Giving [veterans] a lump sum...

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
that's like hanging a case of beer in front of a drunk.





Kelly McParland: A party that depends on Jim Karygiannis is not ready for prime time | National Post

What. The. Fuck?
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
I like how they put the quote next to Trudeau's face, for those who don't take the time to read the attribution to end up assuming he said it.




And RCS, I agree about lump sums. I don't like the idea. Partly because it increases the chances of people slipping through the cracks. It smacks of 'take your money, and don't come back'.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
I like how they put the quote next to Trudeau's face, for those who don't take the time to read the attribution to end up assuming he said it.




And RCS, I agree about lump sums. I don't like the idea. Partly because it increases the chances of people slipping through the cracks. It smacks of 'take your money, and don't come back'.

The New Charter screws Vets- Modeled on the one they brought in for the British Military- Horror stories abounded.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
As a general rule I would say lump sum payouts are not a good idea but should not be ruled out altogether. Some people could be able to start a business this way where it would not be possible on monthly cheques.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
As a general rule I would say lump sum payouts are not a good idea but should not be ruled out altogether. Some people could be able to start a business this way where it would not be possible on monthly cheques.



If you have guaranteed payments coming in from the government, loans should be a snap, so I would think that teaching vets how to access that sort of thing would be more beneficial than giving them a lump sum and telling them tough luck if their business fails.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
What they doo is give some guy who had his legs blown off $250,000.00 and then say see yuh. $250, 000 is peanuts when you have to retrofit your house for a wheelchair, take care of transportation to and from Physio and maybe career retraining. It's BS.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
If you have guaranteed payments coming in from the government, loans should be a snap, so I would think that teaching vets how to access that sort of thing would be more beneficial than giving them a lump sum and telling them tough luck if their business fails.

For most business ventures you still need up front cash. There are not a lot of cases where it would be advisable but we shouldn't shut the door on it just because someone might screw up.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
... we shouldn't shut the door on it just because someone might screw up.


It's actually not 'because they might screw up' that makes me view it the way I do. It's that I really firmly believe, that any government building and deploying an army, needs to do so with the consideration that those men's and women's futures are now their responsibility. To give them a lump sum and send them on their way, diminishes the responsibility that government owes, for having put that soldier in the position that they did. I think it is a tie that should not be severed.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
For those Conservatives out there. And that liberal was an Idiot- Guess who the idiot is the Vets Affairs Minister- Julian- Mr.Fukup, so that should clearly state how Harper looks at Veterans.

Tories’ stand on veterans lawsuit ‘reprehensible,’ Royal Canadian Legion says - The Globe and Mail
The Conservative government is facing a revolt among veterans groups for claiming it is not bound by the promises of previous governments in the care of wounded soldiers.

The Royal Canadian Legion is describing the government’s position as “reprehensible.”

Just before the Battle of Vimy Ridge in April, 1917, then prime minister Robert Borden acknowledged the government’s duty to care for the wounded.

“You can go into this action feeling assured of this, and as the head of the government I give you this assurance: That you need not fear that the government and the country will fail to show just appreciation of your service to the country and Empire in what you are about to do and what you have already done.

“The government and the country will consider it their first duty to see that a proper appreciation of your effort and of your courage is brought to the notice of people at home that no man, whether he goes back or whether he remains in Flanders, will have just cause to reproach the government for having broken faith with the men who won and the men who died.”

Borden’s statement has shaped decades of government policy, but it has never been formally enshrined within the Constitution – a point government lawyers have exploited in their lawsuit defence.

Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino underscored the position when he met with a series of veterans groups last week.


Veterans can sue Ottawa over benefits, judge rules - Canada - CBC News
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
This was a joint venture. The Liberals brought this charter in to **** vets and the conservatives have embraced it. We call that a double pentitration ****-over.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
This was a joint venture. The Liberals brought this charter in to **** vets and the conservatives have embraced it. We call that a double pentitration ****-over.

Every MP voted Yes on this. At that time the Govt had information of approx a 5-6 billion future pensive liability under the old Act. This was driven by money. Pure and simple.
And this Party hack should be shot with a ball of his own BS
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/11/04/laurie-hawn-what-weve-done-for-veterans/
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,346
556
113
59
Alberta
Every MP voted Yes on this. At that time the Govt had information of approx a 5-6 billion future pensive liability under the old Act. This was driven by money. Pure and simple.
And this Party hack should be shot with a ball of his own BS
Laurie Hawn: What we’ve done for veterans | National Post

I'm not disagreeing, but this motion was brought forward by the Libs when Martin was PM.

The Cons have had ample time to fix it, they instead chose to embrace it.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Nothing like abdicating their responsibility to those who served the country
we'll give you some money up front instead of doing the right thing