<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New GI Bill a Boon for (Most) Veterans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 06:11:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenmore</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-959943</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenmore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-959943</guid>
		<description>I am happy to discover your prominent way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and figure out the concept. Thank you for the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am happy to discover your prominent way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and figure out the concept. Thank you for the post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-379037</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-379037</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not socialism.  It&#039;s part of our compensation package.  You know, for services rendered?  Peter&#039;s option isn&#039;t a bad alternative (actually, probably better for the serviceman, since it lets them decide how to structure their finances).  But, in the end, it accomplishes the same thing.  Thus it&#039;s not a question of socialism vs. liberty, but how we attract, retain, and compensate those who fight for their country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not socialism.  It&#8217;s part of our compensation package.  You know, for services rendered?  Peter&#8217;s option isn&#8217;t a bad alternative (actually, probably better for the serviceman, since it lets them decide how to structure their finances).  But, in the end, it accomplishes the same thing.  Thus it&#8217;s not a question of socialism vs. liberty, but how we attract, retain, and compensate those who fight for their country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Montbriand</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-378862</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Montbriand</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 08:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-378862</guid>
		<description>Dave, I agree.  We should simply pay active duty men and women a great deal more and eliminate post service bennies, save for health care for wounded vets.  Let the vets save for post service items with a larger paycheck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave, I agree.  We should simply pay active duty men and women a great deal more and eliminate post service bennies, save for health care for wounded vets.  Let the vets save for post service items with a larger paycheck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave K.</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-378772</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave K.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 03:23:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-378772</guid>
		<description>So socialism is OK as long as it&#039;s for veterans? 
Nice disconnect there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So socialism is OK as long as it&#8217;s for veterans?<br />
Nice disconnect there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-378302</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 14:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-378302</guid>
		<description>For the record, &quot;full time&quot; for summer is five credits.  I just finished two summer coursed and got paid the full rate under the pre-existing GI Bill.  So there is no change in income during the summer.

The BAH provision ends up being a real bone job for those of us who are on Active Duty.  We don&#039;t get paid the BAH twice, which makes sense.  However, that stipend is a major part of the compensation package that was budgeted and on which all the calculations were made.  When it&#039;s removed, the new bill pays significantly less than the former GI Bill, especially since we lose the top-up that we paid for.  Also, if we&#039;re in a commissioning program, we lose Tuition Assistance, so that doesn&#039;t offset the drop in compensation.

For my final year at Virginia Tech, I&#039;m sticking with the old-school GI Bill.  The new one just makes no sense for me.  If the new bill paid the same to every veteran going to a certain school (based, of course, on time served), it would be a great program.  But, as it is, when I get about 40% cut out because I chose to return to the service, it doesn&#039;t cut it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For the record, &#8220;full time&#8221; for summer is five credits.  I just finished two summer coursed and got paid the full rate under the pre-existing GI Bill.  So there is no change in income during the summer.</p>
<p>The BAH provision ends up being a real bone job for those of us who are on Active Duty.  We don&#8217;t get paid the BAH twice, which makes sense.  However, that stipend is a major part of the compensation package that was budgeted and on which all the calculations were made.  When it&#8217;s removed, the new bill pays significantly less than the former GI Bill, especially since we lose the top-up that we paid for.  Also, if we&#8217;re in a commissioning program, we lose Tuition Assistance, so that doesn&#8217;t offset the drop in compensation.</p>
<p>For my final year at Virginia Tech, I&#8217;m sticking with the old-school GI Bill.  The new one just makes no sense for me.  If the new bill paid the same to every veteran going to a certain school (based, of course, on time served), it would be a great program.  But, as it is, when I get about 40% cut out because I chose to return to the service, it doesn&#8217;t cut it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SGT Ted</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-377756</link>
		<dc:creator>SGT Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 12:49:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-377756</guid>
		<description>Most MOS training in tech fields does NOT credential you for immediate transition to civilian work. I&#039;ve  served 26 years as Military Police and I would have to go thru an entry level civilian police academy to get a job as a cop; and, get this, IF I went thru a police academy today, the new GI BIll would not cover the expense, because academies do NOT produce a diploma bearing degree. 

Most ground vehicle mechanics are NOT ASE certified. Trade school access is a MUST for the new GI Bill or there will be large numbers of people not able to use their benefits unless they go to a college. Now, not long ago, many JCs offered trade programs. Most of those programs are gone, due to the money being in transfer students taking thier gen ed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most MOS training in tech fields does NOT credential you for immediate transition to civilian work. I&#8217;ve  served 26 years as Military Police and I would have to go thru an entry level civilian police academy to get a job as a cop; and, get this, IF I went thru a police academy today, the new GI BIll would not cover the expense, because academies do NOT produce a diploma bearing degree. </p>
<p>Most ground vehicle mechanics are NOT ASE certified. Trade school access is a MUST for the new GI Bill or there will be large numbers of people not able to use their benefits unless they go to a college. Now, not long ago, many JCs offered trade programs. Most of those programs are gone, due to the money being in transfer students taking thier gen ed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JR Janaburg</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-377609</link>
		<dc:creator>JR Janaburg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 04:01:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-377609</guid>
		<description>Used my Viet Nam Era GI Bill back in the 70&#039;s. Returned to the army, did Just Cause, Desert Storm, OEF, Joint Forge and OIF. VA says the new bill will only cover the six months of unused portion of my former entitlement. Grad school may just be a dream. Make sure you read the fine print.

Luck in Battle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Used my Viet Nam Era GI Bill back in the 70&#8242;s. Returned to the army, did Just Cause, Desert Storm, OEF, Joint Forge and OIF. VA says the new bill will only cover the six months of unused portion of my former entitlement. Grad school may just be a dream. Make sure you read the fine print.</p>
<p>Luck in Battle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tommyd</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-377576</link>
		<dc:creator>tommyd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-377576</guid>
		<description>I think allowing trade schools is needed. That is just a fact in todays world.

I also believe that there should be a benefit that if any service person is killed in the line of duty that his children should be given a college education in the service members home state at a State University.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think allowing trade schools is needed. That is just a fact in todays world.</p>
<p>I also believe that there should be a benefit that if any service person is killed in the line of duty that his children should be given a college education in the service members home state at a State University.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry J</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-377513</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-377513</guid>
		<description>&lt;I&gt;I think the reason they don’t cover trade schools is because Congress is under the impression that they would be redundant- that MOS training takes the place of trade schools, so a vet should already be qualified in a trade related to their MOS.&lt;/i&gt;

That&#039;s fine if a servicemember&#039;s military job has a civilian equivalent. However, there are a lot of military jobs that don&#039;t exist in the civilian sector. Jobs like infantryman, artillery, and tank driver quickly come to mind. Military personnel might also find they want to do something different after leaving the service. They should have the option to go for vocational training if they wish. They&#039;ve certainly earned that right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>I think the reason they don’t cover trade schools is because Congress is under the impression that they would be redundant- that MOS training takes the place of trade schools, so a vet should already be qualified in a trade related to their MOS.</i></p>
<p>That&#8217;s fine if a servicemember&#8217;s military job has a civilian equivalent. However, there are a lot of military jobs that don&#8217;t exist in the civilian sector. Jobs like infantryman, artillery, and tank driver quickly come to mind. Military personnel might also find they want to do something different after leaving the service. They should have the option to go for vocational training if they wish. They&#8217;ve certainly earned that right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: myth buster</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/new-gi-bill-a-boon-for-most-veterans/#comment-377291</link>
		<dc:creator>myth buster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:23:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=64506#comment-377291</guid>
		<description>I think the reason they don&#039;t cover trade schools is because Congress is under the impression that they would be redundant- that MOS training takes the place of trade schools, so a vet should already be qualified in a trade related to their MOS.  As for the McJobs bit, I doubt most veterans would have to worry about that.  Vets tend to have enough sense to choose majors that are practical.  I know two guys in my major-nuclear engineering- are on GI bill scholarships.  The entire department is only about 120 undergrads.  Besides, employers have common sense, too.  The military throws a lot of responsibility at you really fast, so an honorably discharged vet has proven himself to be an effective leader and someone who can work under pressure.  Employers like that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the reason they don&#8217;t cover trade schools is because Congress is under the impression that they would be redundant- that MOS training takes the place of trade schools, so a vet should already be qualified in a trade related to their MOS.  As for the McJobs bit, I doubt most veterans would have to worry about that.  Vets tend to have enough sense to choose majors that are practical.  I know two guys in my major-nuclear engineering- are on GI bill scholarships.  The entire department is only about 120 undergrads.  Besides, employers have common sense, too.  The military throws a lot of responsibility at you really fast, so an honorably discharged vet has proven himself to be an effective leader and someone who can work under pressure.  Employers like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

