[jonnycsd]

Firefighters dont even make the list of the top 20 most dangerous jobs . . .

But first, CA Renter, your argument comparing the USA to Somalia is flat out stupid. First of all, Somalia is not a capitalist state – it is a failed state. Second, the US no longer runs a capitalist system, we have a mixed economy and it has been that way for 45 years. To put it bluntly, you dont know what you are talking about. If you are so enamored with socialism then move to Venezuela or Cuba.

NOW LETS LOOK AT THE FACTS ON PAY AND JOB DANGER:

For some additional perspecitve on the dollar value of laying your life on the line, consider that the USMC pays about $450 per month extra for service in “a designated hostile-fire area or in an area where they are exposed to hostile fire or in “grave danger of physical injury.””

That drops to only about $250 a month,for service in a foreign area that is designated as an area of imminent danger. A full month of duty in the area of imminent danger is required to be eligible for the $250 payment. Partial months dont count.

Remember, these men are not eating BBQ down at the station, or going home after thier shift to relax and watch TV. They are sleeping on the ground and eating food from plastic pouches. For $450 a month extra.

Yes, firefighting is hard work. So is policing. But neither of them is as hard as soldiering. And neither of them is nearly as dangerous as driving a truck or working construction.

Using the arguments of how dangerous the job is truckers should make even more than the cops and firemen – they die at a much higher rate and account for 20% of all workplace fatalities in the USA. Convenience store clerks are in the top ten – pension for these minimum wage workers? NOT A CHANCE! No pension for the construction worker who dies at a much higer rate than either the cops ro the firemen, and does just as much if not more damage to thier bodies while on the job. Sales clerks and supervisors face more life threatening danger than the cops or firemen and make a fraction of the pay.

Firefighters dont even make the list for the top 20 most dangerous jobs by fatalities(police detectives do). Neither the cops nor firemen make the list for highest rates of on the job injuries. You can find the Department of Labor report here:

http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfar0020.pdf

Life can be a bitch for anyone, but that doesn’t (shouldn’t) entitle them to a free ride. 50 years of defined benefit pension for 20 years of work just doesnt make sense. The unions that drive these bad policies need a haircut.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=threadkiller]A lot of verbage,but the main point of most posters is that just because it’s legal does not make it right. I can go out and legally cheat on my wife, but that doesn’t make it ethical.[/quote]

EVERY lender knew the rules going into this game, giving the home back is not like cheating on your wife. Lenders were ready to get in bed with anyone just to juice up thier fees.

What’s unethical is telling your wife that you want to be a swinger, then calling her a whore after she takes you up on the offer.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=threadkiller]A lot of verbage,but the main point of most posters is that just because it’s legal does not make it right. I can go out and legally cheat on my wife, but that doesn’t make it ethical.[/quote]

EVERY lender knew the rules going into this game, giving the home back is not like cheating on your wife. Lenders were ready to get in bed with anyone just to juice up thier fees.

What’s unethical is telling your wife that you want to be a swinger, then calling her a whore after she takes you up on the offer.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=threadkiller]A lot of verbage,but the main point of most posters is that just because it’s legal does not make it right. I can go out and legally cheat on my wife, but that doesn’t make it ethical.[/quote]

EVERY lender knew the rules going into this game, giving the home back is not like cheating on your wife. Lenders were ready to get in bed with anyone just to juice up thier fees.

What’s unethical is telling your wife that you want to be a swinger, then calling her a whore after she takes you up on the offer.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=threadkiller]A lot of verbage,but the main point of most posters is that just because it’s legal does not make it right. I can go out and legally cheat on my wife, but that doesn’t make it ethical.[/quote]

EVERY lender knew the rules going into this game, giving the home back is not like cheating on your wife. Lenders were ready to get in bed with anyone just to juice up thier fees.

What’s unethical is telling your wife that you want to be a swinger, then calling her a whore after she takes you up on the offer.

[jonnycsd]

[quote=threadkiller]A lot of verbage,but the main point of most posters is that just because it’s legal does not make it right. I can go out and legally cheat on my wife, but that doesn’t make it ethical.[/quote]

EVERY lender knew the rules going into this game, giving the home back is not like cheating on your wife. Lenders were ready to get in bed with anyone just to juice up thier fees.

What’s unethical is telling your wife that you want to be a swinger, then calling her a whore after she takes you up on the offer.

[jonnycsd]

Kev374 wrote:

IF taxpayers were not involved in any way and the system was 100% freemarket, i.e. banks would take losses and shut down then I see absolutely no problem with walking away…it is between the borrower and the bank.

But because of the bailouts this is affecting everyone now so yes it is unethical.

So what you are saying is that the government is spending your money unethically? Thats an argument I can understand – even though the Govt, misguided as it may be, is just clumsily trying to choose the lesser of two evils.

[jonnycsd]

Kev374 wrote:

IF taxpayers were not involved in any way and the system was 100% freemarket, i.e. banks would take losses and shut down then I see absolutely no problem with walking away…it is between the borrower and the bank.

But because of the bailouts this is affecting everyone now so yes it is unethical.

So what you are saying is that the government is spending your money unethically? Thats an argument I can understand – even though the Govt, misguided as it may be, is just clumsily trying to choose the lesser of two evils.

[jonnycsd]

Kev374 wrote:

IF taxpayers were not involved in any way and the system was 100% freemarket, i.e. banks would take losses and shut down then I see absolutely no problem with walking away…it is between the borrower and the bank.

But because of the bailouts this is affecting everyone now so yes it is unethical.

So what you are saying is that the government is spending your money unethically? Thats an argument I can understand – even though the Govt, misguided as it may be, is just clumsily trying to choose the lesser of two evils.

[jonnycsd]

Kev374 wrote:

IF taxpayers were not involved in any way and the system was 100% freemarket, i.e. banks would take losses and shut down then I see absolutely no problem with walking away…it is between the borrower and the bank.

But because of the bailouts this is affecting everyone now so yes it is unethical.

So what you are saying is that the government is spending your money unethically? Thats an argument I can understand – even though the Govt, misguided as it may be, is just clumsily trying to choose the lesser of two evils.

[jonnycsd]

Kev374 wrote:

IF taxpayers were not involved in any way and the system was 100% freemarket, i.e. banks would take losses and shut down then I see absolutely no problem with walking away…it is between the borrower and the bank.

But because of the bailouts this is affecting everyone now so yes it is unethical.

So what you are saying is that the government is spending your money unethically? Thats an argument I can understand – even though the Govt, misguided as it may be, is just clumsily trying to choose the lesser of two evils.

[jonnycsd]

bsrsharma wrote:

. . . may eventually lead to CA becoming a two tier society like Brazil: the gated communities with self contained municipal services and the left behind who have to some how survive without a functioning state

IMHO the entire USA is quietly but steadily moving towards a Brazilian socio-economic model. Like frogs in a pot of water on the stove top, by the time people realize what is happening it will be too late. The middle class will be gone, corruption rampant and clientelismo politics will be the accepted order. And yes, there will be gated communities and a massive underclass.

[jonnycsd]

bsrsharma wrote:

. . . may eventually lead to CA becoming a two tier society like Brazil: the gated communities with self contained municipal services and the left behind who have to some how survive without a functioning state

IMHO the entire USA is quietly but steadily moving towards a Brazilian socio-economic model. Like frogs in a pot of water on the stove top, by the time people realize what is happening it will be too late. The middle class will be gone, corruption rampant and clientelismo politics will be the accepted order. And yes, there will be gated communities and a massive underclass.

[jonnycsd]

bsrsharma wrote:

. . . may eventually lead to CA becoming a two tier society like Brazil: the gated communities with self contained municipal services and the left behind who have to some how survive without a functioning state

IMHO the entire USA is quietly but steadily moving towards a Brazilian socio-economic model. Like frogs in a pot of water on the stove top, by the time people realize what is happening it will be too late. The middle class will be gone, corruption rampant and clientelismo politics will be the accepted order. And yes, there will be gated communities and a massive underclass.

[jonnycsd]

bsrsharma wrote:

. . . may eventually lead to CA becoming a two tier society like Brazil: the gated communities with self contained municipal services and the left behind who have to some how survive without a functioning state

IMHO the entire USA is quietly but steadily moving towards a Brazilian socio-economic model. Like frogs in a pot of water on the stove top, by the time people realize what is happening it will be too late. The middle class will be gone, corruption rampant and clientelismo politics will be the accepted order. And yes, there will be gated communities and a massive underclass.

[Author]

Posts