https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f en-us 2023-06-03 03:00:15 UTC 2026-02-09 19:59:20 UTC hello@padlet.com kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613363282 1- The author argues that most likely military disability payments currently exceed what the loss in pay would be from their injuries sustained in service. The author presents things from both perspectives with background information and historical issues.
2- The argument is persuasive in the amount of information and backing information it brings. This article uses minimum presumptions and plenty of facts.
3- The author does not present a large bias and presents arguments from both sides equally, coming to a final conclusion of disability payments exceed what loss of income would provide. The author considers all points well.
4- The information in this article is largely original or more in depth than other articles I have come across during my research. The article is also formatted more effectively.
5- This source clearly challenges my opinion and uses a large basis of facts to assist in its claim. I need to acknowledge this aspect and find non biased ways to argue against it.
6- This article is meant to persuade others that the current program is outdated largely benefits current veterans. The audience is those whose tax money goes towards these programs as well as people such as myself who disagree with their stance.]]> 2023-06-03 03:06:35 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613363282 kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613363871 1- The author makes arguments that all military veterans who receive or intend on filing for disability benefits understand how the funds can constantly be adjusted do to changes in disability status. The author states the reasons why the VA does this, as well as the timeframes usually abided to. The author also points to how income should not effect your disability rating.
2- The argument that all benefits should not be impacted by personal financial compensation from civilian careers is persuasive in the fact that the disability rating is to bridge the gap of possible earned income. In this aspect I found it easy to be persuaded by this, however am biased in the aspect of being a recipient.
3- The author is not biased and provides input from both sides, stating specifically why the VA does this and to include extreme cases such as fraud. The writing treats each opposing side with the same respect.
4- I do not recognize any information that I have either run into in the past or have heard about. I am unaware of any timelines or reasons VA disability would be reevaluated other than the ones stated in the opinion piece.
5- This source both helps and opposes my opinion by stating that personal income should not effect the rating scale, and also that disability rated "static" or permanent can be reevaluated. For example, cancer can go from 100% disabled to 0% if in remission, regardless of the chances of reoccurances.
6- Again the intended audience would be recipients of this program or those that wish to use it in the future. Civilians would find it interesting as their taxes pay these subsided programs.]]> 2023-06-03 03:07:50 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613363871 kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613364525 1- The author argues the point that half the VA budget that goes towards VA disability compensation should be overhauled and reviewed in its entirety. The author states that the system was built in 1945 following a time when the payments were more for those losing compensation in manual labor jobs, and how it remains the only federal program that pays throughout a persons lifetime.
2- The arguement is persuasive in the fact that our country is having problems with the national debt and consistently finding a way to trim federal programs. The author brings valid points to changes in societal norms, however the author does not cite any sources or links to defend his position.
3- The authors stance seems firm but also holds a viewpoint that the nations veterans need to be taken care of. He seems to believe in a new approach that still assists those who are deserving while still preserving and protecting the funds being collected from the general public.
4- The idea is not uncommon and has come up multiple times because the idea that this is an outdated program is not entirely true. The program is to assist with those who lose compensation for what they would normally be able to do prior to injuries. Indeed there are less manual labor jobs but this does not take into effect the veterans desires in career path, or secondary means of income.
5- This article opposes my opinion and follows the arguement that this program can be abused, or overused to the point that it becomes a drain on government funds. I would refute his position by stating that the same health problems that have affected veterans since 1945 still remain an issue for employment and compensation today.
6- The authors intended audience are most likely members outside of the military to garnish support for a position that would be difficult to proceed with. Even as well intentioned as he seems after twenty years of war it would be difficult to go after major changes to a program that so many veterans rely on after service.]]> 2023-06-03 03:10:06 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2613364525 kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620489936 1- This article again specifically uses PTSD as a reference to the ability for PTSD compensation to increase quality of life. The author argues that those who receive benefits continue to have life long issues, but maintain livable lives.
2- The article is persuasive and approaches from both viewpoints while citing their evidence. There are few assumptions, but the ones made can be stretched. The author assumes veterans maintain PTSD issues due to their possible desire for continued income.
3- The author stands to maintain current payouts due to large success in reduction of homelessness, self medication, and meaningful relationships.
4- This article cover much of the same angles as others, but with more numbers and sources which is why it was chosen. I do need to refute his position of how PTSD symptoms remain due to financial desire and not sustained hardship from twenty years of war.
5- This article both supports my position as it confirms VA disability is required to sustain a quality of life otherwise impossible, while also arguing it is currently sufficient.
6- Same audience as above, and maintains its position that most of what needs to be addressed is very individualized for veterans which would make the process incredible difficult to improve.]]> 2023-06-12 01:13:26 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620489936 kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620490468 1- The author argues there are subgroups of veterans who are not being adequately represented or denied care due to status and overburdened government system.
2- The argument is less persuasive than the previous post as the numbers and studies are less focused. There is evidence provided but it is also a less clear read. Opposing view points are presented with citations as well, but continues to use weaker arguments to defend.
3- The authors stance is to ensure veterans have the availability and opportunity to claim their injuries. Both views viewed fairly.
4- This argument has been made prior, but enjoyed how it talked about the overburdened system and how it fails the current process.
5- This article supports my position with viewpoints and angles I previously did not think of. Specifically how the system is failing do to people using it as intended.
6- The intended audience remains those seeking reform for the largest government health care program in existance.]]> 2023-06-12 01:13:54 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620490468 kypetersen2 https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620491085 1- The author argues that veterans will exaggerate issues when financial compensation is the known outcome, specifically to PTSD. The author does not search different view points, but provides evidence for his claim.
2- The argument is indeed persuasive, and uses case study to back it. The evidence is cited, and supports all levels of his claim.
3- The author does not show bias but concurrently does not show opposing view points or supporting evidence. It is not overtly unfair but does not acknowledge many aspects of this.
4- I have run into many persons arguing the disability process can be falsified or exaggerated, however this article maintains the most evidence.
5- This source clearly challenges my own argument. I agree that this can be persuasive however does not specifically handle the view points of how PTSD and mental illness can be varied day to day. The exam must be clarified on their worst days, not just the current day as there is only one evaluation which may take months to be scheduled.
6- The purpose of the article is the same as mine, to reevaluate the VA disability process, but with a different aim.]]> 2023-06-12 01:14:26 UTC https://padlet.com/kypetersen2/r3rcor4724fgt39f/wish/2620491085