You are herecontent / Military's Health Care Costs Booming

Military's Health Care Costs Booming


Military's health care costs booming
By Gregg Zoroya | USA Today

Military health care spending is rising twice as fast as the nation's overall health care costs, consuming a larger chunk of the defense budget as the Pentagon struggles to pay for two wars, military budget figures show.

The surging costs are prompting the Pentagon and Congress to consider the first hike in out-of-pocket fees for military retirees and some active-duty families in 15 years, said Rear Adm. Christine Hunter, deputy director of TRICARE, the military health care program.

Pentagon spending on health care has increased from $19 billion in 2001 to a projected $50.7 billion in 2011, a 167% increase.

The rapid rise has been driven by a surge in mental health and physical problems for troops who have deployed to war multiple times and by a flood of career military retirees fleeing less-generous civilian health programs, Hunter said. Read more.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Quote: "Pentagon spending on health care has increased from $19 billion in 2001 to a projected $50.7 billion in 2011, a 167% increase".

$19bn in 2001 would require how much today to be equivalent? Maybe the nominal, face value would be as the above-quoted numbers are, but the dollar has decreased in value quite a bit, I believe, so there's surely a serious difference between what the nominal values are and what the real increae in cost is.

If people are seriously concerned about the increase in cost, whatever the real increase is, and there surely is some, for there are thousands more war veterans needing medical care today than there were in 2001, a couple of ways to avoid and reduce these cost increases and which come to mind for me are: stop the damn warring ways of the U.S. elites, and put an end to the corporate profiteering, greed, ... of the pharmaceutical industry and other corporations associated with medical care.

A third way is to reverse the skyrocketed cost of living in the U.S. I believe that it's in a recent interview that George Celente of the Trends Institute provided on the Alex Jones show, earlier this month that viewers are reminded of the fact that the cost of living has skyrocketed since the 1960s, an era when a family generally needed only one member or parent to have a full-time job to be able to afford to live reasonably well, decently, ..., while, today, MANY families need both parents working full-time and sometimes this still isn't quite enough.

Based on that factual history, we don't only need to have the greed or excessive profiteering of the pharma. industry and other corporations that produce products for the medical sector, health care, curbed, the whole economic sitution needs to be corrected.

Seeing to this need and ending the warring ways of the U.S. empire elites would greatly cut costs related to war, and the medical costs are a "drop in the bucket" compared to what the rest of the $400bn or more per year for military expenditures is used for; pointless and extremely expensive weapons of war, new military trucks, etcetera, all of the hardware and electronics.

Some universities would disagree, because enough of them profit from U.S. militarism and wars, but this shouldn't prevent the rest of the population, the general population, from doing everything that possibly can be done to correct the political sphere(s) of the gov't; the Congress, the Senate, and the executive branch. The military "brass", the CIA heads, of the ops branch anyway, ... need to be replaced with people who honourably uphold and defend the Constitution, but this is not something, a change, that voters have any direct ability to change. Voters only have a hypothetical or theoretical possibility of achieving these additional changes by correcting the three main political branches of the gov't, but as David Swanson has written and stated, when speaking to groups, it's the Congress that voters really need to correct; at least first and foremost.

How can voters do that, unless they make sure that their voting districts no longer allow the use of electronic, etcetera, mechanisms for voting; requiring that votes be done using paper ballots, and that counts be conducted by non-partison, independent parties or persons, f.e.? The gov't elites and the elites they work for and with won't allow neutral international obervers to come in to conduct the vote counts, and I'm not sure that more than few or very few voters could be counted on for fully honest vote counting, since they're voters and are likely partisan, instead of voting based only on critically objective, unbiased assessment of electoral candidates.

I think it's the Black Caucus that, in January 2000 or 2001 demanded a vote count to make sure of who really won the presidential election and while Al Gore had stated, during his campaign, that he'd make sure that there'd be a vote count if one seemed to be or was justified, he very immediately or quickly capitulated and as head in the Senate, I believe, he flagrantly blocked the vote count. If he hadn't done that, then we might've had a valid vote count and I believe that we would have. Senator kerry did basically or very much the same thing in 2004, as Gore did in 2000-2001; having stated during his campaign that he'd see to it that a vote count would take place if one seemed justified, but capitulated the afternoon of the day after Election Day and after his running mate had stated, the morning of the same day, that there'd be a vote count; I mean recount.

Voters need to make sure that there are no more despotic, ... disenfranchisements, and no more use of electronic and other risky or most-risky means of voting used; only the surest, safest methods must be used. I only know of paper ballots being acceptable to me, but these unfortunately don't guarantee honest counts, either.

Given these unfortunate realities, I don't see why anyone really cares for having so-called democracy. There'll always be rats, human rodents of sewer quality who'll work on corrupting, perverting, destroying, ... whatever there is of real democracy. It's an endless RAT RACE. Western "democracy" is a real burner of energy and emotions. I'd prefer to live under a real dictatorship, as long as the rulership was fair.

There is no natural law that says that a dictator must be unfair, brutal, etcetera. Similarly, there is no natural law that says that democracy won't usually be a farce, false facade, ... deception used and exploited by the rich and the empire elites. It's better to have a real dictatorship with a dictor who is a little or occasionally unfair, than it is to live under a so-called democracy that is "totally" corrupt, a quasi-total deception, etcetera, exploited by the rich and empire elites. The latter is surely much more sapping of energy and time that should instead be expended or applied productively and constructively; instead of being sapped, drained due to nearly constant warfare to try to to uncorrupt our so-called democratic governments, politics, and economics.

"There are two sides to every coin."

Mike Corbeil

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Stores:























Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.