Joel Pett by Joel Pett

Joel PettNo Zoom

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. 4my10851cs

    4my10851cs said, 4 months ago

    how true

  2. old1953

    old1953 said, 4 months ago

    In 2000, the VA was serving 83,159 veterans who began receiving Veterans Affairs disability compensation that year, 19.8% were aged 55 or older. By FY2011, of the 272,509 veterans who began receiving disability compensation that year, 52.9% were aged 55 or older. Dividing the budget for FY 2000 by the number of disabled vets that year yields a figure of 704,000$ per veteran. Doing the same for the FY 2012 budget yields a figure of 458,000$ per veteran, in the face of a much older veteran population and in that time frame Congress decided to roll the Veterans Educational Assistance Program budget into the VA budget to make it look bigger, so the figure for actual medical spending is smaller than I’m showing, the actual drop is about half. If you want it to change, write your congressman and tell him VA is more important than balancing the budget. Remember, Congress sets spending, not the President. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22897.pdf

  3. hawgowar

    hawgowar said, 4 months ago

    No, fewer veterans is not the answer. I retired in 1987, recalled for Desert Storm and re-retired after. Believe it or not, things were actually worse in the late 80s than they are now, but the media would not report it. Longer waits for appointments then, fewer specialists, lousy equipment. Under Bush 43 after 9/11 there was a massive influx of cash which improved thugs for a while until the flush wore off and things went back to normal. VA employees returned to their surly selves (not all, mind you, but about half) and the VA began thinking up excuses for not treating you for nonlethal conditions so they could improve their numbers and get bonuses. Then it moved on to denying treatment without really denying it (invisible waiting lists are but the tip of the iceberg) to get more and bigger bonuses. Any nurse of Dr who told tales out of school was severely punished or fired. Since the VA uses a TON of foreign doctors, they would do almost anything to be allowed to stay in practice in the VA until they had fulfilled their residency requirements. The neurologist at my local VA, for example, had to have his nurse with him at all times as she spoke Mandarin and his English was so bad that if she was not there to translate, he could not see patients. And the same VA had a scandal back in the 90s of doctors falsifying their specialty certifications and the VA not checking them, so you had non-certified doctors treating specialty patients and doing a poor job of it. At another VA I had to go to for treatment, they didn’t have enough VA doctors to cover the evening and weekend shifts so they “borrowed” foreign doctors on internships to the Ohio State University school of medicine to cover the wards o evenings and weekends. These doctors had never seen you before and would never see you again as the next evening or weekend they’d bring in another load by bus and turn them loose, unsupervised, on the veterans in the VA hospitals.

    The VA had been quite rotten for quite some time. Making fewer veterans will not solve the problem. As a government agency they are inefficient, wasteful, uncaring (institutionally speaking), and incompetent. The system is rife with corruption, fraud and abuse, as we have seen. It would be better to simply give each veteran a medical card like welfare people get and let the civilian medical industry take care of them. That way you don’t have to drive 50 or more miles to be seen by a Dr or PA or go over 150 miles round trip (and i some cases, one way) to the nearest VA hospital which actually performs surgery.

  4. mrs1wing

    mrs1wing GoComics PRO Member said, 4 months ago

    Typical thinking(?) of this generation…just saying.

  5. misterdantes

    misterdantes said, 4 months ago

    Hawgowar, I’m not American so I am not well informed about all the details of the process, but it seems to me your final suggestion makes a lot of sense. I am sure it would be cheaper and more efficient for the government (and of course, most importantly, for the veterans) to provide health care in a “civilian” way and save all the expenses from a massive and, obviously inefficient government agency.
    Also, since the Vietnam war, (Korean war too, maybe?), there does seem to be a bad “tradition” of the US ill treating its veterans. Happy to send them to war, and pushing them under the carpet when they come back. Not a very decent way to treat people who risked their life for the country. Is it because none of these wars were won? Well Desert Storm was, technically, but that’s the exception.

  6. Clark  Kent

    Clark Kent said, 4 months ago

    One hundred years ago today:
    In Sarajevo,
    Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife were murdered.
    That was the catalyst that started world war one. The botched aftermath of WW1 eventually caused world war two. Had the archduke not been killed, neither war would have happened, over one hundred million people would not have died, the planet would would be much different today, especially in the middle east which got carved up, by the winning European powers, into the present “countries” that exist today.

  7. Kylop

    Kylop said, 4 months ago

    But Joel, if you would just listen to the NeoCons and embrace the idea of bombing everywhere that is not us there will clearly be need to rebuild all over the world and we will be greeted as liberators. We have to bomb everyone so that they will love us.

  8. mikefive

    mikefive said, 4 months ago

    “…and pushing them under the carpet when they come back. Not a very decent way to treat people who risked their life for the country.”

    The ill treatment of U.S. veterans isn’t a recent thing. To me, the most egregious treatment of U.S. veterans occurred in the 1932 assembly of WW I vets in Washington, D.C.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

    That URL leads to a sad commentary about veteran treatment.

  9. Barc O'Dez

    Barc O'Dez said, 4 months ago

    @hawgowar

    Thank you for your services and your story, sir.

  10. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, 4 months ago

    I like the horns on Cheney.

  11. Kip W

    Kip W said, 4 months ago

    The GOP loves wounded veterans. They made so many of them, and if you just let them, they’ll make a lot more!

  12. Three Fighting Fish

    Three Fighting Fish said, 4 months ago

    @Kip W

    Indeed. As we all know, no Democrat promotes wars of aggression creating dead and wounded, except for….

    Wilson – First World War
    Frankie Roosevelt – Second World War
    Truman – Korea
    Johnson – Vietnam
    Clinton – Haiti, Iraq, Bosnia, Sudan
    Obama – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya

    If we ignore all that then we can say that Democrats follow the advice of President John Adams in that “America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy”

  13. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, 4 months ago

    Ah, the invasion of Iraq. The gift that keeps on giving.
    -
    It’s also good to remember that it was NOT a mistake based on faulty intelligence. It was a deliberate lie orchestrated by Cheney, Bush, Rice, Rumsfeld and all the rest.
    -
    And no matter how much Republicans/Fox “news” viewer hate Obama, the 4500 American soldiers are still dead and another 32,000 wounded or mutilated.
    -
    Thanks, George. Your gift will never be forgotten.

  14. ARodney

    ARodney said, 4 months ago

    @Three Fighting Fish

    You’re making a straw man argument. The issue of who created wars is irrelevant to the fact that when asked to pay for their health care, the GOP is the only party that filibusters funding bills to void the promises that we made.

  15. cubefarmer

    cubefarmer said, 4 months ago

    Funny how the retired VP has nothing to say about it outside the hate fueled delusions far left bigots.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).