The Government and Universal Healthcare

[DiamondDave]

Let's ask RGS. Should government employees, including the military, including the retired military, have the same shitty health care as everyone else?

Look you dumb ass BITCH. I earned my retirement benefits. As did EVERY retired military member out there. What you want is free shit you did not earn , that you did not do anything to get. You want rewards just for existing. Sorry idiot, the world does not work that way.

Tell ya what RETARD when you start claiming EVERY retirement plan out there is welfare and a social program and whining about benefits others EARNED, maybe someone besides the lunatics will listen to your pathetic little whines.

UAW auto workeres who worked their asses off on the assembly line earned their retirement benefits too. But I've never, not one single time, seen you rush to their defense when all your wingnut buddies say that UAW should cut benefits for the sake of cost efficiency and economic growth.

If UAW should take pension cuts, wouldn't it be principled and consistent for you to support cuts for yourself? Or, are you of the belief that everyone else should sacrifice, except for you?


Personally, I think retired ex-military and retired UAW workers earned what they got and deserve a comfortable retirement. If this country can pay CEOs 20 million dollars a year, and pays for a trillion dollar iraq war, then UAW and vets should be afforded what they earned.

I wonder if I'll ever see you rush to the defense of UAW workers and their benefits? Or, I wonder if you'll continue to defend your benefits, but demand cuts for everyone else who earned them?

I defend the UAW people who negotiated and earned their compensation and benefits... both sides agreed to the terms and the compensation was earned..

Now does that mean I agree with how the UAW works or whether unions are needed? Nope... but I do not ever say that people don't deserve what they earned as negotiated compensation

 

[Ravi]

Let's ask RGS. Should government employees, including the military, including the retired military, have the same shitty health care as everyone else?

Look you dumb ass BITCH. I earned my retirement benefits. As did EVERY retired military member out there. What you want is free shit you did not earn , that you did not do anything to get. You want rewards just for existing. Sorry idiot, the world does not work that way.

Tell ya what RETARD when you start claiming EVERY retirement plan out there is welfare and a social program and whining about benefits others EARNED, maybe someone besides the lunatics will listen to your pathetic little whines.

Never said you didn't earn them, twinkie. Never claimed your bennies were welfare.

Your bennies are a tax-payer subsidized benefit program.

 

[DiamondDave]

Let's ask RGS. Should government employees, including the military, including the retired military, have the same shitty health care as everyone else?

Look you dumb ass BITCH. I earned my retirement benefits. As did EVERY retired military member out there. What you want is free shit you did not earn , that you did not do anything to get. You want rewards just for existing. Sorry idiot, the world does not work that way.

Tell ya what RETARD when you start claiming EVERY retirement plan out there is welfare and a social program and whining about benefits others EARNED, maybe someone besides the lunatics will listen to your pathetic little whines.

Your bennies are a tax-payer subsidized employee earned benefit compensation.

fixed

 

[editec]

EDITEC,

I have never demanded "that they too get screwed". I am simply stating what I believe to be fact and that is that a Government Pension be it Military or otherwise is no different than government welfare. A rose is a rose, and welfare is welfare.

Welfare?

You choose to use a word which does not describe a pension that they worked for and earned as WELFARE?

That's simply unfair and intellectually dishonest.

And a rose is a rose is a rose ONLY when you're talking about A ROSE.

When you're talking about a daisy, or a Abrahams tank, then some other bit of poetry is probably more apt.

 

[auditor0007]

Let's ask RGS. Should government employees, including the military, including the retired military, have the same shitty health care as everyone else?

Look you dumb ass BITCH. I earned my retirement benefits. As did EVERY retired military member out there. What you want is free shit you did not earn , that you did not do anything to get. You want rewards just for existing. Sorry idiot, the world does not work that way.

Tell ya what RETARD when you start claiming EVERY retirement plan out there is welfare and a social program and whining about benefits others EARNED, maybe someone besides the lunatics will listen to your pathetic little whines.

Retired GI Joes go on Government Welfare. They are, for the most part, semi-literate uneducated people who have been "kept" by the government for most of their lives. How can we as a society expect people like this to look after themselves when they are no longer usefull cannon-fodder ?

The GI Joes like to think of themselves as being on "pension" but in fact they are taking welfare payments just like the single mothers in the ghettos.

I would say you are likely to make a few enemies here Yukon. Those in the military earn their retirement benefits, and considering we don't pay our military people all that well to begin with, they deserve good benefits.

That being said, you do make a good point. Military people collect their retirement benefits immediately upon retirement. Unless they are disabled, they go to work in private industry, so why are we paying them retirement benefits before they actually hit retirement age?

My Brother-in-law was in the military for over twenty years. When he retired, he went back to work for the military as a civilian. He has been collecting his retirement all these years from the military, and when he finally does retire, he will be receiving a second retirement package from the Federal government as he is now a federal employee. I don't have an issue with him collecting from two retirement plans, but should we be paying him his military retirement while he's still working, making more money than he ever did in the past. His wife also worked for the Federal government for 30 years and she collects full benefits. She retired at 55. How many places can a person work where they can retire at 55 and collect full benefits? Same with the military, some people retire as early as age 48 with full benefits.

 

[Ravi]

Look you dumb ass BITCH. I earned my retirement benefits. As did EVERY retired military member out there. What you want is free shit you did not earn , that you did not do anything to get. You want rewards just for existing. Sorry idiot, the world does not work that way.

Tell ya what RETARD when you start claiming EVERY retirement plan out there is welfare and a social program and whining about benefits others EARNED, maybe someone besides the lunatics will listen to your pathetic little whines.

Retired GI Joes go on Government Welfare. They are, for the most part, semi-literate uneducated people who have been "kept" by the government for most of their lives. How can we as a society expect people like this to look after themselves when they are no longer usefull cannon-fodder ?

The GI Joes like to think of themselves as being on "pension" but in fact they are taking welfare payments just like the single mothers in the ghettos.

I would say you are likely to make a few enemies here Yukon. Those in the military earn their retirement benefits, and considering we don't pay our military people all that well to begin with, they deserve good benefits.

That being said, you do make a good point. Military people collect their retirement benefits immediately upon retirement. Unless they are disabled, they go to work in private industry, so why are we paying them retirement benefits before they actually hit retirement age?

My Brother-in-law was in the military for over twenty years. When he retired, he went back to work for the military as a civilian. He has been collecting his retirement all these years from the military, and when he finally does retire, he will be receiving a second retirement package from the Federal government as he is now a federal employee. I don't have an issue with him collecting from two retirement plans, but should we be paying him his military retirement while he's still working, making more money than he ever did in the past. His wife also worked for the Federal government for 30 years and she collects full benefits. She retired at 55. How many places can a person work where they can retire at 55 and collect full benefits? Same with the military, some people retire as early as age 48 with full benefits.

I didn't know that, thanks for the informative post. And it is a good question. Do they also get double medical benefit coverage (VHA and whatever their current company pays for?).

 

[auditor0007]

EDITEC,

I have never demanded "that they too get screwed". I am simply stating what I believe to be fact and that is that a Government Pension be it Military or otherwise is no different than government welfare. A rose is a rose, and welfare is welfare.

So your suggestion is that the government set up retirement accounts for all federal/military employees as 401K's? The government would increase all their salaries a little and then match funds dollar for dollar? That could be workable. Then make the individuals vested after ten years, so everyone has a little something. Also, this would resolve the problem of early retirement as these people would be penalized for any early withdrawal of their funds.

 

[auditor0007]

Retired GI Joes go on Government Welfare. They are, for the most part, semi-literate uneducated people who have been "kept" by the government for most of their lives. How can we as a society expect people like this to look after themselves when they are no longer usefull cannon-fodder ?

The GI Joes like to think of themselves as being on "pension" but in fact they are taking welfare payments just like the single mothers in the ghettos.

I would say you are likely to make a few enemies here Yukon. Those in the military earn their retirement benefits, and considering we don't pay our military people all that well to begin with, they deserve good benefits.

That being said, you do make a good point. Military people collect their retirement benefits immediately upon retirement. Unless they are disabled, they go to work in private industry, so why are we paying them retirement benefits before they actually hit retirement age?

My Brother-in-law was in the military for over twenty years. When he retired, he went back to work for the military as a civilian. He has been collecting his retirement all these years from the military, and when he finally does retire, he will be receiving a second retirement package from the Federal government as he is now a federal employee. I don't have an issue with him collecting from two retirement plans, but should we be paying him his military retirement while he's still working, making more money than he ever did in the past. His wife also worked for the Federal government for 30 years and she collects full benefits. She retired at 55. How many places can a person work where they can retire at 55 and collect full benefits? Same with the military, some people retire as early as age 48 with full benefits.

I didn't know that, thanks for the informative post. And it is a good question. Do they also get double medical benefit coverage (VHA and whatever their current company pays for?).

If they work in the private sector, they can choose to accept the companies healthcare plan if one is offered. Some do because they don't care for the VA. The downside is that they will pay their portion of the cost. For that reason, some will just use their VA benefits.

 

[Yukon]

Set up a National Health Care system for all Americans !

 

[editec]

Given the skill levels that many service jobs requried, the benefits packages they get are very generous in comparison to what MOST civilians make.

And the current salary structure of enlisted men is NOT a bad salary in comparison to what a civie of equal skills doing essantially the same jobs makes either.

I'm not demending that they not be paid that salary, merely pointing out that the myth that servicement are underpaid is highly overstated.

 

[auditor0007]

Given the skill levels that many service jobs requried, the benefits packages they get are very generous in comparison to what MOST civilians make.

And the current salary structure of enlisted men is NOT a bad salary in comparison to what a civie of equal skills doing essantially the same jobs makes either.

I'm not demending that they not be paid that salary, merely pointing out that the myth that servicement are underpaid is highly overstated.

Government employees are not underpaid. Military employees start out being greatly underpaid. However, if they stick with it, they do catch up to civilian salaries and in some cases surpass them. A military career is not a bad choice if you plan on actually making it a career. But those first years can be tough, especially for general enlistees. On the other hand, if you go in as an officer, then it's not bad even from the beginning.

Both of my boys want to join, but they are still young, so that might change over time. I just tell them that if that is what they want to do, then I will support them 100%, but I want them to go to college first, so that they have a better chance of starting off as an officer rather than a general enlistee.

 

[DiamondDave]

Entry level e-1 pay is about 15,500 per year

e-4 is realistic after 4-5 years of enlistment... goes up to a whopping 25,500 or so per year.. if you are a go-getter and bust your ass and do make it to Sgt e-5, that goes up to 28,000 or so.. now consider that an e-5 would be about the equivalent of a manager in terms of real world management/responsibility.. .you would pretty much consider that underpaid

No also take into account that the average military work day is not your simple 8 hour shift that most see in the civvy world...

 

[auditor0007]

Entry level e-1 pay is about 15,500 per year

e-4 is realistic after 4-5 years of enlistment... goes up to a whopping 25,500 or so per year.. if you are a go-getter and bust your ass and do make it to Sgt e-5, that goes up to 28,000 or so.. now consider that an e-5 would be about the equivalent of a manager in terms of real world management/responsibility.. .you would pretty much consider that underpaid

No also take into account that the average military work day is not your simple 8 hour shift that most see in the civvy world...

That is just basic pay though. It doesn't include housing and food allowances which can be fairly generous.

 

[DiamondDave]

Entry level e-1 pay is about 15,500 per year

e-4 is realistic after 4-5 years of enlistment... goes up to a whopping 25,500 or so per year.. if you are a go-getter and bust your ass and do make it to Sgt e-5, that goes up to 28,000 or so.. now consider that an e-5 would be about the equivalent of a manager in terms of real world management/responsibility.. .you would pretty much consider that underpaid

No also take into account that the average military work day is not your simple 8 hour shift that most see in the civvy world...

That is just basic pay though. It doesn't include housing and food allowances which can be fairly generous.

If you get those... do not forget that you do not get separate rats or BAQ if you are in the barracks

 

[auditor0007]

Entry level e-1 pay is about 15,500 per year

e-4 is realistic after 4-5 years of enlistment... goes up to a whopping 25,500 or so per year.. if you are a go-getter and bust your ass and do make it to Sgt e-5, that goes up to 28,000 or so.. now consider that an e-5 would be about the equivalent of a manager in terms of real world management/responsibility.. .you would pretty much consider that underpaid

No also take into account that the average military work day is not your simple 8 hour shift that most see in the civvy world...

That is just basic pay though. It doesn't include housing and food allowances which can be fairly generous.

If you get those... do not forget that you do not get separate rats or BAQ if you are in the barracks

This is true, however, you don't pay for food or housing either, unless you choose to go out to eat. I'm not trying to suggest military people are overpaid. I'm just saying you have to include all income and benefits when looking at it.

 

[DiamondDave]

Hell.. I paid LOTS of times NOT to eat chow hall food

And let's just say that the living space afforded to a soldier in the barracks (at least when I was in in the early 90's) was less than that that is required to give to a prisoner in the federal prison system

You could include the clothing allowance (which was about 225 a year when I was in, I believe), COLA, and a few other things as well... but it's negligible, really

I remember being in.. and even as an e-4 when I was about to get married, only making about 900 a month.. maybe it was 1K.. hard to remember off hand.. got married (she was active duty also).. only 1 qualified for BAQ.. and I think that was about 225 a month for finding off post housing... separate rats for food was probably close to about 125 a month.. so between the 2 of us we earned about 2K a month (which was taxed) and an additional 475 a month in combined BAQ and Separate rats

This is with me trying to think back at that time also... I'd say it's pretty accurate, but my memory could be failing me on the BAQ and Saparate rats amounts though

 

[smb15]

Has nothing to do with whether you agree with more or not... you are flat out ignorant in terms of understand thing the roles of government in a free society...

PUBLIC health is a PUBLIC concern... CDC and other things... your PERSONAL CARE is not... IS YOUR BODY PUBLIC DOMAIN?

Society would produce more and 'thrive' more with forced servitude too.... you want that for the 'public good' as well?

Pure and unadulterated ignorance

Again you betray your own bias. It is not out of ignorance that I disregard your arguments it is out of logic and a clear understanding as to what the limitations and boundaries are for a government. Please explain to me what freedoms are being infringed upon with a universal healthcare system. There would be no forcing, except as necessary for public health reasons or to prevent self injury, as is the case today, for anyone to recieve this care. What you call my ignorance is simply your inability to take off the blinders of ideology and see through the lens of sound logic.

 

[Meister]

Has nothing to do with whether you agree with more or not... you are flat out ignorant in terms of understand thing the roles of government in a free society...

PUBLIC health is a PUBLIC concern... CDC and other things... your PERSONAL CARE is not... IS YOUR BODY PUBLIC DOMAIN?

Society would produce more and 'thrive' more with forced servitude too.... you want that for the 'public good' as well?

Pure and unadulterated ignorance

Again you betray your own bias. It is not out of ignorance that I disregard your arguments it is out of logic and a clear understanding as to what the limitations and boundaries are for a government. Please explain to me what freedoms are being infringed upon with a universal healthcare system. There would be no forcing, except as necessary for public health reasons or to prevent self injury, as is the case today, for anyone to recieve this care. What you call my ignorance is simply your inability to take off the blinders of ideology and see through the lens of sound logic.

Could you tell me just how much your universal healthcare is going to cost? Can you tell me if i'm going to be forced to pay through taxes for this socialist venture? If I am going to be forced to pay, could you tell me how much? Also, will you guarantee that these costs are fixed, and won't be going up as we fail in this venture? I just want to know because I will be paying for my own insurance, also. I need to know how much my finacial freedom is going to suffer, because of your so called worthy cause.

 

[Agnapostate]

Could you tell me just how much your universal healthcare is going to cost? Can you tell me if i'm going to be forced to pay through taxes for this socialist venture? If I am going to be forced to pay, could you tell me how much? Also, will you guarantee that these costs are fixed, and won't be going up as we fail in this venture? I just want to know because I will be paying for my own insurance, also. I need to know how much my finacial freedom is going to suffer, because of your so called worthy cause.

You speak out of ignorance yet again. Universal healthcare does not satisfy the condition of collectivization of the means of production, and is thus not "socialist." As I've said so many times, the most amusing facet of the free marketers' rabid hostility toward government intervention in the economy is that the state is a necessary stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy. Moreover, state intervention often has the effect of expanding market competition, as one might realize from an analysis of the infant industries argument, for instance.

 

[DiveCon]

Has nothing to do with whether you agree with more or not... you are flat out ignorant in terms of understand thing the roles of government in a free society...

PUBLIC health is a PUBLIC concern... CDC and other things... your PERSONAL CARE is not... IS YOUR BODY PUBLIC DOMAIN?

Society would produce more and 'thrive' more with forced servitude too.... you want that for the 'public good' as well?

Pure and unadulterated ignorance

Again you betray your own bias. It is not out of ignorance that I disregard your arguments it is out of logic and a clear understanding as to what the limitations and boundaries are for a government. Please explain to me what freedoms are being infringed upon with a universal healthcare system. There would be no forcing, except as necessary for public health reasons or to prevent self injury, as is the case today, for anyone to recieve this care. What you call my ignorance is simply your inability to take off the blinders of ideology and see through the lens of sound logic.

Could you tell me just how much your universal healthcare is going to cost? Can you tell me if i'm going to be forced to pay through taxes for this socialist venture? If I am going to be forced to pay, could you tell me how much? Also, will you guarantee that these costs are fixed, and won't be going up as we fail in this venture? I just want to know because I will be paying for my own insurance, also. I need to know how much my finacial freedom is going to suffer, because of your so called worthy cause.

and dont forget what happens to all those people who currently work for the private insurance companies?
when you have to pay for a system, few people will be willing to pay yet again for another system
thus increasing the numbers the new system would need to cover