Jump to content

HeloDude

Super Moderator
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,336

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

 Content Type 

Everything posted by HeloDude

  1. HeloDude
    Outstanding! Though I didn't ask you (since supposedly you're against government welfare)...but since you mentioned the charity, how much do you give them per year?
  2. HeloDude
    So how much of your personal wealth are you voluntarily donating to charities that help provide healthcare/pay for healthcare expenses of those less foryunate than you? And which specific charities do you use?
  3. HeloDude
    Read what Lord Ratner said--his posts are pretty close to my views. Truthfully, when progressives move away from the coastal cities for fear of the effects of climate change, then I'll be worried.
  4. HeloDude
    No, you originally used an analogy that further reduction of X results in a correlated decrease in Y. If this were the case anything that is perceived as "bad/harmful" should be eliminated...and this is a childish argument, at best. If you want to argue that further government regulation with regards to energy production, etc is better for the environment, regardless of the negative impacts to the economy then I would just say that is purely an opinion of yours and not rooted in factual economic science.
  5. HeloDude
    Again, learn to make a better argument (one you actually can/want to defend), and you'll get a much better response.
  6. HeloDude
    Got it--you're for a maximum speed limit of 40mph.
  7. HeloDude
    You're the one who said we need speed limits to mitigate the risks of an accident at higher speeds...so I would just like to know why you're not advocating for an even further reduction in allowable speeds to further mitigate the risks afte an accident? Or is this no longer your argument?
  8. HeloDude
    Don't get upset...learn to make a better argument.
  9. HeloDude
    So you're for making the maximum speed limit 40mph to minimize the effects of an accident?
  10. HeloDude
    Are you suggesting the Saudi King bowed first to Obama and Obama just returned the bow? If so, please post your source...
  11. HeloDude
    Funny how you conveniently left out the "returning" portion when discussing the salute. But to go with your post above, do you also then think they should not have shaken hands/greeted each other?...since their regimee is "responsible for terror, murder and unspeakable horror against its own people"? Also, just a few weeks ago you were praising how Obama dealt with Iran...who is also a sponsor of terror, murder, and unspeakable terror against its own people. Too funny lol.
  12. HeloDude
    By your logic/scenario above, cars shouldn't be able to drive faster than 40 mph since people have died in car accidents driving faster than 40. Or does "mitigating potential risk" not also work in your own given scenario?
  13. HeloDude
    That is exactly what I meaon by further regulation. Health "insurance" stopped being "insurance" when the government forced people to enter into business where the business was forced to cover things it didn't want to cover. Here's a simple analogy you should be able to understand: Homeowners insurance. If the government forced the insurance business to take a new customer whose house had been burnt down last week and then also forced the insurance company to pay to replace this home after the fact...and then also force me to do business with said insurance company, then this is no longer insurance. It's government mandating that homeowners with insurance who have not had their house burnt down pay for someone's house who didn't pay into the insurance pool before it burnt down. Or even worse, forcing a homeowner who didn't want insurance to pay for the guy whose house burnt down. Like I said, this is not insurance. As for the rest of your post (which came across as quite emotional by the way), I'll gladly respond once we can understand each other as to what is and isn't insurance. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoodman/2016/11/01/why-should-the-young-and-the-healthy-bail-out-of-obamacare/#309d294f1f69
  14. HeloDude
    I've been pondering ideas like this a lot lately (not saying I plan on failing a PT test anytime soon), but what's the incentive for someone who wants out and/or doesn't really care whether they stay in/get out and thus isn't concerned about rank...what's the incentive to do well/pass a PT test? Sure it's good to stay in shape, but those people would workout even if there wasn't a PT test. Failing a PT test is purely administrative. So if the AF is consistently working you 10-12 hours a day, some weekends, deploying you, etc, why workout if that's not your thing and you don't care about advancing your military career? And if someone brings up core values then I would argue the AF hasn't met their part of that obligation. Again, just some thoughts from someone who has been in quite a while...
  15. HeloDude
    So let me get this straight--over the last 50--60 years, healthcare in the US has only become more regulated (at both the state and federal level), and yet your solution to something (that has only gotten worse in your opinion) is to further regulate it. And as for our "healthcare system"--we don't have a "system", and that is a good thing. We have a US Postal "System" (which is inefficient), DMV "systems" (which is very inefficient and really sucks), a social security "retirement system" (which is scheduled to go bust), etc. As for poor people not having the money to be able to see as good of a pediatrician as my family?--well, I bring more value to society than a poor person. The laws of economics never lie. Oh and and as far as using Medicare as a good example of a "quasi-healthcare system", it is also scheduled to go bust even soon than predicted. So thanks but not thanks... https://nypost.com/2018/06/05/medicare-social-security-running-out-of-money-faster-than-expected/
  16. HeloDude
    How do you "overturn" a recommendation? So because a couple recent O-5 boards had a few guys with a DP get non-selected, the board now doesn't take DPs vs Ps into consideration? Read my post on this issue from a couple weeks ago--I understand some of the frustration and agree that the promotion process can always use some improvements, but using nonsense to make your point does not add credibility to your argument. As for what's going on with the recent O-4 board, I have no idea. I think it's poor form to not release some info as to why there is a delay but I bet SRs already know the reason. The SRs knew well before the official release that there was going to be "100% promotion opportunity to Major" (or whatever they called it).
  17. HeloDude
    Totally agree. My original point (which I guess I didn't make clear) is that substantiated evidence against a military member should never be overlooked/not lead to a prosecution. And to Azimuth's post, I agree that a member's rank shouldn't keep you from being prosecuted, but that's a problem with leadership, not the UCMJ.
  18. HeloDude
    No...I was referring to being charged for an alleged crime vs not being charged for an alleged crime. Once someone is acquitted then it's a nothing burger. And an alleged crime refers to not yet being convicted or acquitted when substantiated evidence shows there is reason to prosecute. I'm not an attorney, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
  19. HeloDude
    So are you upset that people are charged when violating the UCMJ or that not everyone is charged for violating the UCMJ? I get the second part, but that in no way excuses people who are charged for an alleged crime.
  20. HeloDude
    So where is your frustration: That fraternization is not allowed per the UCMJ or that you can actually be punished for fraternization (per the UCMJ)? I can also show up to work at FB drunk and it wouldn't necessarily be a crime...in the military, not so much. As much as there are many things with the military, the AF, the UCMJ that I disagree with, the standards are the standards. No one was forced to join.
  21. HeloDude
    Are you suggesting those are not crimes in the military?
  22. HeloDude
    Again, if it's it's "drastic" to undo what Obama did then logically that means that what Obama did in the first place was also "drastic". Unless you're just arguing that what Obama did was good and Trump undoing it is bad--which just means that you're a partisan or an ideologue, you tell me. So once again I ask: What has Trump done that is "sooo far to the right"? Undoing what Obama did just means we go back to pre-2008, so how is that going "far to the right" if Bush was a centrist as you say? Be specific instead of just complaining that he is undoing Obama's executive orders, which by design, are meant to be changed with each President...because let's not pretend that the next Presifent who is a democrat won't likewise undo everything Trump has done. Dude, I get it--you didn't vote for him and you don't like him.
  23. HeloDude
    Wait...so the "drastic changes" that Trump is making is just undoing some of Obama's executive orders? So in essence, Trump is undoing Obama's "drastic changes"? I get it dude--you and the other half of the country who are repulsed by Trump's rhetoricstyle and thought Hillary had this election locked up are still very upset. But your arguments are full of emotion/opinion and little of substance...would you like to take back your "drastic changes" argument?
  24. HeloDude
    Aside from Trump's rhetoric, what are these "drastic changes" we've seen in the last 1.5 years? Obama completely changed the healthcare industry (pretty drastic if you ask me)--what has Trump done that is so drastic? A tax cut? Moving our embassy to Israel? Stepping up border enforcement (which was law well before Trump became President)?
  25. HeloDude
    I don't know how you're being a "quiet professional" at Lowes when you're asking for your 10% military discount in front of the guy who is not getting the discount. Look dude, it's fine if you want to make the argument that military members/veterans should get nothing (nor accept anything) more than what is offered to a non-military/member from a private business, but when you start picking and choosing what we should take vs not take you come across as very hypocritical. Again, when an airline voluntarily offers military members to board first, I don't see how this equates to "demanding" special treatment, especially when you say it's cool to ask for the military discount in front of the guy who doesn't get them. Take one position and be consistent...it's obvious that you're just confusing the rest of us on where you stand, at best.
×
×
  • Create New...