healthcare benefits starting to kick in

[keyboardlover]

So, are you saying that a majority of poverty is caused by people being lazy?

Can you quote where I said that? I said that laziness doesn't help poor people to become successful. The more we give, the more they take. It becomes a habit, they get used to it, and that's the way they live.

[instantkamera]

Money helps money

Exactly. Rich people can't help but stay rich. Broke people, or those really ****ing close to it, have to weigh options and make decisions that might impact them, economically or otherwise, for a long time.

[itlnstln]

That brings me to another point. Does anyone know how hard it is to donate time/resources to a cause that is NOT driven and funded by a religious group? No one else seems to have the time or money to set up programs.

That's the ironic thing here in TX (home of the "mega-church").  Churches are house of rich people, not God.  Churches around here have no interest in helping the needy; they serve as a place for rich people to network on the weekend and perpetuate greed in the name of God.  This is not all churches, but the vast majority and particularly Protestant churches.

[keyboardlover]

That's the ironic thing here in TX (home of the "mega-church").  Churches are house of rich people, not God.  Churches around here have no interest in helping the needy; they serve as a place for rich people to network on the weekend and perpetuate greed in the name of God.  This is not all churches, but the vast majority and particularly Protestant churches.

Well mine is Catholic...not sure if that has much to do with it. It's involved in a ton of programs to benefit the poor and needy.

[ch_123]

Can you quote where I said that? I said that laziness doesn't help poor people to become successful. The more we give, the more they take. It becomes a habit, they get used to it, and that's the way they live.

No. You didn't say that, I asked if that was your stance. Because if you think that laziness is a leading cause of poverty, then you are an idiot. If don't, then you're just 'blaming the victim' (to use a Wellyism) to deflect the seriousness of the problem.

And last I checked, we're talking about healthcare here, not giving people free dinners. The very least we can do is provide people who can't afford healthcare the most basic service that they don't keel over and die.

Some people may be able to afford private healthcare and take public healthcare, but they are paying for it with their own tax money. If there's a situation where someone isn't their taxes, then that's tax evasion. I don't think anyone advocated that here.

[pex]

Its a quesiton of priorities.

I guess for some people, the supreme laws of the land as found in constitutions of the several states and the United States is a high priority.  For mostly everyone else, "**** the law" except apparently all subordinate law, which is quite fine.  We'll just do what we want, because it makes us feel good, no biggie, doesn't matter if some people have to suffer infringement to their life, liberty, or property on the way as long as we can feel good about something related.

it's OK if the kids suffer or die due lack of medical accessibility?

What is your counter-proposition?  Force (i.e. enslave) people to become doctors and insurers?  Maintain a contingency slavery where you're only forced to do what everyone else wants if you become either a doctor or an insurer?

You get the life you're dealt no matter who you are and you have to work with others to make the best of it.  But asking your government to enslave people to make the best of it seems immoral from the start.

Someone would probably offer health care for lower prices and at different tiers of service if the government didn't create monopolies through regulatory barriers.  But that's alright, we can just make more laws to fix those other laws which were probably illegal in the first place, rather than returning to conforming to the precipice for this nation and its several states.

Here's one way to prevent a child from dying because of not having universal enslave-someone health insurance: don't have one.  But that's just one idea.  Everyone has this idea that in the United States there would be no private sector takeover of the public good if we just took the honest and immediate step of complying with our constitutions and cutting away the huge swaths of illegal law that impair our liberties and purses.  The fact is that there would be markets in the public good, and people would ask for certain things to be fulfilled, and so people would fulfill them.  I have no idea why everyone thinks we need an overbearing and onerous government just to have any single good thing.

Less theft, more consensual contract plz.  If we got into the habit of saying no when we can, and yes when we want, the foundation for all of the monopolies created by regulatory barriers that created a perceived need for federal universal health care would have never existed.

people value season box football tickets at 10s of thousands of dollars but want to stiff those agents involved in health care, so we're all kinda at fault (and across generations) for misvaluing things first, and then demanding regulation following to fix the error of our ways rather than just acting differnetly

[itlnstln]

Wow.

Here's a situation that is common in TX.  An oil well dries up, and the foremen, drillers, etc. are laid off; mind you, these are very[/] well-paid people.  The way the oil business works, they may never see work for many years.  They are now poor, have families, etc.  They can't get another well-paying job, because their job skills are not marketable outside the oil industry.  They have families.  Should they have said "no" to children?  No one's talking slavery here, just health insurance.  Hell, it'll even help some doctors get paid since now the people that wouldn't have normally paid their medical bills will be able to now.

[keyboardlover]

Wow.

Here's a situation that is common in TX.  An oil well dries up, and the foremen, drillers, etc. are laid off; mind you, these are very[/] well-paid people.  The way the oil business works, they may never see work for many years.  They are now poor, have families, etc.  They can't get another well-paying job, because their job skills are not marketable outside the oil industry.  They have families.  Should they have said "no" to children?  No one's talking slavery here, just health insurance.  Hell, it'll even help some doctors get paid since now the people that wouldn't have normally paid their medical bills will be able to now.

Relocation is an option...

[instantkamera]

Relocation is an option...

I hope what comes after the ellipsis is a lot more enlightened. This is exactly what I meant by putting yourself in someone's shoes. You clearly don't share in the misery that is being broke and actually weighing options that WILL impact your life directly. With the freedom of a clear (non-lazy) mind, surely you can think a plan through, start to finish, with the affected person/s SOMEHOW coming out for the better. "dot dot dot" WHAT?

[quadibloc]

Leave the social programs to the state and local communities.  That way, if you don't like paying for it, you have the option to move to another community/state/etc.

But you know what that will cause. Every state will be competing with every other state to lower taxes, in order to attract businesses and tax-paying professionals, and so social programs will remain badly underfunded everywhere.

Instead, by doing it at a national level, the public still has control; they can vote for a party that favors less ambitious social programs if they wish. Thus, in that case, the social programs are at the level decreed directly by the electorate through their votes - instead of being kept at a level far below what the voters wish they could be because of the natural economic actions of individuals faced with a situation over which they have no control.

When they're administered federally, if you vote for social programs, you get your share of the higher taxes and your share of the social programs.

If you move to another state for lower taxes, though, the loss to social programs is split thousands of ways, while you get all the lower taxes. Well, maybe not exactly. But if you move to another state to get a job because the people you would get a job from moved to that other state for lower taxes, the feedback is definitely messed up.

What is your counter-proposition?  Force (i.e. enslave) people to become doctors and insurers?  Maintain a contingency slavery where you're only forced to do what everyone else wants if you become either a doctor or an insurer?

How about just forcing (enslaving) people to pay taxes, and hire doctors with that money?

[mike]

The VAST majority of the people we met were only looking for handouts. They were in the situations they were in because of themselves, and didn't want to change. People who wouldn't take jobs but instead chose to eat in soup kitchens and live in shelters.

People queuing up for a free meal are looking for handouts? Of course they are! What you mind find tricky to explain is why the number of the lazy poor increases dramatically during a recession.

Benefits ("Welfare") often come under criticism for encouraging a certain amount of scrounging. That does go on, but not always as much as people would have you believe. Most people would rather have a $10,000 a year job than get $5,000 a year from benefits.

Ignoring the 'lazy' poor for a moment, there are also plenty of hard-working poor and people who would be hard-working if they could get a job. How many Mercs are there in the emplyees car-park at your local Walmart ? Some people aren't capable of getting well paid jobs - they don't have the skills, are a bit dim, have too many other commitments, etc.

[quadibloc]

Ignoring the 'lazy' poor for a moment, there are also plenty of hard-working poor and people who would be hard-working if they could get a job. How many Mercs are there in the emplyees car-park at your local Walmart ? Some people aren't capable of getting well paid jobs - they don't have the skills, are a bit dim, have too many other commitments, etc.

And, on top of that, there are people who do have the skills to do well paid jobs, but there aren't enough of those jobs going around. Just like the army needs a lot more privates than it does generals, the needs of the economy for work to get done don't necessarily match people's talents and abilities.

It will never be the case that everyone who can sing better than Britney Spears will be a famous recording star, for example.

[wellington1869]

i've been called curt, never a belching fattie tho.

it took geekhack to do that

[itlnstln]

Relocation is an option...

Have you ever moved?  It's not cheap.

[keyboardlover]

Have you ever moved?  It's not cheap.

No, and I know, but if it's a question of a person and/or family's health, I think it would become a priority. Take the famine in Ireland for example...

[wellington1869]

Relocation is an option...

we cant all move to massachusetts.

unfortunately healthcare is a nationwide problem, requiring a nationwide solution.

also, insurance is one of these businesses where the more people are in the pool, the more efficient (real cost savings) one receives.  Doesnt lend itself to micro-pools at the city and county level, wouldnt make economic sense.

[Shawn Stanford]

What about blaming poor people for not contributing to society i.e. not doing ****?

Wow, that's an amazingly f*cked up thing to say. It sounds like you think people who don't contribute to society are basically a waste of skin..?

That's the ironic thing here in TX (home of the "mega-church").  Churches are house of rich people, not God.  Churches around here have no interest in helping the needy; they serve as a place for rich people to network on the weekend and perpetuate greed in the name of God.  This is not all churches, but the vast majority and particularly Protestant churches.

That's exactly why I stopped going to the Methodist church I was attending in Olathe, Kansas. It was a great church with a wonderful pastor, but the church got popular, all the rich *******s started going and then it ballooned into a mega-church. Then it became more of a club than a house of God. Pastor Adam just seemed kind of lost when we left...

I have a couple of things to say here...

1. This is the United States of America; Reagan's 'Shining City on the Hill', what William J. Bennett called the "Last, Best Hope". We don't and we can't let people die on the streets because they can't afford health care. If we do, we might as well rename the place 'Somalia' and call it a day.

2. Hospitals are obligated by law to provide emergency treatment for anyone who needs it. Since we all have a right to treatment, we all have an obligation to pay for it. We're all paying for universal emergency room treatment now; either we pay the bill, our insurance pays the bill, some government program pays the bill or - when nobody pays the bill - the hospital passes the cost along to the people who do pay the bills. If we had universal health care - i.e.: Medicare for everyone - then we could implement some oversight and controls onto costs. As it is, there's no reason for hospitals to be realistic with their billing (except to Medicare, which is a harsh cost negotiator).

[instantkamera]

case ****ing closed. And on that note, over to the comic book thread with ye! I need recommendations!

[keyboardlover]

Wow, that's an amazingly f*cked up thing to say. It sounds like you think people who don't contribute to society are basically a waste of skin..?

I didn't say that...but if they don't care about their own lives than why should we? For example - there are a lot of street kids in many post-eastern block countries in Europe. There have been countless efforts and organizations set up over the years to try to get them off the streets but in most cases they fail. This is because the kids prefer their lives on the streets.

[wellington1869]

This is because the kids prefer their lives on the streets.

ok, ghost of reagan.

[keyboardlover]

ok, ghost of reagan.

Um what? What I'm talking about is true.

[wellington1869]

Um what? What I'm talking about is true.

i'm wondering why the catholic church doesnt stop its outreach programs for the poor then?

[keyboardlover]

i'm wondering why the catholic church doesnt stop its outreach programs for the poor then?

There's a documentary called 'The Lost Children' about street kids in Romania. I recommend watching it. The kids literally say when interviewed that they prefer to live on the street. The Christian church there (Orthodox, not Catholic) gets them homes, food, etc., but the kids end up back on the street. And yes, they have ceased some of the programs because of this.

[ch_123]

Take the famine in Ireland for example...

So dawg, do you actually know anything about Irish history?

[wellington1869]

There's a documentary called 'The Lost Children' about street kids in Romania. I recommend watching it. The kids literally say when interviewed that they prefer to live on the street. The Christian church there (Orthodox, not Catholic) gets them homes, food, etc., but the kids end up back on the street. And yes, they have ceased some of the programs because of this.

I dont doubt some kids will prefer the freedom of the street (especially while they're still kids), but you cant assume everyone who is poor "wants it that way", or will always want it that way. Thats what reagan did (to the embarrasment of the nation).

Nor can you refuse to address structural inefficiencies and inequalities in our social systems that produce so many of the poor in the first place, and then simply say "well they like it that way" rather than address those injustices.

In other words, saying "they like it that way" is no way to develop social policy and its no way to run a nation.   Regardless of whether you can produce some idiot kid who says he likes it.  And if you abandon the kid based on that, my god I sure hope you're not a parent.

The orthodox church, regardless of what they did in romania, are not about to abandon their programs either.

[keyboardlover]

So dawg, do you actually know anything about Irish history?

I know that's why a lot of Irish emigrated to the USA...are you denying that fact?

[ch_123]

I didn't say that...but if they don't care about their own lives than why should we? For example - there are a lot of street kids in many post-eastern block countries in Europe. There have been countless efforts and organizations set up over the years to try to get them off the streets but in most cases they fail. This is because the kids prefer their lives on the streets.

And what exactly did you draw that conclusion from? You might as well be saying "Countless programs and billions of dollars have been invested in stopping the spread of AIDS in Africa. But AIDS is still spreading, therefore, African people like having AIDS."

[keyboardlover]

I dont doubt some kids will prefer the freedom of the street (especially while they're still kids), but you cant assume everyone who is poor "wants it that way", or will always want it that way. Thats what reagan did (to the embarrasment of the nation).

I'm not assuming. I know from experience that many prefer it that way.

[keyboardlover]

And what exactly did you draw that conclusion from? You might as well be saying "Countless programs and billions of dollars have been invested in stopping the spread of AIDS in Africa. But AIDS is still spreading, therefore, African people like having AIDS."

I only provided an example of people who prefer their lives in poverty...I don't get where you're going with that analogy.

[wellington1869]

I'm not assuming. I know from experience that many prefer it that way.

you're missing the point. First off I doubt its "many". Second the number is irrelevant because you cant assume "all", and because its no way to develop social policy and its no way to run a modern nation.

If you want to run Somalia, on the other hand, yea, it could work.

[keyboardlover]

you're missing the point. First off I doubt its "many". Second the number is irrelevant because you cant assume "all", and because its no way to develop social policy and its no way to run a modern nation.

If you want to run Somalia, on the other hand, yea, it could work.

Ok then, you're the expert. Welly for president!

[wellington1869]

Ok then, you're the expert. Welly for president!

lol, again you're missing the point.  There are ways to make sure that aid programs help develop skills rather than merely being handouts. There are lots of different kinds of experiments with doing that. But none of them throw their hands up in the air and walk away, as you're suggesting. Thats the difference between responsible social policy, and, well, anarchism.

[ch_123]

I know that's why a lot of Irish emigrated to the USA...are you denying that fact?

The logical conclusion from your original post on the matter was that when it came to the million or so people who died in that famine, it was their fault for not running to Boston or Liverpool.

In addition, given that the reference would be lost on many people around here, it also comes across as a less-than-subtle attempt at a swipe at me, and a pretty **** one at that.

[ch_123]

I only provided an example of people who prefer their lives in poverty...I don't get where you're going with that analogy.

How do you know that they prefer to live in poverty? The 'argument' you used to back up this assertion had as meaningful a correlation as my AIDS analogy.

[keyboardlover]

lol, again you're missing the point.  There are ways to make sure that aid programs help develop skills rather than merely being handouts. There are lots of different kinds of experiments with doing that. But none of them throw their hands up in the air and walk away, as you're suggesting. Thats the difference between responsible social policy, and, well, anarchism.

Where did I suggest throwing our hands in the air and walking away from these people? I actually never talked about what we should do - only about the problem. But if you want my opinion on that, I'll give it to you as well. I do think programs should be in place to help educate poor folks and get them jobs. Once they have work a big part of the problem will be solved.

[keyboardlover]

How do you know that they prefer to live in poverty? The 'argument' you used to back up this assertion had as meaningful a correlation as my AIDS analogy.

It's meaningful because it's one of many real life examples of people who prefer their lives in poverty so...wtf are you talking about??

[ricercar]

Well if the parents didn't get COBRA to ensure their kids would be safe I think that would be a case of neglect.

You seem to be uninformed. When one is suddenly unemployed is not the time one can afford 2500 per month on Cobra for a family of 4. Cobra by itself costs more than unemployment benefits for a family of 4.

[keyboardlover]

You seem to be uninformed. When one is suddenly unemployed is not the time one can afford 2500 per month on Cobra for a family of 4. Cobra by itself costs more than unemployment benefits for a family of 4.

I agree that it's expensive, and that is a problem, but if I needed I would do what it took to afford it.

Edit: And I was laid off and out of work for 3 months, and had to pay for COBRA, so I know from experience.

[ch_123]

You don't seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, so let me labor the point for you -

You explain that something isn't working -

For example - there are a lot of street kids in many post-eastern block countries in Europe. There have been countless efforts and organizations set up over the years to try to get them off the streets but in most cases they fail.

So, there could be countless reasons why they failed. Sometimes the efforts and interventions of the developed world fail. Sometimes they just didn't look at the bigger picture. Sometimes they don't consider various local issues. Sometimes the good efforts are hijacked by corruption and inefficiency at various labels. Oh, maybe even it is possible that the people want to be poor. But without considering why it failed, you suddenly conclude -

This is because the kids prefer their lives on the streets.

Which is a groundless assertion, because you've provided no valid argument as for why this is the actual explanation for the situation out of all possible explanations. So, consider once again my hypothetical AIDS analogy.

"Countless programs and billions of dollars have been invested in stopping the spread of AIDS in Africa. But AIDS is still spreading"

Here, again, we have a description of a problem. A complex issue with many possible explanations. In fact, it is most likely that a whole smörgåsbord of them are to blame. But suddenly the random conclusion is drawn -

"Therefore, African people like having AIDS."

And we have a statement which is related the first part, but isn't explained or validated by it. Thus without any further elaboration, it looks stupid, and so does what you said.

[ricercar]

Without a job, one would have to sell property. Would you sell your keyboards ... an only car ... sell your house; would you stop paying your gas/electric/phone to afford health insurance for healthy kids? This is not an idle philosophical choice for many people. There are points at which it's ludicrous to say failure to buy health insurance is neglect.

[ch_123]

This is the other side of it. The last I checked, the amount of uninsured (in health terms) Americans is greater than the amount of impoverished ones. There are situations where families are busting their balls to make a decent living, but can't afford health insurance on top of it all. Why should they be deprived of health care?

[ricercar]

Edit: And I was laid off and out of work for 3 months, and had to pay for COBRA, so I know from experience.

I see your 3 months unemployment, and raise you 21 months, plus two special-needs kids. Let me tell you from MY experience, skipping food and shelter are far more neglectful than discarding COBRA.

[keyboardlover]

ch_123 --

Watch the documentary I mentioned (or one of many others) - both the kids and organizers are interviewed. You'll see that what I'm saying is exactly what they said. I provided examples in real life that backed up my opinion, and it does make sense. So...the only one that looks stupid here (and in many of your other posts) is you.

[keyboardlover]

I see your 3 months unemployment, and raise you 21 months, plus two special-needs kids. Let me tell you from MY experience, skipping food and shelter are far more neglectful than discarding COBRA.

There are lots of other things you can do: relocate, change professions, increase education, etc. to turn those 21 months into much less. it's all up to the person affected. You can't depend on the government to make your decisions for you.

[ricercar]

You seem to be living in a fantasy world. I won't be letting you make my decisions for me either.

EDIT: Consider for a moment that I've tried each of those solutions you suggested. Where's the money for two years of COBRA coming from?

[keyboardlover]

You seem to be living in a fantasy world. I won't be letting you make my decisions for me either.

I know other folks who have done those things, so I know its not a fantasy.

[ch_123]

ch_123 --

Watch the documentary I mentioned (or one of many others) - both the kids and organizers are interviewed. You'll see that what I'm saying is exactly what they said. I provided examples in real life that backed up my opinion, and it does make sense. So...the only one that looks stupid here (and in many of your other posts) is you.

Your case is only as good as how you present it, so I stand by what I said. For example you say -

The Christian church there (Orthodox, not Catholic) gets them homes, food, etc., but the kids end up back on the street. And yes, they have ceased some of the programs because of this.

But you know what, something tells me that if I actually bothered watching that documentary, I would find that the issue was something far more complicated than just "they want to be poor". I mean, giving people food and somewhere to stay is not a solution for poverty. There are plenty of people who are impoverished who have somewhere to stay, and can find food. People need purpose, and that's something that is far harder to implement than just some priests giving people a place to live. I don't know what the answer is there, but hey, if someone like me knew how to fix these problems, I'm sure the experts would have fixed the world many times over by now.

But either way, the validity or not of your point is irrelevant. What you are ultimately doing here is advocating a certain political agenda, and blaming people for not fitting in to your view of the world, and then engaging in ad-hominem attacks against people who question your position. Except, when it comes to blaming people who are genuinely out of luck for being lazy and sucking off people's generosity so that people don't feel bad about depriving them of their most basic human rights, you just look like an ****ing arsehole.

[keyboardlover]

Except, when it comes to blaming people who are genuinely out of luck for being lazy and sucking off people's generosity so that people don't feel bad about depriving them of their most basic human rights, you just look like an ****ing arsehole.

Actually I never blamed such people ...but if I'm wrong then quote where exactly I did. I just mentioned part of the problem.

[ricercar]

I know other folks who have done those things, so I know its not a fantasy.

But we don't live in a one-size-fits-all fantasy world. What works for one person won't guarantee another the same success. People in different situations require different solutions. What may appear as neglect to a rich person who can meet all his needs is hardly guaranteed to be neglect for a less-fortunate individual.

[keyboardlover]

But we don't live in a one-size-fits-all fantasy world. What works for one person won't guarantee another the same success. People in different situations require different solutions. What may appear as neglect to a rich person who can meet all his needs is hardly guaranteed to be neglect for a less-fortunate individual.

All I'm saying is there are always plenty of options to do better.