Dems at it again

[Ravi]

I will, however, be very appreciative as long as it doesn't cost me anything more than verbalization of said appreciation.

I fear that even that obligation would be too much for an anarchist.

You are projecting some lefty stereotype onto me. I haven't stated, nor do I believe, that the current system of welfare in this country is fair or right.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I fear that even that obligation would be too much for an anarchist.

You are projecting some lefty stereotype onto me. I haven't stated, nor do I believe, that the current system of welfare in this country is fair or right.

No you think the Government should just provide healthcare to any and everyone whether they earned it or not.

You ignore the fact the military and its retirees EARNED the retirement benefits they get due to a CONTRACT to work.

 

[CSM]

I fear that even that obligation would be too much for an anarchist.

You are projecting some lefty stereotype onto me. I haven't stated, nor do I believe, that the current system of welfare in this country is fair or right.

I wasn't talking about welfare.

I am talking about your position that all groups/individuals are equally deserving. It is my contention that I DESERVE to live in your house, eat your food, have you provide clothing as you do for yourself based upon your assertion (quote: "I am saying that if you give it to one group you should give it to another."). You can add that I expect you to pay for my health care as well since I want to keep this discussion on your choice of topics.

The whole point I am trying to make here is that your assertion that all are equally "deserving" is simply pure, unadulterated bullshit.

 

[Ravi]

No you think the Government should just provide healthcare to any and everyone whether they earned it or not.

Wrong.

 

[Ravi]

I wasn't talking about welfare.

I am talking about your position that all groups/individuals are equally deserving. It is my contention that I DESERVE to live in your house, eat your food, have you provide clothing as you do for yourself based upon your assertion (quote: "I am saying that if you give it to one group you should give it to another."). You can add that I expect you to pay for my health care as well since I want to keep this discussion on your choice of topics.

The whole point I am trying to make here is that your assertion that all are equally "deserving" is simply pure, unadulterated bullshit.

I'm pretty sure I didn't state that.

 

[editec]

The military medicine is just another example of socialism at work.

Money is taken from citizens (regardless of whether they agree or not) to pay for military medicine.

People who spend a career in the military that try to tell we who are civilians about how grand free market capitalist medicine is, are simple speaking with the authority of people who have never had to live with the consequences of a capitalist economy free market medicine.

Now I happen to think that the guys in the service do EARN their health care bennies, of course.

Likewise I think the citizens who work and paid taxes to keep those guys in uniform ALSO earned the same health care bennies that our boy and girls in uniform did.

As to the canard that people in the service aren't paid well?

That's not really true for most of billets.

Those in the service who have highly valuable skills who stay in uniform are underpaid, but that's not really most of the billets in the services.

Damned few cooks, for example, in the civilian world have the combined salary, benefits, health care benefits, and retirement packages thy'd get cooking in uniform. Same with most jobs that are done in uniform.

This whole myth 00 that people in the service are terribly paid, is just that, a myth. That used to be true but no longer, folks.

Often a lifer's career is actually quite cushy compared to what they'd be getting if they were doing what they do in the civie world.

And sure there's combat...for about 1 in 40 people in the service.

The rest of the people in uniform are as unlikely to get shot as you or I are.

But when some self proclaiming retired lifer starts whining about socialist social security while they'vee sucking at the teat of a socialistic military their entire adult lives

Well that just sorta cracks me up/

Tell it to the marines, thinks this old salt.

 

[Ravi]

Well said, Editec.

 

[DiamondDave]

The military medicine is just another example of socialism at work.

Money is taken from citizens (regardless of whether they agree or not) to pay for military medicine.

People who spend a career in the military that try to tell we who are civilians about how grand free market capitalist medicine is, are simple speaking with the authority of people who have never had to live with the consequences of a capitalist economy free market medicine.

Now I happen to think that the guys in the service do EARN their health care bennies, of course.

Likewise I think the citizens who work and paid taxes to keep those guys in uniform ALSO earned the same health care bennies that our boy and girls in uniform did.

As to the canard that people in the service aren't paid well?

That's not really true for most of billets.

Those in the service who have highly valuable skills who stay in uniform are underpaid, but that's not really most of the billets in the services.

Damned few cooks, for example, in the civilian world have the combined salary, benefits, health care benefits, and retirement packages thy'd get cooking in uniform. Same with most jobs that are done in uniform.

This whole myth 00 that people in the service are terribly paid, is just that, a myth. That used to be true but no longer, folks.

Often a lifer's career is actually quite cushy compared to what they'd be getting if they were doing what they do in the civie world.

And sure there's combat...for about 1 in 40 people in the service.

The rest of the people in uniform are as unlikely to get shot as you or I are.

But when some self proclaiming retired lifer starts whining about socialist social security while they'vee sucking at the teat of a socialistic military their entire adult lives

Well that just sorta cracks me up/

Tell it to the marines, thinks this old salt.

Do you even THINK before you type this drivel?

A national military is nothing in terms of a socialist ideal.... Perhaps you should actually read the original documents of this republic and see what the government is actually CHARGED to do. One of the most primary being defense of the country. A.K.A. a MILITARY....

Now your civilians do EARN the money that they pay in taxes... but one small detail you leave out... they are not working for the military or the federal government unless they are actually civvy employees of the government... and when they are they are also given medical benefits in their benefits package....

The socialist crapola you and your ilk promote has nothing to do with people in a free society EARNING the benefits you are calling for everyone else in the country to pay for thru the distribution thru the ineffective federal bureaucracy system... if you and your little leftist buddies want something, go out and get a job that provides it in compensation... EARN IT... or learn to earn even more money with a skill and they pay for your own health insurance.... nah... that would be something like work and not putting the responsibility on someone else's shoulders

And you would know shit about what risks each military person goes thru...

pathetic leftists

 

[CSM]

I'm pretty sure I didn't state that.

PULEEEEEZE! Now you are ignoring your own statements which I was very careful to put in quotes. From your various posts:

"I disagree with RGS's idea that somehow one group of Americans are more deserving of medical care."

"I am saying that if you give it to one group you should give it to another."

If you did not intend to make those statements, then you need to have a serious talk with your fingers. They seem to be acting without benefit of your brain being engaged.

 

[editec]

Do you even THINK before you type this drivel?

Yes, as matter of fact I do.

A national military is nothing in terms of a socialist ideal....

What the hell is a "social ideal" DD?

Perhaps you should actually read the original documents of this republic and see what the government is actually CHARGED to do. One of the most primary being defense of the country. A.K.A. a MILITARY....

Yes, that's one of the things that our consitution mandates, true. So?

Now your civilians do EARN the money that they pay in taxes...

I have no idea what the above is supposed to mean. In fact I doubt you do either.

but one small detail you leave out... they are not working for the military or the federal government unless they are actually civvy employees of the government... and when they are they are also given medical benefits in their benefits package....

What does that have to do with anything I've penned? Do try to stay on topic, shall we?

The socialist crapola you and your ilk

I'm sorry...I don't have an ilk, socialist or otherwise. My team is merely the team seeking to find truth in a world of lies.

promote has nothing to do with people in a free society EARNING the benefits you are calling for everyone else in the country to pay for thru the distribution thru the ineffective federal bureaucracy system...

Run on sentences indicate run on thoughts, chum.

Try to think what you mean to say before putting that jumble of incoherence that you think passes for thinking into ASCII.

if you and your little leftist buddies want something, go out and get a job that provides it in compensation... EARN IT... or learn to earn even more money with a skill and they pay for your own health insurance.... nah... that would be something like work and not putting the responsibility on someone else's shoulders

bla bla bla bla blaaaather.

While I have no doubt you feel justified in moaning and bitching, the above doesn't in any way address my points.

Do get a clue, DD.

Read the content of the post first, opine on the content of that post after.

And you would know shit about what risks each military person goes thru...

Presumptive puppy. Each military person faces risks depending on their billet and station. Are you truly so clueless about the real military?

pathetic leftists

Ah yes, the flag surrender of the idiots who imagine themselves to be conservatives and patriots

When lost, assume that the people whose thoughts are beyond your limited ability to understand must be leftists.

The anti- intellectual refuge of angry white male morons of our age.

Call anything you don't understand or like either liberalism or socialism.

Go read a book, dude.

You don't know appear to know anything, or if you do, you clearly don't know how to take your knowledge and covert it into words.

 

[CSM]

The military medicine is just another example of socialism at work.

Money is taken from citizens (regardless of whether they agree or not) to pay for military medicine.

People who spend a career in the military that try to tell we who are civilians about how grand free market capitalist medicine is, are simple speaking with the authority of people who have never had to live with the consequences of a capitalist economy free market medicine.

Now I happen to think that the guys in the service do EARN their health care bennies, of course.

Likewise I think the citizens who work and paid taxes to keep those guys in uniform ALSO earned the same health care bennies that our boy and girls in uniform did.

As to the canard that people in the service aren't paid well?

That's not really true for most of billets.

Those in the service who have highly valuable skills who stay in uniform are underpaid, but that's not really most of the billets in the services.

Damned few cooks, for example, in the civilian world have the combined salary, benefits, health care benefits, and retirement packages thy'd get cooking in uniform. Same with most jobs that are done in uniform.

This whole myth 00 that people in the service are terribly paid, is just that, a myth. That used to be true but no longer, folks.

Often a lifer's career is actually quite cushy compared to what they'd be getting if they were doing what they do in the civie world.

And sure there's combat...for about 1 in 40 people in the service.

The rest of the people in uniform are as unlikely to get shot as you or I are.

But when some self proclaiming retired lifer starts whining about socialist social security while they'vee sucking at the teat of a socialistic military their entire adult lives

Well that just sorta cracks me up/

Tell it to the marines, thinks this old salt.

You are either truly trolling, willfully ignorant or simply naive.

The American people PAY for service. A contract is signed with those providing that service (specifically, those that enlist in the military). Part of that contract is a benefits package afforded the signee. If the citizens of the US should decide that the package is too generous, then by all means they should have it changed.

I presume you are aware that the military does not pay service members based on "billets" but on pay grade. An E-4 cook makes the same as an E-4 infantry man. By the way, that E-4 cook does more than just cook. He still has to maintain personal gear, participate in other training and operations (guard duty, quick reaction force, man the perimeter, etc.) which are things civilian cooks do not have to do. If all an enlisted cook had to do was cook, then I would agree that the pay is equitable if not better. Considering the taskings that a military cook (or any other "billet" you choose to discuss) must perform beyond the actuall act of cooking itself, the pay is rather low.

As for lifers, I will also presume you know that a mid level manager in a civilian company is not usually required to maintain firearms proficiency, meet physical standards (that most civilians would consider extreme) and perform duties outside the actual job of mangement such as staff duty, plan and conduct training, etc.

Regarding the point about getting shot: in the type of warfare the military is engaged in these days, there is no front line. It is called asymetrical warfare. There is no "front line". Cooks, supply clerks, infantrymen, and all others in the theater of war are equally at risk.

Equating a civilian job to a military occupation is not only demeaning to both but disengenous as well.

 

[Ravi]

PULEEEEEZE! Now you are ignoring your own statements which I was very careful to put in quotes. From your various posts:

"I disagree with RGS's idea that somehow one group of Americans are more deserving of medical care."

"I am saying that if you give it to one group you should give it to another."

If you did not intend to make those statements, then you need to have a serious talk with your fingers. They seem to be acting without benefit of your brain being engaged.

I can't deny that doesn't happen. I'll try again.

I don't think that we should be giving one group socialized medicine and not another because of their career choice. That doesn't mean I approve of socialized medicine, I'm actually not sure if I do or not since no one has ever laid out a clear plan for it. I'm more saying they are equally undeserving than that they are equally deserving.

But seriously, if we can make it work for one group why can't we make it work for all?

 

[WhoisJohnGault]

I totally love threads like this where the person who started it and is whining about socialized medicine gets all his medical needs paid for by the government.

lol... too funny.

If you believe that socialized health care will benefit all, you are sadly mistaken. I have a friend from Britain whose mother still lives there and he tells me how horrible it is. Basically, their healthcare is only good for normal maladies, sore throats, measles..whatever, minor fractures etc. For anything important, you wait....and you wait and wait.......did you ever notice how bad the Brit's teeth are? Wonder why??? By the time they get to you, you have either died, gone elsewhere and paid for the treatment out of your pocket or given up.

 

[jillian]

If you believe that socialized health care will benefit all, you are sadly mistaken. I have a friend from Britain whose mother still lives there and he tells me how horrible it is. Basically, their healthcare is only good for normal maladies, sore throats, measles..whatever, minor fractures etc. For anything important, you wait....and you wait and wait.......did you ever notice how bad the Brit's teeth are? Wonder why??? By the time they get to you, you have either died, gone elsewhere and paid for the treatment out of your pocket or given up.

a) you are talking about a situation where medical care is provided by the government. no one is talking about that here. we're talking about health insurance.

And everyone I know who gets their care paid for, like in Israel, Australia, New Zealand, and, yes, even England, is pretty happy with what they have and they know if they need more, they can go out of pocket.

So I think a means of providing people with health coverage (since that's what we're talking about) is imperative to deal with the other issues I raised.

Interestingly, you don't address those. Don't you think those issues need to be addressed?

 

[CSM]

I can't deny that doesn't happen. I'll try again.

I don't think that we should be giving one group socialized medicine and not another because of their career choice. That doesn't mean I approve of socialized medicine, I'm actually not sure if I do or not since no one has ever laid out a clear plan for it. I'm more saying they are equally undeserving than that they are equally deserving.

But seriously, if we can make it work for one group why can't we make it work for all?

You see, you persist in calling it "socialized medicine" when it is not. That is the crux of the discussion thus far. The American people offer those enlisting in the military a fee for service along with an accompanying benefits package. An individual has the choice of signing that contract or not. That is hardly "socialized". If the American citizens decide that the current benefits package is too generous then they can (and do) change it. The individual then has the option of accepting the new package when they enlist/re-enlist or not joining/separating from service.

"But seriously, if we can make it work for one group why can't we make it work for all?"

AHHH different question all together! Generally, part of the benefits package for employees at mid size to large corporations is a health care package that the empoyer makes available to employees. Again, hardly "socialized" medicine. Some packages are better than others but most involve some kind of co-pay. Some employees (usually the younger ones) choose not to take that package with the presumption that they are healthy and will stay that way for the forseeable future. In any case, a service is rendered by the employee. Part of that fee is a benefit which includes health care.

When you say "socialized medicine" the implication (to me at least) is that health care should be provided WHETHER OR NOT A SERVICE IS PROVIDED IN RETURN. It is obvious to me that such is not the case for those in the military or those that have retired from the military.

In any case, the real question is what do we do about those who do not have the opportunity to avail themselves of such a health care package? I would suggest that this subject is an entire thread in itself (which has been discussed ad nauseaum on this board in the past).

 

[CSM]

I totally love threads like this where the person who started it and is whining about socialized medicine gets all his medical needs paid for by the government.

lol... too funny.

So then, Jillian, are we to presume from this statement that all government workers should not have health care as part of their benefits package (including the military)?

It is my opinion (see how nicely I placed that caveat?) that if the American people pay for a service (military or government jobs, per say) and accompany that pay with a benfits package, then it is not "socialized medicine."

As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, should the citizens of this country decide that military service is not valuable enough to have health care included as a benefit, then they should remove said benefit from the contract the offer to prospective government employees.

 

[Ravi]

You see, you persist in calling it "socialized medicine" when it is not. That is the crux of the discussion thus far. The American people offer those enlisting in the military a fee for service along with an accompanying benefits package. An individual has the choice of signing that contract or not. That is hardly "socialized". If the American citizens decide that the current benefits package is too generous then they can (and do) change it. The individual then has the option of accepting the new package when they enlist/re-enlist or not joining/separating from service.

"But seriously, if we can make it work for one group why can't we make it work for all?"

AHHH different question all together! Generally, part of the benefits package for employees at mid size to large corporations is a health care package that the empoyer makes available to employees. Again, hardly "socialized" medicine. Some packages are better than others but most involve some kind of co-pay. Some employees (usually the younger ones) choose not to take that package with the presumption that they are healthy and will stay that way for the forseeable future. In any case, a service is rendered by the employee. Part of that fee is a benefit which includes health care.

When you say "socialized medicine" the implication (to me at least) is that health care should be provided WHETHER OR NOT A SERVICE IS PROVIDED IN RETURN. It is obvious to me that such is not the case for those in the military or those that have retired from the military.

In any case, the real question is what do we do about those who do not have the opportunity to avail themselves of such a health care package? I would suggest that this subject is an entire thread in itself (which has been discussed ad nauseaum on this board in the past).

I disagree. If taxpayers are paying for it, it is socialized medicine whether it is to fulfill a contractual agreement or not.

 

[Ravi]

As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, should the citizens of this country decide that military service is not valuable enough to have health care included as a benefit, then they should remove said benefit from the contract the offer to prospective government employees.

Yep, same with any other social program.

 

[jillian]

So then, Jillian, are we to presume from this statement that all government workers should not have health care as part of their benefits package (including the military)?

Why would you make that assumption? I do believe that *I'm* the one talking about how stupid it is that a country with our wealth has 50% of its bankruptcies because people can't pay for medical care.

It is my opinion (see how nicely I placed that caveat?) that if the American people pay for a service (military or government jobs, per say) and accompany that pay with a benfits package, then it is not "socialized medicine."

Interesting how every industrialized nation makes sure their populace can get medical care but if we have medical INSURANCE, that's socialized?

Silliness.....

As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, should the citizens of this country decide that military service is not valuable enough to have health care included as a benefit, then they should remove said benefit from the contract the offer to prospective government employees.

I have no issues with military or government types getting health coverage. You're the ones who don't want others to have what you do.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes, as matter of fact I do.

Evidently not

What the hell is a "social ideal" DD?

The ideals of SOCIALISM... not social.... slight difference that your feeble mind might want to learn... and as for the socialist ideals... hmmm... possibly that property belongs to the community and should be distributed by that community... because everyone is OWED an equal share....

Yes, that's one of the things that our consitution mandates, true. So?

Hmmm.. never knew our constitution was a socialist document... never knew military units responsible for protection and offense in the past under monarchies and other systems were socialist in nature.... yet you tried to lump our national military in as a socialist system... interesting

I have no idea what the above is supposed to mean. In fact I doubt you do either.

try to follow along... what people pay in taxes is a result of what they earn as income.... keep paying attention, I know it must be hard for you.... just because they earn their income and pay taxes into the federal government for the government to be able to operate, does not mean that they are owed individual services from the government.... there is a big difference between PROMOTING the GENERAL welfare and providing the individual welfare

What does that have to do with anything I've penned? Do try to stay on topic, shall we?

Ahh... but we were/are on the topic that you believe that people not under the employ of the US government are entitled to benefits (such as healthcare) by that federal government.... and that is where you are wrong

I'm sorry...I don't have an ilk, socialist or otherwise. My team is merely the team seeking to find truth in a world of lies.

If you promote socialism or socialist ideals, then yes I would say you have an ilk.... you hardly seem interested in the truth.... mainly because you have ignored it

Run on sentences indicate run on thoughts, chum.

Idiotic statement indicate idiotic thoughts, chum

bla bla bla bla blaaaather.

While I have no doubt you feel justified in moaning and bitching, the above doesn't in any way address my points.

Do get a clue, DD.

Read the content of the post first, opine on the content of that post after.

You made no correct points

Presumptive puppy. Each military person faces risks depending on their billet and station. Are you truly so clueless about the real military?

I served... and you???

Ah yes, the flag surrender of the idiots who imagine themselves to be conservatives and patriots

When lost, assume that the people whose thoughts are beyond your limited ability to understand must be leftists.

The anti- intellectual refuge of angry white male morons of our age.

Call anything you don't understand or like either liberalism or socialism.

Go read a book, dude.

You don't know appear to know anything, or if you do, you clearly don't know how to take your knowledge and covert it into words.

[/QUOTE]

I don't have to imagine myself as anything... nor do I have to defend myself to the likes of you

When someone takes a stand and attempts to defend a stand predicated on marxist/socialist/liberal views and slogans... it is logical to then call that stand socialist, marxist, or liberal in nature....

I have read many books.... most well above your 'Cat in the Hat' level of comprehension