LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
I only think the things that should be free should be free, street-lights and healthcare included. Ferraris, on the other hand. . . Well you can't have everything.
Free can be a misleading word though because it all will come from taxes.
I only think the things that should be free should be free, street-lights and healthcare included. Ferraris, on the other hand. . . Well you can't have everything.
Free can be a misleading word though because it all will come from taxes.
Let's see if my above post is deleted without explanation. Wouldn't be the first time.
It is free insofar as all US citizens have the right to attend public schools, whether or not they pay taxes. Are you equally inclined to whine about the right of all citizens to check books out of a public library, drive on roads paved and maintained through state and federal taxes, or call the police or EMT's when there is an emergency?
Don't forget I worked as an EMT for 20 years. The poor have learned how to milk the system and teach it to their young. They know that if they walk into an emergency room they will have to get in line behind those who are ahead of them as it should be. But they educate their children to call an ambulance, that way they get right into a room bypassing the ones who were there ahead of them. One of the last calls that I made the young guy lived right across the street from the hospital but he still called us for his free ride and passed up everyone else as his momma taught him to do.
The Welfare Queen argument is a fallacious example of inferring the general from a particular. There is also something called the poverty cycle. Maybe you have heard of it.
Not only have I heard of it but I have seen it in my years on the ambulance. I made calls to the homes of the poor and saw their flat screen TVs and their cell phones. I have witnessed the welfare queens who spit out illegitimate babies and collect the money, don't tell me that they don't exist. My daughter worked shelling out entire homes to them after hurricane Rita destroyed a 30 year old shack and the government replaced it with a brand new home complete with energy saving appliances. Some, about half, had the gall to complain that the new house wasn't as big as their old house, even though it was falling apart.
George Washington: Son of a Southern landed aristocrat.
John Adams: Father was a yeoman farmer who married into money.
Thomas Jefferson: Born into the politically, socially and economically powerful Randolph family.
John Jay: Born into a wealthy family of merchants.
James Madison: Son of a wealthy landowner.
Interesting. It appears the most famous and lauded of them (save Franklin and Hamilton) never had to worry about waking up at dawn to milk the cows, feed the chickens, and plant the corn. They didn't even have to open the store or fire up the kiln. In fact, it seems that they would never have had to work a day in their lives if they didn't want to keep themselves busy with officerships they bought and entrepreneurial enterprises (funded, of course, by wealth they INHERITED, not through merit but through birth). One might argue that they were freeloaders who were kind enough to launch a political revolution.
Yet willing to freeze their butts off with an ill equipped army and fight for their freedom. They may have been born wealthy but were willing to face hanging for treason for their right to be free. They didn't have to wake up at dawn to milk cows, they had to cross a frozen river and go into battle, a bit tougher than milking a cow don't you think? These "freeloaders" did launch a revolution and participated in it
I'm for Ron Paul, I don't think he has a chance in hell because most voters are ill informed. Small government is the answer not more spending and higher taxes. We need to teach people to fish instead of giving them fish, because we're running out of fishermen. The problem with Socialism is eventally they run out of other people's money to spend.
I'm afraid that it's going to take a world wide collapse of economies before we are able to finally wake up to learn that big government was indeed a very bitter pill. Libertarian freedom will eventually rule over the whole world because it's truly freedom unlike any other so called freedom we think we might have.
The problem with Socialism in the United States is that it only gets trotted out as a bad word for the programs that people disagree with, but it's perfectly fine when it's something they agree with.Originally Posted by grandbudda
Get rid of public education, Medicair, Medicaid, national parks, subsidized transit, etc.
Every Republican Uncle Tom will be sure to tell you how important these programs are, especially when talking to special interest groups, but will jump at the chance to polarize the country on any discussion surrounding health care, or any other program reform that might improve the lives of Americans at the cost of corporate gains.
I'm not for willy nilly spending, quite the opposite, but I find it very discouraging that it's impossible to have a serious, fact-based discussion on any number of issues because of the doggerel that gets injected. Money that could be freed up from reforming existing programs would go a long way towards expanding or creating new programs, but that conversation is unlikely to happen. Sad.
"Laugh and the world laughs with you, snore and you sleep alone."
- Anthony Burgess (1917-1994)
I'm more for the idea that basic healthcare shouldn't be about profit. If you've got a health problem that could cripple or kill you, you should not have to choose between treatment and bankruptcy, especially when you live in one of the wealthiest nations.
Somedays, I wonder if the republican motto really is "I got mine, screw the rest of you".
"Brother, you don't need to turn me away.
I was waiting down by the ancient gate."
Fleet Foxes
An a card carrying independent, I can't speak for the Republicans, but the federal government is too bloated and over exploited by some people. Until six months ago, I worked in some high rises next to a large public housing sector.
On the outside, the apartment buildings don't look bad, but watch the foot traffic on the street. There is truth to the welfare queens that Ditch spoke of. There are 56 strip joints in the city, and five of them are within a mile of that sector. If you drive the street at night that borders the sector, you'll see prostitutes, age 13 and up, drug dealers, and other various night crawlers. All of them living in federally subsidized housing.
As for the medicare/medicaid thing, the people in that sector get their medical for free. I have to pay for my medical insurance. Matter of fact, I saw an unscrupulous doctor last year, who talked me into a procedure. Because he owned the clinic, I thought everything was covered under my insurance. Within weeks of the procedure, I started getting bills up the ying yang. It turned out that the doctor had subdivided his clinic into six seperate companies. Instead of my procedure (costing two thousand) covered under insurance, I got six sperate bills, all under 500-not covered under the insurance. By putting the chingas to me, he saved himself having to deal with the insurance folk.
They call me Spooky, Spooky Mulder. A joke to my peers and an annoyance to my superiors. Whose sister was abducated by aliens when he was a kid, and now runs around with a badge and gun yelling to anyone who is listening that the fix is in and when it hits, it'll be the crapstorm of all time.
Get rid of public education, Medicair, Medicaid, national parks, subsidized transit, etc.
Public education and medicare are deducted from my pay. I pay school taxes and FICA and have since I was 17 years old. This is forced on us by the government and has been since before I was born, they have been forcing us to pay for health care. National Parks and subsidized transportation are also paid for out of tax dollars as is medicaid. Of these, medicaid is the most badly abused. It was meant for the truly handicapped who never will be able to work. It has been hijacked by the lazy who chose not to work. It needs to be policed and given only to those who truly cannot work, not those who simply chose not to. The same should apply to government subsidized housing, if you can work and pay all of your rent, no assistance. A nanny state has been created with these programs keeping people dependent on the government by their own poor choices.
Next in line is public subsidized transit which in some large cities is necessary and works well. But in smaller cities the buses run the streets all day with three seats taken. You do have a choice to move out of that city to a smaller one that does not have this service taken out of your city taxes as I did and make a short commute too work.
Not many object to national parks. The point is, some things are deemed good for our society such as a good education, reasonable transportation, a park to take the family to and health care for the truly handicapped. It's when the system allows people who don't deserve these programs to jump on that it becomes bad and ruins it for everyone. If, as in Dudester's case, that apartment building was occupied by handicapped and mentally incompetent people there wouldn't be the drug traffic and prostitutes living there on government assistance.
Last edited by Ditch; 05-12-2011 at 11:57 AM.
I completely agree. I think part of "responsible Socialism", if we want to get stuck on a term, is the ensure that any programs instituted are realistic in scope and sustainability. The two go hand in hand: you can't maintain sustainability without clearly defined scope, and scope is meaningless if it can't be sustained.
You can imagine we have the same problem, only to a larger degree in Canada, where the government is much more active in social spending. There's going to be some major discussions surrounding national pension plans, health care, welfare, and employment insurance that are going to upset a lot of liberals here. If you think you have "liberals" in the US, try coming to Canada! lol
I value the above listed social programs, including the ones I mentioned in the US; I just think they can't maintain their current shape, or level of abuse, and still be available in the future.
That being said, I think that if there's a significant percentage of Americans that want health care, the first step to getting everyone on board would be to clean up the existing programs and show the government can run a national-level program, keep it on budget, and provide value to the deserving while protecting the service from abusers. Socialists don't need to be chumps!
"Laugh and the world laughs with you, snore and you sleep alone."
- Anthony Burgess (1917-1994)
I have been a paramedic for over 20 years. I have never seen a person without health care turned away at the hospital, there are signs in both english and Spanish stating this. The hospital will treat and stabilize the patienty, then transport them to a charity hospital such as UTMB in Galveston. My wife has been in and out of hospitals and went to UTMB last week, she said it was one of the finest facilities she had ever seen and very thorough. It is a learning hospital where the interns do their duty and report their findings to the doctor, they dig much deeper than the nurses. My wife said it reminded her of the TV show "House."
We have always had free health care, now the government is trying to shove their paid version of it down our throats when all they really need to do is to clean up the house. The bums that can work but choose not to, kick them to the curb so the money can be spent on the truly needy. If they still refuse to work, let them starve and bleed.
I'm not as familiar with the system as a direct user. I had to use it once during a rugby tournament I travelled to Spokane for, but my travel insurance covered it so it was a painless experience... financially!
My only concern has always been the abilty to provide timely care in a manner that won't decimate a family financially. I completely agree abuse of the system needs to be curbed to ensure that can happen. I may be a liberal (as far as American labels go) but I'm not a bleeding heart liberal. lol
"Laugh and the world laughs with you, snore and you sleep alone."
- Anthony Burgess (1917-1994)
My only concern has always been the abilty to provide timely care in a manner that won't decimate a family financially.
As I said, no one is ever refused care based on the ability to pay. One hospital in particular can cite several cases of illegals who require long term care that has run into the millions. They deported him back to his country of origin and were sued by his family. The abuse of the professional welfare milkers is bad enough, throw in the illegals and you can imagine how quickly the costs spiral out of control.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote