NashVol11
Gloomed to Fail
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2009
- Messages
- 22,399
- Likes
- 7,862
Again, you say you use "logic", and what you type doesn't add up. The "counter argument" you are trying to search for is right in every post I have in this thread- I just don't think you can read well enough to comprehend it. Service to country should grant benefits to those who serve- I'd say most taxpayers are fine with that type of subsidy. Giving benefits to people that have not given the societally agreed-upon service is immoral. Indebting oneself in the way those who benefit from this is a decision they made- unlike getting cancer (most of the time, anyway).
There's no inconsistency in what I've said- you're using the same place loaded with uncountable bots and where we can get polls to say Tennessee is the best football team of all time as proof positive you're right. I'm not sure why you think that's a deep well of logic to pull from.
You're dense and arrogant- it's OK, I'm sure you're a real productive member of society while you're bartending or whatever it is that someone was stupid enough to hire you to mess up at.
I’ve been discussing this in a straightforward way largely this whole time as you call me dumb while missing and sidestepping my point and I’M the arrogant one lol.
Those who serve DO get educational benefits and will continue to even compared to those who get 10-20K of forgiveness. Just from that “irrelevant” point, his “for nothing” is already wrong.
Beyond that, claiming you “lost your legs for tuition” when tuition wasn’t your primary motivation for service is incredibly disingenuous and using lost legs for a sob story that way is pretty distasteful. You still haven’t disagreed with that and I don’t blame you.
I agree with your addition of “most of the time”, and I think if someone DID smoke themselves into lung cancer for instance, it would still likewise be strange to get angry that there’s a cure for them