Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: KLP who wrote (97551)	1/29/2005 3:24:23 PM
From: greenspirit	of 793868

Thanks for the Baghdad update. In regard to the GI Bill, actually it has been steadily improved upon for the better part of 10 year now to our current situation. The system is very complicated, which is probably why few people really understand it. For instance, if you came in before 1986 you receive a certain benefit, if you came in after 1998 you receive the New GI benefit etc. (my dates are not exact, but you get the drift). It's been tweaked with and tweaked with for years and congress has changed the system quite a few times. That's one of main reasons we should adopt a simple system like the old GI bill. Everyone understood it, and it was extremely beneficial. Congress shifted back to using the old name a few years ago in order get the public to buy into the notion the benefits were the same as the old GI bill, but they are not. Not even close. I suppose like allot of things it's a cost matter. The bean counters on Capital Hill probably see a huge cost increase if we go back to the old system. They fail to take into consideration the non-direct benefits to our society and our military imho.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next