- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 40% of all living veterans are on disability benefits
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:02 pm to dkreller
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:02 pm to dkreller
Its a fact that people who never saw combat, and never left stateside, have 100%
Roughley 1/3 of the people I served with on my deployments have some form of rating.
Every now and again you meet people on 100% that never did anything thing and never went anywhere.
Of those maybe half are rated for legit reasons.
Accidents happen in training and on the job all the time.
I've got mobility issues from wounds sustained in combat and dont have 100%. i do however have a purple heart to go along with mine.
Didn't apply for 8 years post service and had to go through more hoops than a 3 ring circus. Also had multiple reviews at 2.5 years, 5 years, and 7.5 years.
I've been approached by veteran advocate groups and organizations (Fraternal order of the purple heart, American legion, vfw, dav, and others) telling me I could get bumped to 100% because I have a couple of enemy marksmanship badges.
I've always turned it down. I went through my process and got what I got.
No, that may change if the conditions get worse over time.
It boggles my mind how people can push through the system on pure bullshite but it happens from time to time.
If you want to spot someone faking a rating it's not hard. They will often lead with, and repetitively talk about how they are a disabled vet.
Most in that category get a disabled veteran plate.
Kind of like how you know if someone does crossfit. You won't have to ask, they will tell you 5 times in your first conversation.
Roughley 1/3 of the people I served with on my deployments have some form of rating.
Every now and again you meet people on 100% that never did anything thing and never went anywhere.
Of those maybe half are rated for legit reasons.
Accidents happen in training and on the job all the time.
I've got mobility issues from wounds sustained in combat and dont have 100%. i do however have a purple heart to go along with mine.
Didn't apply for 8 years post service and had to go through more hoops than a 3 ring circus. Also had multiple reviews at 2.5 years, 5 years, and 7.5 years.
I've been approached by veteran advocate groups and organizations (Fraternal order of the purple heart, American legion, vfw, dav, and others) telling me I could get bumped to 100% because I have a couple of enemy marksmanship badges.
I've always turned it down. I went through my process and got what I got.
No, that may change if the conditions get worse over time.
It boggles my mind how people can push through the system on pure bullshite but it happens from time to time.
If you want to spot someone faking a rating it's not hard. They will often lead with, and repetitively talk about how they are a disabled vet.
Most in that category get a disabled veteran plate.
Kind of like how you know if someone does crossfit. You won't have to ask, they will tell you 5 times in your first conversation.
This post was edited on 7/15/26 at 1:23 pm
4
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:05 pm to Usmc
I don’t deny that there’s fraud. I’m sure it’s excessive. shite for brains suggested that none of the people on disability saw combat.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:09 pm to dkreller
Most people don’t understand that even if you’re in a horrendous car wreck you can be retired and have full disability. They also don’t think of those who have cancer and other terminal illnesses. The risk from hazmat on a day to day basis is something most don’t think about for those who aren’t in combat arms. No veteran will say there’s no fraud or people don’t get it but you can’t just make shite up and expect to have it stick. It’s also not a get rich over night deal because claims take forever. Even medical boards probably average over a year at least. It’s always interesting seeing these threads and the comments made because you can tell how ignorant it is of those who aren’t knowledgeable or are just complaining to complain. The envy over military benefits is weird when it’s a voluntary service. And nobody walks into a recruiters office even discussing VA benefits like it’s some pot of gold after completion of service. 
This post was edited on 7/15/26 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:09 pm to SparkyWilson
.
So I don't even know that you're really discussing disability at this point as much as you are creating a narrative that makes you feel as though that your self-worth is still good even though you didn't serve. This isnt a moral superiority conversation, many people served to avoid jail. They still served. This is about people misconstrueing military disability with welfare.
Its not...
The bottom line is when you're ordered to go do something with the penalty of being jail time, or Worse , historically, not just getting fired from a job if you choose not to do it, and you sustain any injury any injury at all that can even remotely take away from your earning potential then in this country we consider that a legal debt to that person and that's why we pay it.
quote:
That's true; it's certainly not for everybody, but I don't believe it's all solely benevolent service. That's the shroud the military will sometimes wrap themselves in when it's perfectly okay to also say they are in it for the benefits. Whether they sacrifice 4 years to get the GI Bill or 20+ years so they can have a pension, it was a sacrifice with a payoff in mind. That's not watering it down.
So I don't even know that you're really discussing disability at this point as much as you are creating a narrative that makes you feel as though that your self-worth is still good even though you didn't serve. This isnt a moral superiority conversation, many people served to avoid jail. They still served. This is about people misconstrueing military disability with welfare.
Its not...
The bottom line is when you're ordered to go do something with the penalty of being jail time, or Worse , historically, not just getting fired from a job if you choose not to do it, and you sustain any injury any injury at all that can even remotely take away from your earning potential then in this country we consider that a legal debt to that person and that's why we pay it.
This post was edited on 7/15/26 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:12 pm to Usmc
But my understanding is that those folks are getting that rating for the tax purpose. If it gets them additional money on top of what they already get, I'm not privy to.
I do wish they would change the disabled license plate thing because I hear people all the time ask about if someone is disabled when they are able bodied.
But if someone can get a rating, it's approved via VA, so I have no issue with that. I actually had a VA rep say I was probably eligible for some myself when I signed up to setup my VA benefits. And I seperated back in the 90's. I just never felt I had anything I needed to claim.
I do wish they would change the disabled license plate thing because I hear people all the time ask about if someone is disabled when they are able bodied.
But if someone can get a rating, it's approved via VA, so I have no issue with that. I actually had a VA rep say I was probably eligible for some myself when I signed up to setup my VA benefits. And I seperated back in the 90's. I just never felt I had anything I needed to claim.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:15 pm to Usmc
quote:
Most in that category get a disabled veteran plate. Kind of like how you know if someone does crossfit. You won't have to ask, they will tell you 5 times in your first conversation.
I wish that wasn’t accurate but it is. I’ll add the corollary that the more someone talks about what they did, the less they did.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:21 pm to Flats
If anyone talks about anything and you feel like youre talking to someone who does crossfit. Its gaurenteed bullshite.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:22 pm to Flats
quote:
I wish that wasn’t accurate but it is. I’ll add the corollary that the more someone talks about what they did, the less they did.
This really varies imo. It’s usually the shite heads who were shite heads during their service that couldn’t wait to get out, who are always the loudest.
In my experience most veterans who are actually at the VA are pretty legit. Like I posted before I’ve been helping my dad and I have volunteered since at my local VA outpatient clinic helping other veterans. This is all free volunteer advocates who help those not familiar start their process. We have elderly vets who walk in all the time who have never been or started their process who at minimum qualify for medical because of their service dates. It’s actually been very rewarding and humbling. Like I’ve said before too, the taxpayer is lucky only 40% of veterans have a rating and use the system.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:23 pm to DeBoar
quote:
The envy over military benefits is weird
That’s all it is. Notice the argument started as fraudulent claims need to be reviewed and quickly evolved into veterans are getting too much.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:28 pm to Usmc
quote:
I've been approached by veteran advocate groups and organizations (Fateranal order of the purple heart, American legion, vfw, dav, and others) telling me I could get bumped to 100% because I have a couple of enemy marksmanship badges.
I've always turned it down. I went through my process and got what I got.
Isn't this one of the main purposes of these organizations to help fellow veterans get the benefits they may be entitled to?
Pretty noble of you to turn down compensation from the VA that you say you should receive.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:32 pm to Flats
quote:
Most in that category get a disabled veteran plate. Kind of like how you know if someone does crossfit. You won't have to ask, they will tell you 5 times in your first conversation.
I wish that wasn’t accurate but it is. I’ll add the corollary that the more someone talks about what they did, the less they did.
I think the frustration there is the exploitation of the term "veteran." I share the same sentiment, but why would a veteran not go get either that, 100% DAV, or MH plates for the free registration?
They've tried to separate vets and combat vets into different buckets multiple times and it gets shot down... and as frustrating as that is for combat vets... there wouldn't be enough people to lobby for veterans benefits in that set up.
It gets worse every year that passes since we were in war - war. Everyone wants to feel like they belong, so they shite on people that might have "done more" than them.
Its why you see it here " im a vet but ...." you have a lot of people that served and even deployed during much less dangerous times trying to speak for people who went through the gauntlet... and even VA doctors will start to get it confused... making comments about training or military service being rough to people that were actually consistently exposed to combat.
Its performance, because when you didn't live it, you just take your best guess at how that person would act. Kind of like when a combat vet that lost 8 peers in 4 months tells someone happy memorial day, and the younger vet or person that is influenced by the younger vet goes "but is it really happy?"
No, but as domeone that was at their funerals, they'd want us to say this, and have a beer so stfu.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:42 pm to Ebridg3
quote:
The bottom line is when you're ordered to go do something with the penalty of being jail time, or Worse , historically, not just getting fired from a job if you choose not to do it, and you sustain any injury any injury at all that can even remotely take away from your earning potential then in this country we consider that a legal debt to that person and that's why we pay it.
Not about self-worth or misunderstanding military disability. I posted previous that it is better thought of as medical compensation. I don't have anything against it except, of course, fraudulent claims.
This is your statement that started it for me:
quote:
With that said, people who didnt serve sometimes don't quite understand that even not combat veterans, when they served, their life, 24/7 was dictated and controlled by someone else. Most can't wrap their head around that level of sacrifice or what that truly means.
My point is that it isn't a one-sided sacrifice. At sign up and especially when decided to extend, the assessment was made by the individual that the sacrifice was worth it for one or more reasons. From your previous statement, no, most of us don't understand that level of sacrifice, but we can certainly make the assessment that it must be worth it to the individual choosing it. I mean, why would someone go through it and continue to go through it if it wasn't worth it? It also doesn't make disability claims unassailable.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:54 pm to SparkyWilson
quote:
I mean, why would someone go through it and continue to go through it if it wasn't worth it? It also doesn't make disability claims unassailable.
Yeah it’s a great recruiting strategy to say “hey when we frick you up you’ll be rich at $3500/mo”. Again some of you don’t understand how ignorant your thought process is related to this
. Posted on 7/15/26 at 1:58 pm to DeBoar
quote:
mean, why would someone go through it and continue to go through it if it wasn't worth it? It also doesn't make disability claims unassailable.
quote:
Yeah it’s a great recruiting strategy to say “hey when we frick you up you’ll be rich at $3500/mo”. Again some of you don’t understand how ignorant your thought process is related to this .
I don't think you understand either if you think that I think that recruiters are leading with disability claims or that it's the only sell. I spoke with recruiters coming out of high school and they talked about things like paying for college, vocational training, what you'd get paid while your, sign on bonus, and medical benefits.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 2:55 pm to SparkyWilson
quote:
My point is that it isn't a one-sided sacrifice. At sign up and especially when decided to extend, the assessment was made by the individual that the sacrifice was worth it for one or more reasons. From your previous statement, no, most of us don't understand that level of sacrifice, but we can certainly make the assessment that it must be worth it to the individual choosing it. I mean, why would someone go through it and continue to go through it if it wasn't worth it? It also doesn't make disability claims unassailable.
?You are fundamentally confusing a civilian free-market transaction with the legal framework of the United States military, and in doing so, you are trying to rewrite a contract after the fact.
?First, let's address your assumption about "extensions." Millions of disabled veterans never extended. They signed a single contract, did exactly what was asked of them in places like Iraq, sustained permanent physical damage in the process, and got out. You assume people stayed in because they ran some corporate cost-benefit analysis and decided the "sacrifice was worth it." That is a fundamentally civilian mindset. When guys in combat zones extend, they don’t do it for the "benefits"—they do it because their team is going back into the meat grinder and they refuse to leave them behind.
?But let’s play along with your "contract" logic, because it actually destroys your own argument.
?Yes, they made a choice at sign-up. They signed a legally binding contract with the federal government. The terms of that contract were simple: the government gets absolute, dictatorial control over their bodily autonomy, and in exchange, if the government breaks their bodies while exercising that control, it owes them medical compensation for the permanent loss of their earning potential and physical capability.
?That is what VA disability is. It is not SSDI. It is not welfare based on an inability to work. It is a strict, legal liability mechanism for government-mandated physical destruction.
?When you say disability claims aren't "unassailable," you are using a rhetorical bait-and-switch. Nobody is defending fraudulent claims—fraud is a crime, and the VA has an entire inspector general's office dedicated to prosecuting it. But what you are actually trying to assail is the legitimacy of the debt itself.
?You are trying to use the fact that they "volunteered" as a loophole to scrutinize the compensation they are legally owed. You are essentially saying, "Well, you knew what you were getting into, so why should I, the taxpayer, have to foot the bill?"
?Here is the hard truth: disability compensation existed the day they signed those contracts. It was factored into the very "assessment" you claim they made. Now, years after the fact, as the country gets further away from the reality of the wars they fought, people who never took the risk want to back out of their end of the deal. You chose not to take the risk. That is fine. But you don't get to enjoy the security provided by the people who did, and then complain about paying the taxes required to honor the contract the country made with them.
?The debt is unassailable. If you don't want to pay the toll, don't ask men to stand on the wall.
Posted on 7/15/26 at 3:59 pm to Ebridg3
quote:
You are fundamentally confusing a civilian free-market transaction with the legal framework of the United States military, and in doing so, you are trying to rewrite a contract after the fact.
No I'm not. I haven't stated a desire to do any of that.
quote:
First, let's address your assumption about "extensions." Millions of disabled veterans never extended. They signed a single contract, did exactly what was asked of them in places like Iraq, sustained permanent physical damage in the process, and got out. You assume people stayed in because they ran some corporate cost-benefit analysis and decided the "sacrifice was worth it." That is a fundamentally civilian mindset. When guys in combat zones extend, they don’t do it for the "benefits"—they do it because their team is going back into the meat grinder and they refuse to leave them behind.
That's a very specific instance. Only 10-15% of the current military sees combat or goes back to the meat grinder. I don't know all the reasons, but it would be illogical to attribute all military extensions to this reason alone. I have friends and family across all military branches that stayed in and it had nothing to do with going back to a combat zone with their team. They aren't all in combat assignments and don't all have a team to get deployed with if deployment is even on the table. Don't get me started on my stepfather's kid who is blatantly in it for themselves (no, I don't attribute their attitude and reasons to every member of the military).
quote:
But let’s play along with your "contract" logic, because it actually destroys your own argument.
?Yes, they made a choice at sign-up. They signed a legally binding contract with the federal government. The terms of that contract were simple: the government gets absolute, dictatorial control over their bodily autonomy, and in exchange, if the government breaks their bodies while exercising that control, it owes them medical compensation for the permanent loss of their earning potential and physical capability.
it's not destroying any argument. I haven't once stated they shouldn't receive disability (medical) compensation for qualifying conditions.
quote:
That is what VA disability is. It is not SSDI. It is not welfare based on an inability to work. It is a strict, legal liability mechanism for government-mandated physical destruction.
I've already stated before now that it's better to call it medical compensation if you care to look back in the thread.
quote:
When you say disability claims aren't "unassailable," you are using a rhetorical bait-and-switch. Nobody is defending fraudulent claims—fraud is a crime, and the VA has an entire inspector general's office dedicated to prosecuting it. But what you are actually trying to assail is the legitimacy of the debt itself.
No, I'm not. I'm stating that claims can and should be scrutinized.
quote:
You are trying to use the fact that they "volunteered" as a loophole to scrutinize the compensation they are legally owed. You are essentially saying, "Well, you knew what you were getting into, so why should I, the taxpayer, have to foot the bill?"
Didn't say that at all. If they qualify legitimately, then they qualify. That's it.
quote:
Here is the hard truth: disability compensation existed the day they signed those contracts. It was factored into the very "assessment" you claim they made. Now, years after the fact, as the country gets further away from the reality of the wars they fought, people who never took the risk want to back out of their end of the deal. You chose not to take the risk. That is fine. But you don't get to enjoy the security provided by the people who did, and then complain about paying the taxes required to honor the contract the country made with them.
Nothing hard about it. It's part of the deal. I haven't claimed otherwise. I haven't complained once about it.
quote:
The debt is unassailable. If you don't want to pay the toll, don't ask men to stand on the wall.
I didn't say the debt was unassailable. The claim process is and should be. It's clear that it gets taken advantage of by some, and that's a disservice to those who legitimately deserve and, yes, a disservice to the taxpayer.
You're painting this with a very specific brush and color. All military personnel across all branches don't fit into the one instance you are describing. The member that stays stateside in a non-combat assignment isn't making the same sacrifice as the active combat MOS guy who's been in the stuff.
I'll close with I have no issue at all with any of the earned benefits our military personnel receive with the exception of fraudulent claims. You can choose to believe that or not.
Posted on 7/17/26 at 12:38 am to onmymedicalgrind
quote:
IOW, should vets be compensated for both?
I have no opinion on the should. I can just tell you that they are and it is completely within the guidelines of the program.
Posted on 7/17/26 at 12:42 am to stout
There are abusers. I know a guy who only stayed stateside. Minor injury during training. Mooching for 100% disability.
Posted on 7/17/26 at 4:25 pm to stout
I know a guy whos getting 160%..hes living large
He bought an 79k 4runner and a $44
He bought an 79k 4runner and a $44
Posted on 7/17/26 at 4:28 pm to stout
I know a guy getting 160% benefits..he bought an 79k 4 runner and a $460k house in 1 year .
Brags everytime i see him about his financial situation..
Brags everytime i see him about his financial situation..
Page 29 of 30
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News