RP and marriage - How would this affect military families?

[sarahdeez]

My husband and I were discussing that the government shouldnt care whether people are married or not. He agreed in theory. We talked about doing away with tax benefits for marriage which he agreed with. We talked about using private contracts for extending insurance or other benefits with private employers. Makes sense. He is military so he soon was asking about military families and how the us gvt defines marriage for military benefits and pay. Military spouses are different bc they are limited by the soldiers frequent moving. The spouse cannot often keep a job, obtain their own insurance, or accumulate retirement bc of the moving. Also, when deployed married soldiers make significantly more bc of separation pay. Obviously if we send soldiers to war their families deserve additional benefits over a single person who is not affecting others lives. Otherwise no married person (or person wanting to become married) would join the military. Would this not require the government to define marriage? Is there another solution? Of course RP would want a decrease in the military anyway but that does not exactly answer his question.

[Icymudpuppy]

My husband and I were discussing that the government shouldnt care whether people are married or not. He agreed in theory. We talked about doing away with tax benefits for marriage which he agreed with. We talked about using private contracts for extending insurance or other benefits with private employers. Makes sense. He is military so he soon was asking about military families and how the us gvt defines marriage for military benefits and pay. Military spouses are different bc they are limited by the soldiers frequent moving. The spouse cannot often keep a job, obtain their own insurance, or accumulate retirement bc of the moving. Also, when deployed married soldiers make significantly more bc of separation pay. Obviously if we send soldiers to war their families deserve additional benefits over a single person who is not affecting others lives. Otherwise no married person (or person wanting to become married) would join the military. Would this not require the government to define marriage? Is there another solution? Of course RP would want a decrease in the military anyway but that does not exactly answer his question.

Well, since you would be staying home defending your own borders, there would be no need for separation or hazard pay.

[sarahdeez]

Lets just say congress declares war (for whatever God forsaken reason) then what? Its a valid concern about the marriage issue that I couldnt answer. I thought maybe someone here could.

[playboymommy]

I remember hearing Ron Paul say something along the lines of benefits for soldiers can and should be paid with federal taxes because they are defending the nation and it is in the Constitution.

[flightlesskiwi]

My husband and I were discussing that the government shouldnt care whether people are married or not. He agreed in theory. We talked about doing away with tax benefits for marriage which he agreed with. We talked about using private contracts for extending insurance or other benefits with private employers. Makes sense. He is military so he soon was asking about military families and how the us gvt defines marriage for military benefits and pay. Military spouses are different bc they are limited by the soldiers frequent moving. The spouse cannot often keep a job, obtain their own insurance, or accumulate retirement bc of the moving. Also, when deployed married soldiers make significantly more bc of separation pay. Obviously if we send soldiers to war their families deserve additional benefits over a single person who is not affecting others lives. Otherwise no married person (or person wanting to become married) would join the military. Would this not require the government to define marriage? Is there another solution? Of course RP would want a decrease in the military anyway but that does not exactly answer his question.

perhaps with the formation of state militias the frequent moving would come to a grinding halt. the amount of money the military spends to PCS us (i'm a military spouse) is quite ridiculous. and if the military were to magically start being run like a for-profit organization (as far as career promotion opportunities, health care, individual innovation, etc etc) and less like the typical government-controlled nonsensical, political-campaigning-careerist-to-promote (it's who you know, what boxes you check and how well you pander to those in charge of promoting you) leadership track, fiat black hole, things like spouse benefits would work themselves out.