Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:04 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,749,491 times
Reputation: 5386

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by irish_bob View Post
yes , lets ignore the fact that countless numbers of people who always worked have found themselves bankrupt through illness , everyone can be wealthy if they possess the will , like waving a magic wand

those starving kids in places like somalia , their also guilty of making the choice to be wretched

You think those that go bankrupt only go because of lack of insurance? I know many personally that go bankrupt because they are unable to work, so is your proposal that you are going to cover all their personal bills while they are sick as well? Fact is for those unable to provide insurance for themselves there have always been options, especially for children.

As for everyone being wealthy, please show me where I said that? In the united states everybody has the option to improve their lives, it is not my choice if someone chooses to work at a minimum wage job, they have options to improve their lives, and if they do not they still have medical care options available to them, which we already subsidize to a lessor extent. Last I checked their are plenty of grants and subsidized school loans, the government even subsidizes child care for those wanting to go back to school, many blue collar jobs are willing to pay well for those willing to work a **** job. The problem is that many either do not want to put in the effort, or if they have the money to pay for insurance they decide it is not a priority, they choose to drive a new car, own or rent a nicer house then they can afford, and blow off insurance knowing that through forced care, bankruptcy, and government plans they are covered if their health takes a dramatic turn for the worse.

I know you are trying to put words into my mouth, but you are looking ridiculous. I personally have worked in the insurance industry, and have a child with severe medical issues that almost forced me into bankruptcy years ago. I know both sides and am tired of reading people who think they know the answers when they have no idea the problems or what solutions exist. Hell I worked in the real estate industry when the market went bust, and people I know personally were committing suicide, being placed in mental health institutions, and/or going bankrupt left and right, and I found a way to fight through it, even going so far as working in the oil industry for 80 hours a week and traveling 300 miles to stay at a hotel all week away from my family just to pay my bills, until I could find something better. Why should I or anybody like me be forced to subsidize health care for someone who chooses to drop out of school and work at a gas station for minimum wage? Why should I have to subsidize someone who lost their job and will only take a job in a similar industry for similar pay? When did personal responsibility become something for everybody but those who choose not to deal with it? Why should I work 60 hours a week now to give my family a middle class lifestyle while these people who choose not to try to improve their lives sit on their ass and collect food stamps and receive health benefits that I help pay for? If someone is physically unable to work because of a disability or just old age, then I have no problem paying my part to help them, but those that choose not to do what it takes, then I do have a problem with them and paying their way.


As for somalia, nice try at deflection, but last I checked we were talking about people in the United States, you want to help kids in Somalia then by all means I am sure they are willing to take donations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:08 PM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,257,854 times
Reputation: 6476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringwielder View Post
Thing is, unless you are stinking rich, you DONT pay for your own healthcare. You pay into a pool...like taxes, which then goes to pay for the $200,000 treatment for cancer that guy down the street gets, the one you dont like, but just happens to have the same insurance company as you because you live in the same state.

I would actually like to see all the right wingers who bleat on about the 'freedom' to pay for yourself and make your own choices, pay their own health costs in total. We would soon see a change of mind about how great a system it is here.

A guy I work with has a degree and has been working at a low paid job for over a year. He has been trying to get another job all the time he has been there, multiple applications and interviews. He cant just 'choose' to better himself. You make it sound like its a done deal if you try hard enough. Its not, and in the meantime if he needs medical aid, he becomes, one of those, according to Republicans, who 'chose' not to improve his position in life and therefore does not deserve any help with his treatment.
Excellent post; very well said.

Quote:
I dont understand such heartless, cold reasoning...but then again, I am a European.
I don't understand it either.........and I'm an American.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:10 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,749,491 times
Reputation: 5386
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
You subsidize many others yourself. When you pay your health insurance premium you are subsidizing others, clear and simple otherwise there would be no insurance at all.
Of course I subsidize others, but that is my choice, since when is it okay for the government to make that choice for everybody?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:13 PM
 
19,046 posts, read 25,199,065 times
Reputation: 13485
Quote:
Originally Posted by mackinac81 View Post
This kind of stuff is why I'm voting for Obama on Tuesday. Why anyone thinks that child should be denied that kind of help is beyond me.
I have a hunch a majority of pro-lifers would be against it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Eastern Colorado
3,887 posts, read 5,749,491 times
Reputation: 5386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringwielder View Post
Thing is, unless you are stinking rich, you DONT pay for your own healthcare. You pay into a pool...like taxes, which then goes to pay for the $200,000 treatment for cancer that guy down the street gets, the one you dont like, but just happens to have the same insurance company as you because you live in the same state.

I would actually like to see all the right wingers who bleat on about the 'freedom' to pay for yourself and make your own choices, pay their own health costs in total. We would soon see a change of mind about how great a system it is here.

A guy I work with has a degree and has been working at a low paid job for over a year. He has been trying to get another job all the time he has been there, multiple applications and interviews. He cant just 'choose' to better himself. You make it sound like its a done deal if you try hard enough. Its not, and in the meantime if he needs medical aid, he becomes, one of those, according to Republicans, who 'chose' not to improve his position in life and therefore does not deserve any help with his treatment.

I dont understand such heartless, cold reasoning...but then again, I am a European.

If he really wants a job here is a link to find one, https://www.google.com/search?q=oil+...ient=firefox-a

hundreds if not thousands of good paying jobs, I am sure they are not in his career field and the requirement to travel to them for 2 weeks at a time suck, not to mention sharing a trailer with about 7 other guys really sucks, then you have the work itself out in the elements and very hard physical labor, but they pay very well including travel costs and great benefits, and they are hiring, even white collar guys who have never done physical labor in their lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:19 PM
 
8,631 posts, read 9,141,307 times
Reputation: 5990
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwiley View Post
Of course I subsidize others, but that is my choice, since when is it okay for the government to make that choice for everybody?
You also subsidize others every time you work and pay federal FICA taxes, which is Social Security and the other health insurance premium you are paying but unable to use until you become extremely ill where no for-profit insurance will cover you regardless of the fact you paid premiums for decades and or old and retired.............. Medicare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:23 PM
 
Location: North Carolina
1,565 posts, read 2,451,676 times
Reputation: 1647
Jesus must have been one selfish, unsympathetic lowlife because his followers are doing an excellent job spreading his teachings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:24 PM
 
Location: the AZ desert
5,035 posts, read 9,226,477 times
Reputation: 8289
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenejen View Post
And Mitt has promised to do away with these very kind of life-saving provisions that Obamacare insures:

Two years ago, Kevin F. Porter's daughter Erin, then 6 and living with leukemia since she was 3, "needed a bone-marrow transplant, just as Erin had nearly reached their insurance company’s lifetime cap and would no longer be covered for medical expenses. Then the family learned that a provision of the Obama health-care law had kicked in, barring lifetime caps for children. 'It lifted a huge burden off our shoulders,” her father, Kevin F. Potter, said. “We could have lost it all to pay for a transplant. Like any child’s parents we would have done it, but because of our president we didn’t have to. We could focus on Erin.”
Ohio Dad’s Star Turn at Obama Rally - Washington Wire - WSJ
Aren't there facilities like St. Jude's Children's Hospital and Shreiner's Hospital for Children who would care for her for free?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:34 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,537,022 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by amerifree View Post
Nuh-uh....sorry. America is what we make it, not what you dream it should be.
Premium healthcare is not free. Those who can afford it "EARN IT". Those who can't
"Are Entitled to Nothing". It's tough, I know. Just don't shovel that "What about the children?" crapola my direction, cause I'll fling it right back at ya!
Medicaid has been around a very long time. You think they wouldn't have paid? You want the poor to receive nothing - yet I can tell you that's not the way it has been or would be even under your Master Romney.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-04-2012, 04:36 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,537,022 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier View Post
No one thinks that a child should be denied that kind of help - we disagree that the government should be the instruments of doing it. I can think of a handful of private charities, right off the bat , whom could help that girl.

But liberals only think government is the answer - because it allows them to control everything.

The difference between a liberal and conservative is this:

A liberal wants to help the girl with leukemia by confiscating money from people at gunpoint(think i am exagerrating? - try not paying your taxes and see who pays you a little visit - I can promise you that they will be armed).

A conservative believes that people acting out of their own free will, coming together to pool time, money, resourses, talents, and compassion - can effectively help those who are in need.

Now which is more compassionate? (a) The liberal taking money at gunpoint and redistributing it or (b) the conservative who donates, volunteers, and supports private charities that do the work such as helping a girl with leukemia in a much more effective and efficient manner without eroding liberty?

If you chose option B- congratulations you are correct.

Now go do the right thing and vote for Mitt Romney on Tuesday.

May God bless this little girl and my God bless America.

So long as it doesn't take one dime out of your pocket, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top