Health Care

[pattygreen 5]

so⋅cial⋅ism 

–noun a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

This idea erodes the belief in free enterprise.

free enterprise

 

–noun an economic and political doctrine holding that a capitalist economy can regulate itself in a freely competitive market through the relationship of supply and demand with a minimum of governmental intervention and regulation.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

so⋅cial⋅ism 

–noun a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

This idea erodes the belief in free enterprise.

free enterprise

 

–noun an economic and political doctrine holding that a capitalist economy can regulate itself in a freely competitive market through the relationship of supply and demand with a minimum of governmental intervention and regulation.

I would agree to a totally free enterprise system if there was not corporate welfare, no tax breaks and EVERY corporation paid the corporate tax rate with NO exceptions, no time delays, nothing. Just do business and pay the taxes you owe.

But we all know that that doesn't happen. Very few, if any, corporations pay the corporate tax rate and far too many are given government subsidies, tax reductions, etc...

If we try to get them to pay their fair share, well they just threaten to move their corporate base to another lower tax country and take jobs with them.

As I have said before, it is not the government that is the problem in this country. It is corporate america - they have ALL the power and they use it to their ($$$) advantage. And it shows!!!

[BJean 16]

Dude, what I want for America has nothing to do with the dictatorship in Cuba. You, on the other hand, talk like someone who would like to live in Mexico. You could be one of the elite, hog it all, and to hell with the peons. Let some other country give them work.

That's what this country seems to be headed for under the likes of Bush/Cheney (although to be fair I should have put Cheney's name first.)

And patty you should win just by virtue of the fact that you can post more bullshite. I hate to burst your bubble, but just because the extremists say it louder and more often doesn't make it a fact, darlin.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Our country was like that in the beginning, before the middle class was created, largely due to unions.

You had the families that owned the mines, railroads, steel mills, shipyards, factories, etc.. They were the ones who lived in the big mansions on the hill and employed many servants (usually Irish maids because they spoke English).

Then below, living in squalor, were the families who worked in these places which were, for the most part, unsafe. Many workers died making the rich richer.

Workers united and went on strike and the big, bad government instituted workplace safety as well as economic safety nets. Such government interference with free enterprise!!! This changed things for the better as the middle class rose up and people began to live better.

However, the republicans & conservatives want to go back to this 2 class system by such things as "starving the beast" (cutting all social programs), while increasing military and defense budgets and tax breaks for the rich and corporations. It's the old "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer". We have been seeing this happen since Reagan as the middle class has lost real earning power and the gap between the rich and everyone else widening.

[pattygreen 5]

Everyone in this country has an equal opportunity to pursue life, liberty and happiness. Noone will tell you that you can't work hard or long and get what you desire. Where there's a will, there's a way. You can be the President of the United States if you choose. There are many stories of poor people fed up with their situation who chose to put in the effort to better their lives. They worked hard, long hours, saved their money while living meagerly, invested in their desires, and made it big. They went to school. I know someone who started out as a Companion taking care of the elderly making $8.00/hr. she did that for a year while saving up the $1000. it cost to take a CNA course. She took it and passed and started working in a convelescent home making $10.50/hr. She did that for 1 year, then she got a $1.00/hr. raise. She saved the money for a down payment for nursing school. She took out a loan for the remainder and is now going to school. When finished, she can make upwards of $40.00 an hour. All this while choosing to rent a tiny room over a full apt. and eating at home instead of at restaurants and making many sacrifices so she could be a nurse. Yeah, she has to go without for the first few years while she is saving for her education, but she knows in the end it will pay off for her. This is what it takes to get into a profession that will give you a good pay and medical benefits. You don't get it placed into your lap. You must sacrifice some to achieve your goals. If it takes living in a one room apt., and eating mac and cheese for the first year to save for the schooling you need, then you should do it. If it takes using public transportation so that you could save the $400. a month it takes to own a car and put it towards your education, then you should do it. The problem with Americans, is that everything is given to them for nothing. They don't want to be inconvenienced or to sacrifice any luxury to get ahead. They know that if they don't have any heat, the gov. will provide it. If they don't have any food, the gov. will give them some. If they don't have the money for an education, even though they have a $10,000. car, the gov. will pay it for them. They know that others (hard working tax payers) will provide what they don't want to sacrifice and provide themselves with. It's so easy to take advantage of the programs out there rather than work harder and advance your situation on your own. The gov. keeps you content with little. I know someone who will not get a job as long as unemployment is still paying him. He said," Why should I work when I can get by on my unemolyment check. When it runs out, I'll apply for another Chef job. Right now, I'm enjoying the time off." He simply knew that Chef jobs areound here are plenty.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

You pay into unemployment, it is a benefit that when you are unemployed, you use. There should be no guilt in that. If Chef jobs are so plenty, I question why he was laid off.

Additionally, the government doesn't just hand out money to healthy, childless people who are capable of working and choose to just sit back and collect all these benefits. Most of the people who get rent subsidies, utility subsidies, food stamps, etc. are the WORKING poor. AND MOST ARE SINGLE PARENTS. SHOULD WE NOW PUNISH THE CHILDREN, TOO? And until we pay them a living wage, one that will allow them to live on their own and pay all their utilities, then we provide them a helping hand.

There will always be people who have to do the menial tasks and jobs. Clean your hotel or hospital room, pick the fruit you eat, stock the shelves at the grocery store and work the cash register at Walmart. MANY of those work those jobs while they are trying to better themselves by going to school or getting training. But in the meantime, they need some help.

WALMART ACTUALLY HELD SEMINARS FOR THEIR LOW PAID EMPLOYEES ABOUT WHAT GOVERNMENT BENEFITS THEY COULD APPLY FOR. AND OF COURSE, WALMART FIGHTS INCREASES IN THE MINIMUM WAGE. BETTER TO HAVE US TAXPAYERS SUBSIDIZE THEIR EMPLOYEES THAN TO PAY THEM A DECENT WAGE. WALMART IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE GREEDY CORPORATION OF WHICH I FREQUENTLY SPEAK OF.

And that public transportation that you mentioned you friend takes (instead of owning a car)? Well, guess who subsidizes that? That's right, the government. And guess who backs up that student loan she got? Right again, the government.

And what is wrong with owning a $10,000 car (a rather cheap car, I might add) if it helps that person get to school or a job - and still qualify for a loan? NO ONE IS JUST GETTING THE MONEY HANDED TO THEM. Most are loans that must be paid back. It is very difficult to be eligible for the Pell grants.

Public transportation is terrible where I live. If you want to get anywhere, you need a car. Maybe some cities have better public transportation and you can use it to meet your needs, but where I live you need a car. Oh, wait, I guess your solution would be to have everyone move to a city with great public transportation.

You always paid very simplistic solutions to very complicated problems. That speaks to your lack of understanding of complex issues. And your disdain for anyone who isn't like you or who hasn't done what you have done. Or believe what you believe.

[pattygreen 5]

You pay into unemployment, it is a benefit that when you are unemployed, you use. There should be no guilt in that. If Chef jobs are so plenty, I question why he was laid off.

I don't know about where you live, but in CT the unemployment fund is BANKRUPT!!!! The job was seasonal. It ended once summer was over for it was a job at a resort.

Additionally, the government doesn't just hand out money to healthy, childless people who are capable of working and choose to just sit back and collect all these benefits. Most of the people who get rent subsidies, utility subsidies, food stamps, etc. are the WORKING poor. AND MOST ARE SINGLE PARENTS. SHOULD WE NOW PUNISH THE CHILDREN, TOO? And until we pay them a living wage, one that will allow them to live on their own and pay all their utilities, then we provide them a helping hand.

The working poor need to have 2 jobs then if they can't get by with one. Believe me, I used to be what you would consider "the working poor". They need to downsize, get rid of cable and their internet service and throw that money into a savings acct. instead and go to school one evening a week. Single parents are suffering because they chose not to be obedient to God and they got divorced. This is the tax payers burden? If they had just listened to God and believed that divorce should never be an option in a marriage, the 2 of them would have worked out their differences. They should have stayed married for the sake of the children and the taxpayer who must now support them with rental subsidies and foodstamps. This is what I mean, they don't want to sacrifice anything, because they don't have to. They would have stayed married had there not been a handout from the government to help them. Divorce rates were near zero before Roosevelts time of social 'help'.

There will always be people who have to do the menial tasks and jobs. Clean your hotel or hospital room, pick the fruit you eat, stock the shelves at the grocery store and work the cash register at Walmart. MANY of those work those jobs while they are trying to better themselves by going to school or getting training. But in the meantime, they need some help.

WALMART ACTUALLY HELD SEMINARS FOR THEIR LOW PAID EMPLOYEES ABOUT WHAT GOVERNMENT BENEFITS THEY COULD APPLY FOR. AND OF COURSE, WALMART FIGHTS INCREASES IN THE MINIMUM WAGE. BETTER TO HAVE US TAXPAYERS SUBSIDIZE THEIR EMPLOYEES THAN TO PAY THEM A DECENT WAGE. WALMART IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE GREEDY CORPORATION OF WHICH I FREQUENTLY SPEAK OF.

And that public transportation that you mentioned you friend takes (instead of owning a car)? Well, guess who subsidizes that? That's right, the government. And guess who backs up that student loan she got? Right again, the government.

The loan came from her family member.

The government should provide roads and transportation for society. The public bus company doesn't go into bankruptcy like other government run programs.

And what is wrong with owning a $10,000 car (a rather cheap car, I might add) if it helps that person get to school or a job - and still qualify for a loan? NO ONE IS JUST GETTING THE MONEY HANDED TO THEM. Most are loans that must be paid back. It is very difficult to be eligible for the Pell grants.

Who said a loan? Housing assistance, foodstamps, energy assistance, these types of handouts are not repaid.

Public transportation is terrible where I live. If you want to get anywhere, you need a car. Maybe some cities have better public transportation and you can use it to meet your needs, but where I live you need a car. Oh, wait, I guess your solution would be to have everyone move to a city with great public transportation.

You always paid very simplistic solutions to very complicated problems. That speaks to your lack of understanding of complex issues. And your disdain for anyone who isn't like you or who hasn't done what you have done. Or believe what you believe.

I have no disdain for you at all.:smile2:

[tdslf1 0]

THere will always be people who don't, can't, or won't be able to save money or make enough money. To make a statement that people these days don't work hard enough is just plain stupid, especially when you should know better. I really sometimes hate conversations like this. Just had this dumb ass convo the other day about "lazy" people. There are "some lazy people" who are tied to the system. A small "some". Like that is a situation that is different today than it was a century ago. Always and forever America has had people who have to take menial jobs and then try to move up. Maybe I am wrong but people on here seem to be saying that all one has to do is work hard and they can get ahead and never have to rely on the system. Great for you. Glad you coud do it. Not al people can. FACT. Not everyone can be a doctor. Somebody has to be the doorman, cashier, gas pumper, Mom and Pop store owner, the shoe maker, etc. That argument is stupid. Yeah, I said it.....stupid.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

The working poor need to have 2 jobs then if they can't get by with one. Believe me, I used to be what you would consider "the working poor". They need to downsize, get rid of cable and their internet service and throw that money into a savings acct. instead and go to school one evening a week. Single parents are suffering because they chose not to be obedient to God and they got divorced. This is the tax payers burden? If they had just listened to God and believed that divorce should never be an option in a marriage, the 2 of them would have worked out their differences. They should have stayed married for the sake of the children and the taxpayer who must now support them with rental subsidies and foodstamps. This is what I mean, they don't want to sacrifice anything, because they don't have to. They would have stayed married had there not been a handout from the government to help them. Divorce rates were near zero before Roosevelts time of social 'help'.

People stayed married because women didn't work outside the home. Women were forced to stay in abusive marriages because of economic necessity. And divorced, single mothers often qualify for government assistance because their ex-husbands don't pay enough child support.

Additionally, how about those who are single parents who were never married? Oh, I know, they need to suffer for their sinfulness of having sex outside of marriage.

What about Bristol Palin? Who would pay to support her and her baby if she didn't have a wealthy mother doing a million dollar book tour after quitting as governor?

What about all the other Bristol Palin's who you think should be forced to have the baby rather than an abortion. Now you have teenage mothers. Who should support them? If they receive no government assistance who will pay for childcare while they work or go to school? Who will pay for formula and diapers and all the expenses of raising the child.

Who will pay for a place for her and her baby to live. Let's assume she is 18 and her parents have kicked her out.

Now what is she supposed to do?

[msrojacks 1]

I agree with alot with what Michelle says!!!

My dad also owns a small oil company. I am the office manager who oversees the health Coverage, taxes, etc.

I pay 118 a week, as I mentioned before for my Blue cross. I also pay an extra 6 a week for afflec. There are 11 employees. 3 of them opted to Not pay for their health coverage. 2 of those 3 get health insurance from the state. The 1 person who has no coverage is My boyfriend, age 38.

My point isnt that. Its the fact that If the 8 employees who have health coverage now decided to make the switch, the rates would go up for the people who want to continue paying for them self. We get Group deals. The more that buy into it, the cheaper it is.

Think of it in another way. Some companies Use Health care as an incentive to work at their company. It allows each tax breaks. So Small businesses (even big) will have to pay more in wages if they lose this incentive. Most businesses are struggling and simply cant afford raises. In both of my jobs, like Im assuming for many here, no raises have been given in a long time. I think my last raise was in 06. Yes it angers me, But I know that I cant have one because the company will go bankrupt. Personally to me, Id rather make less, then nothing at all.

When will the handouts, the bail outs end?

People will be fined if they do not get coverage. What next? The governement is now making it not a choice. In lets say 10 years, Will the governement force us to all get cable?

Is it fair to people who simply dont want health coverage due to religious views. Many people still go to Witch doctors/ herbal remedies, etc due to their culture. I dont think its fair to make them lose their right to choose.

I know Ill be called naive by Cleo (since she used that word alot for oppossing responses) But I just think that health care isnt the the responsiblity of the governement.

In stead of debating though, perhaps we can come up with Ideas.

Better Clinics? Tax credits for prescriptions, Change Hippa laws alittle. Allow a DR office to tell results over the phone so I dont have to take time out of work, and pay my 20 copay.

If health care has to goes thru, I would love to see only children and people over the age of 65, or people with Cancer/other life threating disease/accidents be able to use it. People ages 20-60 should be able to live a healthy lifestyle and pay for what ever kind of insurance they want, if they want to.

[pattygreen 5]

msrojacks. I like your response mainly because you can see the disadvantage to Nationalized health care from the viewpoint of businesses. I agree with you.

[pattygreen 5]

In general, I want to note that I am not oppposed to ALL government involvement and help in the lives of the US citizens. Some help fore people is needed. Most is wasted and abused. Government is just TOO big now. They need to stop making the people dependent upon them with thier generosity that can't be afforded.

[BJean 16]

Do you have any idea what proportion of your tax dollars actually goes to welfare programs specifically? Have you seen a pie chart of how much of your money actually goes to which government program? You might be surprised.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Pattygreen: You still did not answer my question about the 18 year old who was forced to have a baby because in your "perfect" world abortion is illegal.

-her parents kicked her out

-she is on her own and pregnant

Without government "interference" (i.e. subsidies) where would she get the following:

1) pre-natal care

2) post-natal care

3) an affordable place to live

4) affordable child care

5) ability to pay utilities

6) food for the baby

7) food for her

8) affordable transportation to job/school

9) money for school/training

Don't expect much help from the baby's father. He might still be in school or working some minimum wage job. Or long gone.

So, please answer these questions if you want all pregnant teens to have their babies but are so opposed to government assistance for poor people, portraying them as lazy, leeches of society who just don't want to work hard enough (they're too busy buying their expensive electronics, etc..).

[~Michelle~ 0]

In general, I want to note that I am not oppposed to ALL government involvement and help in the lives of the US citizens. Some help fore people is needed. Most is wasted and abused. Government is just TOO big now. They need to stop making the people dependent upon them with thier generosity that can't be afforded.

I agree that the benifits are abused. I see and have seen people using their welfare to buy cigs, beer, drugs, and whatever else they want, and not so much need.

There are poeple out there having one child after another, even though they can't care for the children they already have. But why should they worry, the government will make sure they are taken care of. Absolutely no accountabilty for their mistake. Why should I have to suffer for their mistake!

Mrsojacks very well said. :rolleyes2: