[ASLplease]

DerbyX DerbyX:

ASLplease ASLplease:

Its none of our business how settlements are squandered.

This is typical Liberal BS where the liberals believe they know how to spend my money better than I do.

Liberal BS? Sounds like retarded partisan nonsense to me. It is not the Liberals being concerned it is apparently Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's top soldier being concerned about the welfare of the vets. The only other political figure mentioned is Jean-Pierre Blackburn, a conservative MP.

I see what you have done. You have zeroed in on the capital 'L' instead of the message. Good move on your part.

[bootlegga]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

bootlegga bootlegga:

The thing is that monthly payments are actually worse than a lump sum payment, because inflation eats away at your payout.

In my case it is completely opposite to what you described. I get about a thousand dollars a month from Veterans Affairs and have been recieving that for almost 8 years. Under the new system I would qualify for under 50,000 lump sum.

The new system was set up to benefit Veterans Affairs and not the soldier.

I'm glad it worked out better for you.

The way the article reads, it sounds like the pay out was the same, just one is in monthly payments and one is lump sum. That's what I was basing my statement on. If the lump sum pay out is less than the monthly ones, then the system sucks.

[ASLplease]

I have no knowledge of how a soldier's disability settlement is administered. But I am well aware of how a WCB settlement comes about.

It usually starts with a period of time where the disabled person get NOTHING! Nothing but bureaucratic bs and frustration at the axact time that they need the financial help the most.

Eventually, often after the person is back to work, WCB will settle your claim and you will get a big fat cheque.

How that money is spent is nobodies business. And that includes big "L" little "l" and even DerbyX

[DerbyX]

ASLplease ASLplease:

DerbyX DerbyX:

ASLplease ASLplease:

Its none of our business how settlements are squandered.

This is typical Liberal BS where the liberals believe they know how to spend my money better than I do.

Liberal BS? Sounds like retarded partisan nonsense to me. It is not the Liberals being concerned it is apparently Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's top soldier being concerned about the welfare of the vets. The only other political figure mentioned is Jean-Pierre Blackburn, a conservative MP.

I see what you have done. You have zeroed in on the capital 'L' instead of the message. Good move on your part.

Sorry I used the exact wording of your argument against you.

The fact is that this isn't Liberal (implying the party as its capitalized) BS nad its certainly not a case of liberals thinking they know better.

This is a case where a high ranking Canadian soldier expressed his person opinion on the matter and suggested that vets be given a choice as to a lump sum or structured settlement.

Don't let the facts of the case dissuade you from thinking it is a bunch og liberal elites who thing they know whats best for the vets.

[bootlegga]

ASLplease ASLplease:

Its none of our business how settlements are squandered.

This is typical Liberal BS where the liberals believe they know how to spend my money better than I do.

WTF are you talking about? The Liberals have nothing to do with this, and you'd know if you had even bothered to read the article. Here's the very first fucking paragraph...

$1:

Canada’s top soldier says he’s concerned some younger vets are blowing their disability awards on trucks and sports cars instead of saving money, and he hopes Veterans Affairs will offers soldiers different payments options if they are wounded.

It's not even from a 'liberal' newspaper like the Star, but from the Toronto Sun, one of the most right wing papers in the country.

Take your partisan BS and troll somewhere else.

[DerbyX]

ASLplease ASLplease:

How that money is spent is nobodies business. And that includes big "L" little "l" and even DerbyX

I for one have no issue with hows it is spent. My issue with you is with you saying its all the L(l)iberals trying to tell people who to spend their money when it looks more like is the guy in charge of that aspect of military life.

Your diatribe should have included cons, both bid C and little C, but then no con would ever put demands on how government given funds are spent.

naaaaaww.

[Zipperfish]

ASLplease ASLplease:

DerbyX DerbyX:

ASLplease ASLplease:

Its none of our business how settlements are squandered.

This is typical Liberal BS where the liberals believe they know how to spend my money better than I do.

Liberal BS? Sounds like retarded partisan nonsense to me. It is not the Liberals being concerned it is apparently Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's top soldier being concerned about the welfare of the vets. The only other political figure mentioned is Jean-Pierre Blackburn, a conservative MP.

I see what you have done. You have zeroed in on the capital 'L' instead of the message. Good move on your part.

...A situation that could have easily been avoided had you not used the capital "L" to start with. But you opted for partisan hackery instead and predictably got...

[ASLplease]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Sorry I used the exact wording of your argument against you

DerbyX DerbyX:

Liberal BS?Sounds like retarded partisan nonsense to me.

Yes. I believe that is an exact definition for "Liberal BS".

[DerbyX]

ASLplease ASLplease:

DerbyX DerbyX:

Sorry I used the exact wording of your argument against you

DerbyX DerbyX:

Liberal BS? Sounds like retarded partisan nonsense to me.

Yes. I believe that is an exact definition for "Liberal BS".

Yeah, your argument is. Judging by the many others on here that echo it you can safely say you've been pwned.

[ASLplease]

owned because you zeroed in on the jab, instead of the message. good move on your part.

[hurley_108]

Sounds like a quick one-day course on financial planning could really help - particularly if it's given before any monthly / lump sum choice is made. Show them what their financial situation will be ten/twenty/thirty years down the road if they spend it all on a fancy truck instead of investing or buying a home. Then if they blow their money, you've at least informed them first.

Oh, and they should be strongly encouraged to bring their wives to the course.

[bootlegga]

ASLplease ASLplease:

owned because you zeroed in on the jab, instead of the message. good move on your part.

And what was your message? Oh yeah, liberals know how to spend your money better than you do.

Given that the article doesn't even mention a liberal, was published in a right wing leaning newspaper, and quotes both the highest ranking officer in the CF and the CONSERVATIVE MP responsible for Veteran's Affairs, it should be no surprise that you got owned.

Further proof you have no idea how internet forums operate. Spout BS and you'll get called on it, pure and simple.

[2Cdo]

bootlegga bootlegga:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

bootlegga bootlegga:

The thing is that monthly payments are actually worse than a lump sum payment, because inflation eats away at your payout.

In my case it is completely opposite to what you described. I get about a thousand dollars a month from Veterans Affairs and have been recieving that for almost 8 years. Under the new system I would qualify for under 50,000 lump sum.

The new system was set up to benefit Veterans Affairs and not the soldier.

I'm glad it worked out better for you.

The way the article reads, it sounds like the pay out was the same, just one is in monthly payments and one is lump sum. That's what I was basing my statement on. If the lump sum pay out is less than the monthly ones, then the system sucks.

Most of the troops that I know prefer the older system to the new. The payouts today will benefit you down the road when you retire but add nothing to your bank account today. My example being $1,000 X 12 months X 8 years = $96,000 and I fully expect to live another 30 years so add a further $360,000. That's without taking into account indexing and any interest accrued from investing some of it.

The newer payout, like I said earlier, is almost universally despised by the troops it is supposed to serve.

[ASLplease]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Sounds like a quick one-day course on financial planning could really help - particularly if it's given before any monthly / lump sum choice is made. Show them what their financial situation will be ten/twenty/thirty years down the road if they spend it all on a fancy truck instead of investing or buying a home. Then if they blow their money, you've at least informed them first.

Oh, and they should be strongly encouraged to bring their wives to the course.

We better make that kind of course manditory to all Canadian because not one of us is as intelignent as a liberal when it comes to spending money and planin

[hurley_108]

ASLplease ASLplease:

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Sounds like a quick one-day course on financial planning could really help - particularly if it's given before any monthly / lump sum choice is made. Show them what their financial situation will be ten/twenty/thirty years down the road if they spend it all on a fancy truck instead of investing or buying a home. Then if they blow their money, you've at least informed them first.

Oh, and they should be strongly encouraged to bring their wives to the course.

We better make that kind of course manditory to all Canadian because not one of us is as intelignent as a liberal when it comes to spending money and planin