not sure how to title this one

[Gust]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vete...onse-1.2577053

[CanuckShooter]

Shameful

Disgusting

Crapping on our Veterans

Vote Harper, screw a veteran

[IR_mike]

Embarrassing is my suggestion.

Throw ungrateful in there somewhere as well.

[greylynx]

We get it Gus.

Sickening.

I have been writing letters to my MP on another issue.

Now this.

Remember folks, you do not even need a postage stamp on the envelope when you write your MP.

And do not worry about your grammar.

[CanuckShooter]

Despicable treatment of Canadian seniors and veterans....in order to fund grandiose spending in foreign lands.

[Scotty P.]

Disgusting! If this crap keeps up, there will be no one willing to join the armed forces. Bloody disgrace.

[nof60]

Unless you were drafted (WW1 or 2) I as a Canadian do not feel I have any social contract with you. You volunteered not out of some misplaced patriotism but because of a search for adventure or lack of other opportunities. Thanks for your service but nobody forced you to go (WW1and2 Vets excepted of course).

[Agb Crash]

Your militaries still loves and serves you regardless of conflict or conscription.
They would defend you even if you don't support them.
How is it you can judge why people join, I joined for patriotism and know many others that did as well.
When a person is injured in war does it matter what war it was? Does it matter that they volunteered or had to go by order?
The injury still hurts the same.
If you tax goes up to support a Veteran, I will gladly pay it!

AGB Crash
Capt. Rtd

[recce43]

[QUOTE=nof60;2368163]Unless you were drafted (WW1 or 2) I as a Canadian do not feel I have any social contract with you. You volunteered not out of some misplaced patriotism but because of a search for adventure or lack of other opportunities. Thanks for your service but nobody forced you to go (WW1and2 Vets excepted of course).[/QUOTE

most soldiers join now and back in the day for one reason only and that's to serve our country .............. I think im going to leave it that before I get banned

[densa44]

Go any lower. I guess I was wrong. This is as bad as it has ever gotten.

When you see those grave yards in Flanders, 66,000 Canadians! Lead by incompetent aristocrats, being shot at dawn for shell shock, and now this. "No social contract".

Why on earth would some one risk/ruin his or her life in Afghanistan if there were no social contract. Just because they weren't busy?

IMO if this or any government wants to throw its weight around showing everyone how tough they are, they damn well better look after the people they send to fight.

How about cutting out the senate, 1/2 the house of commons, anything but you won't get away with leaving these people high and dry.

I won't have believed this even from Harper. The Canadian Nixon.

[greylynx]

Gus.

I know why you posted this.

Would you care to share the reason for posting this?

Or could it get you in trouble?

That we do not want.

[recce43]

Originally Posted by nof60

Unless you were drafted (WW1 or 2) I as a Canadian do not feel I have any social contract with you. You volunteered not out of some misplaced patriotism but because of a search for adventure or lack of other opportunities. Thanks for your service but nobody forced you to go (WW1and2 Vets excepted of course).

No what sickens me most tomorrow iam burying a brother arms that did serve in a combat zone . and came home with some demons

[HunterDave]

This story, although just published, is actually very old news and is just a regurgitation of comments made a year or so ago. As a Veteran, I've been following this issue since back in 2012 when the Equitas Society first launched the lawsuit. Everyone, including Veterans, is divided on this issue and it is much more complex than it appears on the surface.

A little history about the New Veterans Charter (NVC)......The NVC was created by the Liebrals as a living document and changes may be made to it as required. It replaced the life long disability pension with a one time cash settlement based on the extent of the disability and includes numerous more social programs and monetary benefits (ie. Exceptional Incapacity Allowance - EIA, Permanent Impairment Allowance - PIA, Earnings Loss Benefit) . That is in addition to what the SISIP insurance plan pays Veterans which is up to 75% of their last salary prior to becoming disabled. The NVC was passed into legislation two months after PM Harper took office so it is something that he inherited from the Liebrals.

Some disabled Veterans are quite happy with the NVC while others think that it is absolutely terrible. IMO, the biggest flaw to it is that SISIP expires when you turn age 65 and there needs to be a new pension put in place for disabled Veterans when they lose their monthly SISIP payments. As a living document, this change could easily be made and I don't know why the Conservatives wouldn't go ahead with something like this when it probably won't effect the budget for 20 or more years. Perhaps they are waiting until closer to the election to unveil something like that.

WRT the "Social Contract". The argument by Equitas was that Veterans deserved better health care than the average Canadian citizen.....kind of a two tiered medical system......and the government argued that Veterans are entitled to the same medical treatment as the average Canadian citizen, no better or no worse.

The other issue is allowing courts to overturn legislation passed in the House of Commons/Senate. If this suit is won, it would open the door to anyone to challenge in court every legislation passed and the government would be in court all of the time.

Like I stated, it is a very complex issue and I've only touched upon the tip of the iceberg.

[Wild&Free]

as it stands now all legislation can be challenged in court using the constitution. which is not a bad thing imo.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

as it stands now all legislation can be challenged in court using the constitution. which is not a bad thing imo.

That's not my understanding based on the articles that I have read. If so, I wonder how many lawsuits are in progress wrt the omnibus bill that sparked the Idle No More movement.

Regardless, one of the other issues is, should there be a two tiered healthcare program in Canada based on status.....One for Veterans and one for other Canadian citizens? Personally, I'd have a problem walking to the front of the line and receiving treatment before some poor kid requiring the same treatment......but that's just me.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by nof60

Unless you were drafted (WW1 or 2) I as a Canadian do not feel I have any social contract with you. You volunteered not out of some misplaced patriotism but because of a search for adventure or lack of other opportunities. Thanks for your service but nobody forced you to go (WW1and2 Vets excepted of course).

Obviously... you don't know much about service, the people who choose to serve or the obligations that come with it.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

That's not my understanding based on the articles that I have read. If so, I wonder how many lawsuits are in progress wrt the omnibus bill that sparked the Idle No More movement.

Regardless, one of the other issues is, should there be a two tiered healthcare program in Canada based on status.....One for Veterans and one for other Canadian citizens? Personally, I'd have a problem walking to the front of the line and receiving treatment before some poor kid requiring the same treatment......but that's just me.

if the implementation of legislation is contrary to the constitution and bill of rights it may be challenged in court. this would in some cases repeal the legislation or an order given to the government to make changes to the wording and or implementation.

I don't know enough of the issue at hand to comment further, but thought that little insight might clarify thing.

a 2 tiered system may violate the bill of rights based upon some finer point on equitable treatment of all persons.

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by nof60

Unless you were drafted (WW1 or 2) I as a Canadian do not feel I have any social contract with you. You volunteered not out of some misplaced patriotism but because of a search for adventure or lack of other opportunities. Thanks for your service but nobody forced you to go (WW1and2 Vets excepted of course).

Really? That is sad! I am surprised that any Canadian would have this attitude.

[CanuckShooter]

I don't like that we need a military, when we could be putting our efforts and money towards something to better things for Canadians. BUT when our service people lay the I lives in the line you don't abandon them or force them to live like dogs. We should be supporting them and making sure they are cared for in a manner you would for a highly respected individual.

When our govt treats our vets like this it's time for them to go.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

I don't like that we need a military, when we could be putting our efforts and money towards something to better things for Canadians. BUT when our service people lay the I lives in the line you don't abandon them or force them to live like dogs. We should be supporting them and making sure they are cared for in a manner you would for a highly respected individual.

When our govt treats our vets like this it's time for them to go.

x2
A combat veteran should be honored and respected.

[Mekanik]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Personally, I'd have a problem walking to the front of the line and receiving treatment before some poor kid requiring the same treatment......but that's just me.

And that's part of the make up that causes many people to volunteer for service.

You can cut in front of me any day. Thank you for your service.

You are right though: it is a very complex issue.

Legislation can be challenged in court but it is a very long road. Starts in the lower courts until it ends up in the supreme. The purpose of the upper house is to make sure the legislation passed by the House of Commons is constitutional. If the system's working properly, the courts should agree.

Never really hurts to ask the question. I think our vets should get better. Especially from the politicians who send them out with so little regard and equipment.

[nof60]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

Obviously... you don't know much about service, the people who choose to serve or the obligations that come with it.

You don't know me or my background or past or current service to my community and country at all. I know plenty about service. I also know about being 18 and the real reason 18 year olds enlist. As I said I feel we have a social contract to those who fought for King and Country in WW1, WW2 and possibly Korea. Not to those who signed up in piecetime only for it to become wartime. For those who enlist post 2001 I don't know how fighting an American oil war is patriotic either.

But to each their own.

[recce43]

i know why i joined and it was to serve my country my great uncles served my dad served my brother served . i joined in 89 ...

[HunterDave]

nof60, You seem to be under the impression that everyone joins the Military as a job. For anyone that would do that, they wouldn't last very long.....lol. Being Military is not a job, just like farming is not a job.....it's a way of life. If I were paid in the Military like in a civilian job with overtime pay, etc, I'd be a millionaire right now with a Villa on the French Riviera. Also, Soldiers don't pick what conflicts that they participate in, they are ready to go anywhere at any time 24/7, 365 days/year.......ask my wife about that.

[Okotokian]

Maybe I have this wrong, but is the "disgusting" treatment of veterans that they are offered the option of taking a lump sum or continuining with regular benefits/insurance payments? It's up to the soldier to decide. Is that it? Do I have that right?

On the actual point of law, I have to agree with the government. I don't think that any particular benefit plan option is constitutionally guaranteed back to WWI. Maybe overall care of injured veterans is. But how that is delivered could change. It's sort of like insisting that because your company supplied workers with a christmas turkey 70 years ago, you have a right to that turkey now. Benefit and medical and insurance plans change.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Maybe I have this wrong, but is the "disgusting" treatment of veterans that they are offered the option of taking a lump sum or continuining with regular benefits/insurance payments? It's up to the soldier to decide. Is that it? Do I have that right?

You no longer get a Veterans Affairs Canada disability pension for life, you get a one time lump sum payment but you have a choice of getting it all at once or in monthly installments until it is gone.

For less severe injuries like hearing loss without being deaf most people chose to take a $10K cashout. I don't know what would be the best choice for someone that loses a limb, eyesight, etc, and I would confide in a financial planner about what to do about a 6 figure settlement. Generally speaking, older Veterans that develope disabilities attributed to their service like the cash settlement the most and younger Veterans like it the least.

[CNP]

Originally Posted by nof60

You don't know me or my background or past or current service to my community and country at all. I know plenty about service. I also know about being 18 and the real reason 18 year olds enlist. As I said I feel we have a social contract to those who fought for King and Country in WW1, WW2 and possibly Korea. Not to those who signed up in piecetime only for it to become wartime. For those who enlist post 2001 I don't know how fighting an American oil war is patriotic either.

But to each their own.

Do tell us the real reason. I find your rationalization peculiar. Only those who "enlisted" while a war was in place and only for two particular wars and maybe one other exception......deserve your support. All of the others who served before and after your self described window of opportunity are either self absorbed adventurers or misplaced patriots. There is some explanation for your stance on this but you fail to have us understand how you come by this. Afghanistan is not an American oil war and there is nothing credible you can say that would support that misguided idea. A guy who joins in peacetime and ends up in a war does not deserve your support and a guy who joins post 2001 (war in progress) also does not deserve a social contract? Why don't you just come out with it and say: join the military and take your chances, the people are not responsible for any harm you may be subject to as a result of service as a representative of the Government of Canada. Wow, industry (oil) would sure like to have that risk abatement plan. I have this idea you think that those who were conscripted for the great wars are more deserving........because they were forced into a conflict instead of desiring to be part of the conflict. And that those conflicts were real wars and were long ago and fought by hand with steel instead of lasers and night vision devices. I don't know if any of that is what you believe but I have to tell you that those who served in the great wars were volunteers, few were conscripted and fewer of those saw battle. They joined the fight when the fight was on, just like they do now. It's the same people doing what they do for whatever reason. To judge them differently is disrespectful.

[nof60]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

nof60, You seem to be under the impression that everyone joins the Military as a job. For anyone that would do that, they wouldn't last very long.....lol. Being Military is not a job, just like farming is not a job.....it's a way of life. If I were paid in the Military like in a civilian job with overtime pay, etc, I'd be a millionaire right now with a Villa on the French Riviera. Also, Soldiers don't pick what conflicts that they participate in, they are ready to go anywhere at any time 24/7, 365 days/year.......ask my wife about that.

I am of the impression that most young people join the military for adventure and travel. See exotic lands, meet the local people...and then kill those people(to quote a movie). Or some join as a career. Or some because of family tradition. Nothing wrong with any of these things. But most 18 year olds are not joining wholly out of patriotism. And I get a little tired of hearing how they joined and went to some far off place that enters not one bit into Canadian culture or life because they are so proud to be Canadian. WW1 WW2 and Korea maybe. After that ...meh? Most soldiers are proud to be Canadian..yes...Most Canadians are proud of our soldiers...you bet, Myself included...But most young guys don't join solely cause they are proud to be Canadian. There are so many other things you could do to serve. FD, Police, Become a doctor and stay in Canada or join MSF (Doctors without borders), inner city rehab worker, human rights lawyer, activist or CUSO or VSOCAN or WUSC.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

You no longer get a Veterans Affairs Canada disability pension for life, you get a one time lump sum payment but you have a choice of getting it all at once or in monthly installments until it is gone.

Ahhh, thanks Dave.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by nof60

You don't know me or my background or past or current service to my community and country at all. I know plenty about service. I also know about being 18 and the real reason 18 year olds enlist. As I said I feel we have a social contract to those who fought for King and Country in WW1, WW2 and possibly Korea. Not to those who signed up in piecetime only for it to become wartime. For those who enlist post 2001 I don't know how fighting an American oil war is patriotic either.

But to each their own.

I understand... I too have stayed in a Holiday Inn.