Calling all Americans Catholics! I have questions for you!

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

The government can control the health care system but does not set a code of ethics for any profession I know of. Any changes to the Hippocratic oath and other principles stemming from it, have to my knowledge, been made by the medical profession itself (self regulation). Which is why, theoretically at least, no doctor or government agency can force a health care person to participate in an abortion (they could always find some other excuse to get rid of the person however).

In the countries that I’ve lived in (four) with socialized medicine, what determines how medical ethics is adhered to, is the way life is valued in the society as a whole. The governments there do not set codes of conduct/ethics for medical professionals - that function is carried out by medical boards and is independent of the health care administration machinery.

Governments does have a role (through it’s various agencies) in defining and ensuring adherence to established standards of care, but the idea that they could turn the basic process of medical triage on it’s head just doesn’t seem plausible and has happened nowhere else that I’m aware of.

Whether or not it has happened in other places is irrelevant. In the USA I can very easily see it happening. Do other places have the ACLU and many other liberal organizations that have kicked God completely out of every organization that is supported by the government? There are so many other examples that are available, but my posts have been too long. Examples are rampant though without my long threads.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

At the time I lived in Florida now I am up in DC

Man, you had it good. you should have stayed in Florida. I wish you all the best in DC. While you are there, will you do me a favor and fix the government!!! LOL

 

[JenDid]

Oh, Thomfra, you should have known better than to cast any doubts on the US.

I think the US has a stronger entrepreneurial culture than does Europe. This extends not only to taking risks to start a business, but also to “get ahead” in life. We want individuals to take responsibility for their own lives. This, of course, can be taken to extremes e.g. persons ranting about “welfare queens”, but I think it explains some of the antipathy to government, and to taxes (taking my money).

I think Catholics, and indeed most Americans, want to help someone who has had bad fortune. But its not unusual to hear judgemental statements about what poor people spend their money on, and snide comments about a person making “bad choices” in their life.

Boy, did I learn that lesson on another thread!

I think Americans are, on the whole, a very generous people. But there are two factors that can work against us: One is the Calvinistic influence of our national heritage and the other is the materialistic outcome of that. I’ve met people who truly believed “I got mine, you get your own,” and those who believed that if they could “make it” then everybody else could too if they just tried hard enough. Both make great excuses for not helping our fellow citizens who are suffering.

With that, I’ll shut up before I get myself into trouble, if I haven’t already.
In Christ,
Jennifer

 

[seekerz]

Whether or not it has happened in other places is irrelevant. In the USA I can very easily see it happening. Do other places have the ACLU and many other liberal organizations that have kicked God completely out of every organization that is supported by the government? There are so many other examples that are available, but my posts have been too long. Examples are rampant though without my long threads.

Indeed some countries with socialized medicine and are more secular than our own, yet basic triage remains the standard of care. Sorry, that example sounds more like hype and fear of the unknown than a scenario with any real foundation.

 

[seekerz]

Boy, did I learn that lesson on another thread!

I think Americans are, on the whole, a very generous people. But there are two factors that can work against us: One is the Calvinistic influence of our national heritage and the other is the materialistic outcome of that. I’ve met people who truly believed “I got mine, you get your own,” and those who believed that if they could “make it” then everybody else could too if they just tried hard enough. Both make great excuses for not helping our fellow citizens who are suffering.

With that, I’ll shut up before I get myself into trouble, if I haven’t already.
In Christ,
Jennifer

You make some valid points. While I don’t believe in trashing ourselves, I do believe that sometimes we are blind to what needs fixing. Admitting imperfections in ourselves/our country is not equivalent to self-hatred or lack of patriotism. Honesty will get us much further than resting on our laurels.

It seems like such a wall always comes up between those with diametrically opposed views on the subject of how the less fortunate should be viewed and treated.

Even the so-called “self-made” men/women would surely realize the benefit to all society (not just to the poor) of helping people attain at least a minimum standard of living.

Terms like “redistribution of wealth” and “stealing from the rich to give to the poor” evoke such emotion! The truth is the book of Acts shows us that early Christians voluntarily (that is, I think the operative term here) gave their worldly possessions on a much larger scale than taxes ever require us to. They didn’t just give from their excess, they gave it all to share in common with one another. My, how far we have come!

In an age where we decry increasingly secular trends in our society, if the government is making us do in small measure (they’re not taking all our wordly possessions) something we should already be willing to do in our hearts - what’s the big deal?

Waste happens everywhere, not just in government. Show me a church that is wealthy and I’ll show you a church where charitable works, excess and waste very likely exist side by side to some extent. Why, because whether in government or in church organisations, human efforts (even well intended ones) are imperfect.

My big question is, if the government is “we the people” why not hold it accountable to the people rather than grumble about it using our taxes to help the poor? Of all the good things government could do with taxes, this has to be near the top of the list…

 

[JenDid]

You make some valid points. While I don’t believe in trashing ourselves, I do believe that sometimes we are blind to what needs fixing. Admitting imperfections in ourselves/our country is not equivalent to self-hatred or lack of patriotism. Honesty will get us much further than resting on our laurels.

It seems like such a wall always comes up between those with diametrically opposed views on the subject of how the less fortunate should be viewed and treated.

Even the so-called “self-made” men/women would surely realize the benefit to all society (not just to the poor) of helping people attain at least a minimum standard of living.

Terms like “redistribution of wealth” and “stealing from the rich to give to the poor” evoke such emotion! The truth is the book of Acts shows us that early Christians voluntarily (that is, I think the operative term here) gave their worldly possessions on a much larger scale than taxes ever require us to. They didn’t just give from their excess, they gave it all to share in common with one another. My, how far we have come!

In an age where we decry increasingly secular trends in our society, if the government is making us do in small measure (they’re not taking all our wordly possessions) something we should already be willing to do in our hearts - what’s the big deal?

Waste happens everywhere, not just in government. Show me a church that is wealthy and I’ll show you a church where charitable works, excess and waste very likely exist side by side to some extent. Why, because whether in government or in church organisations, human efforts (even well intended ones) are imperfect.

My big question is, if the government is “we the people” why not hold it accountable to the people rather than grumble about it using our taxes to help the poor? Of all the good things government could do with taxes, this has to be near the top of the list…

Beautifully stated. :clapping:
In Christ,
Jennifer

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

You make some valid points. While I don’t believe in trashing ourselves, I do believe that sometimes we are blind to what needs fixing. Admitting imperfections in ourselves/our country is not equivalent to self-hatred or lack of patriotism. Honesty will get us much further than resting on our laurels.

It seems like such a wall always comes up between those with diametrically opposed views on the subject of how the less fortunate should be viewed and treated.

Even the so-called “self-made” men/women would surely realize the benefit to all society (not just to the poor) of helping people attain at least a minimum standard of living.

Terms like “redistribution of wealth” and “stealing from the rich to give to the poor” evoke such emotion! The truth is the book of Acts shows us that early Christians voluntarily (that is, I think the operative term here) gave their worldly possessions on a much larger scale than taxes ever require us to. They didn’t just give from their excess, they gave it all to share in common with one another. My, how far we have come!

In an age where we decry increasingly secular trends in our society, if the government is making us do in small measure (they’re not taking all our wordly possessions) something we should already be willing to do in our hearts - what’s the big deal?

Waste happens everywhere, not just in government. Show me a church that is wealthy and I’ll show you a church where charitable works, excess and waste very likely exist side by side to some extent. Why, because whether in government or in church organisations, human efforts (even well intended ones) are imperfect.

My big question is, if the government is “we the people” why not hold it accountable to the people rather than grumble about it using our taxes to help the poor? Of all the good things government could do with taxes, this has to be near the top of the list…

Why? Because the government doesn’t do what needs to be done with the money they tax us. They don’t use common sense on so many levels. And the Church and non profit charitable organizations have more at stake than some politician in Washington who will never have to depend on welfare or socialized health care, just like they will never have to depend on inner city public schools. They are out of touch with the American people, and too many of them have lost their consciences to the love of the almighty dollar in their own bank accounts.

 

[Nino]

Of course the ole line…‘liberals who dont know what they are doing’ has been proven to be of itself ‘stupid’ or in a cunning way…misleading.the ruling class knows exactly what it is doing,they are secular humanistists and hate all that is good in the world…ie: love of family,honor,fidelity ,etc…so they have for years,in movies and sit-coms lampooned the above. And of course they are hardly ‘liberals’ but fascists in the true sense…for they believe in centerlized control of all means of production,of thought and of action. Notice how in education most of the public servants (gag) send their children to private schools but make it extremely expensive for the average family to send their kids to one if ,as is so much the case,the local public school is a disgrace…these are not ‘liberal idiots’ ,but evil people with an agenda…better to control you little ones…the latest fuel outrage is a case in point…we have tons off shore,under-ground,in Alaska but we are being gorged at the pumps…the insiders get rebate checks so they just moan etc on tv and radio ie: Rush,Bill,Sean etc…its all a game for the hearts and souls of we peasants and we are in the last of the ninth…and it dont look good…fans…

 

[Dale_M]

What I believe needs to happen is that the government lets the people know that we have a short time…say a year…to open charities run by churches or other organizations that are not government run…and then the government should cease…STOP…with health care. When people know that they are not paying in taxes, but people will need help in charities that WILL put their money to much better use than the government ever has, WE WILL RESPOND generously.

Cherie, you have a very optimistic view of people.

I have volunteered for a transitional homeless shelter - one which helps a family get back on their feet. It is open year round because the need is year round. Donations pour in from Thanksgiving to Christmas but then dry up for the rest of the year, despite appeals for assistance.

NGOs often refer to “donor fatigue” when natural disasters strike too close together. People feel generous for the first, but then not so generous for the second, feeling that they have already “done their part” despite the fact that the two disasters are unrelated and the need of the second crisis is very real.

I’m sorry, but relying upon individual donations is a very sketchy program. I would feel sorry for anyone who had to rely upon such ephemeral assistance. Certainly it would be a poor way to fund medical care for the needy - the current process of relying upon emergency rooms to provide free care to the poor has been a disaster for hospitals and for the persons who need care.

 

[thomfra]

My big question is, if the government is “we the people” why not hold it accountable to the people rather than grumble about it using our taxes to help the poor? Of all the good things government could do with taxes, this has to be near the top of the list…

This is what have asked. I haven’t got an answer yet. Either the governmental system/democracy is broken, or it works, and you need to vote in an adminstration who will do a proper job.

 

[Oscarthecat]

This is what have asked. I haven’t got an answer yet. Either the governmental system/democracy is broken, or it works, and you need to vote in an adminstration who will do a proper job.

The government is nothing more than a tool- and like any tool, it can perform some specific appllications well. It can also be used in a pinch when you don’'t have the best tool for the job, but it isn’t the ideal choice and you really should get the right tool as soon as you can or you’ll make things worse. Finally, there are those applications that are completely incompatible with the tool. In these cases, using the wrong tool for the wrong job will take a lot of time, cause a lot of frustration, and generally ends with the tool breaking, makes the end product worse than when you began, and somebody involved usually gets hurt.

So no, it is not a question of whether the government is “completely broken,” but whether the government is the best tool, a tool that can be used in a pinch until we get the right tool, or, as I believe, that the government is the worst tool for this job, and using it in this way makes life worse for the poor, hurts everyone else involved, and ends up damages the government so badly that it can’t even do what it was originally intended to do.

 

[estesbob]

Of. And of course they are hardly ‘liberals’ but fascists in the true sense…

A distinction without a difference

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Cherie, you have a very optimistic view of people.

I have volunteered for a transitional homeless shelter - one which helps a family get back on their feet. It is open year round because the need is year round. Donations pour in from Thanksgiving to Christmas but then dry up for the rest of the year, despite appeals for assistance.

NGOs often refer to “donor fatigue” when natural disasters strike too close together. People feel generous for the first, but then not so generous for the second, feeling that they have already “done their part” despite the fact that the two disasters are unrelated and the need of the second crisis is very real.

I’m sorry, but relying upon individual donations is a very sketchy program. I would feel sorry for anyone who had to rely upon such ephemeral assistance. Certainly it would be a poor way to fund medical care for the needy - the current process of relying upon emergency rooms to provide free care to the poor has been a disaster for hospitals and for the persons who need care.

In my other posts, I have stated that tort reform needs to happen before all of the rest to work. If it happened, insurance would go down, medical costs would go down, medicine would go down. And even the poor would be able to afford, with minimal help, to pay for their own medical care. As long as midical care is so expensive because of bogus lawsuits and rewards in the many millions of dollars than the medical industry cannot lower its costs. Yes, I am optimistic in my view of people. One must also understand that for the government to get completely out of the healthcare profession, our citizens would not be paying as much in tax every week, month and year. Therefore, they could put that money to organizations that will notably help those who weren’t being helped by the government, even though the tax dollars were supposed to.
People in America do not mind paying for things that they believe are good and worthwhile to society. The government is just totally destroying everything they claim to be doing good for society. So we need to stop handing over a large part of our hard earned money to them. Let’s use this money for things that can really work.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

The government is nothing more than a tool- and like any tool, it can perform some specific appllications well. It can also be used in a pinch when you don’'t have the best tool for the job, but it isn’t the ideal choice and you really should get the right tool as soon as you can or you’ll make things worse. Finally, there are those applications that are completely incompatible with the tool. In these cases, using the wrong tool for the wrong job will take a lot of time, cause a lot of frustration, and generally ends with the tool breaking, makes the end product worse than when you began, and somebody involved usually gets hurt.

So no, it is not a question of whether the government is “completely broken,” but whether the government is the best tool, a tool that can be used in a pinch until we get the right tool, or, as I believe, that the government is the worst tool for this job, and using it in this way makes life worse for the poor, hurts everyone else involved, and ends up damages the government so badly that it can’t even do what it was originally intended to do.

:yup: :clapping:

 

[bobzills]

My point is, the government messes up even what society has needed. .

It is too bad that it is that way.

 

[seekerz]

It is too bad that it is that way.

I see more hope in holding government accountable than in relying on people to deny themselves junk they don’t need so that the poor can have food and health care. Too many people find it hard to deny themselves the unnecessary even to the point of financial ruin, how would we find enough donors willing to deny themselves for that sake of strangers?

I’m interested in understanding the exact mechanism by which charitable organizations are expected to raise enough to provide health care to the disadvantaged (with the present high cost of services). And no, those costs are not going to tumble with tort reform because they are also determined by other major players involved here, such as the insurance industry.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I see more hope in holding government accountable than in relying on people to deny themselves junk they don’t need so that the poor can have food and health care. Too many people find it hard to deny themselves the unnecessary even to the point of financial ruin, how would we find enough donors willing to deny themselves for that sake of strangers?

I’m interested in understanding the exact mechanism by which charitable organizations are expected to raise enough to provide health care to the disadvantaged (with the present high cost of services). And no, those costs are not going to tumble with tort reform because they are also determined by other major players involved here, such as the insurance industry.

The whole reason that malpractice insurance is so high is because of bogus million dollar lawsuits. That is one of the biggest reasons for tort reform. Then doctors and other medical professionals wouldn’t have to pay the phenomenal premiums. And they wouldn’t have to charge patients so much in order to cover those high premiums.
And the people are already paying phenomenal taxes for programs that will never work…because of beauracracy. Why keep feeding the system that is a failure, rather than taking it away from them…along with taking away the taxes they recieve from us…and the people will give. They already are. Why is it that your faith in humanity is so low? Most ordinary people will give when they see a need. Ordinary people realize that soon it could be them in need. But the fact of the matter is, with tort reform, the costs won’t be phenomenal any longer, so there will be less need for the help to begin with.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I see more hope in holding government accountable than in relying on people to deny themselves junk they don’t need so that the poor can have food and health care. Too many people find it hard to deny themselves the unnecessary even to the point of financial ruin, how would we find enough donors willing to deny themselves for that sake of strangers?

I’m interested in understanding the exact mechanism by which charitable organizations are expected to raise enough to provide health care to the disadvantaged (with the present high cost of services). And no, those costs are not going to tumble with tort reform because they are also determined by other major players involved here, such as the insurance industry.

How do you hold accountable a government that holds itself immune from prosecution?

 

[JKS]

I really like what I’ve heard about MSAs. My brother has one and he likes it a lot. Any American who thinks that the European model of universal health care is a good one for us, should try US military health care. It gets harder all the time to get treatment, and the “insurance” is useless; if you need eye or dental care, it’s almost all out-of-pocket.

Thomfra, you don’t really seem to have any idea of how Catholic hospitals used to run, before malpractice suits raised the cost of everything. Hey, anyone else read the story of the guy in Oregon? He has a medical condition that the state won’t treat, but they sent him a letter saying they WILL, in fact, cover his assisted suicide. I’ve read a few stories like that in Great Britain, too.

British guy (can’t remember who you were and it’s too far back to look and I’ve had a glass of wine tonight besides), petrol/gas is so expensive because your government takes a huge cut in taxes. I agree with what I remember of the rest of your post, though. Your boys are tough and we appreciate all they do (including your younger Prince).

Dumbest comment so far has to be the guy who boasted that Norway doesn’t spend much time worrying about diversity. (5 pages back or so).

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I really like what I’ve heard about MSAs. My brother has one and he likes it a lot. Any American who thinks that the European model of universal health care is a good one for us, should try US military health care. It gets harder all the time to get treatment, and the “insurance” is useless; if you need eye or dental care, it’s almost all out-of-pocket.

Thomfra, you don’t really seem to have any idea of how Catholic hospitals used to run, before malpractice suits raised the cost of everything. Hey, anyone else read the story of the guy in Oregon? He has a medical condition that the state won’t treat, but they sent him a letter saying they WILL, in fact, cover his assisted suicide. I’ve read a few stories like that in Great Britain, too.

British guy (can’t remember who you were and it’s too far back to look and I’ve had a glass of wine tonight besides), petrol/gas is so expensive because your government takes a huge cut in taxes. I agree with what I remember of the rest of your post, though. Your boys are tough and we appreciate all they do (including your younger Prince).

Dumbest comment so far has to be the guy who boasted that Norway doesn’t spend much time worrying about diversity. (5 pages back or so).

Maybe it needs to be explained how the Catholic hospitals used to run. Anyone remember that far back?