Thursday, July 27, 2017

Captain Miss America

Any of you watch Captain America? Dude, that guy is awesome. A little upsetting to find out it's not an actual biography though. Here I was cheering for him and stuff. But, sadly, it's not real. Ok, well a couple parts are true.
As it turns out, there really was a World War 2. Trippy, right? I'm sure you guys already knew that though. There was a bad guy doing bad things. When his buddy attacked us we got active. Obviously, our military was heavily involved and folks were lining up to enlist in the military. 

Even though we were at war, a big big war, not everyone was able to grab a gun and go fight. See, this is the other part of the movie that was true. No no, really. They told some people they couldn't get in. It was "hey, thanks for your patriotic offer but it's gonna be a 'no' from us. You've got a medical condition that goes against our hiring policy". Or something like that. 
The list included things like flat feet (I guess the arch in the foot is important), asthma (I guess you've gotta breathe ok when fighting for your life), diabetes (because slipping into a diabetic coma when driving a tank might be bad), facial tattoos (maybe something to do with your decision making skills and how it reflects on your employer), and the list goes on. 

Hell, I'd planned on going in the military when I was a senior in high school. Only missed one question on the ASVAB according to my recruiter. He basically told me "just pick what you wanna do."  I wanted to be a pilot. He was all "well, anything but that. You wear glasses and you can't be a pilot if you need glasses going in. How about linguistics or something?"
Didn't matter because before I could finalize everything I found something that also disqualifies you, a felony. Yep. I screwed up and got arrested for a felony a week before I was to enlist. Crap. In the 60's they'd have given me the option of going to the military instead of jail. In 1990, not so much. 

Now though? Now a BUNCH of people are upset because they reverted to the rule of no "transgender" people in the military. "Progressives" are saying it as "hateful bigotry" to not let these folks in. For 100 years it's been ok to refuse to hire people with medical, legal or psychiatric issues and there's been no outrage. Yet here we are now. 

Now, the President met with military leaders and they all discussed this beforehand. It wasn't some sudden and random thing. Their primary reasoning? It's just not cost effective. Hmm. Let's take a quick looksee. 

The military budget increases by 2.4 million to 8.4 million annually by accommodating "trans" people. So not hiring them saves millions of dollars a year. I'm not sure if this includes the roughly 2 years they can't actually do the work they're getting paid for while they undergo surgeries at taxpayer expense. If not, I wonder what that cost is. 
Then there's the lifetime of maintenance required which, naturally, would also be at the taxpayer's expense. Ongoing hormone treatment and potential surgeries, have we considered that cost? 

Let's go just a tad deeper, shall we? With the WPATH Standards of Care. The most recent version, Version 7 of the Standards of Care, says that is strongly suggested that someone does see a qualified mental health professional if they are going to be starting medical transition. But, it does say it is also ok if the medical professional you are going to is trained in behavioral health and/or they work as part of a multiple disciplinary team, meaning there is probably someone there who would do an evaluation with you. 
Huh, well that's weird. I thought the military didn't hire people with a pre-existing need to see a mental health professional. In fact: 'Section 8 is a category of discharge from the United States military, used for a service member judged mentally unfit for service. It also came to mean any service member given such a discharge or behaving as if deserving such a discharge, as in the expression, "he's a Section 8".'

"But what about the special accommodations and allowances that can and must be made for 'trans' people in the military?" Well that's certainly an additional expense as well. Special "we care" type training that interferes with the job. Were they willing to make these allowances and accommodations for Steve Rogers all the times he got rejected? What about all the asthmatics? I'm hearing crickets.

See, ultimately, the military is a job. The can set guidelines for who they will hire. For financial reasons they chose to not hire 'trans' people. 'Trans' people already didn't meet the hiring criteria and the last manager/owner, Obama, made exceptions. The military is under new management and they decided to enforce the rules and quit making exceptions. Don't like it? Apply elsewhere. I hear Starbucks likes a good "progressive" cause. 

Wednesday, July 26, 2017

"Her Rights, My Wrongs"

What's up with all of these ridiculous posts and protests lately? You know the ones. People up in arms over the loss of women's rights. The ones about how millions are going to die once Obamacare is repealed and/or replaced. Interesting points. 

Now, if you've ever read anything I've written you probably know that I'm about to drop some logic on this. Some of you aren't going to like it. Well here's some exciting news about that: I'm probably not gonna care unless you can give a logical and reasonable debate. So far that's where everyone falters or lapses into supposition and assumption. For the record, I only play the "what if" game with my kids. 

So here's the thing. Women's rights. You didn't lose them. They're still sitting right there along with the house you can own with the money you can earn at the job you're allowed to have. Look at you, all "righted" up and shit. Good on ya, ladies. 
What's that? Oh. It's about abortion rights. Gotcha. My bad. So you're upset because of the Planned Parenthood thing. Yeah, bummer about that, I've known a person or two who use abortion as a form of birth control. Poor girls might be stuck dealing with accountability now. Drats. 
Here's a fun fact: two people were required to make that baby. Where are the men's rights when women abort a child he wanted? 

However, women still didn't lose any rights. I've yet to have anyone list any "rights" women have actually lost. For the record here, although abortion has never been listed as a "right", abortion is still available. No one has outlawed it. You know that, right? 

Look, I don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control. I know, I know. The mantra is that it's not my body. Fair point. Your body, his shared DNA. Guess what, it IS my tax dollars I don't want spent on it. You had sex without a thought to the outcome, you pay for your own abortion. How's that for fair? Oh. You can't afford it? Then you may wanna look into the millions of people looking to adopt. Problem solved and shit. 

The other rights, what? Equality? Hmm. Let's see. You want equal pay. Ok. For equal work though, right? You know. None of this "but I can't lift as much as these guys, you've gotta make allowances for me because I'm a girl." Oh. Well then I guess you can't lift as big a check as those guys then either. No no. I'm not going to make any special allowances. It's not fair to everyone else. Equal work for equal pay. Bottom line. 

Now.... on to this ridiculous nonsense about the "millions that'll die if Obamacare gets repealed." Cough, cough... bullshit. Let's just start there and make you even more upset as we go. 
Obamacare is a nightmare of failure and lies. Did it help millions get affordable healthcare? Sure. The ones who already qualified for Medicaid and Medicare. Those of us who were already paying for health insurance? Millions either got dropped or had our premiums raise to the point we couldn't afford it. Unless, of course, we switched to a plan with ludicrous deductibles and limitations. 
What do I think the government should do about healthcare? So glad you asked. Nothing. That's what they should do. Nothing except get out of the micromanagement business. Our government wasn't put in place to regulate healthcare. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does it mention the government needs to get involved. It's simply not in their job description. 

Plus, let's face it, what our government excels at is screwing things up. So we want them in the doctor's office with us now? You sure about that? 

Oh. I see. You think health care should just be free. Gotcha. You know "free" isn't really free, right? You do understand the money has to come from somewhere, don't you? The more "free" shit we have, the higher taxes go. If you work, that is. You want to give your money to the government and let them manage your life? Have you seen the way our government manages things? 

Let them repeal it. Don't replace it. Let insurance companies compete for our business. I assure you the law of supply and demand will lower rates. It's just simple economics.