Republican Debate?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems to me that perhaps health care isn't a human right, it's more in the goods and services category. If it were a human right, then wouldn't it be moral to force health care providers to provide health care whether there was any benefit to the provider or not. Could you force a nurse to provide nursing care, even if what she really wanted was to retire and raise chickens? I'm not convinced that government can provide any goods and services more efficiently than the private sector. Efficiency and government don't seem to happen in the same space; there's no incentive for it, and I haven't seen evidence of governmental efficiency so far. I agree that the system we had wasn't always "fair", but neither is its replacement. I don't know what the answer is, but I see a lot of politicians asking the wrong questions.

And yes, Jesus was NOT a socialist. He wasn't concerned with governmental power structures of this world. And he didn't take other people's resources to give "health care" to those he encountered. Seems to me he cared more about their spiritual well being than their physical well being, and what he gave them he gave from his own resources. He was kind of unique that way, I suppose.

I'm not sure it's fair to call President Obama an anti war socialist, in any case. Now we have Iraq, Afghanistan, AND Lybia. I'm just glad I'm not president. Seems like a tough job.
 
Quote:
And I would argue that the Democrats are the ones who despise the poor, even though they pander to them, as a voting base.

The War on Poverty was never designed as a hand up, but a hand out. It was and is nothing but the redistribution of wealth. If I can get someone to send me a check for $400 plus enough food stamps to feed my family, why should I ever leave the rocking chair. After all, working for money is so much harder.

It worked just as planned....I guess the Democrats can do something right.
 
I'm all in favor of helping those who truly need it but at some point they need to help them selves. While I am now retired, when I was a fire fighter/paramedic, I often was called to homes where there would be three generations all living on welfare. That sure doesn't seem like a successful program to me.
 
If medicaid truly worked the way it should,
I think it could be a good thing. Working in the
medical field, I see so much of it abused. Illegals,
parents and children with Iphones, Droids, driving
a newer car than myself, but they can't pay the $3 copay.
I do believe also they should have to pass a drug test
to receive benefits. All other goverment workers have too.
 
Quote:
And I would argue that the Democrats are the ones who despise the poor, even though they pander to them, as a voting base.

The War on Poverty was never designed as a hand up, but a hand out. It was and is nothing but the redistribution of wealth. If I can get someone to send me a check for $400 plus enough food stamps to feed my family, why should I ever leave the rocking chair. After all, working for money is so much harder.

It worked just as planned....I guess the Democrats can do something right.

Yes! It is redistribution of wealth!
thumbsup.gif
 
Anyone else wish we had a time limited campaign? I would love to see a rule with no campaign ads until six months before the election. I think it is horrible that presidential campaigns basically start as soon as the election is over.

I'm also not that fond of the whole primary thing. To get the nod from the party, candidates must pander to the fringe of their parties, and to states that have only minor play on the national stage. Iowa really isn't a good reflection of the country at large, but it sure looks that way during the primary season.

And for presidential elections, I would love a national voting period...say from 5 am East Coast time to 9 pm Alaska/Hawaii time. This would even the playing field for the west coast, without knowing the outcome of elections before voting is finished in the West.
 
Mom's Folly, I agree. Prohibit campaigning till the last 6 months. It'll give those pols time to actually govern. I get so tired of it. The silly season starts WAY too soon. Even the President is campaigning already, and he doesn't even have to compete in primaries.
 
I have yet to hear a speech from our current president that hasn't been a blatant campaign speech. It seems that all of the politicians are guilty of applying for a new job without proving they are capable of doing anything.
 
Quote:
Our life experienced color our thinking, even for those that see everything in only black and white, with no gray anywhere. I've got relatives that have abused the welfare system. I've seen businesses that have abused the regulations. We are dealing with people in an unfair world. Some will do what is right, even if they are poor. Some will abuse the system, even if they are business owners. Some stories:

My nephew was drawing $11 an hour in unemployment. The only jobs he could find to even apply for paid $8 per hour and would require a move to a place of his own. If he was not working, he could live with his widowed grandmother, not pay rent other than his labor and part of the groceries, help take care of her with the $11 an hour, and help her raise a garden and can and freeze quite a bit of vegetables to help her out. Would you seriously look for an $8 an hour job under those circumstances until the $11 ran out? If you have never been in similar circumstances, be careful how you answer. That $8 was without benefits.

My grandparents came from way back in the hills. Before Medicare and Medicaid, and before I was born, my grandfather had a stroke. There was no money for medical treatment. He lay in bed at home with his wife and family from when he had the stroke in September until he died in December. Can you inmagine the mood in that house while he lay there dying? Can you imagine what his wife was going through, trying to figure out how to raise a bunch of kids without a husband? Maybe that's part of why Mom never made it past 4th grade.

Parts of the system are broken. I have no problem with helping people that really need help, but yeah, some people learn to milk the system. It becomes a generational thing. You have exceptions, I'm one, but people that are born into poverty tend to remain in poverty. That's what they learn from their parents. There education does not prepare them for success. And by education, I don't just mean schools but also their life experiences and what they learn from their parents and other role models. I'm a strong believer in a good education, but the best of schools cannot overcome bad parents or people that don't even know how to be good parents. If they were not taught to be good parents, how can you expect a majority to be good parents? How do you break that cycle? How do you solve that problem? Have the government take over a lot of raising the kids? Hitler showed it can work with his youth programs, but with the government taking over raising the kids, you are on a real slippery slope that I don't want to go to.

People that are not used to having money look at it differently than people that are used to having some. Instead of looking to the future, they look to the present. What can I get for this money now because I'm not going to have any in the future. An example. Many decades ago in my youth, a trailer burned down. The family lost everything. It was covered on TV and others donated about $60,000 to help the family out. So they made a down payment on a new trailer, a down payment on a new car, a down payment on a TV, and several other down payments. They did not pay anything off, just made down payments. Back then, for $60,000 they could have bought a lot of that stuff, totally paid it off. But they did not know how to handle money so within a few months, they were back with nothing. It seems like stupidity, but I think it was more that they just did not understand.

I don't know how you fix the problems. You have to have written rules and regulations for people to qualify for help. Some people are going to find a way to abuse any written system. It is practically impossible to put something on paper that somebody can't figure out a way around. And it is not necessarily laziness. Often you can do better milking the system than holding down a regular job. I think a lot of it is that it is a learned behavior. They can get by at a certain acceptable level by milking the system and maybe getting cash for other under-the-table taxfree jobs. Their ambition and pride is such that that is a perfectly acceptable way of living. I could not do it. I saw how much it hurt Dad to accept the free peanut butter and such when he hit a rough spot due to the economy changing and him finding that his kids needed cash for school lunches and school clothes. He could not raise those on the farm, so he had to take a factory job. He wanted to farm, not work in a factory. But he had the pride and responsibility that he was going to take care of his family.

I think a start is to reduce the benefits to a point that they allow people to live but don't allow them to live better than having a job. Enough for a safety net but not enough for a satisfactory way of life. Also, I saw how my niece finally started really looking for a job when some of her welfare benefits ran out or depended on her getting training and finding a job. I think this kind of reform will help, but how you put the laws on paper in written form to stop people from figuring a way to abuse it, I don't know. How do you break that family tradition of not trying to better yourself? That concept of not trying to better yourself and taking care of yourself is so foreign to me, I just don't have a clue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom