I am not entirely sure I understand the gist of your response. Sounds to me like you agree with my sentiments, but I figured I might as well ask for clarification.
Do you mean what’s good for the gander is good for the goose?
What I was trying to say was that those who are supplied with income (government employee) from money taken by force from others(net taxpayers), they should have no expectation of receiving a greater level of benefits than the least of those taxpayers. Government employees should not have their own health care costs paid for by people who do not get the same treatment, yet are forced to pay for theirs. Private sector employers, those subject to market forces, can offer whatever they are able because their income arising from voluntary exchanges. IBM or Exxon can’t force me to supply them with income, but if I do so of my own free will, they can spend the money as they please. So, in a way, I guess you could say what is good for the goose is good for the gander, as long as the gander doesn’t show up with a badge and a gun.