for the next decade by not approving the proposed defense spending increase for two years and instead create an endowment for the program or they can raise 3% over the next decade by basically taxing the soldiers to use a benefit they earned with their service. This is bullshit political theater.
