Want to know what winds my clock too tight????

[OC for ME]

First of all, our Founders did not create liberty, nor were they ultimate authorities on liberty. They attempted to establish liberty in America, and IMO they did a pretty damn good job in the very beginning.

I did not state that the Founders created liberty, you did. I stated that they created a document that enumerates our rights.....which is intended to protect our liberties. I should have explicitly stated that, my apologies.

I believe, however, that the Founders with the greatest grasp on liberty were unable to establish their principles as deeply as they had wished, and documents such as the one to which you are referring are actually a result of that. I am not a constitutionalists by any means. The constitution is not the crux of liberty in America. If the time ever came that the constitution as a tool for the preservation of liberty became ineffective, the constitution would not be any part of the battle cry of true patriots - only the principles of liberty would be. My view of liberty having inconsistencies with the Constitution of the United States of America does not concern me or lead me to believe that there may be an error in my view.

OK

You did not state that military service entitles one to a status of nobility. However, that is the impression being given off (or at least received on this end) by the attitude being perpetuated by several of the members here, including you.

I clearly stated my position. You either take it at face value or you do not. You clearly do not, this is on you, not me. You have the prerogative to reword my posts to suit your premise but it does not change the words I posted nor the clear meaning of them.

Regarding the benefits, though... IMO DrakeZ07's position was, basically, that military service-members should not receive these "government benefits." If you eliminate the elaboration, that is the base of his post, so far as I can see. You and other posters dissented to his position, indicating that you believe military service-members should receive "government benefits." All this seems ridiculously verbose, but, apparently that is necessary. I am not making up my own dots out of thin air to make the connections and draw the resulting picture, as you seem to be implying with your "Interesting take on what I did not say" comment.

Again, you reword my clearly stated position to suit your argument. The feds provide benefits as a incentive for citizens to join. DrakeZ07, you, and other folks disagrees with the providing of benefits in exchange for service. No big deal.

The feds must provide for a army and navy. As such, the feds have the prerogative to extend benefits as they see fit to meet their constitutional obligation. As I stated earlier, there is a mechanism in place to achieve that which you and others desire.

No, government employment is not just "a job, nothing more, nothing less"

Yes, it is. The feds are a employer, the largest employer by far, but still a employer.

It is a job which is payrolled via exploitation, coercion and deceit. My job is not. The benefits that my employer provides me are not comparable to benefits which the government provides its employees.

You don't like paying taxes, I get that, I don't either.

The military is a small percentage of our taxes expenditures compared to other federal expenditures that have no constitutional mandate. There are far greater concerns, I believe, that should be addressed other than military service members, and their families, getting tax free food at the base commissary, or "free health insurance."

You don't like the military, you seem to not like military service members, generally speaking, and you really don't like taxes.

OK

 

[stealthyeliminator]

i'm sorry did i miss your response to my query about what equivalent benefits you are not receiving that are provided to US service members?

pooh paw'g with an answer 'not particularly relevant' doesn't count.

unfortunately i am not sure what your career is, nor do i care, but i am sure you would be surprised to learn, if you looked, the community or state waived taxation for your big business to settle in that particular area...

most businesses do not pay their share of taxes and are given a 'break' other small business owners lack.

ipse

The only question you asked is "I am confused from the read of this thread as to what specific 'government benefits' are being bestowed on US service members that individuals in the private sector do not receive?"

That is irrelevant. This isn't about them getting benefits that I don't also get. This isn't about "fairness" or "equality." This is about them getting benefits which they should not, regardless of benefits I do or don't receive. DrakeZ07 probably has entirely different reasons for why he might feel this way, but for me, I believe that these benefits should not be given because they're sourced from illegitimately acquired funding.

 

[Primus]

The only question you asked is "I am confused from the read of this thread as to what specific 'government benefits' are being bestowed on US service members that individuals in the private sector do not receive?"

That is irrelevant. This isn't about them getting benefits that I don't also get. This isn't about "fairness" or "equality." This is about them getting benefits which they should not, regardless of benefits I do or don't receive. DrakeZ07 probably has entirely different reasons for why he might feel this way, but for me, I believe that these benefits should not be given because they're sourced from illegitimately acquired funding.

I'm confused....

Your saying we both get the same benefits but I don't deserve mine because of my service?

You said its NOT about equality. Just that we get any benefits at all.

Do some math with me my friend... I spent 19 mths 15 days in a foreign country. 24 hrs a day 7 days a week I was present in that place working. There is no "free time" no days off. Just straight work. So.... 24 hrs a day... times 30 days a month.... and I got about 1500 a month give or take.

We are literally talking cents on the hr. Pennies on the hr to literally put your life in the line. Just take a second and mull that over.

So... when I get hone if they happen to give me free health care at a hospital known for not washing their medical equipment between shoving it in some other dudes rectum or building damn near condemned due to mold and hazardous conditions... so be it. Maybe you can equate that to a dollar an hour we made.

Oh and as far as it coming from "illegal taxes from evasion and coercion from the devil fear mongers!!!" Or whatever you called it.... listen you NEED a military whether you wake up and realize that or not. No military. Hello Putin. Hell mexico would take over if we had no military.

So ills say the same to you I did to drake. Your welcome. We will continue to serve you even if you can't even realize we are or actively hate us for doing so. Well will still defend your ability to ridicule us on the internet from the comfort of your home.

Finally, for any reading this who may take issue with the way the military is funded or taxes or hell even where they get sent.... just remember we don't decide where we go. Its run by civilians. Those same politicians that pass dumb gun laws send us to some dumb places sometimes. We don't control how we are paid, even its just a few dollars an hr. Send THEM a letter. Tell THEM how bad a job they are doing. Have at least a little tiny bit of respect enough not to have issue with the dude literally following orders.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[stealthyeliminator]

I did not state that the Founders created liberty, you did. I stated that they created a document that enumerates our rights.....which is intended to protect our liberties. I should have explicitly stated that, my apologies.

No, I understood precisely what you meant. No apology is necessary. Perhaps I should apologize if I gave the impression that I believed that you were saying that the Founders created liberty. I know full well that you didn't say, or mean, or imply that. I was simply building a foundation for my following statements.

I clearly stated my position. You either take it at face value or you do not. You clearly do not, this is on you, not me. You have the prerogative to reword my posts to suit your premise but it does not change the words I posted nor the clear meaning of them.

I did not falsely attribute any statements to you. If you feel that I've misinterpreted your meanings, well, we don't seem to be getting very far on clearing that matter up so perhaps it's time to just move on

Again, you reword my clearly stated position to suit your argument. The feds provide benefits as a incentive for citizens to join. DrakeZ07, you, and other folks disagrees with the providing of benefits in exchange for service. No big deal.

No, I do not have a problem with the provision of "benefits" in exchange for services. Even though DrakeZ07 and I may have arrived at the same conclusion, I suspect it is for vastly different reasons. I believe I've made my reasoning clear, I don't believe you agree with it, probably time to just agree to disagree. I have no hope for convincing you of my position and it's not my intention to do so in this thread.

I do not believe I have reworded anything you've said. I have articulated the vibe and attitude I'm seeing. I'm human, I could always be wrong, but I think I've done a pretty good job of making it clear when I'm making interpretations and stating things as non-fact. For instance... "However, that is the impression being given off (or at least received on this end)" Clearly I am not claiming you said something that you didn't. I'm saying that I interpreted the original attack against DrakeZ07 a certain way, and then you came in support of that poster and his position who attacked DrakeZ07.

You don't like the military, you seem to not like military service members, generally speaking, and you really don't like taxes.

I never stated that I don't "like" the military. That is a false attribution. You probably should have said that I don't seem to like the military. I have numerous friends and family that are veterans or active duty military service members. I do not dislike military service members. Do I believe that ultimately their paycheck is funded illegitimately? Yes. Do I love them less or treat them worse for it? No.

To recap, the post that started this all was essentially an attack against DrakeZ07 which included some statement along the lines of, until you've joined the military and served, you have no right to criticize or judge the compensation of their service. This is hogwash. There is no logical basis for this other than to say that military service elevates your social status, or something like that (note that I am not claiming anyone has said or implied this - I'm just saying that this is the only way I see that it could be true that DrakeZ07 or anyone else shouldn't criticize their compensation). Clearly that isn't the case, so there's no real logical basis to say that the compensation of military service shouldn't be criticized by non-veterans. Really, I think, the entire thing boils down to the fact that the original attacker feels as though military service members should be respected, and he felt as though DrakeZ07 was not giving them the respect that they deserve. My intention was just to point out the fact that whether they are or aren't deserving of respect, that has nothing to do whether or not DrakeZ07, or anyone else, has a right to or can reasonably criticize their compensation. That they are deserving of respect does not equate to they deserve the compensation that they get - whatever that compensation may be. Whether they actually deserve the compensation they get is another matter, and whether or not the sourcing of that compensation is legitimate is yet another separate matter.

 

[OC for ME]

OK, I'll ask the question.

What benefits should be extended to them?

The feds have the authority to "collect taxes" and as such the expenditure of those taxes is legitimate if the funds are expended only on those functions clearly identified in the constitution. You disagree with the constitution. No big deal.

 

[stealthyeliminator]

I'm confused....

Your saying we both get the same benefits but I don't deserve mine because of my service?

You said its NOT about equality. Just that we get any benefits at all.

Do some math with me my friend... I spent 19 mths 15 days in a foreign country. 24 hrs a day 7 days a week I was present in that place working. There is no "free time" no days off. Just straight work. So.... 24 hrs a day... times 30 days a month.... and I got about 1500 a month give or take.

We are literally talking cents on the hr. Pennies on the hr to literally put your life in the line. Just take a second and mull that over.

So... when I get hone if they happen to give me free health care at a hospital known for not washing their medical equipment between shoving it in some other dudes rectum or building damn near condemned due to mold and hazardous conditions... so be it. Maybe you can equate that to a dollar an hour we made.

Oh and as far as it coming from "illegal taxes from evasion and coercion from the devil fear mongers!!!" Or whatever you called it.... listen you NEED a military whether you wake up and realize that or not. No military. Hello Putin. Hell mexico would take over if we had no military.

So ills say the same to you I did to drake. Your welcome. We will continue to serve you even if you can't even realize we are or actively hate us for doing so. Well will still defend your ability to ridicule us on the internet from the comfort of your home.

Finally, for any reading this who may take issue with the way the military is funded or taxes or hell even where they get sent.... just remember we don't decide where we go. Its run by civilians. Those same politicians that pass dumb gun laws send us to some dumb places sometimes. We don't control how we are paid, even its just a few dollars an hr. Send THEM a letter. Tell THEM how bad a job they are doing. Have at least a little tiny bit of respect enough not to have issue with the dude literally following orders.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I did not mean that military service members do not deserve compensation, or even that they don't deserve the compensation that they get. In fact, if you told me that many service members were underpaid based on their job duties, I wouldn't even disagree. That they deserve compensation doesn't automatically justify the sourcing of it - that is all I was saying. But really, I don't think that's what this whole disagreement is about. At least, that's not the road I originally intended to go down.

I think that the start of this entire thing was this -- someone was essentially saying that the compensation of military service members shouldn't be criticized by non-military service members. That is the position which I primarily had an issue with I think, and somehow I think we got way off track. Basically, I felt as though the original attacker was saying that military service members are so deserving of respect that non members have no right to criticize their compensation. That's complete ********. That's the sum of my issue in this thread.

The whole taxes thing I probably should have steered clear of, I didn't really want to debate that.

 

[Primus]

I did not mean that military service members do not deserve compensation, or even that they don't deserve the compensation that they get. In fact, if you told me that many service members were underpaid based on their job duties, I wouldn't even disagree. That they deserve compensation doesn't automatically justify the sourcing of it - that is all I was saying. But really, I don't think that's what this whole disagreement is about. At least, that's not the road I originally intended to go down.

I think that the start of this entire thing was this -- someone was essentially saying that the compensation of military service members shouldn't be criticized by non-military service members. That is the position which I primarily had an issue with I think, and somehow I think we got way off track. Basically, I felt as though the original attacker was saying that military service members are so deserving of respect that non members have no right to criticize their compensation. That's complete ********. That's the sum of my issue in this thread.

The whole taxes thing I probably should have steered clear of, I didn't really want to debate that.

Thank you for clarifying. I appreciate that.

To address that premise then, all I can say is that serving in the military is truly a unique position.

I'm not implying its above or any order of ascendance of any other "job" but I do honestly believe until you sign up and walk a mile you shouldn't criticize the joes. You want to criticize the politician, sure. He's just another dumb politician and unfortunately the soldiers are tools in their tool box.

Here is why I say its unique. You literally sign your life away. "Take my life and do as you please, as long as its lawful and for my country". Need me to get blown up? Ok. Want me to catch a mortar on my hooch. Ok. Need to me kill someone for you? Got it. Need me to get shot? Too easy. Need me to sleep in crap eat crap and walk through crap or drive through crap for days? Too easy.

Yes. Signing a paper and accepting that and more importantly stepping up and doing it, does put you in a different class. Never said better, so do NOT twist. Its just different. So different that the vast majority literally can't even fathom what is done by service men and women. Hence the reason such a small percent share the burden for all.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Freedom1Man]

They are payrolled via taxation, that is the relevant characterization. Whether or not they're "considered" so called "government employees" is not particularly relevant.

My paycheck, and whatever 'benefits' I receive, are not sourced from taxation.

Okay, what is the source of that tax money, eg which taxes are collected to pay for soldier/government workers?

 

[Tess]

Ok, let's quantify the OP's post...the PX/BX is not selling food stuffs, period. you want to talk foodstuffs, discuss the commissary which is a military commissary agency, AKA a military run enterprise!

the AAFES business entities carry medium to high end clothing, appliances, computers, toys, jewelry, etc. and was brought on line to provide the service member and their family a viable methodology to purchase those creature comfort items when they member is stationed outside the United States.

it morphed to stateside probably due to single service members who were unable to leave the military facilities due to lack of transportation and became a tax free entity for what ever rationale developed by Congressional decree.

if the PX/BX exchange enterprises went away, stateside only, NOBODY WOULD STARVE!

in fact their product lines are extremely overpriced because the local establishments in military communities complained many many years ago they couldn't compete with the exchanges so again congress decreed the exchanges can only sell at competitive prices based on surveys from establishments around the military facilities. only thing you save is no state taxes are collected!!

therefore, in light of Walmart etc., stateside the exchanges are an albatross and IMHO should be closed as they serve no useful purpose - with the exception a small percentage of the exchange's profits is given to the base's Moral, Welfare, and Recreation fund to support the golf courses and the like.

the degradation of this thread to 'you don't know **** cuz you didn't serve' and such is an insult to the concept: 'all gave some, some gave all!' get over yourselves...

now you know what winds my clock!

btw, you notice the op started this and like a bar brawl, isn't contributing?

ipse

Thank you.

I think your very important distinction is missed by many who are reading this thread. You made one mistake; the Exchange provides around 70% (not a small portion) of its profits to Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) programs, so in effect, the military is subsidizing itself by shopping at the exchange.

The PX (BX on AF bases) is a department store. It's Kohl's, JCPenney, Sears, etc. In the late 1980s, the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) was the 3rd largest retailer in the US; I haven't seen newer data on that. The only congressionally appropriated money spent in the Exchange comes in the form of utilities and transportation of merchandise to overseas exchanges and for salaries of U.S. military personnel assigned to the Exchange . A non-appropriated fund instrumentality (NAFI) of the Department of Defense, the Exchange funds 98% of its operating budget, including civilian employee salaries, inventory investments, utilities and capital investments for equipment, vehicles and facilities, from the sale of merchandise, food and services to customers. (What food it sells is from food courts, or snack foods such as are carried in convenience stores.) Whether it could go away without anyone noticing is an opinion; you may be right.

The commissaries, on the other hand, sell foodstuffs at cost plus five percent (and I have to wonder, as costs will vary from one commissary to another, even in the same region). In high-cost areas (think DC, SF, NYC, etc.), it's a not inconsiderable assist, particularly to younger enlisted folks with families.

 

[OC for ME]

No, I understood precisely what you meant. No apology is necessary. <snip>

I understand your position clearly now. Thanks for the informative and polite discussion.

As to defending 1911er, I wasn't. He owns his words and I disagree with his premise, I do not expect a citizen to walk in a service member's shoes to be "qualified" to criticize the military services. It is our right to criticize any government institution. It is our right to demand that government institutions do and be what we want them to do or be. It is the American way.

 

[solus]

let's see...your post 38 states:

First of all, snip... The benefits that my employer provides me are not comparable to benefits which the government provides its employees.

I asked: quote: then i again ask what specific benefits do you believe are incompatible with your current employment against those of US service members. unquote

then again i reiterate the question in a later post and you profess to be ignorant of the statements made?

so once again so we can discern your concept of what those serving in the US' armed forces receive in compensation receive and you do not from your current employer?????

your dance of well, gee, uh, excuse me, is getting olde quickly. and while some might buy your half hearted proffered apology(ies), you opened your mouth spouting misconceptions for the world to see which enabled you to managed to stick both feet inside and are choking.

the heimlich is not being offered until you clarify your statement!



ipse

 

[solus]

Okay, what is the source of that tax money, eg which taxes are collected to pay for soldier/government workers?

they are funded by separate pots of government money...us service members and government workers are two distinct entities!.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Every cent spent on military is a cent taken out of productive economy.

Every cent spent on military is stolen from someone else.

The idea that we can't cut this theft when outspend the next 4 world powers combined is silly.

 

[marshaul]

Every cent spent on military is a cent taken out of productive economy.

Every cent spent on military is stolen from someone else.

The idea that we can't cut this theft when outspend the next 4 world powers combined is silly.

Hard to argue with that.

 

[Gallowmere]

they are funded by separate pots of government money...us service members and government workers are two distinct entities!.

Funny...I don't recall there being a distinction made on my paycheck stub. No matter which pot it comes from, the pots were filled by the same source.

 

[color of law]

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961.

 

[Freedom1Man]

they are funded by separate pots of government money...us service members and government workers are two distinct entities!.

You did not answer that question.

 

[Freedom1Man]

Every cent spent on military is a cent taken out of productive economy.

Every cent spent on military is stolen from someone else.

The idea that we can't cut this theft when outspend the next 4 world powers combined is silly.

So, a heavy tax on imported, "goods," from China to encourage the purchase of domestic products, is a bad thing?

Why not run the costs up on countries who do not have the same standards for pollution, working conditions, etc, that we force upon domestic companies?

The idea behind the original taxing program is that NO-ONE would ever HAVE to ever pay 1 red cent for taxes directly or indirectly if they were not willing to. The taxing was supposed to be very limited in scope and nature in such a way that you could legally avoid taxes by not engaging in any of a set of limited privileged activities, such as making alcohol for the purpose of selling it, doing business as a foreigner, etc.

The tax system was setup for only taxing land owners (at the state level) and then only those who paid taxes could vote. NOW, most people are being forced to pay in one way or another and that is why "everyone" can vote. Sadly, even those who only collect the money stolen from others in the form of improper taxes, can vote too. We also allow a special class of criminals to vote and our dead to vote too.

 

[MamaLiberty]

stay safe.

Oops - just realized MammaLiberty is the author of the quote. Apologies for messing it up.

Nope, that wasn't my quote. I posted a bit earlier.

 

[MamaLiberty]

I'll check with my kids and see if they agree with you. I suspect that they will. What should I do then?

Start living that way. As much as possible, stop asking for "permission." Stop accepting stolen goods. Stop providing goods to be stolen. Practice non-aggression always. Live within your means, without recourse to government anything as much as possible, even if it is difficult and your family hates you for it.

Easy? Comfortable? Hell no. But the harder we work to live this way, the closer we'll get.

The most important thing is this, however. Rid yourself of the common belief that government, or anyone else has some or much legitimate authority to control the lives of other people. It's that simple.

The Most Dangerous Superstition
http://www.larkenrose.com/component...oks/2019-the-most-dangerous-superstition.html
The root cause of most of society's ills--the main source of man's inhumanity to man--is neither malice nor negligence, but a mere superstition--an unquestioned assumption which has been accepted on faith by nearly everyone, of all ages, races, religions, education and income levels. If people were to recognize that one belief for what it is--an utterly irrational, self-contradictory, and horribly destructive myth--most of the violence, oppression and injustice in the world would cease. But that will happen only when people dare to honestly and objectively re-examine their belief systems.