Are Veterans Better Than The Rest Of Us?

[Dan From Smithville]

Except what benefits, and why are they deserving?

Are they deserving of more? Less? Just that amount? Still no why?

Veteran benefits are varied, constantly in flux, and subject to change through debated legislation. But the post says nothing. Just "yeah, they deserve what they get." There is literally no substance. It is just more hollow words "supporting our vets."

Well cheers and thank you for your service.

I think you were looking for more out of his response than I was or I understood it to mean something different than you did.

While I appreciate your sentiment, it is in no way deserved. I have not served in the military.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Except what benefits, and why are they deserving?

Are they deserving of more? Less? Just that amount? Still no why?

Veteran benefits are varied, constantly in flux, and subject to change through debated legislation. But the post says nothing. Just "yeah, they deserve what they get." There is literally no substance. It is just more hollow words "supporting our vets."

Well cheers and thank you for your service.

Unless you are taking a more expansive view of service that was espoused by @Enoch07. Or were you being facetious?

 

[Enoch07]

But you are suggesting that all of these professions should get equal pay?

Nope, just that they all perform different but equally important duties. Some of those duties are more dangerous, some require specific skills, some require extra education.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Nope, just that they all perform different but equally important duties. Some of those duties are more dangerous, some require specific skills, some require extra education.

A trash collector may not be a glamorous job and many may look down on him or her for their dirty job that does not require an advanced education, but see how important they become when they stop showing up.

 

[Curious George]

I know. I was just waxing a little philosophical about the disproportions between certain professions and a little humorous in my previous response about where I thought the line should be drawn.

Obviously, becoming a physician requires certain aptitudes that are not equally shared as well as costly training, and significant time investment and effort. While certain aptitudes and skills are required to make McDonald's food, they are not equivalent to the demands of becoming a physician and it would be unreasonable to justify equal compensation for both occupations.

And there we have little problem if we stop. While we want to some for their exceptional skills and ability should we go so far as to acquiesce to the notion that those less capable are deserving of a less qualitative life? how far can such a principle hold without weighing on your conscience?

 

[Curious George]

Nope, just that they all perform different but equally important duties. Some of those duties are more dangerous, some require specific skills, some require extra education.

That moment when you realize the thing you said before is no longer the thing you believe:

So they are not equal?

 

[Enoch07]

A trash collector may not be a glamorous job and many may look down on him or her for their dirty job that does not require an advanced education, but see how important they become when they stop showing up.

I bet not many people on RF will grab a 3,000 psi snake drain to beak loose a grease ball while raw sewage pours in from 3-4 other pipes onto their head. Guess how much that job pays. Not as much as a soldier but you can bet when p00p backs up into your bathtub you are gonna need that person just as much.

 

[Curious George]

Unless you are taking a more expansive view of service that was espoused by @Enoch07. Or were you being facetious?

It wasn't @Enoch07

 

[Enoch07]

That moment when you realize the thing you said before is no longer the thing you believe:

So they are not equal?

You can be equal but different.

My job is equally important as Neil Degrasse Tyson's, but I'm not making the same money as him. I don't have as much education as him.

 

[Curious George]

I think you were looking for more out of his response than I was or I understood it to mean something different than you did.

While I appreciate your sentiment, it is in no way deserved. I have not served in the military.

That is the thing with terribly vague statements.

The thank you means the same regardless of whether you served

 

[Curious George]

You can be equal but different.

My job is equally important as Neil Degrasse Tyson's, but I'm not making the same money as him. I don't have as much education as him.

How exactly are you equal but less deserving?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And there we have little problem if we stop. While we want to some for their exceptional skills and ability should we go so far as to acquiesce to the notion that those less capable are deserving of a less qualitative life? how far can such a principle hold without weighing on your conscience?

That is related to the points I am interested in and I think is underlying the questions of the OP whether intended or not. Does a desirable attribute(s) elevate a person to a status that gives them further attributes that have nothing to do with possession of the original attribute(s)? Conversely, do those without those specific attributes deserve to be viewed as lower status and deserving of less as a result?

Should we give that latter group more? Should we elevate the less capable artificially? What is the difference between providing a level playing field and just awarding a win to make up for their lack of skill so that they can artificially be equal?

These are important social issues that I do not have answers for, but am interested in so that I can make more rational, practical, informed and compassionate decisions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That is the thing with terribly vague statements.

The thank you means the same regardless of whether you served

But in the context of the discussion, it is perceived to mean thank you for serving in the military. It was not offered in a vacuum of the issues and the OP.

 

[Enoch07]

How exactly are you equal but less deserving?

Not, but different jobs require different pay.


Hypothetical situation.

Why would anyone clean sewers for $15 an hour of they can flip burgers for the same pay. Nobody would ever clean sewers.

So how do you get people to clean sewers then?

Well since burger flippers get $8 per hour you offer $10 an hour to clean sewers.

Both jobs are important, but one requires extra grit and fortitude. So it pays more.

 

[Curious George]

But in the context of the discussion, it is perceived to mean thank you for serving in the military. It was not offered in a vacuum of the issues and the OP.

No it was not. And the fact that you in no way indicated your service was also part of the context. Given that it was, (i guess not so) clearly tongue in cheek to point out the hollowness of such platitudes.

 

[Curious George]

Not, but different jobs require different pay.


Hypothetical situation.

Why would anyone clean sewers for $15 an hour of they can flip burgers for the same pay. Nobody would ever clean sewers.

So how do you get people to clean sewers then?

Well since burger flippers get $8 per hour you offer $10 an hour to clean sewers.

Both jobs are important, but one requires extra grit and fortitude. So it pays more.

*bold mine*
The moment you realize that you are no longer suggesting they are equal in importance.

You want to trivialize the inequality in your jobs and instead use umbrella terms such as "importance." What you are getting at is "the world needs ditch diggers." Sure, the world does need them. But that doesn't mean we honestly view them as equally important jobs. As you suggested yourself some jobs require more skill, more knowledge, more "grit and fortitude." More importantly, you have suggested anyone can be a burger flipper or at least that burger flipping skills are a dime a dozen. If this is true then the more skilled job is more important because anyone can replace the burger flipper. Not so true of the doctor.

Now if you want to put the doctor against another highly qualified or hard to replace position then you are arguing that the jobs are important in different ways. This is true. But if they are equally important then they would deserve equal pay.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How exactly are you equal but less deserving?

What role does supply and demand play in this? On rare occasions I have found myself defending positions that I do not particularly agree with, but found the opposing viewpoint so extreme that it warranted a counterpoint. The high salaries of professional sports figures was one such instance. Much like actors, it is my view that they receive salaries well out of proportion to what they contribute. This is not the same as saying they are not highly skilled and very talented and successful at their jobs. However, there is a demand for those figures and in meeting the demand, there is an economic struggle to get the best performing--sometimes just the most popular--members of that group. The pro sports athlete is not at fault for having abilities that someone is willing to pay a lot to see in action. I found myself arguing that there is a market for their skills. There is a demand for players that outperform and this demand drives up the price to get them to perform. Higher performers can ask for more money and receive it. In the context of the conditions, they are getting paid what others percieve they are worth.

I think an important question for me that came out of taking the pro position, regards whether any such job is deserving of disproportionately large compensation in light of the fact that the contribution largely amounts to entertainment value?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No it was not. And the fact that you in no way indicated your service was also part of the context. Given that it was, (i guess not so) clearly tongue in cheek to point out the hollowness of such platitudes.

Yes it was. You posted in that general context, whether you mentioned it or not. The thread is about veteran status. It is common these days for people to offer thanks when they are talking to a veteran. What other context would elicit such an offering?

I did ask if you were being facetious. Considering the context of this thread, it was a question worth asking.

 

[Enoch07]

If this is true then the more skilled job is more important because anyone can replace the burger flipper. Not so true of the doctor.

Meh ask a hungry doctor that just worked a 38 hour shift with no sleep. He is gonna be very thankful that burger flipper is there doing his job.

 

[Curious George]

What role does supply and demand play in this? On rare occasions I have found myself defending positions that I do not particularly agree with, but found the opposing viewpoint so extreme that it warranted a counterpoint. The high salaries of professional sports figures was one such instance. Much like actors, it is my view that they receive salaries well out of proportion to what they contribute. This is not the same as saying they are not highly skilled and very talented and successful at their jobs. However, there is a demand for those figures and in meeting the demand, there is an economic struggle to get the best performing--sometimes just the most popular--members of that group. The pro sports athlete is not at fault for having abilities that someone is willing to pay a lot to see in action. I found myself arguing that there is a market for their skills. There is a demand for players that outperform and this demand drives up the price to get them to perform. Higher performers can ask for more money and receive it. In the context of the conditions, they are getting paid what others percieve they are worth.

I think an important question for me that came out of taking the pro position, regards whether any such job is deserving of disproportionately large compensation in light of the fact that the contribution largely amounts to entertainment value?

Yet to those that are willing to pay such high fees, those athletes are undoubtedly more important.

Demand plays a huge role. It is how our actions speak louder than our idealistic banter.

Many would agree in the grand scheme of things an entertainer, or at least the multi million dollar entertainer instead of the one who didn't make it but was nearly as good) is less "important" than say a teacher.

But is this really how our society feels? Actions speak louder than words.