Quit hogging all the "A's" ...it's not fair...time to redistribute GPA's

• isadore

  dwccrew;1158391 wrote:I'll also send a food care package, so no need for food stamps. Spam and some M&M's. I'm feeling generous......peanut M&M's.

  thank you, it will all be put to good use.
• I Wear Pants

  isadore;1158314 wrote:Yes people on here believe the military is overpaid. That anyone could do their job. Even some who doubt their bravery.
  I am not opposed to the natural cuts that would come to military spending with the end of the war in Iraq and the coming end of war in Afghanistan. For one thing national guard units will no longer need to be deployed and that would be a savings I would imagine. 11 years ago we had a budget surplus, then came the Bush tax cuts. Those cuts are about to be rescinded. At least the upper level cuts should still be.
  As to cuts to the needy, people are much too quick to be willing to take from those most in need.

  Who said they were overpaid?
  
  And the "anyone can do their job" thing is a trap because of the connotations most people think of when you say that but if we're being honest the military is not the most selective of employers. That's not to belittle the bravery or importance of what they do. But the fact is that many can do what they do, it's just that few do.
• believer

  

  I Wear Pants;1158415 wrote:..but if we're being honest the military is not the most selective of employers. That's not to belittle the bravery or importance of what they do. But the fact is that many can do what they do, it's just that few do.

  While it is true that some military jobs don't require a high-level skills set there are, indeed, a lot of other military positions that require some above-average talent not unlike the private sector.
  
  For those few of us who spent some time in military service, we've come to that understanding.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1158077 wrote:cut military pay, cut military equipment, endanger soldiers lives.
  and how do you answer the below quote
  
  
  
  
  you know even Scrooge and Grinch's heart finally started to grow. (too sarcastic?)

  
  I don't know how to answer statements at all.
  
  The military needs to be cut.
  
  I didn't say anywhere it needs to be cut to the minimum.
  
  It's social safety nets that need to be cut t the minimum.
  
  What question do you wish to have answered?
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1158314 wrote:Yes people on here believe the military is overpaid. That anyone could do their job. Even some who doubt their bravery.
  I am not opposed to the natural cuts that would come to military spending with the end of the war in Iraq and the coming end of war in Afghanistan. For one thing national guard units will no longer need to be deployed and that would be a savings I would imagine. 11 years ago we had a budget surplus, then came the Bush tax cuts. Those cuts are about to be rescinded. At least the upper level cuts should still be.
  As to cuts to the needy, people are much too quick to be willing to take from those most in need.

  I don't think anyone is overpaid. Heck, I would give them a raise. When I refer to cuts it's not raises I speak of. It's size and number of people along with the development of certain weapons programs.
  
  When you say people are much to quick to take from those in need, is there a slower pace that would make it more palatable for you?
• isadore

  I Wear Pants;1158415 wrote:Who said they were overpaid?
  
  And the "anyone can do their job" thing is a trap because of the connotations most people think of when you say that but if we're being honest the military is not the most selective of employers. That's not to belittle the bravery or importance of what they do. But the fact is that many can do what they do, it's just that few do.

  , sleeper and others have denigrated their value. "Can" in that context would seem to mean "physically and mentally able to" and while the first maybe true, the second is affectively not true.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1158462 wrote:I don't know how to answer statements at all.
  
  The military needs to be cut.
  
  I didn't say anywhere it needs to be cut to the minimum.
  
  It's social safety nets that need to be cut t the minimum.
  
  What question do you wish to have answered?

  Con_Alma wrote: I don't know how to answer statements at all

  That must be rough, to go through life without being able to answer the statements of other people. You may be able to qualify for some federal disability program. It does explain so much of the thread.
  As I wrote somewhere on these threads recently, I think as we have withdrawn first from Iraq and now from Afghanistan there are natural cuts as the national guard units would no longer need to be deployed.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1158463 wrote:I don't think anyone is overpaid. Heck, I would give them a raise. When I refer to cuts it's not raises I speak of. It's size and number of people along with the development of certain weapons programs.
  
  When you say people are much to quick to take from those in need, is there a slower pace that would make it more palatable for you?

  I don't believe those people are being provided for in such away that cuts should be made. I don't believe in causing more pain to those already in very difficult circumstances.
• sleeper

  

  isadore;1158502 wrote:, sleeper and others have denigrated their value. "Can" in that context would seem to mean "physically and mentally able to" and while the first maybe true, the second is affectively not true.

  I have never degenerated their value. I merely think we over-value the members of the military. This is not the same as thinking they don't have value or that their job isn't important.
  
  Also, don't lump me in with Con_Alma or IWP. I am not interested in rational debate with irrational people.
• Al Bundy

  isadore;1158511 wrote:I don't believe those people are being provided for in such away that cuts should be made. I don't believe in causing more pain to those already in very difficult circumstances.

  I don't think the military personal are being overpaid, but they are agreeing to the terms, so they feel that it is a deal that is fair to them. While the pay is low, it is important to remember, that their living expenses are low because of the benefits that they receive with housing and food. Their retirement benefits are outstanding. Their education benefits are outstanding. I know several people who have spent 20 years in the military after high school, use the education benefits to get a degree and start another career in their early 40's.
• BoatShoes

  Al Bundy;1156514 wrote:How do you know the parents of Steve Jobs or the parents of the kids in East Cleveland?

  
  Because Steve Jobs has talked about what great parents he had and how he used to play with and build electronics with his dad in his garage. And, have you ever been to East Cleveland?
  
  
  Are you going to deny that there's a bunch of a father-less kids in East Cleveland that don't have a dad there to build electronics with them in their garages?
  
  
  Steve Jobs was a brilliant man and an amazing capitalist but that doesn't mean he didn't grow up in really an ideal situation with loving parents and good public schools. That is certainly a leg up over a lot of kids. That early experience played a large role in the man he became.
  
  And, Mitt Romney who was the son of the CEO of American Motors/Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and paid his way through college by selling Daddy's stock certainly had even more of a leg up.
  
  
  It is incredible to me that people are actually denying this ITT.
  
  No reason he should apologize for it but he ought not to agree to support a budget would be devastating towards the opportunities of others who didn't share his fortune.
  
  
  No gambling man would bet more money that a fatherless kid in east cleveland would achieve more in life than baby Mitt Romney. It's possible...but it's also possible that a 7-2 off-suit can beat pocket ace's.
• isadore

  Al Bundy;1158600 wrote:I don't think the military personal are being overpaid, but they are agreeing to the terms, so they feel that it is a deal that is fair to them. While the pay is low, it is important to remember, that their living expenses are low because of the benefits that they receive with housing and food. Their retirement benefits are outstanding. Their education benefits are outstanding. I know several people who have spent 20 years in the military after high school, use the education benefits to get a degree and start another career in their early 40's.

  excellent and lets not try to save money by taking these benefits that they richly deserve from them.
• dwccrew

  

  believer;1158456 wrote:While it is true that some military jobs don't require a high-level skills set there are, indeed, a lot of other military positions that require some above-average talent not unlike the private sector.
  
  For those few of us who spent some time in military service, we've come to that understanding.

  
  Being former military, I tend to agree with you. Most of those people are in the Air Force and Navy since that is where most of the technical jobs are. The Army has some, as do the Marines, but AF and Navy have far more technical jobs that require a higher skill set than the other two branches.
  
  All 4 branches (well 3 since Marines are a part of the Dept. of the Navy, but nevermind) have equal importance though.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1158511 wrote:I don't believe those people are being provided for in such away that cuts should be made. I don't believe in causing more pain to those already in very difficult circumstances.

  I gather that those would be your thoughts. They are simply very different than mine if it's those utilizing social safety nets that you are speaking of. If it's the military personnel, I have no interest in reducing their compensation or care in any manner what so ever.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1158509 wrote:That must be rough, to go through life without being able to answer the statements of other people. You may be able to qualify for some federal disability program. It does explain so much of the thread.
  As I wrote somewhere on these threads recently, I think as we have withdrawn first from Iraq and now from Afghanistan there are natural cuts as the national guard units would no longer need to be deployed.

  It's not rough to not answer people's statements at all. I simply choose if I want to indulge someone or not. I wouldn't even apply for a federal disability program. I'll leave that for those who can't survive without it.
  
  Then there's no disagreement between us in that we believe that the military should be cut. It's a simple statement. You don't have to read into it any more than what's written.
• WebFire

  So this thread has turned into military pay and cuts?
  
  
• isadore

  sleeper;1158590 wrote:I have never degenerated their value. I merely think we over-value the members of the military. This is not the same as thinking they don't have value or that their job isn't important.
  
  Also, don't lump me in with Con_Alma or IWP. I am not interested in rational debate with irrational people.

  sleeper wrote: I have never degenerated their value.

  what? And you denigrate their value, which was what was written about you. You are a soldier hater, it is good to know. And thank you for leaving.
• sleeper

  

  isadore;1159000 wrote:what? And you denigrate their value, which was what was written about you. You are a soldier hater, it is good to know. And thank you for leaving.

  Link to where I hate soliders?
  
  Didn't think so.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1158712 wrote:I gather that those would be your thoughts. They are simply very different than mine if it's those utilizing social safety nets that you are speaking of. If it's the military personnel, I have no interest in reducing their compensation or care in any manner what so ever.

  Con_Alma wrote: or care in any manner what so ever.

  about what soldiers are paid or what?
• isadore

  sleeper;1159005 wrote:Link to where I hate soliders?
  
  Didn't think so.

  Comments of a soldier hater
  Are our troops overpaid? Thread

  sleeper wrote:
  don't see a problem with it, they are getting above fair market value for a job that requires no college degree. If anyone can do it, then it likely lowers their value, just like the fast food industry only typically pays minimum wage because they can replace those workers quite easily.

  #3

  sleeper wrote: I know some dumb ****s in the military, and I know some dumb ****s that work for McDonalds.
  
  Coincidence? I think not.

  #23
  

  Glory Days wrote: i know some dumb **** CEOs. i know some dumb **** doctors. i know some dumb **** chatters.
  
  Coincidence? I think not.

  #24

  sleeper wrote:Well then you don't know JACK!

  #28
  Lets see CEOs can not be debases, doctors can not be debases, but soldiers can. Just them and MCD workers.
• I Wear Pants

  believer;1158456 wrote:While it is true that some military jobs don't require a high-level skills set there are, indeed, a lot of other military positions that require some above-average talent not unlike the private sector.
  
  For those few of us who spent some time in military service, we've come to that understanding.

  Yes there are positions within the military that require above-average talent and even ones that require extraordinary talent as well as education. But those aren't the vast majority of the armed forces.
  
  Again, not denigrating people in the military.
• sleeper

  

  isadore;1159070 wrote:Comments of a soldier hater
  Are our troops overpaid? Thread
  #3
  #23
  #24
  #28
  Lets see CEOs can not be debases, doctors can not be debases, but soldiers can. Just them and MCD workers.

  
  
  Nothing is false in my statements. I see you don't have any objectivity any are mostly concerned with pushing your far left agenda ignoring reality.
• believer

  

  I Wear Pants;1159169 wrote:But those aren't the vast majority of the armed forces.

  I don't know about the broad statement "vast majority" but OK. The same can be said of non-military jobs both public and private.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1159011 wrote:about what soldiers are paid or what?

  No. Payment for soldiers is not involved in my views with regards to cutting the military. It's about cutting the overall size. Just read what's there. There's no reason to try and figure out something that's not there. There's no underlying agenda. We need to make it smaller. That's all.
• isadore

  sleeper;1159191 wrote:Nothing is false in my statements. I see you don't have any objectivity any are mostly concerned with pushing your far left agenda ignoring reality.

  I dont know what world you live in, but supporting our troops is hardly a left wing agenda. now hating and denigrating our troops, whose agenda would that be, beside yours .