It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Myth of the Working Poor

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 05:50 AM
link   
well.....gee......just think how someone like my husband must feel...
has worked since he was 16, nam vet, never took time off from his position as taxpayer to get additional schooling, positioned himself to get trained in a field that is really pretty important if one were to take the time to think about it...

he's paid taxes that helped others get that degree...now that they have it, well, he couldn't afford to provide healthcare simply bacause he was lazy and didn't plan.....
...ungratefull idiots!!

hey, here's an idea....how about the businesses that provide the basic necessities, ya know like healthcare, quit being so greedy!! ya know, maybe the upper management of the insurance companies could avoid giving themselves that nice raise for a few years.....and we get the cost of living down to a manageable level....and well, how about businesses start paying all their employees an adequate wage for them to be able get those needed necessities for themselves and their families....




posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


Originally posted by goose
Most people overseas who live in countries that have universal health coverage only pays slightly higher taxes than we already do in the states.


Horse PUCKY - You had better check that one, we have the lowest taxes of the major industrialized countries (Oil emirates excluded of course). Our tax rate is far less and the Rich are now paying more of that burden.


Originally posted by goose
Personally I would rather pay a few dollars more in taxes than to know because of my greed a baby is sick and dying and can't get treatment because it was unfortuanate enough to be born poor. I'd rather pay a few dollars more to know a child or an elderly person is not starving in America.



Move to California where health care is free, unless you are a citizen, then you have to pay.

Try and get in an emergency room out there (I KNOW THIS ONE PERSONALLY), 4-5 hour wait because those illegals and those without insurance use it as a doctors office because they can not be turned away. The first sign of nationalized health care,

Second, go to Canada and ask them how great their system is. How many Canadians are driving south of the border to get quality health care here while passing US Seniors going north to buy drugs?

Move to France - Its nice there...



So because you have had to pay for everything so the medical establishment can overcharge you and your family, you want that for your children and grandchilren to continue.

You had to wait for care so it's due to the illegals, could it be the hospital had to call some person within your insurance network to verify it was ok to treat you, to check and see what they would cover?

No one is saying that universal healthcare is perfect, but they must be doing something right since your life expectancy in the USA is shorter than other people equal to you in age and work and living conditions living in countries that have universal healthcare.

As for the cost the Canadians pay approx. 10% higher in taxes, but they do not pay out of their pockets the high premeiums we do each month to keep their families insured, so they are actually ahead money wise. Here is a link with a chart showing the 2007 income tax rate in Canada
www.cra-arc.gc.ca...

Though I am sure there are problems and some complaints, I think the majority of people who have universal healthcare would not allow thier countries to take it away.

Here is a link to a blog by an American who addresses all of the issues and apparently has received health care in both countries. I've just put the first paragraph here.



dneiwert.blogspot.com...

As a health-care-card-carrying Canadian resident and uninsured American citizen who regularly sees doctors on both sides of the border, I'm in a unique position to address the pros and cons of both systems first-hand. If the health-care debates are going to begin again in the US -- and it's way past high time they should -- then let's please start with actual facts, instead of ideological posturing, wishful thinking, hearsay, and random guessing about how things get done up here. Here are a few things y'all need to have the straight goods on before this goes any further.











[edit on 11-7-2007 by goose]



posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar


he's paid taxes that helped others get that degree...now that they have it, well, he couldn't afford to provide healthcare simply bacause he was lazy and didn't plan.....
...ungratefull idiots!!




Well I pay taxes, I pay my share of them. When I needed help it was not there. They probably knew there was no chance of me voting democrat anyway so I was denied.

Oh well, it amazes me the people that love the idea of "redistribution of wealth' without understanding that it kills incentive and rewards those that don't have initiative. That being said, I still want a safety net, I just think the Church's could handle it better than the super efficient government we have.



posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   
ya...just one question...where were the churches, the family, the neighbors, for that 80 year old women that was assaulted by the police office over her lawn.
it took police brutality to get anyone to offer her help with her lawn.
if the family, neighbors, and charity organizations were taking care of the needs caused by proverty to begin with...we would never have come up with the social services to begin with...dad's refuse to help their kids, neighbors turn a blind eye, and all too often religious charity groups are too busy judging people to offer assistance.

and, well to put it bluntly....having a system where getting a raise, or a job is more likely to cause you to lose resources than gain is a pretty poor incentive also. I mean, a person makes x amount of money, and because of this, them and their family can get free healthcare...but, well....have that person work a couple hours overtime, well....they'll lose the healthcare, although the extra amount of money they earned will in no way make it possible for them to pay for the healthcare from their earnings...
One of my co-workers I knew once was in that position.. she knew exactly how many hours she could work, before she would lose her son's healthcare....so, she made sure that she never worked more hours. ya, now that's incentive!!!

another coworker I know is looking for a new apartment...or house. he called about one last week...he thought he had one, filled out the application for it and all.....but was told that his credit wasn't perfect, so he couldn't have it..he does have fairly good credit..
he had his daughters call the landlord...they both pretended to be single moms...section 8 housing would be responsible for the rent.....hey, no problem....

now, that's incentive, isn't it!!!

I'm sorry, but I don't see where the present system is helping anyone. except big business who crave extra cheap labor and the freedom to price their goods way above what would be the norm if everyone were actually having to pay for it themselves. . how are the "poor" being helped....most are working, albeit in jobs that pay sqaut!! we're just assuring that they will stay functional enough to show up at work the next day.
ain't helping the middle class people...many of us can't even afford what we're giving to the poor!!

and I'll tell ya a secret....
someone who was laid up in bed facing the possibility of never having to walk again because the lambrained doctor thought we should have a few thousand dollars stashed away somewhere to give him before he fixed the problem aint gonna be phased one bit by your no one helped me.....the only reason the danged doctor did the operation was because I had a reputation in the state legislature as someone who who could cause them a few massive headaches when I found something that could cause an uproar within their constituents!
but this demonizing the poor bit isn't gonna solve any problems whatsoever. since like I pointed out....we want someone doing the jobs that they are doing, it's society that has decided that they don't want to pay them enough to keep them alive and functional. so what if one happens to find their way out and lands themselves a good paying job, that job will still need someone to do it, and it will be someone else doing it...and needing the help.
and....no matter which way you go with it...we will be paying them, or living without that job being done. I'd prefer we just paid them through their paycheck, if that means a little higher prices, well.....okay...got a feeling it isn't gonna be as much as it is now, paying through the governmental mass of agencies and clerical nightmares!!



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
[

Oh well, it amazes me the people that love the idea of "redistribution of wealth' without understanding that it kills incentive and rewards those that don't have initiative. That being said, I still want a safety net, I just think the Church's could handle it better than the super efficient government we have.


Ok so I have shown you that in countries like Canada the people are actually paying less because their taxes are only 10% higher, but they don't pay premiums on insurance every month, deductibles and co-pays everytime they go to the dr. ,and the cost of meds for prescriptions. Even though, I have two insurances I have to pay way more than Canadians for my meds, and that is just paying my co-pay on the prescriptions.

So your answer is to take away the incentive and people won't work, hey that's a weak argument considering that people in these countries that have universal healthcare still have jobs, still work everyday. They live longer than you or I due to living in a country with universal healthcare. I think that fact alone is enough to make anyone with any sense choose universal healthcare over the system we have now.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
I can not disagree with what you wrote, we have serious problems. The point I try to make is government will NOT solve them, they have other interests. Take a look at what happened during the depression, the government helped by providing jobs, the feeding of the jobless was handled through other means.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstar
Soraia,

the problem isn't with our education, the problem lies in our value systems...our society wants the cashier, file clerks, the burger flippers, ect...but they fail to see their contribution to society as worthy of a living
wage...the people who do those jobs as worthy of life....


hey dawnstar, you are totally right....

It is human nature, and while writing it, I actually thought, wait, I'm sure there are people that would use it to their advantage as well, and reintroduce child labour...but my post was too long to add that on too.

But I do think that informing our kids about certain values from an early stage could help in their future decisions. Otherwise just give up and complain. There is nothing we can do, or change except give handouts.

But, I don't believe that. I believe that if people learned how to handle money from an early age, they would make different decisions in life. Sometimes the best people to learn from are not our parents. Some kids don't want to learn from their parents, etc.

I think that if you (or rather youth, especially from poor backgrounds) learned how banks work, how "money works", how mortgages and investments work, how stocks work, small business basics, leadership skills, and not just in University, where many young people miss out, but in steady sessions from their childhood up - then they would have a better chance of not being "suckered". And these kids that open up their own business, hopefully value their workers more...and the workers understand their value more, and refuse to work for that wage (way easier said than done, but you get my drift.)

Once again, I do not think we can change this generations experiences significantly, but we could change some things for our next...

I always thought there is another reason the rich stay rich, besides greed, avarice, ambition, sense of entitlement and all the other stuff. It has to with education and knowledge...being able to see from childhood up, how certain things happen and are dealt with. A friend of mine's father had an investment broker (family friend) come see him once a month after he turned 16, to explain things to him, and walk him through some small investments.

Can you imagine the decisions you would have made in your life, if you had had that in your background?
There's not much you can learn from tired parents that work, and on top of it get handouts...because they don't have the time to learn themselves, much less teach anything to their kids, besides you have to work hard to pay your bills...
But we can end the cycle, just not now.

But I doubt it will ever happen. It's like that saying...if you took away all the money from everyone in this world, and distributed to everyone the same amount, in a week you'd be back to the same scenario. Some people would still have the same amount you gave them, some would have a little more, some a little less, some nothing at all, and a few would have almost everything.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoraiaI think that if you (or rather youth, especially from poor backgrounds) learned how banks work, how "money works", how mortgages and investments work, how stocks work, small business basics, leadership skills, and not just in University, where many young people miss out, but in steady sessions from their childhood up - then they would have a better chance of not being "suckered". And these kids that open up their own business, hopefully value their workers more...and the workers understand their value more, and refuse to work for that wage (way easier said than done, but you get my drift.)



And if they choose not to because they know that they can get it handed to them free? I agree with what you said and there are some that are not given the opportunity, but many pass it up as they have better things than to get a education.

Thing is, its been 10 years, and I paid for all my education and I just now have half paid back.

I didn't get it free, but I went and earned it.......

It irks me to see 1/3 of my paycheck leave and to see just how its wasted, sure some is for good but he government just is not efficient. that is why I would like to manage my Social Security money, you know that stuff that I will never see.....



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 09:28 PM
link   
ya, well, I'd like my social security donation back too, since there's a pretty good chance that I'll never see it. but, I think we can forget about the government giving it back to us. In plain simple words-- they don't have it!! they've raided the fund and blew it on bridges to nowhere and such.
the closest you're gonna get is the nice scam where a small fortune of taxpayer money is invested into a program that would divert this money into the stock exchange in hopes that it will give it a boost. I'm in the tailend of the baby boomers. It doesn't matter which way it goes for me. By the time the older boomers cash out, the government will be broke, the markets crashed by their cashing out.
So, if they want to actually give me back my funds and quit taking money out of my paycheck, leaving me to handle that money as I see fit, fine. Doubt if they'll do that one though. they'll want some say as to where this money goes, preselected areas of investment, more than likely areas that they are heavily invested in also. and there's no doubt in my mind, that they'll be one of the first ones cashing out when those stock reach top values.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 07:10 AM
link   
You and I are not in disagreement on this, I highly doubt it will happen any time soon, look what happened when Bush brought it to the table, the Dems went nuts!

In another thread, I mentioned that Chile did just that, privitazed it, and they had a problem of to many retiring EARLY because they had so much in their fund!



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
I can not disagree with what you wrote, we have serious problems. The point I try to make is government will NOT solve them, they have other interests. Take a look at what happened during the depression, the government helped by providing jobs, the feeding of the jobless was handled through other means.



So who is going to solve them? The churches, please give me a break, we both know that is not going to happen. Many churches have great programs to help, but they are not rich enough, nor organized enough to to handle healthcare on a large scale basis. Also, we both know that eventually there would be the argument about religion and affiliations and who is receiving the most and the best and who is paying the msot toward it.

The government is supposed to be a representation of the people, it's supposed to be we the people, not we the corporations, HMO's and every other lobbiest in DC being represented. Our tax dollars are supposed to do something besides support these organizations.

Did you know Germany has had universal healthcare for all of it's citizens for 124 years?

You say there is a myth of the working poor, but yet confess to having to sell your truck to pay a hospital bill?

Your reasoning seems to be that you don't want to support the lazy no goods of the world, who also would benefit from this universal healthcare but, you forget that you, and your own children and grandchildren will also benefit from this, so in other words you would condemn your children and grandchildren to paying the ever increasing cost of healthcare, perhaps even do without needed healthcare due to the cost, than to see someone whom you consider lesser than you receiving the same benefits.

You are throwing the baby out with the bath water!

[edit on 13-7-2007 by goose]



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Oh the Churches never did much for medical except for the small stuff, as for food they did and could, but alas there is a problem. Much much less BELIEVE anymore due to the constant state of being torn asunder, so to this I can say we reap what we sow.


You say there is a myth of the working poor, but yet confess to having to sell your truck to pay a hospital bill?


Well I had NO JOB so it wasn't a 'working situation', I was in school with no income.



Your reasoning seems to be that you don't want to support the lazy no goods of the world, who also would benefit from this universal healthcare but, you forget that you, and your own children and grandchildren will also benefit from this, so in other words you would condemn your children and grandchildren to paying the ever increasing cost of healthcare, perhaps even do without needed healthcare due to the cost, than to see someone whom you consider lesser than you receiving the same benefits.


All I am saying is universal health care will not work, it hasn't and it won't no matter what you liberals claim. How about for starters, we give some health care to US citizens instead of non-citizens. How about give it to those that follow the law rather than to those who don't.

If one is getting handouts from the taxpayer, then at least they should walk the streets collecting trash or something, sure there are cases that this would not work, but in most cases it would. Once they do this for a while I bet they would find a job.

You know why I know this? because I have some of the lazy people in my family, they ask me for money all the time, at least they did.

I will not pay for their beer, cigarettes, drugs, or whatever......but the government doesn't mind doing it with my tax dollars and the democrats get free votes as they build dependants for the government.



posted on Jul, 13 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   
gee...wonder if my boss would mind if my co-worker took off a few hours every day to pick up the litter off the streets for her hud, food stamps, medicaid, wic, ect.....
for some reason, I think he would.

I got a feeling that in over 50% of the cases, it wouldn't work..
many of the recipients are single moms....you want to pitch in and help pay the $3 or more dollars per kid in child care while mom is out picking up after the pigs or society? you are already ya know, they are required to work so many hours each month....doesn't really matter how much they make, but the have to work it if they want the benefits. alot of times, they are making less than the cost for the childcare involved...

alot of others are working, but they are also relying on food stamps, or some help with healthcare, or hud for housing, ect....
and well, if you want to include free and reduced lunches at school as a handout.....
take the time out from you busy schedule to find out the percentage of kids that recieve these free and reduced lunches. in the city I moved from was a little over 50% and in the city I am living in, I think it is also.... that would mean that around 50% of the families that have children would have to take time out of their busy schedule of child maintenence, home maintenance, work, meals, ect....to pick up after the pigs of society..

I don't think the pigs are that piggish!!

even the illegals that you complain about....most of them are working...
it's just that the actual cost of living has risen dramatically and the wages of many workers have either sat stagnant or have actually decreased. you can try to portray these people as being lazy all you want...but it won't change anything...because most are not! ya, there are some who have managed to fool the system into thinking that they are disabled, or whatever, and can get away with lounging around. but there are many, many more who do work!

and there's one thing I am pretty sure of....
the problem will never be addressed adequately as long as the problem is never seen for what it is!



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger



Your reasoning seems to be that you don't want to support the lazy no goods of the world, who also would benefit from this universal healthcare but, you forget that you, and your own children and grandchildren will also benefit from this, so in other words you would condemn your children and grandchildren to paying the ever increasing cost of healthcare, perhaps even do without needed healthcare due to the cost, than to see someone whom you consider lesser than you receiving the same benefits.


All I am saying is universal health care will not work, it hasn't and it won't no matter what you liberals claim. How about for starters, we give some health care to US citizens instead of non-citizens. How about give it to those that follow the law rather than to those who don't.

If one is getting handouts from the taxpayer, then at least they should walk the streets collecting trash or something, sure there are cases that this would not work, but in most cases it would. Once they do this for a while I bet they would find a job.


Have you ever lived in a country that has universal health care? It works in 24 of the 25 industrialized countries and we are the lone one that does not have it. Living in the USA without universal health care means your life span is shorter than it would be if you lived in a country with universal health care.

Where are you getting your information on universal health care? Are you getting the info from the mainstream media who receives tons of cash every year through advertising for pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies? Are you getting the info from the politicians who receives tons of money from these industries as well, through campaign finance?

BTW are you going to see the movie SICKO? I dare you to go and see it, though I seriously doubt you will, you are probably like every conservative out there who screams how much you do not feel universal health care will work, but refuse to go and see anything that is not put out by a conservative think tank on the subject.

While I am sure MM probably only presents the good side of universal health care, he should not have to present the bad since that is all we have heard from our leaders and mainstream media, so it will be nice to see the good side for a change. I have not seen it yet, but intend to as asap.

You keep saying you do not want to support the people who will not work by giving them universal health care, but by punishing them you are also punishing the ones who will work, and you are also supporting the insurance and pharmaceutical industry who are making a good deal of money by denying people access to care. BTW SICKO is about people like you who work, and have insurance coverage.

For your families sake I hope you go see it and I also hope you realize that someday someone you love might be very affected by the lack of access to care in this country, not only are the 47 million people who have no insurance suffering, but some of the ones who have insurance are suffering by lack of access through being denied care because it is too costly to their insurance company.

[edit on 14-7-2007 by goose]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnstarand there's one thing I am pretty sure of....the problem will never be addressed adequately as long as the problem is never seen for what it is!


Look not all are lazy, I readily agree that some need the help. What I am trying to explain is that as long as the 'ability' to abuse the system exists, there will be a certain percentage of them the abuse it.

Should the welfare checks by cigarettes? Dog food? Lotto Tickets?

One thing I will admit is that we as a nation are getting better, its not as bad as it was, its been getting better since Clinton's term but I attribute it to Congress mostly at that time.

We should never be a Welfare state, ask those that live near Chicago, how many went across the border to Wisconsin to get 'double' benefits?

I have seen this abuse, and think there are better ways.

So, does your coworker smoke? In that case it really doesn't matter as she is working and can buy what she wishes.

Even in our Military people are on food stamps so the system is not perfect, but the idea of going back to the systems we had in the 1970's is a farce....

If they are Lazy, then move to Canada and let the Canadian taxpayer pay for it.

As you said would her boss let her go get trash? well the way I see it, this is not a case where that would apply as she has a job. Its the mother with 5 or 6 kids with 4 different men that is looking for another $250 a month so she has another kid. There are many like this. I think if she had to pick up trash to get her 'check' she would be more inclined to close her legs and quit letting deadbeat dads have their way. It has to stop because odds are those kids, or at least 80% of them will end op the same way, its a cycle.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by goose
Have you ever lived in a country that has universal health care? It works in 24 of the 25 industrialized countries and we are the lone one that does not have it. Living in the USA without universal health care means your life span is shorter than it would be if you lived in a country with universal health care.



No I haven't and would not want to. I have asked Europeans about it and at least in the UK it is not what it seems. I knew a guy who had some 'mental' issues and was on a bout of severe depression and needed help. They made him an appointment, 6-weeks out.

One example of universal health care that is in the states is the Department of defense 'TriCare'. My wife and I took a 6 year old in for 6 months while the single parent deployed to Afghanistan. This parent in my opinion was not getting the child the care it needed. His mouth, teeth , and gums were completed rotted. His esophagus was top small and he was susceptible to easily choking. This had been this way a while and I know the parent took this child to doctors and they KNEW yet did nothing. The parent was not perfect and maybe didn't know the system well enough to get what needed to get done, done. Well the wife and I did, in that 6 months we got it all fixed and TriCare paid most of the bills. The problem was the scheduling, it took literally months to get the appointments with the doctors that would accept that insurance. There was a line and they were overbooked. It was a pain to see this child in pain but we did the best we could. that is a case of socialized medicine just as the incident in California with my own child.

The only way it would work it set limits on doctor's pay and charges, limit the frivolous lawsuits (BIG PROBLEM!), and give an incentive for the treatment of low income people. Right now the doctors abuse the system as much as anyone (MEDICAID).

There is no perfect solution but anything that the Federal Government wants to run will certainly not be better, look at Walter Reed for an example. They do so much so well and yet screw up so much more, sad really.




Originally posted by gooseBTW are you going to see the movie SICKO? I dare you to go and see it, though I seriously doubt you will, you are probably like every conservative out there who screams how much you do not feel universal health care will work, but refuse to go and see anything that is not put out by a conservative think tank on the subject.


I would not give that POS the time of day, he does not present an accurate depiction in nay thing he has done yet so why would he start now?





Originally posted by gooseFor your families sake I hope you go see it and I also hope you realize that someday someone you love might be very affected by the lack of access to care in this country, not only are the 47 million people who have no insurance suffering, but some of the ones who have insurance are suffering by lack of access through being denied care because it is too costly to their insurance company.



Well when it costs $50 to see a doctor for 3 minutes, you have to ask yourself, where is the fairness in that? I sure hope that doctor never needs some engineering done as my rate just went up.

Some doctors are decent, I actually had one refuse payment when I didn't have a job. He was the exception to the rule though. Most have to make their Mercedes payments and $2600 monthly mortgages.



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 02:46 PM
link   
As a liberal on most issues, not all, I will listen to the likes of Rush Limbaugh and similar pundits to see what they have to say, I do not mind having my ideas on certain issues challenged.

I have found that most conservatives like yourself gives the same sad answer you just gave as to why they will only view or listen to what they agree with, whether it is MM or anyone else they do not agree with. How can you know you are right when you continue to view only the same viewpoint over and over?

As to the child left in your care, who got medical care through a state program similar to universal health care you complained about the wait because there was a waiting list of people in front of him, were these people less important or their health care issues less important than this child's because they got in line first?

The point is the child eventually got the needed health care! Could you have afforded to pay for it had the child not been eligible for the health care? What would have happened had the access to health care not been there or been denied?

As to your friends in other countries who are fortunate enough to have universal health care coverage that complain about the waiting period involved for some things, do they complain about having medical coverage all of the time and access to healthcare, even though they might have to wait a while for it?

I bet they would laugh their butts off if someone suggested they would be better off without universal health care coverage? I'm also betting they would riot in the streets if the government attempted to take it away.

Do they complain about co-pays and high premiums? Do they complain about not having money to purchase their meds or the high cost of meds? Do they complain about not having health care coverage between jobs and waiting periods for coverage for certain things or not being able to leave their jobs due to not having coverage for pre-existing illnesses? Do they complain about not having access to health care coverage when they are laid off or lose their jobs?

As to the Walter Reed hospital incident, you might be interested to learn that the probelms did not start until the government turned over some of the running of the military hospital to a private contractor who did not do near as good a job as was done when the government ran it.



www.msnbc.msn.com...
WASHINGTON - Even the military's best friends in Congress dressed down Army leaders over conditions at Walter Reed.

"It was a failure in the most basic tenets of command responsibility — to take care of our troops," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., at Tuesday's hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Critics say part of the problem may be an Army decision last year to contract out maintenance and support at Walter Reed to a private company, even though government workers argued they could do it better, and for less.









[edit on 14-7-2007 by goose]



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by gooseAs to the child left in your care, who got medical care through a state program similar to universal health care you complained about the wait because there was a waiting list of people in front of him, were these people less important or their health care issues less important than this child's because they got in line first?


the problem is that there was an unreasonable wait in the first place! No matter, big government doesn't really do anything well. This is what happens.


Originally posted by gooseDo they complain about co-pays and high premiums? Do they complain about not having money to purchase their meds or the high cost of meds? Do they complain about not having health care coverage between jobs and waiting periods for coverage for certain things or not being able to leave their jobs due to not having coverage for pre-existing illnesses? Do they complain about not having access to health care coverage when they are laid off or lose their jobs?



No, they just come to the states when they need medical care in a timely fashion.

As for drugs, the US Government doesn't subsidize the industry like other nations. See AIRBUS



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
As for drugs, the US Government doesn't subsidize the industry like other nations. See AIRBUS



Well you forgot to say if you could have afforded to pay out of pocket for the child's care yourself, you just complained because it took too long, maybe it did take an unreasonable amount of time but at least his health care needs were eventually met.

That is better than my friend's mother who had cancer, she was denied a procedure by her insurance company that might have saved her life. She died.

Ever heard of corporate welfare? It is alive and well and that is where a large amount of your tax dollars go.

While you complain about the poor getting your tax dollars, and hear a lot about those neer do wells that take advantage of the system, you never hear success stories about how how much your tax dollars have helped the poor, in the mainstream media, you also very seldom hear about corporate welfare in the mainstream media. How fair and balanced is that?

You don't think the government gives to the rich pharmaceutical industries? Over there in the countries that subsidizes the phamaceutical industry at least their tax payers gets cheap drugs, over here all we get is $0 for our tax dollars they get.




www.ahrp.org...

Who do you think are the major corporate benficiaries?

Why the "cash rich" pharmaceutical companies who shelter their foreign profits to avoid taxes: Merck has $15 billion in sheltered profits; Johnson & Johnson, $11 billion; Shering-Plough, $9.4 billion; Eli Lilly, $8 billion.... It is estimated that by the end of 2005 between $100 billion and $500 billion will be "repatriated."

The company's gain is the US Treasury's loss. This giveaway will allow companies to spend the money to buy other companies - resulting, no doubt, in job layoffs, as corporate acquisitions usually do. It will also provide even larger legal defense funds for drug companies whose unconscionable marketing practices - such as concealing hazardous drug effects while advertising the drugs' safety--have resulted in preventable deaths. What possible justification can there be for the government to reward - and thereby to encourage--corporate crimes?



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by goose
Well you forgot to say if you could have afforded to pay out of pocket for the child's care yourself, you just complained because it took too long, maybe it did take an unreasonable amount of time but at least his health care needs were eventually met.


Yeah, they were met alright, and I do not think that it was good service. It typically shows that government can't run squat without huge waste with lousy inefficiency and poor service. yeah we need that nationally.



Originally posted by gooseThat is better than my friend's mother who had cancer, she was denied a procedure by her insurance company that might have saved her life. She died.


Well it might be more informative if the full range of the case was known. If this person had a 5% chance of living 2 more months and the procedure cost $100k, then would it have been wise to spend it? I mean you yourself said the money could be spent elsewhere like on those that have NO insurance. I mean many a procedure is done that doesn't need to be. that might not be what the family of this particular woman wanted but it is harsh fact.




Originally posted by goose
While you complain about the poor getting your tax dollars, and hear a lot about those neer do wells that take advantage of the system, you never hear success stories about how how much your tax dollars have helped the poor, in the mainstream media, you also very seldom hear about corporate welfare in the mainstream media. How fair and balanced is that?



In this we agree more than you know. I want a flat tax so the rich have to at least pay some. Its a farce, in the present system you can not tax the ultra rich if they choose not to be taxed. Flat tax = fair tax. Don't give me the excessive burden on the poor even, they could get refunds or some other offset.


Originally posted by goose
You don't think the government gives to the rich pharmaceutical industries? Over there in the countries that subsidizes the phamaceutical industry at least their tax payers gets cheap drugs, over here all we get is $0 for our tax dollars they get.



Last I heard the US government doesn't pay to have Merck or whomever develop drugs no...Look the Drug companies are plain robbing the American people of this I can not deny but giving drugs away is no fix either.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join