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 05-18-2017, 05:59 AM
 
29,388 posts, read 32,534,725 times
Reputation: 23770

Advertisements

A good read on American social programs in place at the moment=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social..._United_States
Amazes me that Republicans would like to eliminate all these social programs that are beneficial to many and employ many in the admin of said social programs.While some may mistakenly call this socialism to me these social programs in place are the signs of a successful and prosperous society.For those that think these social programs should be eliminated i'm sure they would be first in line to derive benefits from these social programs if needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:00 AM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,411,112 times
Reputation: 1867
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariatozz View Post
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
Here's the trick, have you lived in Europe? I mean actually resided there, not just spent a vacation, or an exchange term at school there? I mean actually lived there for say three or more years? The problem with the fascination of the left in the U.S. with the feel-good social programs of Europe is their deliberate, and willful ignorance to the fact that those programs simply do not work. They are fiscally unsustainable. For a recent example, see the EU wide austerity measures from 2008-2010.

The reality is that yes, people in places like the U.K. do pay significantly higher taxes, but do not receive the "far better health care" you mention as a return on their investment. The NHS is in a shambles. It has operated in the red for nearly 2 decades. The quality of care is nowhere near what we enjoy in the U.S. Wait times for all elective procedures, and care rationing are very real things. I know this, because I lived there, and had to use the NHS for medical care.

So let me ask you in return, is it worth paying a significantly higher amount in taxes, and getting a lower standard of care in return, so long as everyone has the same low level of care?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:02 AM
 
55,127 posts, read 20,662,356 times
Reputation: 10788
Everyone can access health care in the U.K. not so here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:05 AM
 
Location: near a beach
13,725 posts, read 13,047,492 times
Reputation: 21146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua View Post
All of my friends and family have fed, clothed, and housed their families without any help.

I'm willing to help people in need. I'm not willing to help people who suck.
"I've got mine, who cares about you?"

Who are you to judge? Better to leave social decisions to a qualified social worker. A social worker has been trained to determine whether someone is deserving of help. They're not just throwing money at anyone, they're helping people who are down on their luck. The social services need reforming, it's true. No one should be on food stamps or welfare forever as a life style. There have to be limits except in cases where the person is disable or elderly and can't help themselves. This country is divided by extremes--all or nothing, a lot of people don't see that there are shades of gray in between.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:05 AM
 
5 posts, read 908 times
Reputation: 18
I'd be more supportive of increasing social programs, but it seems like most people in the "middle class" don't even benefit from them because they "make too much". For example, the new free college in New York is only for students from parents with a combined income of 100-125k, which is a pretty low threshold for a northern state where the cost of living is more expensive. The system is set up so that poor income families can have tons of children because they will get financial support from the government, and the wealthiest families are all set. As someone who will be part of the lingering middle class in a few years when I'm done with my training, I don't even know if I'll be able to afford even just one kid. I won't get financial help, and after all the necessary expenses are paid for, there isn't much left over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:07 AM
 
55,127 posts, read 20,662,356 times
Reputation: 10788
Quote:
Originally Posted by CountryZebra View Post
I'd be more supportive of increasing social programs, but it seems like most people in the "middle class" don't even benefit from them because they "make too much". For example, the new free college in New York is only for students from parents with a combined income of 100-125k, which is a pretty low threshold for a northern state where the cost of living is more expensive. The system is set up so that poor income families can have tons of children because they will get financial support from the government, and the wealthiest families are all set. As someone who will be part of the lingering middle class in a few years when I'm done with my training, I don't even know if I'll be able to afford even just one kid. I won't get financial help, and after all the necessary expenses are paid for, there isn't much left over.
Maybe you should move....(said sarcastically in reply to earlier comments)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:10 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
4,506 posts, read 5,754,117 times
Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat View Post
Here's the trick, have you lived in Europe? I mean actually resided there, not just spent a vacation, or an exchange term at school there? I mean actually lived there for say three or more years? The problem with the fascination of the left in the U.S. with the feel-good social programs of Europe is their deliberate, and willful ignorance to the fact that those programs simply do not work. They are fiscally unsustainable. For a recent example, see the EU wide austerity measures from 2008-2010.

The reality is that yes, people in places like the U.K. do pay significantly higher taxes, but do not receive the "far better health care" you mention as a return on their investment. The NHS is in a shambles. It has operated in the red for nearly 2 decades. The quality of care is nowhere near what we enjoy in the U.S. Wait times for all elective procedures, and care rationing are very real things. I know this, because I lived there, and had to use the NHS for medical care.

So let me ask you in return, is it worth paying a significantly higher amount in taxes, and getting a lower standard of care in return, so long as everyone has the same low level of care?
The UK ranks better than the US in almost any health category like infant mortality etc. If you are wealthy, yes the US has hospitals worth traveling to. For the bottom 80% not so much. Thousands in the US die because they will not see a doctor about a minor issue before it becomes a major issue due to bills. Pricing is hidden. Etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:10 AM
 
14 posts, read 2,429 times
Reputation: 19
Default Because limbaugh, fox , and the repubs taught them to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariatozz View Post
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
After years of brainwashing by am hate talk since Limbaugh hatred and bigotry turned out a generation of greed and hate
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:11 AM
 
35 posts, read 3,087 times
Reputation: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
Because many people don't like to pay for the decisions of others
I understand that. But do poor children choose to be impoverished. 1/5 go to bed hungry. Did they decide that?

What about the blind and cripples? Did they decide those infirmities would be some sort of governmental gravy train?

What about NAIRU? The non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment which requires a pool of unemployed labor to keep inflation at bay. Should we resign that unemployed labor pool to poverty and life on the streets?

I think we need a robust safety net for these types of people...sort of like, I don't know, social insurance against that misfortunes and depredations of society and life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2017, 06:11 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
4,272 posts, read 1,469,023 times
Reputation: 3544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariatozz View Post
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
How about you pay for your own life choices. Socialism is dead.
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

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $99,000 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.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top