GI Bill
 

On Feb 13, 10:16*am, BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
Vic Smith wrote:
Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan..
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. *Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. *Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

--Vic

Webb is going to run for president some day, and he'll win. He's the
right stuff.

He's a flaming asshole. He hasn't been heard from since his Democrat
Response after the SOU, I belive, last year.

Yeah, right...Jim Webb is a flaming a**hole and you're a high school
dropout. That's the ticket.

All of your statements are questioned for their veracity. Your history
of lying about your own life and the lives of others is well known.

I have never uttered a lie in rec.boats. You on the other hand utter
lies in every post you make.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Harry is a chronic liar. I think it's brought on by his real life
failings. What is funny as all hell is how if anyone here DARES to ask
him about any of his lies, he'll deflect by name calling first, and if
that doesn't work, he'll put you in Bozo's Bin.
Ask him about his lobster boat, his yale degree and his Dr. Dr. wife.
Then sit back and watch!

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:01:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:22:34 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan.
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

Guess you don't know much about it, or just have jerking knees.
From right after WWII until sometime in the 80's, maybe late 70's,
ALL vets were eligible for state school tuition, and a monthly
stipend.
I served 64-67 and that's how - and WHY - I attended college.
What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

--Vic

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:01:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:22:34 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan.
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

By now, I'd think the Korean and Vietnam vets would have used whatever GI
Bill education benefits they wanted to use.

Webb makes it sound as though the current crop of folks leaving the
military get nothing. They will receive about $1100 per month. Tuition at
George Mason University is $3420 for a full time student taking 12-16
hours. That doesn't seem like such a bad deal to me.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:32:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:01:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:22:34 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan.
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

By now, I'd think the Korean and Vietnam vets would have used whatever GI
Bill education benefits they wanted to use.

Webb makes it sound as though the current crop of folks leaving the
military get nothing. They will receive about $1100 per month. Tuition at
George Mason University is $3420 for a full time student taking 12-16
hours. That doesn't seem like such a bad deal to me.

My understanding of current GI bill is that you have to contribute if
you want ed benefits. I seem to remember when they changed it
it was quite a downgrade from what I had. Of course pay was quite a
bit higher too, so the bite maybe wasn't as bad as it looked to me.

--Vic

GI Bill
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:01:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:22:34 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan.
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

Guess you don't know much about it, or just have jerking knees.
From right after WWII until sometime in the 80's, maybe late 70's,
ALL vets were eligible for state school tuition, and a monthly
stipend.
I served 64-67 and that's how - and WHY - I attended college.
What's your beef? Don't like Jim Webb?

--Vic

I don't know how or when the benefit package changed, but I was active duty
from '68 to '77. Continued school after I got out with full GI benefits
and purchased my first house with a VA backed loan.

Eisboch

GI Bill
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
..

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

Tucked?

how about "CRAMMED!"

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:35:49 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:32:10 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:01:14 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:22:34 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Saw Jim Webb on C-Span a while ago talking about his and Chuck
Hagel's attempt to get the GI Bill back to where it was before Reagan.
I think the guys putting their lives on the line for us in Iraq and
Afghanistan deserve that. Webb said the educational benefits of that
bill returned 7 to 1 (tax revenues vs costs.)
I'm sure it did in my case. Probably more.
Republicans in the Senate are generally not supporting it.
Creeps.

Once again, the Korean and Vietnam vets get it tucked straight up the
ass.

Moron.

By now, I'd think the Korean and Vietnam vets would have used whatever GI
Bill education benefits they wanted to use.

Webb makes it sound as though the current crop of folks leaving the
military get nothing. They will receive about $1100 per month. Tuition at
George Mason University is $3420 for a full time student taking 12-16
hours. That doesn't seem like such a bad deal to me.

My understanding of current GI bill is that you have to contribute if
you want ed benefits. I seem to remember when they changed it
it was quite a downgrade from what I had. Of course pay was quite a
bit higher too, so the bite maybe wasn't as bad as it looked to me.

--Vic

Yes, the contribution is $100 per month for the first 12 months. That was
instituted to get soldiers 'vested' and interested so they would actually
use the benefits. So they pay $1200 and in return get a little over
$39,600. Not a bad investment, if they use it.
--
John H

GI Bill
 

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:38:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:




I don't know how or when the benefit package changed, but I was active duty
from '68 to '77. Continued school after I got out with full GI benefits
and purchased my first house with a VA backed loan.

As I recall reading it, the change was something like a 100% match of
what you contribute for tuition. So you'd have to contribute $1000 to
get $2000 back.
My tuition was paid in full, no contribution from me. Besides that I
was getting a gov check for $400 a month while in school.
There was a maximum, and I hit it as I finished school.
I doubt I would have attended college without that GI Bill, because
I started late and already had kids.
Didn't use a VA backed loan for my first house as I had 20% down,
which used to be the standard. I recall hearing the VA loans
sometimes were a hassle in Chicago, because an inspection had
to find the house up to all codes, which often required the seller do
some work, making VA buyers less desirable.

--Vic

GI Bill
 

"John H." wrote in message
...

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:35:49 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:


My understanding of current GI bill is that you have to contribute if
you want ed benefits. I seem to remember when they changed it
it was quite a downgrade from what I had. Of course pay was quite a
bit higher too, so the bite maybe wasn't as bad as it looked to me.

--Vic


Yes, the contribution is $100 per month for the first 12 months. That was
instituted to get soldiers 'vested' and interested so they would actually
use the benefits. So they pay $1200 and in return get a little over
$39,600. Not a bad investment, if they use it.
--
John H

I have a hazy memory of it working that way when I entered the service, so
it was in effect in 1968.
We signed some paperwork (with significant encouragement to do so)
authorizing the deduction from our pay when we entered boot camp.

Eisboch

GI Bill
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:38:45 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:




I don't know how or when the benefit package changed, but I was active
duty
from '68 to '77. Continued school after I got out with full GI benefits
and purchased my first house with a VA backed loan.

As I recall reading it, the change was something like a 100% match of
what you contribute for tuition. So you'd have to contribute $1000 to
get $2000 back.
My tuition was paid in full, no contribution from me. Besides that I
was getting a gov check for $400 a month while in school.
There was a maximum, and I hit it as I finished school.
I doubt I would have attended college without that GI Bill, because
I started late and already had kids.
Didn't use a VA backed loan for my first house as I had 20% down,
which used to be the standard. I recall hearing the VA loans
sometimes were a hassle in Chicago, because an inspection had
to find the house up to all codes, which often required the seller do
some work, making VA buyers less desirable.

--Vic

My experience with the VA backed loan program was different. The guy
showed up, asked me what the house was selling for, then asked if I thought
it was worth it. I said yes, and he signed off on it.

Eisboch