blzrul Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Enough of this entitlement, right? (note to the pinhead majority: I'm being sarcastic. the point is that we hear so much about supporting our troops and thanking our veterans. most of us do, although not all in ways that some of you acknowledge. so it will be interesting to hear how you can rationalize around the beef these people have against your beloved administration.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Enough of this entitlement, right? (note to the pinhead majority: I'm being sarcastic. the point is that we hear so much about supporting our troops and thanking our veterans. most of us do, although not all in ways that some of you acknowledge. so it will be interesting to hear how you can rationalize around the beef these people have against your beloved administration.) 344849[/snapback] Don't let Michael Crook find out about this.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Something blue? Maybe, nice earth tones...Harvest colors... No one knows, you are THE TBD hottie. (you ready to hit me yet, Deb? I'm smiling as I do this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted May 26, 2005 Author Share Posted May 26, 2005 Something blue? Maybe, nice earth tones...Harvest colors... No one knows, you are THE TBD hottie. (you ready to hit me yet, Deb? I'm smiling as I do this) 344891[/snapback] No way? That the BEST you can do? Shoot that's nothing. I am not a blue person. 90% of my wardrobe is black, followed by deep purple and turquoise. That would be it. It's my shoes that are wild. Real wild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 No way? That the BEST you can do? Shoot that's nothing. I am not a blue person. 90% of my wardrobe is black, followed by deep purple and turquoise. That would be it. It's my shoes that are wild. Real wild. 344945[/snapback] Turqoise and black could work....but you are such a B word I don't know that you could accessorize properly. Maybe a cobalt purse, I don't know. Don't you love what we are doing to them? They don't know our thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Turqoise and black could work....but you are such a B word I don't know that you could accessorize properly. Maybe a cobalt purse, I don't know. 344953[/snapback] Fag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Fag. 344963[/snapback] Just faking, Debbie is HOT! Ever see her webcam? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Jarhead Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 To bring this back to Nozzlenut's original post, I think the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The creation of this home was a nice idea. But when you consider the extremely small number of veterans it actually serves, I'm not sure it's worth it. There is a need to cut spending in this country, and this to me is just one example of someones budget being cut a bit and them not liking it. I personnaly despise the entitlement mentality that exists in our country, and that is what this looks like to me. It's funny how they advocate increasing the amount of money (in fact doubling) contributed by servicemembers every month. I say fuggedaboudit! As far as the 'beloved' administration, I think they should be applauded for trying to save some money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 As far as the 'beloved' administration, I think they should be applauded for trying to save some money. 344992[/snapback] 3 thoughts on this... First, this a home for war vets we're talking about here. Secondly, according to the article the home's "operating costs are borne mainly by a trust fund and by monthly fees paid by its residents. Another source of revenue are the fines and forfeitures levied upon members of the active-duty military in judicial proceedings." Thirdly, did I mention that these are United States war vets we're talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Thirdly, did I mention that these are United States war vets we're talking about? 345008[/snapback] Not necessarily. There are very likely a number of 20 retirees in that home that never served anywhere overseas or saw any combat. That article is pretty cryptic on eligibility but just having 20 years of service is enough. One of the things that sincerely pisses me off is the percentage of people considered "disabled veterans" who're living high off the government tit collecting over 70% of their retirement check untaxed (as well as other benefits from various government levels) yet aren't any more disabled than I am. It's really quite a scam and doesn't leave anywhere near enough money for those who actually deserve/need it. I guess honor ends when it's your turn at the trough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 The criteria for being labeled "disabled" period is pretty lax. This crappy weather we've had in New England has had me feeling blue for a while now. I say all the right things to my doctor and BLAMMO, I'm disabled. Where's muh parkin pass to crip corner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 IIRC, when I ETS'd, the sergeants that ran the place ENCOURAGED you to get a physical to see if you could pull in a 10 or 20% disability. I thought it was pretty shady, but I did call the Army on dental service they failed to give me while in uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 Not necessarily. There are very likely a number of 20 retirees in that home that never served anywhere overseas or saw any combat. That article is pretty cryptic on eligibility but just having 20 years of service is enough. One of the things that sincerely pisses me off is the percentage of people considered "disabled veterans" who're living high off the government tit collecting over 70% of their retirement check untaxed (as well as other benefits from various government levels) yet aren't any more disabled than I am. It's really quite a scam and doesn't leave anywhere near enough money for those who actually deserve/need it. I guess honor ends when it's your turn at the trough. 345021[/snapback] Actually not entirely true. These actually could be 180 day vets. Meaning they served active dity at some time, hell maybe peeling potatoes at a reserve unit in Iowa. There are 7 levels (if I remember correct) of eligible vets for places like this. Depending on where you live your odds go up of having access to VA services such as this. It's possible for some folks who did this to be in these homes. Hell, they are even changing what constitutes a Vet of FW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Jarhead Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 3 thoughts on this... First, this a home for war vets we're talking about here. Secondly, according to the article the home's "operating costs are borne mainly by a trust fund and by monthly fees paid by its residents. Another source of revenue are the fines and forfeitures levied upon members of the active-duty military in judicial proceedings." Thirdly, did I mention that these are United States war vets we're talking about? 345008[/snapback] Yes they are veterans, shoot I am a veteran of multiple campaigns. But I don't ever plan on living there. That stated, it doesen't mean I don't have compassion for those who are wounded. But as Darrin opined, there are some gravy-training veterans out there who think they are entitled to the world because they served 20 years. I've got to agree with VA and some of the other posters here about what happens at the end of service for some. There are those who will try to milk the government for all they can get in the name of being a veteran. Most recently, I worked with a Gunny who was near retirement. This clown spent more time in sickcall and Balboa medical center than he did at work...no exageration. You wouldn't believe the ailments he came up with 9 months from retiring. It makes me sick to my stomach, because I knew exactly what he was trying to pull. He had everything under the sun listed in his health record so he could go back to the VA and petition them for increased disability. When I read stories like the one Nozzlenut posted, these are the type of people who come to mind for me. Also, CD, you conveniently failed to note that I and every other servicemember involuntarily pay $.50 a month for this place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 I've got to agree with VA and some of the other posters here about what happens at the end of service for some. There are those who will try to milk the government for all they can get in the name of being a veteran. 345264[/snapback] That does change things a bit, doesn't it? When the author wrote "war vets," I assumed they were veterans of the last declared war in which the United States participated in. I didn't realize the author found the terms "war vets" and "activity duty vets" to be synonymous. Thanks to you, AD, and VA for pointing out the author's misrepresentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted May 26, 2005 Share Posted May 26, 2005 That does change things a bit, doesn't it? When the author wrote "war vets," I assumed they were veterans of the last declared war in which the United States participated in. I didn't realize the author found the terms "war vets" and "activity duty vets" to be synonymous. Thanks to you, AD, and VA for pointing out the author's misrepresentation. 345496[/snapback] This home had these requirements for availability, others are not as restrictive Veterans can live there if their active duty service in the military was at least 50 percent enlisted or warrant officer. They must have served on active duty for at least 20 years and be at least 60 years old. Also eligible are veterans unable to earn a living due to a service-related disability or whose disability is not service related but who served in a war zone. All female veterans who served before 1948 are eligible.[/I] So basically a vet even without 20 years (180 active duty vet) who can't earn a living due to any disability can live there. Any any female vet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts