OK, not sure how to do quotes so I hope that I am doing this right but...
I agree, I also am not in favor of government run healthcare although I do think changes need to be made.
What's your objection to government run "health" care?
I object to the cost, I object to the government running the program.
Fair enough. Who do you think should run it?
The thing that really gets me down on threads like this is the attitude that the government owes us all something. The poorest people in the US pay very little or no taxes so who will be paying for this "free" healthcare? I remember reading on another thread about how someone gets about $8K back in taxes every year which is WAY more than she makes.
I don't exactly think the government "owes" people anything. But, I do think the government exists to serve the people, not the other way around. They're the servants of the public, not the masters of the public (well, they're supposed to be). And, you know...even people who don't pay a lot of taxes often contribute to the economy and society around them in a variety of ways. If someone is getting $8000 in assistance (and that's not taxes - you don't get back more in taxes than you earn in the first place!), then she's probably in a pretty bad place right now. That doesn't mean she should be left out to hang if she has a heart attack or develops cancer. Maybe that person is just coasting (although the one person I know personally who fits this bill has serious mental health challenges), and maybe she's contributing to her society in other ways, yk? Maybe she babysits for free so that someone else can go to work and earn money to live on (and pay taxes!). Maybe she does a lot of volunteer or charity work. We're all in a web of interdependency and interconnectedness, and trying to isolate people and say "this person doesn't pay enough tax, so they don't contribute" is flawed thinking.
I mis-spoke. I mean, they got back more than they paid in in taxes--google Earned Income Credit. I don't know that I believe that the government exists to help people, I mean, to a certain degree, yes. But I am a believer in small government and government run health care only serves to expand government. I don't know all the details of this woman's life, and what you've said may be true and I don't begrudge her a leg up, if needed but I do believe we all need to pay our own way. This is not my origional though, obviously, but people get caught up in this web of getting money from the government and they lose the incentive to do better for themselves. I am not a poor people hater so please don't accuse me of that. I just don't think that government assistance is always truly a help.
I know what you mean about people getting caught up in getting money from the government. I've seen it first hand, in more than one case. I will admit that I'm not sure what it has to do with medical care, though. It's not like people can just get a do-it-yourself surgical procedure, yk? And, I also suspect (based on my own observations) that the people who get that caught up in getting money from the government are going to suffer from serious entitlement issues, anyway - and they cause problems for other people wherever they go. Having worked with a couple of them, I'd honestly prefer to see these people on welfare, where my taxes may go to support them, but at least they're not actively getting in my way. YMMV.
This is all doubly true, in light of the fact that substances, manufacturing processes, additives, etc. of dubious safety, healthy benefits, etc. are routinely allowed to be sold as "food". Sometihing's really screwed up when kids are being fed unhealthy, illness promoting "foods" in schools, and then being told "you're don't have enough worth as a human being to get medical care".
Again, I just feel like we are blaming others for the problems. Yes, schools food isn't great. Then pack a lunch and who is saying you don't have enough worth to get medical care? I'm not saying that???
If we're saying that there shouldn't be public/government run "health" care, then you're saying it should be a system of private insurance. Therefore, your ability to receive medical treatment depends on your worth, as defined by the dollar value of your assets/investments. You can't have it both ways. And, if you can't afford to pack a lunch (some people can't), then the child is just screwed. If the shcool doesn't allow bag lunches (yes, I've heard of this, but only in the US, so I haven't experienced it first-hand), then your child is required to either miss meals or eat things that are unhealthy.
The goverment owes the public its best efforts to serve the needs of said public...not the "needs" of corporations, and not lining their own pockets with fat benefits that they deny to other people. They owe the public their best efforts to serve the public. That's what they're there for.
Here we go. Hating the big corporations.....do big corporations not provide jobs for people? Then those people in turn pay taxes? And that tax money goes to the government? I just don't get the mentality behind hating big corporations.
My post had nothing to do with hating big corporations (although I'm not fond of them) and nothing to do with jobs or taxes. (Lots of small business give people jobs, too - until they get shoved out of business by big companies.) I was talking about government...government that governs according to which wealthy lobbyists buy them off most effectively. I can't really blame big corporations for submering their ethics in the quest for profit - profit is why they exist, after all. (I wish they'd take ethical considerations more seriously, but having read a few articles about business ethics, I don't expect it anytime soon. They're quite upfront in such articles that ethical behaviour within a corporation is behaviour that turns a profit for shareholders. Period.) But, I do blame the "people's representatives" for representing their own wallets, instead of doing the job they were elected to do.
And, honestly...a whole lot of big corporations provide as few jobs as they possibly can to get the job done. I don't object to them making a profit, but let's not pretend they "give" people jobs out of the goodness of their hearts, yk? How many jobs have big corporations taken off shore? Do those jobs pay taxes in the US? Those companies are still making a profit off US customers, but they're not employing Americans (obviously, they still employ Americans, but not if they can avoid it).
Things like this are going to bankrupt this country and no one seems to care.
Do you have the numbers to prove that? I'm going to guess that a whole lot more money has been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last few years than has been spent on social assistance. And, while some people do stay on welfare for life, a lot of people use social assistance to get back on their feet, and become economically productive again. If they're just written off, they don't have the chance to do that. This especially applies to medical care! If someone can't afford treatment, then conditions that start off as fairly minor and easily treated can develop into much more serious, and even life threatening, conditions.
You just need to turn on any news channel to see that we have raised the debt ceiling AGAIN. Government run health care is going to add layer after expensive layer to our already bloated government. That is expensive.
Yes. Your government is in big trouble. I asked, specifically, why you're blaming that on "things like this" (ie. the woman who posted about getting the $8,000). That stuff is a drop in the bucket, compared to the money being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm not getting into the complicated back story, but I know a young man who complained of a toothache for months. It could have been handled in a quick office visit with a dentist. While he didn't end up needing expensive treatment, he did end up with a face that looked as if he'd been punched in the nose - bruises all across his face under his eyes, because the toothache was an abscess and the infection had spread through most of his face. If he hadn't seen a dentist when he did, it could, and probably would, have killed him. The reason he didn't see a dentist? His mom didn't have the money to pay for it. YMMV, but I'd rather see $80 of my taxes go to a filling or tooth removal for a child living in poverty, than see the same child die of an easily treatable dental abscess. That young man may end up with a decent job, paying his taxes, etc. He may end up being a SAHD (he's amazing with little kids). He may end up doing a series of crappy, low-paying jobs, where he doesn't "contribute" (because he pays no, or little, taxes), but does work. But, whatever he does, he'll do it, because he survived the abscess. He didn't actually get government help, but he would have qualified for it, and I would have had NO issue with that at all. I think the lives of our citizens are worth more than holding onto every penny of "our share".
People on this site always talk about how openminded they are but if I disagree with having government run health care the all of the sudden everyone thinks that I hate poor people. I am a human, I don't like to see suffering and I said that I believe that there needs to be reform to the current system but I don't want the government running it.
Okay. You don't hate poor people. I guess I just want to know, if you think poor people still deserve to receive some kind of medical care, and not suffer, even if they can't pay for it, what do you think is the answer? Private insurance isn't going to operate without a profit, so they're not going to insure poor people who can't pay. If private insurers won't do it, and the government shouldn't do it...then, who should? I believe you that you don't hate poor people, and don't want to see them suffer...so where should their treatment come from, if not profit-based private programs or the government?
Also, I know that I am going to get flamed for this but I also hate all the USA bashing that goes on, if Canada is so great, then move there! We can all disagree with how things are run, voice our opinions but when people say that they hate the US, it really gets my hackles up.
If people hate the way the US is run, but still consider it home, and are working to change things, then why the heck should they move?? Aside from the fact that Canada is a separate country, and US citizens can't actually just say, "oh, I've decided to live in Canada" and pack their bags, they shouldn't have to move here, just because they don't like the way things are going in the US. I'm not crazy about our current government, either. That doesn't mean that I should just move away from the place where I grew up, and my siblings grew up, and my parents grew up, and my grandparents grew up. I don't know how you feel about your country, but I think my country is more than whatever idiot is currently "in charge". Loving Canada doesn't mean I have to love Stephen Harper...and loving the US doesn't mean anybody has to love the asinine lock the "two" parties have on your political system. I think if the people who "bash" the US all left, you'd find your country in a really ugly state, to be honest. You need the people who "bash", because otherwise, the government is a functional dictatorship.
The system is very much stacked against people who grow up in poverty. That's true in Canada, too, but not to the same degree as in the US. I think both our countries can do better...and medical is very basic thing to leave people high and dry on.
Go ahead, disagree with how it is run, work to change things but someone in this thread said that they were beginning to hate the US. They said those words. People in my family have fought and died for this country and when people say that, it burns me. Also, I don't think that bashing the government is the same as having conversations about what they think is wrong and working to fix it. Bashing doesn't help anything.
I've also heard people who have fought for the US say they're starting to hate the US. What does one have to do with the other? I've got to say that, from the outside, I can't imagine wjy anyone would fight or die for your country...because it wouldn't be for your country. It would be to line someone's pockets. You guys can do what you want to change the government - they're not running the show, anyway. Those big corporations who "provide" all those jobs are way more in charge than any Republicrat. DH and I almost moved down there a few years ago, for various reasons (dh is American). You couldn't pay me to live there now. I'm just really grateful that I, unlike any number of poor people who are already there, don't have to.