The 'tremedous medical costs' of trans soldiers

[PeoplesElbow]

Considering people bust my balls over a $20 travel expense I say it costs too much.

 

[glhs837]

So by that logic should we demand women are sterilized or on birth control before they can serve so they don't become pregnant and incur extra costs?

Sure, I'll go along with that, as long as you back me in my play that any woman receiving govt assistance must be on birth control? And women or men convicted of child abuse or neglect past a certain point must be sterilized?

Why? What does that have to do with the inappropriate use of military funds or additional time of to recuperate from surgery.

If it's not cool for the govt to pay for the care of pregnant women who have signed up to defend this nation with thier lives, it's damn well not cool to keep paying for either abortions or care and feeing of kids for women who cannot support themselves of the kids they already have. Apply the principle evenly or drop it.

 

[Hijinx]

I find it funny that a person is about to crap themselves over the expense of building a wall but is perfectly happy to spend money to cut a guys dick off.

 

[GURPS]

If you believe the RAND study done last year, between 1,362 and 6,630 trans people serve in the military and costs associated with those people's transitioning would increase military spending by between $2.4 million and $8.4 million each year, or a 0.04% and 0.13% increase.

This argument ignores the fact that the 10-year medical costs associated with transgender individuals are around $3-4 billion as well as the fact that sex change surgeries have proven to be ineffective at curbing the mental health issues behind gender dysphoria. That's $3-4 billion over a 10 year period that would have been diverted from other worthwhile medical causes for military personnel and veterans, especially in light of the military being whacked by Barack Obama's cuts and the myriad issues plaguing the Department of Veteran's Affairs.



http://www.dailywire.com/news/19062...nder-people-military-aaron-bandler#exit-modal



I Was Once Transgender. Why I Think Trump Made the Right Decision for the Military.

 

[GURPS]

It's hard for them to admit that it's about bigotry so they hide behind other arguments.

I've never seen anyone here challenge the Viagra budget or getting women who become pregnant to cover their own expenses.

A has nothing to do with B and C

 

[Sapidus]

This argument ignores the fact that the 10-year medical costs associated with transgender individuals are around $3-4 billion as well as the fact that sex change surgeries have proven to be ineffective at curbing the mental health issues behind gender dysphoria. That's $3-4 billion over a 10 year period that would have been diverted from other worthwhile medical causes for military personnel and veterans, especially in light of the military being whacked by Barack Obama's cuts and the myriad issues plaguing the Department of Veteran's Affairs.



http://www.dailywire.com/news/19062...nder-people-military-aaron-bandler#exit-modal



I Was Once Transgender. Why I Think Trump Made the Right Decision for the Military.

You really are nuts if you believe those numbers and that source when every other source has it as a tiny fraction of that. Do you even stop to think about what you post or you just throw it all out there and hope something gets a reaction?


$3-4 Billion. With a B. Good god are you delusional

 

[vraiblonde]

I find it funny that a person is about to crap themselves over the expense of building a wall but is perfectly happy to spend money to cut a guys dick off.

Don't want to pay for national security; do want to pay to turn men into women.

 

[Lurk]

If you believe the RAND study done last year[/URL], between 1,362 and 6,630 trans people serve in the military

A New England Journal of Medicine study done in 2015 found that 12,800 trans people serve

If you guys can't even decide how many sexual-mentally ill are serving, why the hell should we suddenly believe you can determine much it's gonna cost to fund their foolishness?

It's another fricking "Global Cooling/Warming/Change deal.

 

[Kyle]

Just more elevation, fictional numbers, of a minuscule existence.

just like back in the 90s when they were trying to convince everybody that one in five people were gay.

they elevate the number to make the problem seem bigger than it is.

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

The services, and fighting forces, of the United States should not, and must not, be used for social experimentation. Get the queerer queers out. Then re-institute the homosexual ban.

 

[Sapidus]

If I may ...

The services, and fighting forces, of the United States should not, and must not, be used for social experimentation. Get the queerer queers out. Then re-institute the homosexual ban.

Yeah because it has been so disruptive having gays serve. The world ended just as lunatics like you predicted. It's not a social experiment. It is real people's real lives and they have every right to serve if they are capable. Just because you are a bigot doesn't change that.

 

[hotbikermama40]

Yeah because it has been so disruptive having gays serve. The world ended just as lunatics like you predicted. It's not a social experiment. It is real people's real lives and they have every right to serve if they are capable. Just because you are a bigot doesn't change that.

I think the key phrase here is "if they are capable". Homosexuality, whether repugnant to some or accepted by others, isn't the issue. It’s the reality that gender-modification surgeries, post-op recovery time, and all that other stuff (already detailed in other posts in this thread) create a disruption in that "capability".

And hurling the word bigot around doesn't change that.

 

[Kyle]

And hurling the word bigot around doesn't change that.

that's their all encompassing answer to every differing opinion.

 

[GURPS]

You really are nuts if you believe those numbers and that source when every other source has it as a tiny fraction of that. Do you even stop to think about what you post or you just throw it all out there and hope something gets a reaction?


$3-4 Billion. With a B. Good god are you delusional

did you miss the part about LONG TERM POST OP Care ...

 

[Sapidus]

I think the key phrase here is "if they are capable". Homosexuality, whether repugnant to some or accepted by others, isn't the issue. It’s the reality that gender-modification surgeries, post-op recovery time, and all that other stuff (already detailed in other posts in this thread) create a disruption in that "capability".

And hurling the word bigot around doesn't change that.

So they why don't you advocate that women be sterilized or forced to take contraceptives as a pregnancy can do the same thing causing a woman to mis work and incur needless costs.

What about the team people that have already transitioned or the ones who don't plan to ?

I'm not hurling it. I'm using the word when it is appropriate. There is no reason to ban Trans people other than bigotry. It's the same argument used to keep gays out and it proved untrue. There was no disruption and $8 million out of $6 billion isn't a justifiable reason to deny someone the freedom to serve our country.

 

[Hijinx]

So they why don't you advocate that women be sterilized or forced to take contraceptives as a pregnancy can do the same thing causing a woman to mis work and incur needless costs.

What about the team people that have already transitioned or the ones who don't plan to ?

I'm not hurling it. I'm using the word when it is appropriate. There is no reason to ban Trans people other than bigotry. It's the same argument used to keep gays out and it proved untrue. There was no disruption and $8 million out of $6 billion isn't a justifiable reason to deny someone the freedom to serve our country.

you seem to be really into this. Are you thinking of joining?

 

[black dog]

Yeah because it has been so disruptive having gays serve. The world ended just as lunatics like you predicted. It's not a social experiment. It is real people's real lives and they have every right to serve if they are capable. Just because you are a bigot doesn't change that.

It's interesting that lass than 50 years ago, the Democrats fought tooth and nail to keep gays out of the Armed Services...

 

[GURPS]

There was no disruption and $8 million out of $6 billion isn't a justifiable reason to deny someone the freedom to serve our country.

Gohmert’s Statement on the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act


“We were advised in a Republican conference meeting that the projected 10-year cost will be $3-4 billion that could be used to actually defend our homeland and liberty. That projected cost is before the military becomes known as the place to have an all-expenses paid sex change surgery, including meals and housing. Medical costs for just one gender reassignment surgery can average up to $130,000, including lifetime hormone treatments, in addition to their overhead and salary costs for the minimum two-year period when they are in a non-deployable status. Regrettably, this policy prevents others, willing and able, from fighting in their stead to protect this nation.”

“Even the first hospital in the United States to ever conduct same sex surgeries, Johns Hopkins, stopped the surgeries decades later because they did not appear to be making the changed person’s life better and they might have been making their lives worse. That concern was shown to be legitimate by the most thorough study, covering about 30 years, of people who had the sex change surgery. The study established the fact that after the surgery the patient was 20 times more likely to commit suicide. This all comes at a time when active duty military suicides and veteran suicides have been at an all time high.