Santorum: Why Charity can't replace Health Care

Providing health care to others can be a form of charity. Why would you replace a charity with a charity?

Except it's nothing of the sort.

Most "health Care" is offered as a form of compensation, for the 150 million of us who have jobs and get it through our employers. For the 100 million who get it through government, most of us paid into that through medicare taxes and such.

In 2011, I paid $1,200 into my HSA and insurance co-pay, and my employer paid about $5000. I spent about $500.00 treating a few minor ailments last year.

In 2007, I and my employer spent about the same amount, but due to some medical issues, I was billed some $50,000 in expenses for two operations and therapy.

So it's really not "charity", it's gambling.

Of course, the thing is, like any Casino, the Insurance companies don't like doing pay outs. in 2008, after I ran up all those bills, I was downsized despite an impeccable work record and seniority on most of the other employees. (Could have sued, but I had lined up a new job within a week.)

Not sure if the Government can run things better than Big Insurance, but they certainly can't do worse.
 
I do just not understand why this is a issue. Stop doing charity. We should just build a good social system that takes care of ill people.

Is that because you don't believe in giving charity....and would rather have someone else do it?

In his book "Intellectuals," Paul Johnson quotes Pablo Picasso scoffing at the idea that he would give to the needy. "I'm afraid you've got it wrong," Picasso explains, "we are socialists. We don't pretend to be Christians."
 
He is absolutely right on all fronts.

There is global warming now. He is wrong on that. Only thing to be questioned and I do it is what has caused it.
Drilling is nothing other than a short term answer if that.
EPA has too much power but who curbs that power? Santorum who is being pulled by big unions?
You believe you do not have a constitutional right to privacy with your sex life?
He is dead wrong on that one also.

No. There isn't global warming. He's not wrong at all. If the earth was warming they wouldnt be talking about global cooling now. Global warming was supposed to have had the oceans covering our coastal cities two years ago. There is a reason global warming scientists have been frabricating information about it. It's because it's a political scam. The politicians funda the scientists to falsify data. The scientists do so, the politicians then try to scare people into acting without thinking by giving them more and more power to control their lives.

It's a very convenient issue, because no matter what happens, that's evidence for it. If the tempature goes up, it's global warming. If the tempature goes down, that's global warming. If there are alot of hurricanes, that's global warming. If there are no hurricanes, that's global warming. If there is an earthquake, it's global warming (I still cant understand that stupid argument). If there is lots of snow, that's global warming. If there is no snow, that's global warming.

No matter what happens, the politician can use the issue to scare people into giving them more and more power. Don't you think it's an odd coincidence that the same exact things that politicians tried to sell the people under economics, are the exact things that we need to do to save the world from global warming? It's much easier to sell stupid policies if you can make people act emotionally instead of allowing them to think through things.

If drilling is a short term solution then let's do it till the long term solution becomes viable. It's absolutely stupid to handicap ourselves by having our enemies provide us with the energy we need. Especially those phonies who pretend to oppose it for the environments sake. If they were serious about protecting the environment, they would be encouraging us getting the oil safely and cleanly rather than relying on outside countries who dont have the standards we do.

The EPA does have too much power. Especially since the Federal Government has absolutely zero authority to pass a single environmental law. Can you cite the grant of authority to govern the environment?

There is no Constitutional right to privacy. In fact, the Constitution explicitly grants the government authority to invade our privacy. It requires probable cause and/or a search warrant, but the Constitution grants the government authority to search our person and seize things that are unlawful. And since that is the main justification for the so called right to privacy, it simply doesn't exist in the Constitution.

I'm sorry. You might not like Santorum, but the man isnt wrong on those things. You might disagree with my rational and his, but all you've done is provide denials and absolutely no explanation for why you are correct and we are not.

There are record highs all over this country and the world so who the hell is talking about global cooling? NASA and NOAA and Naval Climatologists ALL state there is global warming. Our entire military believes it.
Bowers v. Hardwick and Lawrence v. Texas where sexual practices of consenting adults are protected under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Those are just a few.
An interesting document. I suggest you read it before making your absurd right to privacy arguments. Private certain sexual practices of consenting adults are protected.
We are a nation OF LAW, not men like Ricky Santorum with their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
 
There is global warming now. He is wrong on that. Only thing to be questioned and I do it is what has caused it.
Drilling is nothing other than a short term answer if that.
EPA has too much power but who curbs that power? Santorum who is being pulled by big unions?
You believe you do not have a constitutional right to privacy with your sex life?
He is dead wrong on that one also.

No. There isn't global warming. He's not wrong at all. If the earth was warming they wouldnt be talking about global cooling now. Global warming was supposed to have had the oceans covering our coastal cities two years ago. There is a reason global warming scientists have been frabricating information about it. It's because it's a political scam. The politicians funda the scientists to falsify data. The scientists do so, the politicians then try to scare people into acting without thinking by giving them more and more power to control their lives.

It's a very convenient issue, because no matter what happens, that's evidence for it. If the tempature goes up, it's global warming. If the tempature goes down, that's global warming. If there are alot of hurricanes, that's global warming. If there are no hurricanes, that's global warming. If there is an earthquake, it's global warming (I still cant understand that stupid argument). If there is lots of snow, that's global warming. If there is no snow, that's global warming.

No matter what happens, the politician can use the issue to scare people into giving them more and more power. Don't you think it's an odd coincidence that the same exact things that politicians tried to sell the people under economics, are the exact things that we need to do to save the world from global warming? It's much easier to sell stupid policies if you can make people act emotionally instead of allowing them to think through things.

If drilling is a short term solution then let's do it till the long term solution becomes viable. It's absolutely stupid to handicap ourselves by having our enemies provide us with the energy we need. Especially those phonies who pretend to oppose it for the environments sake. If they were serious about protecting the environment, they would be encouraging us getting the oil safely and cleanly rather than relying on outside countries who dont have the standards we do.

The EPA does have too much power. Especially since the Federal Government has absolutely zero authority to pass a single environmental law. Can you cite the grant of authority to govern the environment?

There is no Constitutional right to privacy. In fact, the Constitution explicitly grants the government authority to invade our privacy. It requires probable cause and/or a search warrant, but the Constitution grants the government authority to search our person and seize things that are unlawful. And since that is the main justification for the so called right to privacy, it simply doesn't exist in the Constitution.

I'm sorry. You might not like Santorum, but the man isnt wrong on those things. You might disagree with my rational and his, but all you've done is provide denials and absolutely no explanation for why you are correct and we are not.
Avatar, do you eat imbecile crackers all day? You think the government should be policing our sex acts between adults? So I can't bang my girlfriend in any other position but missionary? Santorum also wants to outlaw porn, that's just too funny.
The US is the world's biggest polluter and you think that the EPA has TOO MUCH power? lol, good one. Our enemies provides us with oil? Like Canada and Saudi Arabia? LOL, another funny one. And there's no global warming? Well, that much stupid speaks for itself.

Why do people have such a difficult time differentiating between the fact that the government could lawfully do something and whether the government should do something?
 
Romney's a mor(m)on, so he has to pay to be in a church. That's not really charity to give to the already wealthy. Plus, you have to factor in the tax deduction received, which also isn't a donation to charity.

He doesnt have to pay a cent to be in Church.

And yes, religious organizations are charity.

It's amazing how desperate you are for excuses.
 
Romney's a mor(m)on, so he has to pay to be in a church. That's not really charity to give to the already wealthy. Plus, you have to factor in the tax deduction received, which also isn't a donation to charity.

He doesnt have to pay a cent to be in Church.

And yes, religious organizations are charity.

It's amazing how desperate you are for excuses.

I don't know what broke-ass church you go to, but everyone pays the going rate, which is 10% of income I believe for mormons? All other churches have a collection plate or you pay for your pew... Pay to get wed, baptisms...
Anyways, Romney's just going to get Obama elected for another 4 years.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top