Veterans vs Harper government

[Topaz]

In British Columbia, thre a law suit against the feds by soldiers who fought in Afghanistan and have a big problem with their benefit or lack thereof. The Feds are saying"the country holds no exraordinary social obligation to ex-soldiers". I think there a big difference to what the country says to what the Harper government says. The article has soldiers stating thir views at the bottom of the page and its very interesting what they say over what they feds say. Thoughts? http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/veterans-group-urges-feds-to-retreat-from-request-to-drop-class-action-1.1389960

[dre]

I actually think the Harper government is right about this one.

[Topaz]

I can see IF this holds true, why would ANY Canadian want to join the military, if the government does do a better job of looking after them after they come home hurt. Why do MP's and the PM's get taken care off better, than someone who puts their life in danger? I can't imagine Harper as a soldier or a boy scout.

[cybercoma]

I actually think the Harper government is right about this one.

Context matters. There are a number of veterans suffering from combat-related illnesses. They do not fall under provincial governments for healthcare. The federal government covers them. And it's in that context that the federal government is saying that veterans are not their responsibility.

[Guest Derek L]

I actually think the Harper government is right about this one.

Exactly, and as mentioned in the OP:

He noted that unlike the previous legislation, the new veterans charter -- passed unanimously by all parties in 2005 and enacted by the Conservatives in 2006 -- contained no reference to social obligation.

At the end of the day, when a person signs along the dotted line, the clause of unlimited liability is part and parcel with military service…..

[guyser]

At the end of the day, when a person signs along the dotted line, the clause of unlimited liability is part and parcel with military service…..

How so?

[Guest Derek L]

How so?

Look at the job description………labour and workplace safety laws do not apply to military service, for what I’d hope would be obvious reasons.

[guyser]

Look at the job description………labour and workplace safety laws do not apply to military service, for what I’d hope would be obvious reasons.

So you meant limited liability then .

[jacee]

Young people won't be as willing to sign up for the military when they see how Harper 'supports the troops'.

Maybe we won't be getting involved in any more wars of aggression for resources!

[Guest Derek L]

So you meant limited liability then .

No, unlimited liability.........don't blur the legal meaning, in military context, unlimited liability refers to a expectation that the individual could be expected to sacrifice life and limb through the course of their career……If a person joins the Forces without that expectation, in that the things the military do are potentially dangerous, they probably shouldn’t be in the service………..Go drive a city bus.

[guyser]

ok thank you

[PIK]

I actually think the Harper government is right about this one.

Ya but sometimes being right ,is that you are still wrong.

[dre]

Ya but sometimes being right ,is that you are still wrong.

I think whats wrong is the political correctness that calls for all this military idolitry and placing on a pedastel of people that do this particular job. And the constant use of "the troops" as a political hammer with which to beat on opponents. "So and so doesnt support the troops!".

I

[AlienB]

Cheapskating.

It has been a tradition since WWI to offer benefits to returning soldiers.

This represents a policy change.

While there are no contracted benefits some may have had the notion that benefits which have been given since WWI would continue to be given.

While by letter of the written contract he may be right, as far as moral obligation to those who fight for Canada, one should expect that they are provided with benefits to help them integrate into civilian life when and if they so choose.

I do think that it is a much less lucritive occupation without short term service benefits. It seems that fighting wars is not where the benefits are in the military you need your 20 years of service or however much to get a solid pension in the military.

It is unfortunate that it is a cold turkey approach, and helmets to hardhats is the best the government has to offer soldiers on their future.

I think just having the image of "we got nothing" is not so great. The government has had a traditional role in helping former soldiers involved in war time service.

Now bear in mind lump sum benefits were given and others, it is not as if they got nothing.. some definately did.

This they got nothing is another matter.

If solidiers are unable to get private life insurance due to their occupation, you would think that a private life insurance fund could be made by the government. Or is the job so risky that the insurance plan would go bust.

These are realities the government should face. Being a solider should not equate a life of hardship, now I havn't assessed this fully but is danger pay, which the US has gone about cutting for various overseas deployments the extent of benefits for wartime service?

Why would reservists choose to serve in an overseas war as an option on the basis of no support if they are injured or killed.

None the less, the current policy stance isn't healthy, but I don't expect the government to get something right going, they have really failed at that for so many other policies due to their hard line no nonsense, it isn't about making it right, its about our way or no way at all.

Like look at this

http://www.forces.ca/en/page/benefits-98

Notice

PERSONAL SUPPORT

The CF offers you and your family a wide variety of support programs and services, including:

• Family support centres (Military Family Resource Centres)
• Retail stores on CF bases (Canadian Forces Exchange System - CANEX)
• Financial planning services
• Financial assistance programs
• Counselling services
• Group term life insurance
• Comprehensive long term disability

This is not an absence of supports. According to the website both life insurance and long term disability benefits exist.

What this is really about most likely is that veteran's benefits check, and special veteran's supports after leaving.

They all got them because they served, it is a policy change, that has to be recognized.

My Grandfather served for a year or so at the end of WWII and he right up until cancer finally took him received medical and other benefits as a veteran. You can't say that people who served 4 years in Afghanistan had a drastically lessor service for Canada, aside from the fact it was a nonsense war that has caused so great damage and will continue to, for reasons of cultural control.

Edited August 1, 2013 by AlienB

[Wilber]

At one point my son said he was considering a stint in the military. I told him it was an honorable occupation and I would be proud of him but this country does not have a good track record of supporting its military since WWII and I would be really pissed if he got killed in some of the piece of junk equipment we were sending our troops into war zones at that time. I thought things would change with the Harper govt and with regard to equipment they have to a large degree but that is where it ends. I don't know whether my talk had any effect but he ended up going back to college and becoming a cop instead

It seems that to our politicians and far to many of our citizens, the unlimited limited liability extends only to those who are put in harms way but the people who sent them there bear none. It is the pre twentieth century mentality of regarding its armed forces personnel as mere cannon fodder to be used up and discarded according to the whims of the governments and citizens.

This attitude makes me want to puke and makes me think this country doesn't deserve the people it has serving in its military. Yes they should all get jobs driving a bus because they will probably be better looked after if they are dissabled on the job.

[Guest Derek L]

At one point my son said he was considering a stint in the military. I told him it was an honorable occupation and I would be proud of him but this country does not have a good track record of supporting its military since WWII and I would be really pissed if he got killed in some of the piece of junk equipment we were sending our troops into war zones at that time. I thought things would change with the Harper govt and with regard to equipment they have to a large degree but that is where it ends. I don't know whether my talk had any effect but he ended up going back to college and becoming a cop instead

It seems that to our politicians and far to many of our citizens, the unlimited limited liability extends only to those who are put in harms way but the people who sent them there bear none. It is the pre twentieth century mentality of regarding its armed forces personnel as mere cannon fodder to be used up and discarded according to the whims of the governments and citizens.

This attitude makes me want to puke and makes me think this country doesn't deserve the people it has serving in its military. Yes they should all get jobs driving a bus because they will probably be better looked after if they are dissabled on the job.

The unanimous agreement of the major political parties on the revision of the Veterans Charter only makes sense………A 27 year old that has just lost a leg would be better served with a large cash settlement early as opposed to a slow drip over the course of many years…..The individual could invest in furthering their education and/or starting their own business etc, as opposed to receiving slightly more then folks on the dole………..

As you alluded to, what’s next? Individuals wounded can sue current or past Governments for negligence, namely in the form of providing improper equipment on deployment? With Afghanistan in particular, the overwhelming majority of those injured or killed were the victims of IEDs and landmines……Should those vets be able to sue the Mulroney/Campbell government for the cancellation of the MRCV program, coupled with the early retirement of our original Chinooks in the early 1990s? Or what about the Chrétien government for the lacklustre funding in the 90s, coupled with the early deployment of our forces to Afghanistan in the Iltis?

The entire thing is a slippery slope….

[Wilber]

The cash settlements are not so large and a convenient means of kissing them off with no further expense. The new veterans charter was primarily a cost cutting measure initiated by the Liberals but embraced by all parties.

Your slippery slope is a crock. This country has always entered its wars poorly prepared. What has changed is the treatment of its victims.

[Guest Derek L]

The cash settlements are not so large and a convenient means of kissing them off with no further expense. The new veterans charter was primarily a cost cutting measure initiated by the Liberals but embraced by all parties.

Your slippery slope is a crock. This country has always entered its wars poorly prepared. What has changed is the treatment of its victims.

The previous system was allowing them to barley live the rest of their natural lives (on cat food) disabled, for the previous monthly payouts were maxed around $880………Kinda shitty prospect for someone in their twenties missing a limb…….With the new Charter, the “kiss off” can be better used as seed money for a new life for the individual……

This idea, actually started in the States (imagine they have oddles of experience with vets) has proven to be both successful for those that entered the program financially, but also more importantly, as a device to help recover from the mental scarring well further instilling a sense of self worth and accomplishment………

60 minutes did a great piece a few months ago on American vets injured in Iraq and Afghanistan (including those suffering from PTSD) and their inclusion into such programs and the positive results for the individuals.

Notice only a tiny fraction of Canadian vets have vocally made their displeasure of the new program known……there’s a reason.

[Guest Derek L]

To add, the link to the 60 Minutes piece on the American program that help vets transition into civilian life, and in this piece, namely wounded veterans…….We now have similar programs, including the “Kiss off” (as referred to by Wilber) of the financial lump sum payout new Canadian vets receive……As mentioned in the piece, the empowerment of wounded veterans aides in combating the prevalent mental scares that can be found in many……..

A much better solution then slow dripping monthly payments of under $1000, especially for the majority of said wounded veterans that share in being under 35 years of age…..

Think about it, would you rather be shunted off in a corner on an income not much better than social assistance, or be given the financial opportunity to retread yourself into a differing field of work, be it through educational advancement and/or entrepreneurship……To say nothing of the opportunity for self fulfilment and contributing to society.

I would recommend, if the topic actually interests you, to watch the 60 Minutes piece:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50146678n

[jacee]

No, unlimited liability.........don't blur the legal meaning, in military context, unlimited liability refers to a expectation that the individual could be expected to sacrifice life and limb through the course of their careerIf a person joins the Forces without that expectation, in that the things the military do are potentially dangerous, they probably shouldnt be in the service..Go drive a city bus.

Yup ... all aspiring soldiers should go drive a bus instead. It's not high risk like soldiers' work fighting wars for resource profiteers, but if you are disabled on the job, you get decent benefits.

Soldiers, not so much.

[Wilber]

To add, the link to the 60 Minutes piece on the American program that help vets transition into civilian life, and in this piece, namely wounded veterans…….We now have similar programs, including the “Kiss off” (as referred to by Wilber) of the financial lump sum payout new Canadian vets receive……As mentioned in the piece, the empowerment of wounded veterans aides in combating the prevalent mental scares that can be found in many……..

A much better solution then slow dripping monthly payments of under $1000, especially for the majority of said wounded veterans that share in being under 35 years of age…..

Think about it, would you rather be shunted off in a corner on an income not much better than social assistance, or be given the financial opportunity to retread yourself into a differing field of work, be it through educational advancement and/or entrepreneurship……To say nothing of the opportunity for self fulfilment and contributing to society.

I would recommend, if the topic actually interests you, to watch the 60 Minutes piece:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50146678n

Wait a minute. Isn't this video all about private business, institutions and individuals trying to compensate for a huge hole left by government and a drop in the bucket at that? Perhaps you should watch it yourself.

I know of WWII vets that are getting a lot more than $880 a month to help them in their old age, much of it tax free but for the sake of argument let's use that number. For a 25 year old with both legs blown off in Afghanistan who lives to 75, that $880 pm adds up to $528,000 over his life time. Throw in an average 2% per year COLA and it comes to well over $800,000. Considering todays GIC rates, a vet would have to be one shrewd investor to generate that kind of income from your generous $300,000 lump sum and in bad market years, might not be able to take any income at all without destroying his capital to a point where he could not recover.

This is a huge off load by government, it's the the equivalent of a corporate buy out. Here's some money now go away and don't bother us any more. Modern medicine saves more lives and keeps disabled vets alive longer now so government is looking for ways of reducing costs and lump sum payments do that. If they are so damn good, offer vets a choice and let them decide which option they would prefer.

[Guest Derek L]

Wait a minute. Isn't this video all about private business, institutions and individuals trying to compensate for a huge hole left by government and a drop in the bucket at that? Perhaps you should watch it yourself.

And there lies the difference, our similar programs, are offered to all vets through the Government.

I know of WWII vets that are getting a lot more than $880 a month to help them in their old age, much of it tax free but for the sake of argument let's use that number. For a 25 year old with both legs blown off in Afghanistan who lives to 75, that $880 pm adds up to $528,000 over his life time. Throw in an average 2% per year COLA and it comes to well over $800,000. Considering todays GIC rates, a vet would have to be one shrewd investor to generate that kind of income from your generous $300,000 lump sum and in bad market years, might not be able to take any income at all without destroying his capital to a point where he could not recover

Define “a lot more”……..Now if you’re not including a reg force pension, medical benefits covered through VAC or pensions from other means, I’m forced to call bullshit…….

None the less, let’s assume you’re correct, and double that $800 figure, hell let’s call it $2000 clams a month, if you’re 27 and missing a leg, how does that grab you for sustaining yourself (and maybe you have a family) for the remainder of your life? Sounds like a prescription to drink or maybe give a blow-job to a shotgun……

With that said, perhaps you should further learn up on what’s actually available to current Canadian veterans, well maybe asking yourself why all the major political parties agreed on the change near a decade ago, well coupling this to the fact that only a handful, a tiny, tiny fraction of Canadian veterans (most of them from the PRes) are bitching and moaning……Think about it prior to going off half cocked and puking everywhere:

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/benefits/yourbenefits/cfm

This is a huge off load by government, it's the the equivalent of a corporate buy out. Here's some money now go away and don't bother us any more. Modern medicine saves more lives and keeps disabled vets alive longer now so government is looking for ways of reducing costs and lump sum payments do that. If they are so damn good, offer vets a choice and let them decide which option they would prefer.

The Government doesn't need a "huge offload" to curtail spending from VAC......The majority of the cliental is “off loading” naturally……..And as their numbers shrink drastically over the next decade, so to will the requirement for all those VAC case workers……….

And they do have a choice:

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/disability-benefits/disability-pension

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/services/disability-benefits/disability-award

And the majority of Afghan vets are taking the lump sum……..of course, there are those that have pissed it away and are crying after the fact (not saying that is so with this current lot involved in the lawsuit mind you)

If you're in your 20s or 30s, ~200K is more than enough to get a four year University degree or practical technical training......Try getting a student loan on a disability pension.

Edited August 3, 2013 by Derek L

[jacee]

If you're in your 20s or 30s, ~200K is more than enough to get a four year University degree or practical technical training......Try getting a student loan on a disability pension.

That advanced care and the nature of the weapon Canadian troops face means the war in Afghanistan has become a battle of disabilities. Crude but effective improvised explosive devices now account for up to 80 per cent of the injuries suffered by Canadian soldiers.Fashioned from old artillery shells and landmines left behind from decades of conflict, and sometimes packed with bolts and nails, IEDs have proven to be lethally efficient.First, theres a blast wave that that can rupture eardrums and injure bowels and lungs. The pressure waves also rattle brains and, in the long term, can leave soldiers suffering traumatic brain injuries.

Fragments carried by the explosion of air shrapnel from the bomb along with other debris cause more damage. Finally, theres the blunt trauma suffered when vehicles get blown over or soldiers get tossed like rag dolls....

But the devastating explosions have meant many soldiers suffering severe wounds to their extremities arms and legs shattered.

Derek you might give some thought to brain injuries, severe chronic pain and other permanently debilitating effects. It really isn't as simple as every wounded vet just run right out there and grab a university degree and a job.

[Guest Derek L]

Derek you might give some thought to brain injuries, severe chronic pain and other permanently debilitating effects. It really isn't as simple as every wounded vet just run right out there and grab a university degree and a job.

As I responded to Wilber above, prior to casting an uneducated opinion, look up (from the links above) the services currently provided……..These issues are addressed, and vets are given the choice between a pension or reward from VAC………..

[CPCFTW]

Wait a minute. Isn't this video all about private business, institutions and individuals trying to compensate for a huge hole left by government and a drop in the bucket at that? Perhaps you should watch it yourself.

I know of WWII vets that are getting a lot more than $880 a month to help them in their old age, much of it tax free but for the sake of argument let's use that number. For a 25 year old with both legs blown off in Afghanistan who lives to 75, that $880 pm adds up to $528,000 over his life time. Throw in an average 2% per year COLA and it comes to well over $800,000. Considering todays GIC rates, a vet would have to be one shrewd investor to generate that kind of income from your generous $300,000 lump sum and in bad market years, might not be able to take any income at all without destroying his capital to a point where he could not recover.

This is a huge off load by government, it's the the equivalent of a corporate buy out. Here's some money now go away and don't bother us any more. Modern medicine saves more lives and keeps disabled vets alive longer now so government is looking for ways of reducing costs and lump sum payments do that. If they are so damn good, offer vets a choice and let them decide which option they would prefer.

You think you need to be a saavy investor to turn 300k into 800k in 50 years..? You could just buy etfs for the s&p500 and tsx60 and maybe throw in a fixed income etf and you'd make about 10000/yr in dividends/interest, and likely have 5-10% annual capital appreciation. You could be a millionaire making 30k/yr on dividends and interest by the time you're 40-50.