Should Medal Of Honor winners be exempt from Income taxes?

Chariatiable? Your damm right I'm chariatable towards veterans.
I don't believe anyone is asking you for anything jefnvk. Nor do I believe you would even give a dime or a damm if you were asked to help.
Click to expand...

Attitudes like this is why I am somewhat against special benefits. It is the few vets who think that their service somehow makes them super-citizens. I am sorry that I cannot be a vet, the simple fact is is that I have a medical condition that prohibits me from serving. Believe me, I have tried. I would take a states side desk job if I could, the fact is that I cannot. Heck, I took ROTC lab knowing full well that I couldn't join, but just to know what the life is like, what I am missing.

To those few vets, I am below them. I am not the person they are, because I didn't give for my country like they did. Unfortunately, nothign I do will change their minds.

I apolgize to any vets this may offend. I realize the very vast majority are not this way. Most I know don't promote they are vets, belittle others because they are not. They will share a story, and will accept thanks and recognition for their service, not demand it. I fully understand it is a few making the rest look bad, but I am tired of being treated as second class because of a choice that is not mine.
 
Out of curiosity, how many would support voiding taxes for members of Congress? I distinctly disfavour special classes. The idea is pork and I think Kennedy and Clinton would probably be the co-sponsors of such legislation. OTOH, I was not properly compensated for my blisters. LOL
 
I don't like the idea of MOH 'winners' being exempt from income taxes for a variety of reasons. I know a lot of you are calling them "winners" of the medal, but they sure didn't win them. They earned them and at some high risk. There was no competition that assigned winners and losers.

Why should MOH not be excluded from income tax? First, there are a lot of folks in the military who accomplished monumental feats against all odds and did so selflessly, but the right people weren't around to see to it that they get special treatment. So basically, not only would they miss out on an award, but lose out on 10s or 100s of thousands of dollars of non-tax benefits.

Sure, MOH guys are special heroes. I am good with that, but there are a lot of other special heroes out there in the world who sacrifice greatly, often at great personal risk, but because they are not in the military, then they miss out on the big monetary bonus of not having to pay taxes. Here, I would call attention to all the firemen, law enforcement folks, and those of various emergency services agencies that respond to things like 9-11 crashes. So they were not in the military at the time, but they are not lesser heroes.

Giving MOH or other persons a free ride on taxes isn't just inequitable to the rest of use, but it sets of the system for abuse. The problem would be exacerbated when applied to their families as well. They could set up a sole proprietorship business and as a result, their business would get a free ride as well.

Why should it be extended to families? They didn't win or earn the medal.

If you think about it, tax payers already shoulder the burden of the military and all the other benefits paid to service folks and their families (where applicable). Why should I be forced to pay more to them?

Okay, so I am completely against the notion of me being taxed more so as to give additional benefits to MOH folks who already get additional benefits over other service folks when I am already paying for those benefits. HOWEVER, I would be entirely supportive of having a box on the tax form where tax payers could opt to pay an additional amount (specified by the taxpayer) that would go to MOH people. Say I decide to donate $100 to the cause. The result would be either that I rec'd $100 less on my tax refund or had to pay an extra $100 on top of whatever I was still due to pay.
 
Never met a MOH awardee, since I assume most are handed posthumous anyway.

I say remove their cost of medicine and healthcare and offer them a decent paying guaranteed job in the government anywhere they wish (so long as they have no handicaps from performing the job).

As for us, instead of launching money to one like that, I think a sincere thank-you, handshake/hug (whichever is your thing), and the offer of companionship and willingness to help a fellow citizen in need is what we should do for these MOH awardees, I don't think income tax is the top of any soldier's priorities, especially getting out. I think their priorities are lead by the need to set up a stable lifestyle.

Wait, we should do that for all soldiers, regardless of their accomplishments in battle. I thank God every day that there are people who are out preserving my rights. I'd be there too if I didn't have a siezure at a younger age. Kudos to all who can fight since I can not.
 
I do not favor exempting anybody from taxes. That being said, I believe that MOH recipents should recieve a tax-free stipend for life in an amount that they could live off of if they went cheap. I would guess about 25,000 annually. As it stands, disabled vets already get a tax free stipend (compensation), and most MOH winners if they live, usually get some sort of disability in the process of earning the MOH.

Veterans also recieve hiring preferences throughout the government and are protected in many cases from losing their jobs during RIF's. You can bet that an application in a stack of apps that shows the applicant as a MOH recipient will likely find itself at the top of the list. Even anti-war maggots know what you had to do to get that award.
 
Absolutely not. The way awards are distributed in the military would make this totally unfair. What would mean a MOH in one unit, might mean a Silver Star or less in another. For instance, I believe the Commander of the 101st Airborne Div. in WWII decreed that there would only be one MOH per regiment, per campaign. How would that compare fairly to another unit whose officers recommeded their men for more MOH's more often? Also, officers have traditionally been awarded medals a lot more than enlisted men, and that has not much to do with the difference in valor shown by individuals in each group.

I could maybe see giving people who are awarded medals a month stipend based on what they did, but not a cut in income tax. Why should a wealthy guy who displayed valor in combat be rewarded financially more significantly than a guy who was awarded the MOH, and came home only to turn into a heroin addict who ends up being killed when he held up a liquor store?
 
What kind of honor is it for the war heroes of this country - by giving them a partial "break" on the theft of the fruits of their labor?
 
Medal of Honor recipients should be able to recieve the reward that they and all other service people fought for; The right for they and their families to live and die as free Americans. Any other rewards, while nice, should be unnecessary.

Nonq
 
I caught it Novus. Jarheads, indeed.
Count this Jarhead in favor for MOH recipients, "above and beyond the call of duty" and all that.
 
Why should a wealthy guy who displayed valor in combat be rewarded financially more significantly than a guy who was awarded the MOH, and came home only to turn into a heroin addict who ends up being killed when he held up a liquor store?
Click to expand...
assume the worst, why dont ya?

reminds me, i was watching tv last night, and some stupid program was on mtv2, an animated sketch about Vietnam Veterans that was so grossly disrespectful of them, portraying them as being criminals, perverts, and completely mentally deranged. it ended with a mother telling her son 'ignore that man', and inside a tear was the American flag, burning.
i tried giving it the benefit of the doubt, figuring maybe they were trying to make a statement that in general, people ignore the Veterans, but i decided it was just an attempt to get laughs at the expense of Veterans. the rest of the sketch show wasn't even remotely humorous.
its sad that our country is producing more PAB's that have no respect for the sacrifices others have made in their behalf.
 
you'd use one instance as a basis for your position?

the Law of Large Numbers should be everyones friend.
Click to expand...

I used one instance to illustrate a the principle. A more successful veteran should not be financially rewarded more for his valor than a less successful veteran.
 
A more successful veteran should not be financially rewarded more for his valor than a less successful veteran.
Click to expand...


Yea and why not? If he takes the risks joins the infantry,goes Ranger or Special Oerations,Seal, demolition or Green Beret. And goes into combat gets wounded in an arm or a leg or both. Why should the soldiers who do the extreamly dangerous and dirty work at the risk of there own lives recieve the same benifits as the soldier who delivers the mail to his hospital bed? The average politician in Washington that often sends the soldiers to there death is compensated far better than the vast majority of soldiers except perhaps for field grade officers.So why shouldn't the ones who do the fighting be compensated nearly as well,as the politicans who are sending them to war?
 
The minute this passes, you'll see more MOH winners than you can shake a stick at, principally among the US legislature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top