I know you were all concerned about this, but you don't have to worry anymore. The Brit journalists have weighed in.
The folks over at The Economist, the economics magazine in Britain, have pored over the US budget and think they know exactly where to make cuts.
I think we can all agree, with the defense spending and endless wars, with a gigantic welfare state, with paying for housing and healthcare for illegal immigrants, and the myriad of fake and gay university studies subsidized by the US government, the first place we need to cut is ... veterans benefits.
If you've ever talked with a veteran dependent upon the VA, you know that they think they are being lavished with generosity.
Yes, please, someone get Elon and Vivek on the phone at DOGE! We've found the most pressing budgetary issue!
The current system was introduced during the first world war. It provides tax-free monthly payments to soldiers who are injured or sick owing to their service. From 1960 to 2000, roughly 9% of veterans qualified for payments, typically for ailments such as hearing loss or burns. The department assigns a rating from zero to 100% based on the severity of disabilities. In 2000 the average rating was 30%; monthly payments averaged the equivalent of $975 today. Few qualified for the top tier.
The modern programme bears little resemblance to its original form. This year 6m veterans — or a third of the total — qualified for payments, with an average monthly benefit of $2,200.
Are we spending ... inefficiently on our vets? You know, there's probably an argument to be made. But are our vets getting even a fraction of the care they deserve for serving in our armed forces?
Again, just ask your local vet at the VA hospital and see what they tell you.
All I'm saying is that I can think of about 1,000 other things to cut before we start cutting vets medical care.
I mean, how did The Economist publish this crap piece? What kind of people are running this site?
Oh yeah ...
It's starting to make sense now.
The ratio on The Economists post is worth the price of admission here. These replies are brutal.
You can click through to see some much more colorful language that The Economist likely earned in response.
Maybe I am a little bit crazy, but what if we stopped the forever wars, secured our borders, and used some of the money we were spending on pensions in Ukraine and aid to Palestine and give it to our veterans instead?
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
