A
aspawloski4th
Guest
of Ill put it this way. If I am just surviving what makes me different from the common wild animal?
- Status
E
Ella
Guest
No, it was not. The high unemployment rate was caused, and remains a problem, due to the collapse of our economy, which is due in large part to the unregulated mortgage swapping and resultant crisis that went on during the Bush administration in the early 2000’s.
Well, the 401Ks tanked due to the economy crashing, as I mentioned in my other paragraph. So you can’t have one without the other. They went hand-in-hand.
I LOVE this statement of yours. Believe it or not many people make a living - somehow - on minimum wage jobs. There simply cannot be a society where someone- statistically - does not do these jobs. AND most of those people do not have health insurance. So as a result, they do not go to a doctor until their condition worsens to the point that it takes a lot of money - your money - to treat them in the ER.
By having a public option, and available basic health care for all, we could each save money down the road because these people who are not getting checkups would be doing so, and conditions could be treated before they got chronic. We don’t live in a vacuum- having more healthy citizens benefits us all.
It seems that you can’t stand the idea of someone getting health care who did not earn the money to pay for health insurance. Well, I can’t stand the idea of people getting sick and suffering because they do not have the money for health insurance, when meanwhile my country per capita spends more on health care than any other country in the world. And I have to know that I’m spending more, and getting less- when other countries spend less and cover everybody!
S
Shoshana
Guest
That is certainly one thing I do not understand! How can a country spend so much on one person in health care, the highest indeed, and there are so many who do not have care??? Am I missing something?
P
pathia
Guest
I don’t own a car, a cellphone. I’m in the cheapest apartment that I can bus to work from. The internet is from a neighbor’s wireless. The laptop is a work computer. My daily food consists of ramen, PB&J or anything on drastic closeout sales. I’m slowly losing weight, I was already underweight to begin with mind. My osteoporosis is developing again, because I struggle to afford enough drugs/food to keep it at bay.
Yet despite that my debt continues to grow, every month.
A
Arwen037
Guest
This is precisely why education is a different situation from health care. People who have good educations are less likely to become a burden on society. Plus, again, it is equal. Anyone can go to a public school for the same price. Not only people who can’t pay for private school.
I had major problems with this. This “too big to fail” concept is ridiculous. It was wrong for tax money to line the pockets of already rich men. But, two wrongs don’t make a right. Just because the government already takes money for inappropriate purposes doesn’t mean they should add more.
This sounds like a choice to me. **If **this statement is accurate, that is even more reason I shouldn’t be paying for it. If it’s not just unfortunate circumstances then she doesn’t have any ground to stand on. I’m sorry if you interpret that as discriminatory, but you can’t make a choice and then expect everyone else to pay for it.
I thought that part of the argument for socialized health care was for “equality”, but this is not equality. Everyone should have to pay the same for health care. Right now some people pay it through health insurance, some have to pay out of pocket. But the price is equal for everyone. There is no reason that someone should have to pay MORE just because they have a better job.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
Arwen said:
This sounds like a choice to me. **If **this statement is accurate, that is even more reason I shouldn’t be paying for it. If it’s not just unfortunate circumstances then she doesn’t have any ground to stand on. I’m sorry if you interpret that as discriminatory, but you can’t make a choice and then expect everyone else to pay for it.
When she tryed livng the way the ignorant like think she should she attempted suicide ten times. she happens to have all sets of chromosomes possible in the human spiecies. So by virtue of chromosomes you cant detrmine one way or the other what she should be, she was born with both sets of genitailia so she was physically hermaphroditic. At birth she was given surgery to make her totally male, which was standard practice in those days, but since then the practice has been dropped due to all the problems it causes. She never innerself wise identified as male but a society that was very anti female at the time tried to make a male out someone who couldn’t be made into one. The old understanding of sex and gender has been proved to be far overly simplistic, and the simpletons that think the way of 50 years ago need to sit out of medical related debates and get reducated up to speed on current knowledge.
This sounds like a choice to me. **If **this statement is accurate, that is even more reason I shouldn’t be paying for it. If it’s not just unfortunate circumstances then she doesn’t have any ground to stand on. I’m sorry if you interpret that as discriminatory, but you can’t make a choice and then expect everyone else to pay for it.
When she tryed livng the way the ignorant like think she should she attempted suicide ten times. she happens to have all sets of chromosomes possible in the human spiecies. So by virtue of chromosomes you cant detrmine one way or the other what she should be, she was born with both sets of genitailia so she was physically hermaphroditic. At birth she was given surgery to make her totally male, which was standard practice in those days, but since then the practice has been dropped due to all the problems it causes. She never innerself wise identified as male but a society that was very anti female at the time tried to make a male out someone who couldn’t be made into one. The old understanding of sex and gender has been proved to be far overly simplistic, and the simpletons that think the way of 50 years ago need to sit out of medical related debates and get reducated up to speed on current knowledge.
4
4elise
Guest
I had the same reaction
— I’ll read on.
4
4elise
Guest
Anyone I know who has medicare is pretty happy with this GOVERNMENT RUN program, and in fact is VERY upset at any discussion about changing this… I find the opposition to the option of a government run program for those who can not afford other options very confusing -
“Not with my taxes”… yet our taxes, and insurance premiums pay for the expensive ER visits for those with no insurance —
Do some oppose this option ONLY because of who is proposing it?
4
4elise
Guest
Your employer let you pick your insurance?
Insurance companies are much more likely to drop the ill, not cover people with pre-existing conditions… fight you on payments when you need it the most… Yup - the Insurance companies sure have it right
— however the biggest government run program - MEDICARE does neither. Hum… which one has it right?
4
4elise
Guest
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
Just think of the money that will go to actual healthcare rather than a few greedy millionaires who did no work to earn it.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
To be very honest with you sir. It sickens me very much to think that there are other Catholics with your attitude. Thats why for the most part I just go Mass to meet my obligation, then go home to my life.
R
rtconstant
Guest
This mostly a recent American phenomenon. It has to do with Calvinist ideals entering politics.
C
Contarini
Guest
E
Ella
Guest
Contarini, I would be interested in what Calvinists do think about this.
As regards the person you quoted, I think maybe they meant ‘prosperity gospel’ followers.
R
rtconstant
Guest
I really should have said Evangelicals. And I don’t even mean that as implying all of evangelicals or that it is necessarily a de facto of their theology. Just that in those circles in America these sorts of ideals have become an assumed position. I should have elaborated more, as my post was too terse and so could offend. I apologize.
C
Contarini
Guest
Actually, to be honest I read the post to which you were responding too quickly and misread what it was saying.
As for whether Arwen’s ideas reflect "Calvinist’ ideas, it depends on which Calvinist ideas. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’m skeptical of the “Weberian” thesis that attributes to Calvinism the notion that wealth is generally a blessing from God and the poor usually deserve to be so. But certainly Calvinism can lead to callousness on the grounds that “ungodly” people are unworthy of compassion. It all depends on which version of Calvinism you go with. The “theonomist” writer Gary North (anathema sit) does use Calvinism to argue for libertarian capitalism, arguing that the “godly” shouldn’t have to pay to supply the needs of the “ungodly.” But other Calvinists of my acquaintance would say that this is a total perversion of the historic Reformed position.
I would actually say that attributing such ideas to evangelicalism as a whole is even less fair. 19th-century evangelicalism was very much tied to social reform and taking care of the poor, even if this was sometimes patronizing and moralistic. But certainly the individualism of modern evangelicalism has done immense damage.
Edwin
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
There is an aire of truth to it. Here in Grand Rapids Im surrounded by Christian Reformed Dutch, who think John Calvin is infallable.
A
aspawloski4th
Guest
Boy if you guys were at the dinner table when I was growing up, and listening to the lectures my dad was giving on how evil and satanic John Calvin was. Phew! And just for disobeying a Pope.
R
royal_archer
Guest
a soul.
- Status