Federal Workers Shocked to Learn They're Not Royalty and Forced by Trump to...
Eight More Years! President Trump Trolls Media by Hinting He’s Ready to Serve...
He’s Everywhere! ‘Journalists’ Lament Energetic, Omnipresent Trump After Boring Biden’s Ca...
‘Hatch’ Act: Elie Mystal Goes on Race Rant Blaming White People for Trump...
Remaining Red: Florida Republicans Celebrate Nikki Fried’s Democrat Party Chair Victory
Stand-Up Guy: Trump Creates Comedy Skit Out of Sleepy Joe Biden’s Inability to...
Maddow in Tears! Trump Predicts the Demise of ‘Enemy of the People’ MSNBC...
Brit Goes Undercover With the Far-Right Patriotic Alternative for BBC
America’s Golden Age: White House Releases List of Trump’s Actions Over His First...
Here’s a Peek at Anthony Fauci’s Old Taxpayer-Funded Security
President Donald Trump Announces We Are Now in a Merit-Based World
The Left's Warped View of Women Is Bound to Backfire
'USA! USA!' Trump Hit a Vegas Casino and What Happened Next Is a...
Historian Amazed by How Well Fed and Looked After Released Hamas Hostages Appear
Following Pete Hegseth's Confirmation, Media Double Down on Former Sister-in-Law's Debunke...

Lefties at The Economist Finally Want to Cut Spending (of Veteran's Disability Benefits, That Is)

ImgFlip

This writer would like to remind you that we spend a lot of money -- and waste a lot of money -- on things both stupid and maddening. Under the 'maddening' category is the $150 billion we spend on illegal immigration every year. And there are slew of stupid things including $50 million for combating cow farts.

Advertisement

But the point is: we have to do something to cut spending. The Economist, who we've written about before, has found something we can cut back on. Except it's the most insulting option imaginable:

Seriously?

SERIOUSLY?!

Veterans are where they decide to make cuts?

No. Just no.

They write:

Mr Musk is zeroing in on discretionary spending, which includes programmes such as the department’s medical services. But the main driver of its spending surge is mandatory outlays for disability compensation. Between 2000 and 2024, such payments ballooned from $26bn, in today’s prices, to $159bn. Last year alone saw a 17% jump. And the department’s latest budget request forecasts that compensation will soar to $185bn over the next two years.

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 men and women who served this nation -- many at great personal cost, both physically and emotionally -- are the ones The Economist thinks aren't deserving of benefits is galling.

Advertisement

We sent a lot of them to Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 24 years and now some nerd at this rag decided they shouldn't get money for that.

The good news is, everyone hated this.

They're not very bright, are they?

Nope. And they deserve it.

No lies detected.

And it gets even better. Guess who was all in on the Iraq War back in 2003?

Wow.

Just wow.

Not surprising at all.

YUP.

Always adorbs.

Advertisement

Much better idea.

Pure evil.

What's the fair price for getting your leg blown off by an IED, we wonder?

They'd deserve them.

That's where we start.

Or hurricane victims.

Noticing a pattern here.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement