Taomon
Active Member
- Dec 21, 2007
- 1,563
- 47
- 36
The things I say leads you to believe, that is not a universal phenomena. You think that about me because you cannot think outside of your limited scope. Anything that even remotely sounds socialistic you automatically deem as such and apply false statements to. I pity you for that. We as a society have certain social responsibilities. That is a fact.Yet the things you say leads one to that conclusion. And you already have the right to access to adequate health care - you just have to pay for it.
The fact that you can't pay for it is why you fall back on the class argument....despite the fact you are a member of the richest working class in the history of the world, a typical 2car, 2TV, 2cell phone family, (and nobody really in need sits for 4+ hours in emergency) you think you are poor and downtrodden. Boohoo.
I never claimed to be poor. In fact, I was not complaining for me at all. I was complaining for the millions of lower middle class people who cannot afford to survive - let alone buy insurance. As well to do as I am, I do not have 2 cars. Television is a luxury that I can afford. My cell phone is a business expense. I am moving into the upper middle class area financially. And there are many more who cannot.
When I worked at Blue Cross (and I don't anymore), I was at the lowest end of the working class scale. Not poor enough for assistance and not earning enough to pay for food, rent and clothes for my kids. There are plenty of people in that boat. And I am speaking for them. You talk as though you are comfortable and everyone doesn't matter.
Actually, it may not be in the Constitution...but if I am shot and no one does anything to help me, they have broken the law. I do have a right to necessary medical care. It comes at a cost (premiums, bills & credit collection calls). I think you misjudge people too quickly and too harshly. Do you really think someone who is pro-choice would decide not to give me medical care for some petty reason? If so, then you do not understand the pro-choice position and are making assumptions that you cannot prove.If you are shot there is nothing in the Constitution that says anybody must save you. You do not have a "right" to medical care. As God-fearing people, however, we believe it is a moral duty for others to help you if they can .but now we are getting into "religion" and we wouldn't want that to happen, would we? Although you might have a new respect for pro-lifers when seculars take over and decide not to give you medical care because you're not worth it...too old, too sick, whatever...all for the greater good, of course.
Wow, that is the coldest thing I ever heard someone say. Do you really believe people wake up and say "hmm, I want to let my kids go hungry today." Or maybe love is not allowed to be in this equation? So you fall in love, get married and have a kid or two. That is wrong if you are poor and lower class because you cannot afford it?If you cannot afford the price, you either need to make more money or vote for change. Change can be for either more government involvement or less. I think it's already been proven that more is not the best route.
If you have a family of 4 and only earn slightly above minimum wage, that does not mean you deserve anything. What it really means is you are an irresponsible person for having a family when you cannot afford one. Why should I pay for your stupid mistakes? It means you better get two jobs or else learn how to make more money per hour.
That is one of the things wrong about our society. Human emotion is only allowed to be used when guiding the masses through an election. As a matter of public policy, emotion is not allowed. Love is not allowed. Family issues are not allowed.
Why should you pay for some one's stupid mistakes? One, having a child is not a stupid mistake. And two, we are a society and we have a social responsibility towards each other. You will be taxed no matter what. Would you rather the money go to Bureaucrats, military quagmires or social programs that help working class people who are struggling?
Personally, I would want to see price controls and subsidies that drive the cost of living down. Food, shelter, healthcare, education, utilities, and clothing should never be unattainable. And it would not matter if you made minimum wage if the cost of living were lower. Greed and apathy drive this and you exemplified it in your post.
Some glitches? Please show some examples of how competition has kept greed under control. Healthcare is not one of them.This free market competition works real well for the most part. Just because there are some glitches does not mean we need to scrap the whole idea. Greed is a factor found in any economic system. Competition is what keeps greed under control.
See, this is what I am talking about. You cannot see the forest for the trees. I never said I wanted to live under corrupt regimes like those you mention here. I do not want to see America become a socialist state. But it requires a little socialism to enforce social responsibility. And the business world has spent trillions of dollars on (since 1945) to drive any notion of that out of our heads. You must be a star pupil.Regulation to enforce price fixing is socialism. Show me a true socialist system that has worked so well you that you've had dreams of living under it .like the once great USSR? How about Maoist style? I'm sure you'd love the health care system in Cuba. Hey, Venezuela is going socialist today .quick, change countries! Socialism and evil seem to go together. Why is it people cannot learn from history?
Socialism isn't evil. The problem with the socialist regimes you mention is one factor; human greed. Those systems were corrupted by human greed. Greed for money and power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
So you can only consider solutions that fit the frame of capitalism, otherwise it is socialist and therefore evil? C'mon, you must be smarter than that eagle. Price controls would make healthcare (and other necessary commodities) affordable for the lower working classes.
And let's face it, the following necessities are considered a commodity in our country: Food, shelter, healthcare, clothing, utilities (like heat and electricity) and education. Do you believe that the necessities of life should be a commodity? How do you feel about homeless people? Are they just lazy & irresponsible? Are all homeless people easily generalized like that? Have you ever seen or spoke to a homeless person? The route word there is person.
Slacker or lower working class person who cannot afford it?Looks like Romney's government decree is not working. Forced car insurance doesn't work either. Seems every time I'm hit it's by some slacker without insurance.
I meant posting. And socialism can be part of the solution. Don't be so narrow minded about this brother.Where'd you get the idea I've been boasting about anything?
That only works for upper middle class families. Lower middle class families (of which, I was one for many years) usually have bills to catch up on or a big expense (like a new-used car, medical/dental needs, etc) when they get their taxes. It doesn't really solve anything and takes tax money away from social programs that we need.1. Reform the tax treatment of health care expenses - to level the playing field & lower costs.
Can you say MONOPOLY?2. Promote portable, nationwide insurance - to help provide lower cost insurance options.
Can you guarantee a high standard of knowledge and capability from those reduce barrier doctors & nurses? Education is a factor and some changes there could actually increase the amount of available doctors & nurses.3. Reduce barriers to entry - to help increase the supply of doctors, nurses, etc.
So free healthcare for chronically ill? I can dig that. If we are capable of working we should want to help those who cannot. But we lack solidarity in this country (again, proven by your posts).4. Address head-on the costs of treating the chronically ill - provide direct subsidies to purchase insurance.
We already know that model does not work. The people in charge of major corporations do not want to relinquish that power.5. Allow market forces to work - put the consumers in charge.