Rubric "A news and the story behind" in the german "SPIEGEL" 33/2010.
Title: The Rescue Shot - "How a patient tried to solve an insurance issue."
"Ms. Myers, 41 years old, homosexual, smokes, worked with toxic waste for 23 years, with asbestos, with radioactive material. The nightmare of every insurance company, high risk candidate for cancer, asthma, skin diseases. She would have had to pay more than a thousand dollars a month. Sorting waste earned her 8$ an hour."
She suffered a very painful shoulder injury when walking the dog.
""There is no mortal danger", said the doctor at Lakeland Community Hospital in Niles, Michigan, "we can't treat your shoulder, because you have no health insurance." The nurse gave her a painkiller. [...] Myers swallowed some pills, continued her work, the pain in her shoulder got worse. She voted for Obama, partially because of the health care reform. Nothing changed yet. 47 million Americans without health insurance, Myers one of them. She passed out at the assembly line. Next day she called her employer, reported sick. "You don't need to come anymore at all" they told her. At that point she, daughter of a cashier and youngest of six childs, made a decision: She would make politics herself, set an example."
Afterwards, she shot her shoulder to make the injury a life threatening one and called 911.
"The ambulance came and brought her to the hospital, 500$. In the hospital they radiograph her shoulder. The gunshot wound only is a flesh wound, nothing serious. They inject a pain killer in her arm. They give her two slices of bread, a cookie and a glass of tea. Six hours later she leaves the hospital, 1800$. [...] "The whole thing didn't achieve me anything" Myers says and takes a pull of her cigarette. She laughs humorless, "the pain is exactly as bad as before." [...] She is charged with an lawsuit for unathorized use of a gun inside a city area. Myers hopes for imprisonement. "In jail" she says, "they even have a dentist.""
Just one more story that makes it totally unbelievable and even disgusting to me that there still are Americans who deeply refuse a health care reform. A nightmare for affected people as well as doctors who aren't allowed to treat ill or injured people.
Though it is a terrible story and exposes some of the worst parts of our health care system, I strongly believe that you can't make policy decisions that will affect millions of people based on emotion wrought from stories like this. Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be fixed. Yes, reform in some way is needed; though I think the path that the current health care reform is taking is flawed. But be very careful about letting stories like this inform what policies you think should be implemented; there are a million tragic stories about every cause, and it's a simple fact that we can't eliminate all of them. That's what leaders and people in a government/society have to do, make hard choices about which problems to tackle with limited resources, and you have to always take into account the costs, both implicit and explicit.
This story is pretty shocking. I will say that I have family who live in the states and luckily all of them have decent coverage, but they were hoping that changes would happen soon after Obama's election. They say not much has changed...
The problem stems from the media imho people who don't have healthcare coverage think that the majority of the tax burden will fall on them and they don't want to pay for "other people's" healthcare. As a result nothing happens and when you are the one who gets sick... Its pretty devastating.
Here's hoping they can institute some kind of drastic measures in the future to make the system work better for those less fortunate souls.
Also for canadians who read this. Know that we may soon be in the same boat as our government is not properly funding our healthcare system and many attempts have already been made to privatize healthcare in Canada. It will be a sad day when it happens but I have no doubt that it will eventually since healthcare is a billion dollar industry in the states.
On August 24 2010 14:57 theonemephisto wrote: Though it is a terrible story and exposes some of the worst parts of our health care system, I strongly believe that you can't make policy decisions that will affect millions of people based on emotion wrought from stories like this. Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be fixed. Yes, reform in some way is needed; though I think the path that the current health care reform is taking is flawed. But be very careful about letting stories like this inform what policies you think should be implemented; there are a million tragic stories about every cause, and it's a simple fact that we can't eliminate all of them. That's what leaders and people in a government/society have to do, make hard choices about which problems to tackle with limited resources, and you have to always take into account the costs, both implicit and explicit.
You can't eliminate all of them? You can still eliminate a lot of cases :S
Plus, you say you have limited resources, when a shitload of cash is spent on a war per month in the midst of an economic crisis. I bet they could give less money to the army and spend more money on the people.
Yeah, Obama is really going to save us! I mean, he already bailed out all those failed companies so their CEO's could shit on gold toilets. Then he was nice enough to pass health care reform, which has done nothing except make it so I can be thrown in jail and fined if I don't want to buy health insurance.
Thanks Obama!
As someone going into the healthcare field (I'm an EMT and am trying to get into med school) I can say that whereas some reform would be nice, what we passed is doing nothing but terrible harm.
All I've seen from this most recent election is that democrats and republicans are all the same. They just pander and pander to whoever feeds them the money (unless it's the taxpayer!) and no matter who is in office, they just want more government power.
I find it terribly sad that I can't say I have ever had the chance to say I was proud of one of my politicians.
We got wallstreet CEO's that need bailouts so they can get their year end bonus.
Far more important imo
Well said sir. They wouldn't want to miss that extravagant party on their cruise ship they had planned all year, now would they. Or perhaps their gold golf club wasn't good enough, and they needed to replace it with platinum or diamond.
On August 24 2010 14:57 theonemephisto wrote: Though it is a terrible story and exposes some of the worst parts of our health care system, I strongly believe that you can't make policy decisions that will affect millions of people based on emotion wrought from stories like this. Yes, there are a lot of things that need to be fixed. Yes, reform in some way is needed; though I think the path that the current health care reform is taking is flawed. But be very careful about letting stories like this inform what policies you think should be implemented; there are a million tragic stories about every cause, and it's a simple fact that we can't eliminate all of them. That's what leaders and people in a government/society have to do, make hard choices about which problems to tackle with limited resources, and you have to always take into account the costs, both implicit and explicit.
Yes, that's right. Yet this area of health care might be the once with the closest relation to ethics and fairness. Illness and injury are things that anyone can be affected by without doing any mistakes, yet people of low income or, in this case, also high insurance charges because of the job they do are easily getting punished by the current American health care system. That's something nobody can justify as a just system.
You're certainly right with saying "there are a million tragic stories about every cause, and it's a simple fact that we can't eliminate all of them" but as I just wrote, this topic is one of those that are closely related to ethics and should aim for finding a compromise of eliminating as many tragic stories as possible without dealing damage to economy or other people.
Makes me glad living in Germany once more, yet fearful of certain political parties here who like to stress words like "personal responsibility", because stories such as this is what people get for pursuing economic liberalism too far.
maybe lay off the smoking and find a new god damn job? I have a shitty job at a grocery store not handling toxic waste and get 9$/hr +health insurance. A pretty decent amount of employers, even in non-professional jobs, offer health insurance benefits. I have a strong suspicion this story is made up, it's just too hyperbolic. Who the hell is dumb enough to handle toxic waste for only 8$/hr for decades AND smoke cigarettes anyway? Even if this is real, it's such a tiny minority of our population of people who are in this kind of situation.
Playing the blame game now? I have NO healthcare, No dental, and no eye care plans. Point? I have a faster then normal heartbeat (irregular, and yes I have been tested for this), wisdom teeth that need to come out (they are coming in kinda sideways). I make 12 a hour. Give me pity.
Oh I suffer, but this world wasn't built around me. For the system to benefit everyone, some concessions have to be reach. Point is this world isn't fair, and while things could be made easier you DON"T get to walk away scott free while somebody else has to pay for it, irregardless if it was their fault or not.
I really can pull that for the Canadian (use as an example) healthcare system if you want to point at each other.
On August 24 2010 15:07 Drowsy wrote: maybe lay off the smoking and find a new god damn job? I have a shitty job at a grocery store not handling toxic waste and get 9$/hr +health insurance. A pretty decent amount of employers, even in non-professional jobs, offer health insurance benefits. I have a strong suspicion this story is made up, it's just too hyperbolic. Who the hell is dumb enough to handle toxic waste for only 8$/hr AND smoke anyway? Even if this is real, it's such a tiny minority of our population of people who are in this kind of situation.
Wow, are you serious about this? It sounds a bit too serious to be ironical if you ment it that way...
Who is dumb enough to do that? People who have low qualifications or aren't demanded by employers for other reasons so they rather do a crappy job than just ending their lifes... The worse the situation and the less the chances to escape it, the sooner people start with drugs, even if it's only tobacco.
The US currently has 9.7% unimployment (15 Million people), 6.8 million of them long-term unemployed. Do you really think every one of these could find a decent job?
The whole story wasn't intended to be important for this sole case. The representation is the important part. The column issues one news a week and goes in-depth into the case to reflect the representation of the single case.
On August 24 2010 15:10 angelicfolly wrote: Playing the blame game now? I have NO healthcare, No dental, and no eye care plans. Point? I have a faster then normal heartbeat (irregular, and yes I have been tested for this), wisdom teeth that need to come out (they are coming in kinda sideways). I make 12 a hour. Give me pity.
Oh I suffer, but this world wasn't built around me. For the system to benefit everyone, some concessions have to be reach. Point is this world isn't fair, and while things could be made easier you DON"T get to walk away scott free while somebody else has to pay for it, irregardless if it was their fault or not.
I really can pull that for the Canadian (use as an example) healthcare system if you want to point at each other.
I like your way of thinking but I just cringe when I see "irregardless."
On August 24 2010 14:58 groms wrote: This story is pretty shocking. I will say that I have family who live in the states and luckily all of them have decent coverage, but they were hoping that changes would happen soon after Obama's election. They say not much has changed...
The problem stems from the media imho people who don't have healthcare coverage think that the majority of the tax burden will fall on them and they don't want to pay for "other people's" healthcare. As a result nothing happens and when you are the one who gets sick... Its pretty devastating.
Here's hoping they can institute some kind of drastic measures in the future to make the system work better for those less fortunate souls.
Also for canadians who read this. Know that we may soon be in the same boat as our government is not properly funding our healthcare system and many attempts have already been made to privatize healthcare in Canada. It will be a sad day when it happens but I have no doubt that it will eventually since healthcare is a billion dollar industry in the states.
The bill is passed and healthcare will be available for those who are unemployed or denied. It doesn't take effect until 2014 i believe, although we start paying for it this year so you will notice a tax increase if you live in the states. This is unless it is blocked by republicans if they win the senate in the upcoming elections.
On August 24 2010 15:10 angelicfolly wrote: Playing the blame game now? I have NO healthcare, No dental, and no eye care plans. Point? I have a faster then normal heartbeat (irregular, and yes I have been tested for this), wisdom teeth that need to come out (they are coming in kinda sideways). I make 12 a hour. Give me pity.
Oh I suffer, but this world wasn't built around me. For the system to benefit everyone, some concessions have to be reach. Point is this world isn't fair, and while things could be made easier you DON"T get to walk away scott free while somebody else has to pay for it, irregardless if it was their fault or not.
I really can pull that for the Canadian (use as an example) healthcare system if you want to point at each other.
I like your way of thinking but I just cringe when I see "irregardless."
It is a word, and yes it is a double negative, but words are also used for the tone and emotion behind it.
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
+1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
Let's see... What are the points made in this thread: - bailout... Not sure why you would even pick up a totally unrelated issue, but since I sense a strong negative connotation in those posts, I feel the need to try to make you at least read up something relevant on this topic. Everybody with a basic understanding of how the world's economy works will understand what the idea behind the bailout was. It was absolutely neccessary and there was basically no way around it. That's the reason why whole Europe and Japan amongst others passed their own stimulus packages including bank and whatever bailouts. It might be arguable if the American stimulus package (or any other for that matter) was perfectly planned, if everything was neccessary or if priorities have been set correctly, but it is a fact that there was absolutely no other option besides a stimulus package with bailouts for some major companies... - sueing her employer (for whatever reason) omg... good luck starting a lawsuit when you have no money. In most justice systems around the world it is of far lesser importance who is right than who has more money. - her own fault for working such a shitty job (should have gotten a better one) well yeah, she accepted the job, knowing what she was going to do. But I'd guess that she has very poor education and would probably be considered "stupid". She surely didn't consider the consequences back then. Also, I'm sure that there isn't much that she'd be able to work anyway. By the way, you do realize that unemployment stems not only from people's lazyness but also from lack of jobs?
As far as this woman's case is concerned, it is sounds like a pretty dumb decission to shoot yourself no matter what. Obvisouly she was in great pain, especially since she fainted at her job, so I guess she didn't see any other option. Nevertheless, the whole story is a prime example of why universal health care should be implemented in every developed country in the world (Actually, is there a developed country besides the US that doesn't have universal health care?). In the end it is an ethical question, but I really don't understand how a country, in which charity is valued so highly, and in which so many religious zealots dwell, can be opposed to an act of humanity that would benefit basically everybody.
This is really sad... I know a lot of people that intentionally commit a crime just to be sent to jail. It truly is horrific that people are refused medical treatment... I've even heard horror stories of people WITH insurance being refused treatment by insurance companies...
For a swede, this sounds really medieval... Healthcare should of course be free for everyone. I doubt anyone in this country is even against it. I guess it is a difference in upbringing and morals, but I just can't understand people who are against this. For me it's so unbelievably barbaric. I'm at a loss for words
On August 24 2010 18:25 Mykill wrote: i'd be smarter to shoot yourself in Canada. they fix you up for free at least.
this healthcare crap in US is retarded and Obama doesn't change shit he really isnt any different minus his skin color.
he tried to change things, but his proposition got butchered by retard republicans whose only aim was to make sure the reform would be a failure so that they can later say 'look how much you fucked up' in the upcoming elections and hope that people will forget how deep george W bush ran the country into the ground
obama's original proposal was good, the 'thing' that got passed is an abomination
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
+1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
I don't know how your health insurance works in USA, but have you ever seen someone in real pain? Those people would really shoot themselves if they think it would fix them.
On August 24 2010 18:30 IntoTheBush wrote: I guess she snorted her whole script of Oxy's within the first week. She was probably dope sick and needed the drugs. Anyone think of that?
That was my first thought as well.
People like the woman in the OP are examples of what is wrong with the country, not a shining example of why it needs to be changed.
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
+1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
If she didn't work in a center to recycle toxic waste / nuclear waste, someone else would. Unless you expect the waste to recycle by itself which will not happen. Every country need people like this to accept to work in these recycling centers. Saying you wouldn't want to support these people as a taxpayer is terrible. Unless you never use electricity from nuclear plants, or never use any products that generated toxic waste during his manufacture (most do).
I agree with you regarding her smoking habit.
Her shooting herself, as the article mentions, was more to set an example.
Story sounds like a spoof, I don't know any company disposing of toxic waste, specifically toxic waste that is even noteable on an insurance form, that only pays 8 dollars an hour? Pretty sure I made 8 dollars an hour 5 years ago working at Taco Bell.(Ironically, grade d meat can be considered toxic to some, but not m stomach!)
And any company disposing of waste on a professional level will most certainly have health insurance, it is required by any responsible company and that is a general UAC violation unless she did not work full time(her fault). Even self-pay programs through your emplyer cost about 30-40 bucks a month.
In any case, 8 dollars an hour will bring you about 800 bucks a month, which, while shit, can still fund your own privately owned insurance, which costs the average person about 75-120 bucks a month.
I've got to agree with the guy from Sweden, this really seems medieval to me as well. But everyone has a right to their opinion, and if there isn't enough compassion around to want general healthcare, then I'd like to look at the economic side of things instead.
Reading this thread, I'm amazed how many think that this is a clear case, where on one side insuring everyone will cost money, and on the other side keeping the status quo, the uninsured citizens wont cost others money.
But is that really true ? How does a person who becomes unable to perform work because of disease or injury that could be cured impact the economy ? Is having one more unemployed, unproductive person in the country a good thing ? What will that person eat ? How will he/she pay rent ?
Maybe charity can help, maybe the person will steal, maybe the person will do somthing to go to jail to get medical care and food. So how are these things NOT costing the general public money but an insurance does ?
Would it not be much preferable for the community to help that person out, curing the disease or injury so she can support herself again and not continue costing others money ?
I don't like to sound insincere but honestly this is the analogical equivalent of cheesing. The time to work out insurance was when she was insurable. She worked for 23 years and only thought about insurance after she needed it. Drawing on my analogy, this is exactly like proxy gating someone and then complaining later that their main is completely undefended. If someone made that same post here on TL, complaining about how hard it is to deal with attacks when all of your buildings are on the other side of the map, they would be met with "obviously, you idiot; if you proxy gate cheese, your base is undefended, so stop doing it." Trying to blame this problem on the health care system is saying that we should be giving the cheesing player probe insurance into the midgame.
I was valedictorian of electrical engineering at my university and went through all of my schooling on scholarship. It wasn't actually very hard; all it took was some dedication from a young age, and then being fortunate enough to have grown up in the USA did the rest. I now live in China, and the kids here don't have half the opportunities I, or the woman mentioned in the article, had growing up. In my opinion, it seems that irresponsible behavior is largely a result of people having their previous irresponsible behavior tolerated.
All of that said, I'm not against health care reform in the least (Nixda is on the right track with this). Exactly as never_toss and others have stated, the problem is that the money that could be used on this is being funneled to stupid things instead, whether war, financial bailouts (which will hurt later), or our insanely complicated tax system. But I don't agree with fueling the reform based on emotional stories and based on specious arguments, because then the problem is later "solved" in an unsustainable way, and the problem reappears in another form.
Edit: Anyone think it's weird that someone is actually spending money to prosecute her for “inappropriate gun use" rather than helping her out? Litigation is expensive.
Edit 2: The "If she didn't work in a center to recycle toxic waste / nuclear waste, someone else would" argument is wrong. If everyone was educated and had good alternative work options (including starting their own business if necessary), then no recycling center could hire these people without providing adequate insurance. Supply/demand.
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
+1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
If she didn't work in a center to recycle toxic waste / nuclear waste, someone else would. Unless you expect the waste to recycle by itself which will not happen. Every country need people like this to accept to work in these recycling centers. Saying you wouldn't want to support these people as a taxpayer is terrible. Unless you never use electricity from nuclear plants, or never use any products that generated toxic waste during his manufacture (most do).
I agree with you regarding her smoking habit.
Her shooting herself, as the article mentions, was more to set an example.
On August 24 2010 19:43 Ruien wrote: Edit 2: The "If she didn't work in a center to recycle toxic waste / nuclear waste, someone else would" argument is wrong. If everyone was educated and had good alternative work options (including starting their own business if necessary), then no recycling center could hire these people without providing adequate insurance. Supply/demand.
How is that more wrong than supposing "If everyone was educated"... The demand is just too high compared to the supply. And even if everyone was educated, you would have educated people to work in a recycling center, educated garbagemen etc. But shitty jobs will always exist whatever the level of education. Even if 100% of the population had a PhD from Harvard you would still need someone to work as a garbageman.
And recycling centers are indirectly funded by taxpayers or is a part of the cost of the electricity on your electricity bill in the case of nuclear power. My initial point was criticizing someone who as a taxpayer wouldn't want to support someone working in a recycling center. = is not willing to pay more tax so that recycling centers can provide a good health insurance.
On August 24 2010 16:58 ggrrg wrote: - sueing her employer (for whatever reason) omg... good luck starting a lawsuit when you have no money. In most justice systems around the world it is of far lesser importance who is right than who has more money.
you misread, mister Bulgarian. its the other way around. that's the situation that makes her say that she hopes to go to jail
what i don't understand is how anybody could look at this poor woman's situation and NOT be for helping out her and everyone like her.
On August 24 2010 15:03 w_Ender_w wrote: Yeah, Obama is really going to save us! I mean, he already bailed out all those failed companies so their CEO's could shit on gold toilets. Then he was nice enough to pass health care reform, which has done nothing except make it so I can be thrown in jail and fined if I don't want to buy health insurance.
Health insurance is also a hell of a lot cheaper now because of the healthcare bill's passage. Humana's standard went down from $800 a month to $100 a month, for example.
I am so sick and tired of Americans who think that people are poor because they chose to be that way.
Its the exact same reasoning from the days of segregation in the South where whites actually believed that the blacks didn't go to ball games or restaurants because they chose not to do so.
And who the fuck would choose not to have health insurance. What a silly talking point.
Yeah, those 12 million Americans chose not to buy it, that's the reason they go without.
I hope a charity is started to help this woman sort out her arm. It is a tough world and we do have to work/make more intelligent decisions to not land us in a spot akin to hers... but I believe becoming aware of her situation makes us somewhat responsible for it.
Hmm, those are some pretty terrible life choices. I'm sure for minimum wage you could get a job picking up shit on the side of the freeway, and at least you wouldn't be handling toxic waste. Similarly, we've all known smoking is a terrible choice since the 70's. Sounds like 1 of millions of cases of people who don't take care of themselves and expect "the system" to pick up their slack.
nothing will ever change so whats the point of trying, the only thing helping people realize the truth will do is... oh wait. lets hope that actually happens someday... maybe the soldiers will side with us.
Heres food for thought, I would never go join the military in fear of war, but if the war was against government then fuck yeah I would definitely be in the military.. So strange now that I think about it. :o
On August 24 2010 16:16 Drowsy wrote: +1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
The discussion isn't going to go anywhere as long as people continue to unironically think this women makes $8/hour handling toxic waste as if this is her dream job. People do what's necessary to make rent.
On August 24 2010 22:31 Galois wrote: Lexpar, I want to reach through my monitor and punch your stupid bitch ass in the face.
You sir are one righteous dude. So glad to know that people like you are "better" than everyone else in this country.
You're god damned right I am.
For God's sake, a woman had to fucking shoot herself in order to get medical attention.
It is a rare kind of person who could push themselves that far for help. Hell, I doubt that I could ever push myself to put myself through her pain. But the fact that a human being — an AMERICAN — arrived at the conclusion that they had to fucking shoot themselves for a chance of having at least an ounce of medical attention should bring absolute and utmost feelings of shame to every single man, woman, and child who hears her story.
and I say that anyone who does not feel this way is a sinner!
sob story is retarded. health care system in the US is convoluted and needs massive reform it's a shame that nothing will ever change in this country. the business's have all the power, and most US ppl are too goddamn lazy to affect policy by threatening their representatives with a unified front to kick them out of office. oh well.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
People like this are not the norm, not average joes, and not upstanding citizens trying to make a living.
And why the hell does she have 6 kids on $8 an hour? Hello, people! Welfare queen!
And the fact that the press covers this makes me even angrier.
and you are one of many self righteous pricks that helps situations that need change stay the same.
oh, they could get better jobs, blah blah blah blah blah, their own damn fault.
not always the case.
have you ever tried starting your own business, self employed insurance rates are some of the craziest prices. family of two with decent insurance, no smoking history, healthy is above 2000+ a month with decent coverage.
there ARE jobs that provide jack shit for health insurance, the corporations skimping out.
just because YOU are well off doesn't mean that everyone has the same opportunity.
i find it idiotic that this country can shit money through earmarking, senseless wars and bailouts of financial corporations that deserve to fail but don't have the common sense to join the rest of the first nation worlds in helping out their ordinary citizens with providing decent health coverage.
japan, germany, canada, england, etc etc etc all provide health care but the US runs like a second world nation, if you have the money you can get top notch healthcare, otherwise you better learn how to milk the system
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
People like this are not the norm, not average joes, and not upstanding citizens trying to make a living.
And why the hell does she have 6 kids on $8 an hour? Hello, people! Welfare queen!
And the fact that the press covers this makes me even angrier.
How do you know her mother wasnt a crackhead, and her father a an abusive husband who didnt abuse both of them before killing himself, and her mother at the age of 10.. I mean c'mon bro people have fucked up shit to deal with not everyone has picture perfect homes with wealthy lifestyles and role models that teach them all this shit, half the people i know today are in their adult stages trying to find out what the fuck is what, I mean we all can talk, but doing and speaking about it are always and will never change from being two totally different things. Maybe thats why she didn't finish school, or maybe she did, but had children, just because abortions exist, don't mean people believe in it. Some people are very old fashioned, once your pregnant you don't kill the child. You go and find whatever work you can to help this child survive, and her home seemed nice, a big house and a basement so she can't be doing that bad aside from US just being selfish on helping its citizens.
How come she did have money for guns but not for her own fucking health? She chose an unhealthy habit and occupation, she should bear the consequences. I find it hilarious that she expects other people to pay thousand dollars a month for her own idiocy. Manage your life and money better, bitch, don't expect other people to fix your shit, cause they WON'T. By the way, I heard shooting yourself in the head cures cancer better than in the shoulders.
> Just one more story that makes it totally unbelievable and even disgusting to me that there still are Americans who deeply refuse a health care reform. I'm pretty sure this sorry excuse of a sob story has the completely opposite effect. Is this from The Onion?
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
People like this are not the norm, not average joes, and not upstanding citizens trying to make a living.
And why the hell does she have 6 kids on $8 an hour? Hello, people! Welfare queen!
And the fact that the press covers this makes me even angrier.
So, reading this post, it's pretty clear that you're in college or younger, right? How many people do you know well who have even been alive for 35 years? I'm guessing it ain't a lot. If I'm wrong, feel free to let me know, but I won't hold my breath.
Why would you publish this post? You literally know nothing about this woman, and you literally have no idea why and how she wound up with her job or her injuries. Those are some pretty fucked up things to say that you just wrote.
By the way, "youngest of six childs [sic]" doesn't mean "has 6 kids."
I'm not living in the US so you guys might put this off easily (which is ok).
There are benefits and drawbacks in every health care system, we in Europe just have another shitty system (at least we in Germany). But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
So the next time, YOU are wondering why YOU should pay for these lazy and/or uneducated and/or immigrated and/or handicapped and/or ... people's health insurance, just remind yourself, you are talking about their lives.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
People like this are not the norm, not average joes, and not upstanding citizens trying to make a living.
And why the hell does she have 6 kids on $8 an hour? Hello, people! Welfare queen!
And the fact that the press covers this makes me even angrier.
How do you know her mother wasnt a crackhead, and her father a an abusive husband who didnt abuse both of them before killing himself, and her mother at the age of 10.. I mean c'mon bro people have fucked up shit to deal with not everyone has picture perfect homes with wealthy lifestyles and role models that teach them all this shit, half the people i know today are in their adult stages trying to find out what the fuck is what, I mean we all can talk, but doing and speaking about it are always and will never change from being two totally different things. Maybe thats why she didn't finish school, or maybe she did, but had children, just because abortions exist, don't mean people believe in it. Some people are very old fashioned, once your pregnant you don't kill the child. You go and find whatever work you can to help this child survive, and her home seemed nice, a big house and a basement so she can't be doing that bad aside from US just being selfish on helping its citizens.
But this is now a social issue as to what to do with children of abuse so they don't end up in these situations. This is why harder police intervention and greater punishment for bad parents is a good thing. There's a lot of complexity beyond the basic issue, but the fact of the matter is we have to assume she got there from her own volition since that's the only thing we can do anything about directly, otherwise it's caused by indirect problems.
On August 24 2010 21:04 Galois wrote: And for the record, I have no problem with my tax dollars paying for any one of your medical expenses. Why? Because I'm better than you
and anyone who feels differently should be ashamed of themselves and get the fuck out of my way.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: I'm not living in the US so you guys might put this off easily (which is ok).
There are benefits and drawbacks in every health care system, we in Europe just have another shitty system (at least we in Germany). But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
So the next time, YOU are wondering why YOU should pay for these lazy and/or uneducated and/or immigrated and/or handicapped and/or ... people's health insurance, just remind yourself, you are talking about their lives.
high five!
What some people write here scares the shit out of me... Egoistic dumbfucks.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
People like this are not the norm, not average joes, and not upstanding citizens trying to make a living.
And why the hell does she have 6 kids on $8 an hour? Hello, people! Welfare queen!
And the fact that the press covers this makes me even angrier.
????
You cant find good paying jobs nowadays wtf are you talking about.
I know people who work 40+ hours a week in a factory that make $10 an hour. There are over 3000 applications at this place.
Jobs dont pay as much as they once did ontop of healthcare costs going up.
As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
I don't want a fucking penny of my money going to treat any smoker that has lung cancer. Morons shouldn't have been smoking, I don't care what situation they got themselves into, whether they have 6 children and are on minimum wage (which would also be completely their fault).
Same thing with fatasses who get heart attacks. Maybe you shouldn't have pigged out so much. If you got a heart attack because of YOUR lifestyle, then YOU should pay the money to have your own life saved, not me.
Of course it's hard to figure out what constitutes what, and how much to charge. This is why a privatized system where smokers have to pay more is better.
I won't really comment on her smoking habit, all I can say is here (canada) at least they tax the living hell out of cigarettes that it might not cover the extra cost to the medical system if a person goes sick, at least it helps.
I believe however in equal opportunity, but I mean how many people have to die before the skeptics stop saying a change isn't needed? I don't even LIVE in the states, and I have a friend who is in one of these sad situations.
Friend of mine has a heart problem, college student, good kid, lives in near constant chest pain since half the time he can't afford his heart meds so he can pay for food and rent. His condition will likely lock him out of any reasonable kind of health insurance for the rest of his life. Critics of obama attempt to change things would basically have you believe: Land of equal opportunity, cept if you are sick.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote:But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
I also NEED housing, food, heating, water, electricity, internet access, entertainment and quite a lot of things which if I don't have, can mess up my life greatly. You gonna pay for that? Hey, it's only a few thousand dollars a month! No? Thought so.
It's totally unbelievable and even disgusting to me that there still are people who deeply refuse welfare reform. You big meanies.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly.
Would you care to go into detail how a poor person with no chance of higher education and no contacts waits around for a year or so until they can land a "good" job as to opposed to taking the first thing available?
Somehow I am not surprised a forum that primarily caters to people with enough time to play a lot of Starcraft has a significant amount of people who lead sheltered lives divorced from reality.
On August 25 2010 01:23 Furycrab wrote: I won't really comment on her smoking habit, all I can say is here (canada) at least they tax the living hell out of cigarettes that it might not cover the extra cost to the medical system if a person goes sick, at least it helps.
I believe however in equal opportunity, but I mean how many people have to die before the skeptics stop saying a change isn't needed? I don't even LIVE in the states, and I have a friend who is in one of these sad situations.
Friend of mine has a heart problem, college student, good kid, lives in near constant chest pain since half the time he can't afford his heart meds so he can pay for food and rent. His condition will likely lock him out of any reasonable kind of health insurance for the rest of his life. Critics of obama attempt to change things would basically have you believe: Land of equal opportunity, cept if you are sick.
So I have to pay for him, despite me also struggling financially? That's cool. It's a sad thing that his life is like that, but I don't give a damn about helping him.
Let me ask you this - why don't you give your money to the starving children in Africa? Who could have all their daily nutrients for a week off whatever it is (a few quarters?). Only a little bit of your money, right? Are you giving a small portion of every single paycheck to your friend to help him afford the meds? If you're not, you better not expect me to. I don't even know him.
I don't have the best vision. Are you going to help me pay for my contacts/glasses?
I'm not stopping your friend from doing anything. He has an equal opportunity to do whatever he wants. That's what opportunity is. What you're asking is for everyone else to pitch in to push him forward, which is completely different from opportunity.
It's up to his parents to raise him and decide whether or not to insure him and pay for his meds. If they can't afford it then it's the fault of his parents, and it's a family matter, not a matter to me. There's already plenty of plans and welfare for those in financial need, and if he really is in dire financial need, he's already getting thousands in financial aid, and I have zero pity for him. If he knew he had this condition he should have worked more during high school (you can get a job as early as 14, I had my first job I took the bus 45 minutes away at 15) to save up money. Maybe ride a motorcycle instead of drive a car, or take public transit.
So if you care that much for him, how about you pay for it yourself.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
Could you define "deciding?" Because I don't think most people would agree that she is deciding to work at a facility handling toxic waste. I certainly don't. If you're presented with a choice between working somewhere and being homeless, I don't think your choice is much of a decision.
Why shouldn't our tax dollars pay for covering the health of people working dangerous jobs? The existence of those jobs is an externality of our lifestyles. Toxic waste exists as a byproduct of manufacturing goods and providing services that everyone wants.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
Could you define "deciding?" Because I don't think most people would agree that she is deciding to work at a facility handling toxic waste. I certainly don't. If you're presented with a choice between working somewhere and being homeless, I don't think your choice is much of a decision.
Working at said facility for 23 years instead of seeking better employment all that time pretty much exhausts the definition of "deciding". But then again, it has already been deduced she isn't the brightest of the bunch.
On August 24 2010 22:31 Galois wrote: Lexpar, I want to reach through my monitor and punch your stupid bitch ass in the face.
You sir are one righteous dude. So glad to know that people like you are "better" than everyone else in this country.
You're god damned right I am.
For God's sake, a woman had to fucking shoot herself in order to get medical attention.
It is a rare kind of person who could push themselves that far for help. Hell, I doubt that I could ever push myself to put myself through her pain. But the fact that a human being — an AMERICAN — arrived at the conclusion that they had to fucking shoot themselves for a chance of having at least an ounce of medical attention should bring absolute and utmost feelings of shame to every single man, woman, and child who hears her story.
and I say that anyone who does not feel this way is a sinner!
Keep your religious bigotry out of this. Im currently in a spot similar to hers, while I have health insurance its just bare bones crap and i have a medical condition on my feet that cracks and eats at my skin literally making it feel like Im walking on pin cushions every day of my live. I have to constantly wrap my feet up in make shift bandages because regular bandages damage my feet too much. Ive been to several doctors and even the "best specialist in my region" but none of them had anything that worked past a 2 week period and infact a few of them made it worse. However Im at the end of my coverage limit meaning that the insurance won't pay for me to see any other specialists then the ones I've already seen. So Im basically living just in constant pain all day long working a job that requires me to stand on my feet for about 95% of the time im there.
Im not willing to light my feet on fire or some other ignorant thing that could of POTIENTALY FUCK ME UP FOR LIFE, just so I can get a sob story and someone can foot my bill. This is my problem, not anyone elses, and I even make less then she does at $7.25 an hour at a sub shop trying to support school and a daughter. Luckily my parents help out by buying me the bare bones so at least I've got that, but while I feel sympathy for this woman, we can't tolerate this kind of behavior. We as a society can't say that just because you are trying to kill yourself to get medical attention thats ok. Its not, think about how much potientally SADDENING this story would be if the woman had actually killed herself because she hit an artery and bled to death. Then she'd be leaving all her kids behind and from the article it doesn't seem like the fathers really around so they'd all go to aunts/uncles/orphange.
Also the jobs/insurance thing aside, while I feel that we should take care of her, what about medicaid or medicare...which ever one is the one that is like a mini insurance thing? Why haven't she been able to get some coverage through that to at least get her arm checked out to see what's happening?
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
I don't want a fucking penny of my money going to treat any smoker that has lung cancer. Morons shouldn't have been smoking, I don't care what situation they got themselves into, whether they have 6 children and are on minimum wage (which would also be completely their fault).
Same thing with fatasses who get heart attacks. Maybe you shouldn't have pigged out so much. If you got a heart attack because of YOUR lifestyle, then YOU should pay the money to have your own life saved, not me.
Of course it's hard to figure out what constitutes what, and how much to charge. This is why a privatized system where smokers have to pay more is better.
I pity you because one day you may understand why this kind of thinking is wrong.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
Could you define "deciding?" Because I don't think most people would agree that she is deciding to work at a facility handling toxic waste. I certainly don't. If you're presented with a choice between working somewhere and being homeless, I don't think your choice is much of a decision.
Working at said facility for 23 years instead of seeking better employment all that time pretty much exhausts the definition of "deciding". But then again, it has already been deduced she isn't the brightest of the bunch.
I don't know if you're reading different excerpts, but nowhere did I get the impression that she wasn't seeking better employment. Why wouldn't she? I don't think that a lot of people set out in life hoping to work for $8/hour on an assembly line with no benefits.
What's it matter, though? If she wasn't working that job, someone else would; there's work in the world that needs doing, and plenty of labor willing to do it if it's their only option on the table. Either way, we've got someone who needs expensive health insurance.
P.S. What is this "all her kids" thing that keeps cropping up? I really think other people are reading something I'm not, because it doesn't mention children anywhere.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
Could you define "deciding?" Because I don't think most people would agree that she is deciding to work at a facility handling toxic waste. I certainly don't. If you're presented with a choice between working somewhere and being homeless, I don't think your choice is much of a decision.
Why shouldn't our tax dollars pay for covering the health of people working dangerous jobs? The existence of those jobs is an externality of our lifestyles. Toxic waste exists as a byproduct of manufacturing goods and providing services that everyone wants.
Because it's their choice to take such a job in the first place. If they don't feel $8/hr is worth the risk, then they shouldn't take the risk. They don't have to take the job. By taking the $8/hr risky job, they are deciding to take the job. No one is putting a gun to her head and forcing her to take it. It's her decision.
Whether or not you think she might be homeless otherwise is irrelevant. There is unemployment insurance for the very reason of giving people MONTHS to find a job (literally, they are getting insurance to not take a job but instead LOOK for a job that suits them) to supplement their income and keep them going. That is one of the forms of welfare that I approve of, because not only does unemployment insurance allow people to better find jobs to suit their specialty, but studies suggest it actually improves the economy as a whole (taxes usually equate to deadweight loss).
There's no such thing as "not having a decision." Whatever poor decisions in her life that ended up landing her in this predicament isn't my fault. I have a desk job that I make $10.20/hr and I've been employed at 4 different companies in the last 5 years. You have to put yourself out there is all. I bet she partied in her early years, never built up a resume, and ended up in this situation. ZEROOO sympathy for this woman. I have much more for people born into the situation. The economy prior to the recession was BOOMING, I assure you she could have found a job nearly anywhere. I can't think of a single retail place that WASN'T hiring in 2006.
PS. She smokes. She obviously has some extra income that she could easily cut if she was that desperate. I do not take "being addicted" as a valid reason. Once again, not my fault she picked up the habit and her insurance rates increased. If she wants health insurance, how about she stops smoking to
1. decrease her rates 2. save the income from cigarettes to put forth to purchasing health insurance
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: No one is putting a gun to her head and forcing her to take it. It's her decision.
Whether or not you think she might be homeless otherwise is irrelevant. There is unemployment insurance for the very reason of giving people MONTHS to find a job (literally, they are getting insurance to not take a job but instead LOOK for a job that suits them) to supplement their income and keep them going. That is one of the forms of welfare that I approve of, because not only does unemployment insurance allow people to better find jobs to suit their specialty, but studies suggest it actually improves the economy as a whole (taxes usually equate to deadweight loss).
There's no such thing as "not having a decision."
Nobody's putting a gun to her head? Pretty damn close. Her world won't be any more pleasant homeless than it is working at the assembly line, and judging by how her health is described here, her life might be well in danger if she doesn't make enough money to afford treatment.
I graduated with a bachelor's degree in '08, and I know friends who came out of school spending eight hours a day looking for work. (I'm lucky to be employed in a field with a ton of demand.) They send out hundreds of resumes to anyone even vaguely associated with their fields, and on top of that, they apply to every retail, food service, and everything-else job opening that they can find. No dice. No dice for weeks, and months, and years. They are not stupid or lazy people; the U-6 unemployment rate is 15%! I don't know why you expect that alternatives are magically going to materialize for unemployed people, when every job opening has hundreds of applicants. (Also, unemployment insurance generally doesn't apply if you quit voluntarily, or if you're fired with cause.)
It's nice that your experience has been that hard-working people always have a decision. It is not representative of the whole world, or the whole country.
I bet she partied in her early years, never built up a resume, and ended up in this situation.
OK, if that makes you feel better about not giving a shit.
Anyway, point still stands; someone has to do this work. I don't see why we should shit on whoever ends up doing it, and if you don't have sympathy for a 41-year-old sick woman who's worked on an assembly line handling toxic waste for 23 years, you don't have sympathy, period.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: No one is putting a gun to her head and forcing her to take it. It's her decision.
Whether or not you think she might be homeless otherwise is irrelevant. There is unemployment insurance for the very reason of giving people MONTHS to find a job (literally, they are getting insurance to not take a job but instead LOOK for a job that suits them) to supplement their income and keep them going. That is one of the forms of welfare that I approve of, because not only does unemployment insurance allow people to better find jobs to suit their specialty, but studies suggest it actually improves the economy as a whole (taxes usually equate to deadweight loss).
There's no such thing as "not having a decision."
Nobody's putting a gun to her head? Pretty damn close. Her world won't be any more pleasant homeless than it is working at the assembly line, and judging by how her health is described here, her life might be well in danger if she doesn't make enough money to afford treatment.
I graduated with a bachelor's degree in '08, and I know friends who came out of school spending eight hours a day looking for work. (I'm lucky to be employed in a field with a ton of demand.) They send out hundreds of resumes to anyone even vaguely associated with their fields, and on top of that, they apply to every retail, food service, and everything-else job opening that they can find. No dice. No dice for weeks, and months, and years. They are not stupid or lazy people; the U-6 unemployment rate is 15%! I don't know why you expect that alternatives are magically going to materialize for unemployed people, when every job opening has hundreds of applicants. (Also, unemployment insurance generally doesn't apply if you quit voluntarily, or if you're fired with cause.)
It's nice that your experience has been that hard-working people always have a decision. It is not representative of the whole world, or the whole country.
I bet she partied in her early years, never built up a resume, and ended up in this situation.
OK, if that makes you feel better about not giving a shit.
No, it's not even relatively close, and your entire argument has lost validity.
EDIT: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
On August 25 2010 01:54 catamorphist wrote: OK, if that makes you feel better about not giving a shit.
There is no "feel better." I don't feel bad in the first place. Hence not giving a shit. Sheesh. When you don't feel bad in the first place, there's no problems concerning "whatever makes you sleep at night," etc. Because I would never have problems sleeping at night in the first place knowing this is going on. How do you sleep at night when there are hundreds being gangraped in Africa? Please send a portion of your paycheck to them. Every dollar you don't send is dead babies.
Anyway, point still stands; someone has to do this work. I don't see why we should shit on whoever ends up doing it, and if you don't have sympathy for a 41-year-old sick woman who's worked on an assembly line handling toxic waste for 23 years, you don't have sympathy, periodfor the 41-year-old sick woman who has regularly smoked cigarettes and can't afford health insurance because she put herself in the situation.
Eeesh.... something somewhat similar happened to a friend of mine, (without the shooting part).
She passed out at work from a medical condition the company knew about. Called in sick the next day and they simply told her not to show up anymore. Pretty fucked up t.t;
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
You lack compassion and if you think that all those who suffer in similar situations deserve to suffer then you might be bordering on sadistic. In this particular case you seem to suggest that because she is a smoker its her own fault when infact the only fault here is being born in 1 of the only the only 1st world countries which fails to provide affordable health care.
Anyway as i said in my eariler post; When you find out why you are wrong, I will not need to explain it to you.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
Sounds like you need a reality check. If you have no money, you don't exactly have the opportunity to say "Oh, I don't need the money I can earn there. If I hold on to this long enough they might raise the salary, just need to survive until they give in! And a higher paycheck might attract other people with better qualifications then me which can put me out of play. But then I did something for the greater good I guess! Even if I will still be left in the cold with no money at all..." You CAN be forced in a job when you really need the money and don't see any other way out. It ain't because you have the possibility to pick your job that everybody has that choice. Really seems that you lack a bit of empathy if you ask me.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
Sounds like you need a reality check. If you have no money, you don't exactly have the opportunity to say "Oh, I don't need the money I can earn there. If I hold on to this long enough they might raise the salary, just need to survive until they give in! And a higher paycheck might attract other people with better qualifications then me which can put me out of play. But then I did something for the greater good I guess! Even if I will still be left in the cold with no money at all..." You CAN be forced in a job when you really need the money and don't see any other way out. It ain't because you have the possibility to pick your job that everybody has that choice. Really seems that you lack a bit of empathy if you ask me.
I never said she should wait. Your bullshit remarks aren't appreciated. No, you can't be forced into a job no matter what circumstance. Every single economist also says you are wrong. You are mixing free will and sympathy. I believe you need a reality check. I am very much a realist.
I'm saying that people are willing to take the job at $8/hr so there's no reason the wage should go up. Completely different than saying wait. I also think most other first world countries are shittier than the United States so you can go throw that terrible argument elsewhere.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
The doctors DID treat her, even without insurance. They gave her anti-inflammatories. As is wont with most (if not all) cases, doctors will indeed treat you with or without insurance because its their job and they will get the shit sued out of them if they refuse anyone treatment. That, and despite what people may think, most get into the medical field because they genuinely care.
It seems to me that instead of getting a second opinion or just taking the anti-inflammatories they gave her, she just freaked out and for some crazy reason shot herself in the shoulder. If she really needed an MRI or any of those things she complained about being "refused because I had no insurance" she would have gotten them. More then likely the doctor said to her, "We could give you an MRI, but there is really no need and without insurance it would cost you a ton of money."
Let's not ignore the fact that this women has a house full of stuff and a pet dog. Seems to me that she could clearly have afforded some cursory health insurance if she really needed it.
As someone working as an EMT, this kind of thing is infuriating. We bend over backwards to treat people, insurance or no, if they are in trouble. And half the time we get sued for our efforts. Now this 'Healthcare' bill has passed and it's made everything worse.
It'd be nice if everyone got free healthcare, sure. But realistically, we have such a good healthcare system here because people do get paid for their efforts. The only problem now-a-days is the health insurance companies, who lobby the hell out of congress. They control all pricing, and essentially decide how much they feel like paying doctors at any given time.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
Sounds like you need a reality check. If you have no money, you don't exactly have the opportunity to say "Oh, I don't need the money I can earn there. If I hold on to this long enough they might raise the salary, just need to survive until they give in! And a higher paycheck might attract other people with better qualifications then me which can put me out of play. But then I did something for the greater good I guess! Even if I will still be left in the cold with no money at all..." You CAN be forced in a job when you really need the money and don't see any other way out. It ain't because you have the possibility to pick your job that everybody has that choice. Really seems that you lack a bit of empathy if you ask me.
I never said she should wait. Your bullshit remarks aren't appreciated. No, you can't be forced into a job no matter what circumstance. Every single economist also says you are wrong. You are mixing free will and sympathy. I believe you need a reality check. I am very much a realist.
I'm saying that people are willing to take the job at $8/hr so there's no reason the wage should go up. Completely different than saying wait. I also think most other first world countries are shittier than the United States so you can go throw that terrible argument elsewhere.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
Maybe I didn't explain my point to well. Is that job underpaid for the risks it brings? Yes it is. But some money is better then no money. If you have no money and you can't find any other job, I am pretty certain that you will take it for the wage they offer you. That is what I mean with being forced into a job.
For the other first world countries: I didn't say anything about them so I have no idea what my argument on those would be? But as a response to your extra notes: I do not think Canada has the perfect healthcare system at all. Every system has it's flaws. But personally I do believe it to be a better system then in the USA for social reasons though.
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
I deserve a punch in the face because I lack sympathy for a woman trying to abuse the system? Every time someone pulls a stunt like this it makes it worse for the people trying to actually make a difference.
Sure, we can look at her life choices. Like buying a .25 to shoot herself with, which costs anywhere between $150 and $500 dollars. Maybe she should have purchased insurance with that money?
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation. ...
It is a perfectly valid explanation and if you had understood that the model situations you study, normally cannot be applied to real world situations due to a multitude of external factors, then you might understand why your suggestion is ridiculous at the very least. People take jobs because they need money for living. Your suggestion that nobody should take shitty jobs, so the "wages and benefits" for the job are raised, has the premise that these potential workers would have other means of supporting their living during the time, in which they are not employed at the shitty job. Potential scenarios when this could apply are: - if the demand for labor was higher than the supply (aka 100% employment rate), so the shittiest jobs would have to improve their conditions in order to get any workers - if every unemployed person was not hard pressed for money (e.g. has a hidden stash of gold under his house) and does not need an income to survive - other utopian scenarios (e.g. people could photosynthesize)
In reality however, the very moment somebody leaves his shitty job for whatever reason, there are hordes of people craving to get it, because they have decided for themselves that living in a rat-infested hole eating cheap soup and having a health condition is better than starving under a bridge.
On August 24 2010 16:58 ggrrg wrote: - sueing her employer (for whatever reason) omg... good luck starting a lawsuit when you have no money. In most justice systems around the world it is of far lesser importance who is right than who has more money.
you misread, mister Bulgarian. its the other way around. that's the situation that makes her say that she hopes to go to jail
what i don't understand is how anybody could look at this poor woman's situation and NOT be for helping out her and everyone like her.
Way to be condescending, Mister triple-post. I most certainly have acquired the ability to read, but I am not so certain about you.
On August 24 2010 15:55 TanGeng wrote: Fuck her. ....
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer?
...
My statement was targeted at this post and at anybody that might agree with it or suggest something similar.
On August 24 2010 15:03 w_Ender_w wrote: Yeah, Obama is really going to save us! I mean, he already bailed out all those failed companies so their CEO's could shit on gold toilets. Then he was nice enough to pass health care reform, which has done nothing except make it so I can be thrown in jail and fined if I don't want to buy health insurance.
Thanks Obama!
As someone going into the healthcare field (I'm an EMT and am trying to get into med school) I can say that whereas some reform would be nice, what we passed is doing nothing but terrible harm.
All I've seen from this most recent election is that democrats and republicans are all the same. They just pander and pander to whoever feeds them the money (unless it's the taxpayer!) and no matter who is in office, they just want more government power.
I find it terribly sad that I can't say I have ever had the chance to say I was proud of one of my politicians.
This is very true, it's kinda sad to see all the changes Obama has made to be more a socialistic stand i.e. bailing out failed companies where in a capitalist society these companies should utterly fail and be forced to learn from their mistakes, and the new healthcare system where if I don't buy healthcare I either have to pay an annual fine or go to jail.
So her solution for not having health care is pulling this BS and trying to get a free ride? And for what? For the shoulder to hurt no less than before? The hospitals and doctors are screwy too and don't have a sense of responsibility to treat these people.
On top of that, why can't she just sue her employer? Unless, of course, it's known risk basically screaming at workers, "This job isn't worth it" or "Find another job!" Seriously quit smoking, too. You kind of feel sorry for her fucked up situation, but she's unrepentant pretentious bitch.
I love all these self-destructive attention seeking whores.
+1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
My dad is a psycotic and have cronic backpain. He never chose to be mentally ill and he didn't realise how important his back was when he was a kid. Now he only has one job that he can barely handle and he doesn't get any sickcare anymore because our goverment has switched to right-wing. This means that the goverment wants my dad to work more by stop paying him to force him out on the market even though his condition hasn't changed. So now he's gotten into an even deeeper depression and almost gave up on live during the summer. And remember that it is sweden that i live in and we have generally great healthcare.
My point is that if it's tough for my family and my dad, then i can't imagine how fucking sad it must be for the unemployed people that nobody wants to sell their insurance to. If we lived in U.S (thank god we don't) nobody would hire my dad and i wouldn't be suprised if my family was split and my dad nuts or my mom was a widow.
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
I deserve a punch in the face because I lack sympathy for a woman trying to abuse the system? Every time someone pulls a stunt like this it makes it worse for the people trying to actually make a difference.
Sure, we can look at her life choices. Like buying a .25 to shoot herself with, which costs anywhere between $150 and $500 dollars. Maybe she should have purchased insurance with that money?
Well that's different outlooks, to some the system is full of problems for some reasons, for others the system is so broken that exploitation is the alternative to nothingness. Also, gl on her getting insurance for anywhere near $500. That's a fucking joke. Anyway, You don't literally deserve a punch in the face. :D
EDIT: and I feel abuse is a bit of a strong word... She's not doing this out of spite, she's doing this because the system has failed her. (I'm sure theres a strong argument that she failed the system as well, but whatever, this is one person's personal life we're talking) :D :D
On August 25 2010 02:02 FabledIntegral wrote: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
Play the market. Sell yourself.
Maybe they should have, but there are more people than jobs. If they were all twice as good at marketing themselves and had a flawless academic record, they'd just edge out a dozen other candidates from the pool, and then we'd be talking about those people, instead.
Fundamentally, I don't understand why you are committed to this view where if you haven't done all these things, you then deserve to toil in shit and shouldn't get any sympathy. I think that's immoral. I don't think it's reasonable to leave hard-working poor people without any accessible health care because they didn't go to enough career fairs or (gasp) didn't attend college.
On August 25 2010 02:02 FabledIntegral wrote: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
Play the market. Sell yourself.
Maybe they should have, but there are more people than jobs. If they were all twice as good at marketing themselves and had a flawless academic record, they'd just edge out a dozen other candidates from the pool, and then we'd be talking about those people, instead.
Fundamentally, I don't understand why you are committed to this view where if you haven't done all these things, you then deserve to toil in shit and shouldn't get any sympathy. I think that's immoral. I don't think it's reasonable to leave hard-working poor people without any accessible health care because they didn't go to enough career fairs or (gasp) didn't attend college.
Agreed
Furthermore what if you're not a materialistic job/money oriented zombie like the rest of the nation? What if the knowledge is worth more to you than the degree, and so you don't pursue one? It's common knowledge that Albert Einstien wouldn't be accepted to college these days. To hold every person to ridiculous standards, particularly when you don't know the meaning of life or anything like that and are simply just making blind judgments based on your world view without any empathy at all is nothing short of selfish and blind.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
Sounds like you need a reality check. If you have no money, you don't exactly have the opportunity to say "Oh, I don't need the money I can earn there. If I hold on to this long enough they might raise the salary, just need to survive until they give in! And a higher paycheck might attract other people with better qualifications then me which can put me out of play. But then I did something for the greater good I guess! Even if I will still be left in the cold with no money at all..." You CAN be forced in a job when you really need the money and don't see any other way out. It ain't because you have the possibility to pick your job that everybody has that choice. Really seems that you lack a bit of empathy if you ask me.
I never said she should wait. Your bullshit remarks aren't appreciated. No, you can't be forced into a job no matter what circumstance. Every single economist also says you are wrong. You are mixing free will and sympathy. I believe you need a reality check. I am very much a realist.
I'm saying that people are willing to take the job at $8/hr so there's no reason the wage should go up. Completely different than saying wait. I also think most other first world countries are shittier than the United States so you can go throw that terrible argument elsewhere.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
No, the Canadian system is awesome. Everyone gets a standard of care regardless of if you're rich or poor - but the rich people can just pony up and fly to the US to jump the queue.
Do you know what the fundamental reason why healthcare is so expensive? BECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS THE BEST HEALTHCARE. Who's going to settle for a 30 year old cancer treatment when you can get an MRI? What doctor is going to recommend that to you?
Healthcare is constantly improving, just like computers are. The components, the equipment, the techniques all get more costly and more effective all the time. And just like computers, it gets more expensive over time. The difference? EVERYBODY wants to be a first adopter in healthcare whereas only a very few people want to be first adopters in new computer tech. Therefore, healthcare is constantly extremly expensive.
Money and resources don't grow on trees. Yes, healthcare keeps getting more expensive but that's because it keeps getting better. If you want a cheap solution... you're not going to get the best solution. Solution: Make more money. Don't be an assembly line worker. Don't produce the same value in goods every day but try to consume more and more goods every day of your life.
I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The real solution is a teired healthcare system where poor people get doctors with older techniques, less experience and the equipment is worse. But unfortunatly, right now "everyone is equal" in terms of lives. That means everyone gets the same standard of care, so instead of people getting different levels of care based on what they can afford, you either get care or striaght up don't get anything.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
Let me throw an idea out there. You folks who don't think that this woman deserves subsidized health care -- would you agree or disagree with this statement?
"The amount of money someone makes should roughly represent how much value they contribute to society."
If you agreed with that statement, I might understand where you're coming from morally saying that poor people generally don't deserve to have help paying for care. Needless to say, I don't.
On August 25 2010 04:16 Offhand wrote: Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
Nothing's fair or just about that; that was my whole point. A lot of people complain about this from the "fairness" angle, saying that it's not fair to take money they earned and tax it to contribute to things that only help other people. I agree, it's probably unfair. Personally, I don't think it's important at all whether it's fair or not; it's not really on my radar to question whether things are fair.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
The Canadian system is just fine. My mother and her 2 sisters have mammograms regularly, when their doctors recommend them. They have not had to wait months for them. If your family physician suspects something they will bump you right up (like they did for my mom, but found nothing cancerous).
My father passed out and hit his head on a metal railing due to kidney failure, was set up on a dialysis program that still allowed him to work and all at no cost out of his pocket. He since had a kidney transplant and the anti-rejection drugs are no cost to him.
My grandfather has had two heart attacks, a quadruple bypass, had a vein in his leg transplanted to his heart, and takes 7 different pills at various times in the week for his condition. And he is retired and able to live comfortably.
At age 15, my brother was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, which means his pancreas no longer produces insulin, which we all need. The insulin he needs, the doctor and specialist doctor visits he needs are all covered by our national healthcare system.
I had my tonsils removed in 1993, I haven't been to the hospital for myself since then, and I gladly pay my share of the taxes that go towards the healthcare in this nation.
I'm sorry that your aunt's diagnosis may have been screwed up, she had a shitty doctor, or whatever happened there, but to generalize an entire system because of one instance is the same as me generalizing the system as perfect because it has been good to my family. It has its flaws, I agree, but it and every other first world health care system is better than America's system.
I'm not saying the doctors or specialists or nurses are bad, some of the finest in the world work in America, but the insurance system you have is terrible and this most recent healthcare reform bill has done very little to make it comparable to the rest of the civilized world.
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
LOL so now I have to pay money because people aren't as smart as me? We should have a friggin' IQ test and I'll tank it on purpose to receive welfare from the government. Really? You really want to argue that people who are less smart are going to deserve my money because I'm smarter?
Life isn't fair. I have my own life and I don't want it to be affected by other people's poor decisions. No, I don't know about her history and don't care to. She made her own choices in her life that led up to this situation.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
I know they do, and I disagree with all the programs you quoted. I do not want, or support, any government program that is funded by theft and coercion.
Do you know what I would give up? For one, my property would be forcefully confiscated from me for the arcane "greater good". Secondly, with every government program comes a loss of liberty. Every mandate, program, regulation, etc that is put in place by the leviathan state chips away at my freedom.
On August 24 2010 16:16 Drowsy wrote: +1, this sob story is just retarded. Why should somebody who's voluntarily subjected themselves to that many health risks "deserve" to be insured? Did anyone put a gun to her head and force her to work handling toxic waste or coerce her into using cigarette? The fact that she was willing to shoot herself in addition to her profession and smoking habit might just reveal that she has some serious self destructive tendencies. As an insurance company, or better yet a taxpayer, I wouldn't want somebody with these kind of proclivities to have health insurance. If it's a big enough deal to her she's willing to shoot herself, it's a big enough deal for her to rethink her life a bit and maybe get a different job with health insurance.
The discussion isn't going to go anywhere as long as people continue to unironically think this women makes $8/hour handling toxic waste as if this is her dream job. People do what's necessary to make rent.
You're right. Nobody has any efficacy in what they do for a living, it's all out of anyone's control and completely random. Somebody took her hostage and threatened to rape her whole family if she didn't work at the toxic waste plant for 8$ for 23 years. There's no way she could have switched in 23 years either.
I'm not even saying she needs to go to school and puruse a career, but there's sooo many non-professional jobs that offer health insurance benefits. Three of the four of the jobs that I've had as a student have offered health insurance, my current one does it even for part time employees. And the bad economy excuse is retarded because she's had decades to switch jobs and stop smoking.
On August 25 2010 01:10 FabledIntegral wrote: As said before by others, I fail to understand why my tax dollars should pay for someone who's deciding to work at a toxic care facility and smokes regularly. I don't think she deserves a penny of my money. Maybe she shouldn't be smoking.
Could you define "deciding?" Because I don't think most people would agree that she is deciding to work at a facility handling toxic waste. I certainly don't. If you're presented with a choice between working somewhere and being homeless, I don't think your choice is much of a decision.
Why shouldn't our tax dollars pay for covering the health of people working dangerous jobs? The existence of those jobs is an externality of our lifestyles. Toxic waste exists as a byproduct of manufacturing goods and providing services that everyone wants.
Because it's their choice to take such a job in the first place. If they don't feel $8/hr is worth the risk, then they shouldn't take the risk. They don't have to take the job. By taking the $8/hr risky job, they are deciding to take the job. No one is putting a gun to her head and forcing her to take it. It's her decision.
NO MAN YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND! Here in civilized Europe we understand that nobody is accountable for anything. Nobody has any choices and and everybody's actions are completely divorced from their personal outcomes. She had NO CHOICE but to smoke and work at the nuclear waste sorting facility, NO CHOICE! We should all give her money to help! We're not productive taxpayers by choice, just happened.
On August 25 2010 04:39 nttea wrote: I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
A non-smoker without existing health problems who doesn't desperately want health insurance can do it too, and there are many such people.
I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
People are still living in an ideal world? People have to it too easy. If a animal was unsuccessful (as this person is) no1 would bring it food and tend to its wounds. In order to gain the things you want you need to have power. You get power by being able to control people ( money ), and without out it you would be foolish to expect to have the things i want. I am so poor right now i cant eat the healthy food that i want/need to it so i have to deal it with it. This is just people searching for handouts.
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
LOL so now I have to pay money because people aren't as smart as me? We should have a friggin' IQ test and I'll tank it on purpose to receive welfare from the government. Really? You really want to argue that people who are less smart are going to deserve my money because I'm smarter?
Life isn't fair. I have my own life and I don't want it to be affected by other people's poor decisions. No, I don't know about her history and don't care to. She made her own choices in her life that led up to this situation.
Well fortunately since you care so little, your opinion matters about as much.
Do I really want to argue that people who are less smart deserve anything? No, I'm not sure I did anything to merit the sort... Are you interested in arguing things that have nothing to do with anything? You don't want poor decisions affected your life, I don't want to have to reply to poorly thought out posts. Or we could stay on topic, and you could just read my words and take the meaning for what it is, instead of having to pretend i'm arguing something when I'm really just being like wtf @ all the bias in this thread. Suddenly a not very bright woman does something and theres a 10 page thread of well of people condemning her. I'm not asking you to pay her anything, and if someone says you have to pay her something, well then, complain to them, not to someone who has nothing to do with it. Me.
However, I must say it's a startling revelation that you don't want poor decisions caused by others to affect you... However, she made her own choices, we can both assume this, I'm down. However to say that her situation isn't affected by the same fucking retarded people making retarded decisions all over teh world is asinine. Not your point perhaps, but you made your point several posts ago, why are you asking me OT questions?
If you have a problem with my problem with people insisting on their superior world view, or interpreation there-of. So be it... Just making my point.
On August 25 2010 04:39 nttea wrote: I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
So your definition of compassion is that people are entitled to others wealth?
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
LOL so now I have to pay money because people aren't as smart as me? We should have a friggin' IQ test and I'll tank it on purpose to receive welfare from the government. Really? You really want to argue that people who are less smart are going to deserve my money because I'm smarter?
Life isn't fair. I have my own life and I don't want it to be affected by other people's poor decisions. No, I don't know about her history and don't care to. She made her own choices in her life that led up to this situation.
On August 25 2010 02:02 FabledIntegral wrote: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
Play the market. Sell yourself.
Maybe they should have, but there are more people than jobs. If they were all twice as good at marketing themselves and had a flawless academic record, they'd just edge out a dozen other candidates from the pool, and then we'd be talking about those people, instead.
Fundamentally, I don't understand why you are committed to this view where if you haven't done all these things, you then deserve to toil in shit and shouldn't get any sympathy. I think that's immoral. I don't think it's reasonable to leave hard-working poor people without any accessible health care because they didn't go to enough career fairs or (gasp) didn't attend college.
Exactly, there are more people than jobs. So put yourself forward, and make sure you aren't in the bottom X%. If you are, then you failed to beat your peers. Don't punish the ones who were able to edge out their peers by supporting the ones who couldn't.
I'm not saying you deserve to toil in shit. I'm saying you don't deserve anything from ME. I'm saying you can make whatever you want out of your situation. Just don't make ME pay for it because I went above and beyond to maintain a 3.8 GPA during college while working simultaneously while YOU (not you specifically) went out and got a 2.7 (B- average) and are wondering why you can't get a job during this recession. You made your own life choices to end up where you are. I wish you the best in making the best for yourself. But don't take my money because you can't afford your own health care.
On August 25 2010 02:02 FabledIntegral wrote: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
Play the market. Sell yourself.
Maybe they should have, but there are more people than jobs. If they were all twice as good at marketing themselves and had a flawless academic record, they'd just edge out a dozen other candidates from the pool, and then we'd be talking about those people, instead.
Fundamentally, I don't understand why you are committed to this view where if you haven't done all these things, you then deserve to toil in shit and shouldn't get any sympathy. I think that's immoral. I don't think it's reasonable to leave hard-working poor people without any accessible health care because they didn't go to enough career fairs or (gasp) didn't attend college.
Agreed
Furthermore what if you're not a materialistic job/money oriented zombie like the rest of the nation? What if the knowledge is worth more to you than the degree, and so you don't pursue one? It's common knowledge that Albert Einstien wouldn't be accepted to college these days. To hold every person to ridiculous standards, particularly when you don't know the meaning of life or anything like that and are simply just making blind judgments based on your world view without any empathy at all is nothing short of selfish and blind.
What? This has nothing to do with materialism. It has to do with not taking money from people who earned it. I don't understand your knowledge vs degree argument; a degree typically results in more knowledge than not having a degree, maybe I'm misreading it. I don't know what "standards," you're speaking of. I'm saying don't expect other people to take care of you simply because you can't yourself. Why should I pay for someone else who broke their arm when skateboarding and needed to go to the hospital? Why should I pay for someone who has had a heart attack because they decided to continually eat terrible? Why should I pay for someone who has lung cancer because they smoked their entire life? They made their choices.
Yeah, it's a tragedy that things happen to people as well that didn't make those choices and ended there anyways. But there's no reason I should be forced by law to pay for their disabilities. I assume all of you have at least a few extra dollars spending cash, why don't every single one of you donate ALL your money to Africa to save dying children? Your hypocrisy astounds me. The argument I've seen over and over is that it's "people's lives," etc. So now because of what country you live in lives are valued differently? The amount of money it takes to save one person from dying from cancer could save a hundred kids from starving each year in another country. Why not take 10% out of EVERYONE'S paychecks from now on to help them? There's a difference between killing someone and failing to save someone. One is causing something and the other is omission of action. And I know a lot of you have some extra cash or you wouldn't have any internet access.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
If no one takes the job and they "need to be done," then the wages and benefits for the job will go up. No one forced her to take the job, as no one has forced any of them to take the job. Because they are willing to say "yes, I will work at this job for $8/hr" that they get paid $8/hr. Somebody has do to it is never a valid explanation.
As said I said before, if she wanted health insurance affordable, maybe she should have quit smoking to lower her rates and apply all the money saved on cigarettes to pay for her shoulder getting fixed.
Sounds like you need a reality check. If you have no money, you don't exactly have the opportunity to say "Oh, I don't need the money I can earn there. If I hold on to this long enough they might raise the salary, just need to survive until they give in! And a higher paycheck might attract other people with better qualifications then me which can put me out of play. But then I did something for the greater good I guess! Even if I will still be left in the cold with no money at all..." You CAN be forced in a job when you really need the money and don't see any other way out. It ain't because you have the possibility to pick your job that everybody has that choice. Really seems that you lack a bit of empathy if you ask me.
I never said she should wait. Your bullshit remarks aren't appreciated. No, you can't be forced into a job no matter what circumstance. Every single economist also says you are wrong. You are mixing free will and sympathy. I believe you need a reality check. I am very much a realist.
I'm saying that people are willing to take the job at $8/hr so there's no reason the wage should go up. Completely different than saying wait. I also think most other first world countries are shittier than the United States so you can go throw that terrible argument elsewhere.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
No, the Canadian system is awesome. Everyone gets a standard of care regardless of if you're rich or poor - but the rich people can just pony up and fly to the US to jump the queue.
Do you know what the fundamental reason why healthcare is so expensive? BECAUSE EVERYONE WANTS THE BEST HEALTHCARE. Who's going to settle for a 30 year old cancer treatment when you can get an MRI? What doctor is going to recommend that to you?
Healthcare is constantly improving, just like computers are. The components, the equipment, the techniques all get more costly and more effective all the time. And just like computers, it gets more expensive over time. The difference? EVERYBODY wants to be a first adopter in healthcare whereas only a very few people want to be first adopters in new computer tech. Therefore, healthcare is constantly extremly expensive.
Money and resources don't grow on trees. Yes, healthcare keeps getting more expensive but that's because it keeps getting better. If you want a cheap solution... you're not going to get the best solution. Solution: Make more money. Don't be an assembly line worker. Don't produce the same value in goods every day but try to consume more and more goods every day of your life.
I'm sorry, but that's the truth. The real solution is a teired healthcare system where poor people get doctors with older techniques, less experience and the equipment is worse. But unfortunatly, right now "everyone is equal" in terms of lives. That means everyone gets the same standard of care, so instead of people getting different levels of care based on what they can afford, you either get care or striaght up don't get anything.
What I've gotten from this is you like paying into the system because you've gotten far more out of it than you've put it. But what about a person who remained single his entire life, never had any genetic defects, lived a healthy life, etc. How much money did he have to pay in his life to support YOUR surgeries. I feel like it isn't fair to him whatsoever. It's only fair to you because everyone pitched in to help YOU. Imagine you're getting paid $10/hr in the current system. Now you're told because other people want to be insured, you're going to only get paid $9/hr. 10% of your salary is now gone to help other people, and the frugal existence you're surviving on now is made even harder because some dipshit decided to go off a ramp snowboarding and failed to land it.
Universal healthcare also hurts those who don't have healthcare already but are living safely and don't need it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
You can't argue police because it's considered a necessity to maintain order. It's universally agreed in that aspect, and isn't debated by anyone. School is more tricky but the end result is a significantly more educated population that may be deemed necessary by the government and produces an overall more productive society, etc. Healthcare only has negative costs on society in terms of economic growth (no, being able to "still work," does not offset this cost by having your shoulder repaired).
What would I be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment? Money that I have to spend because she can't manage her own life and do it herself. All you are is a pushover that refuses to even address the fact she could have easily made her situation better by not smoking. Not smoking = more money from not purchasing cigarettes and more affordable healthcare --> win. So stop saying she was fucking helpless.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
I know they do, and I disagree with all the programs you quoted. I do not want, or support, any government program that is funded by theft and coercion.
Do you know what I would give up? For one, my property would be forcefully confiscated from me for the arcane "greater good". Secondly, with every government program comes a loss of liberty. Every mandate, program, regulation, etc that is put in place by the leviathan state chips away at my freedom.
Then by all means find some open desert where you can live out your anarcho-libertarian fantasies.
It really wasn't necessary to repost the same thing I just replied too...
And to your other reply to my comment... I'm not going to take the time. My posts speak for themselves, no need to repost the same thing. If you don't understand basic things like Actually Having knowledge vs Actually having knowledge + Degree and if you want to actually turn this into a political debate when we're all just sharing our opinions on an event that happened in the world. Take a chill pill or reread what I meant because this is not a debate thread. If your really interested, I'd be willing via PM to converse.
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
LOL so now I have to pay money because people aren't as smart as me? We should have a friggin' IQ test and I'll tank it on purpose to receive welfare from the government. Really? You really want to argue that people who are less smart are going to deserve my money because I'm smarter?
Life isn't fair. I have my own life and I don't want it to be affected by other people's poor decisions. No, I don't know about her history and don't care to. She made her own choices in her life that led up to this situation.
Yeah man fucking stupid people always gotta be doing stupid stuff and making me pay for it. I mean, all those kids who were born with fetal alcohol syndrome because their mom was a drunkass bitch and dad just disappeared should just STAY homeless and crazy begging on the corner. When they come clean my house or mow my lawn or handle the radioactive waste produced by my electricity usage they should shut up and deal with it. If they were like ME they would just find a job and some other dumbfuck would have to do it and get the all the ass cancer that comes with it. I got to where I am by being BETTER than everyone else and working harder, I had to even go to public school man because my parents couldn't afford prep school like the other kids in my neighborhood. Why the fuck should I care if some poor person has a medical problem that she can't afford, tough cookie bitch.
On August 25 2010 04:52 FabledIntegral wrote: Why should I pay for someone else who broke their arm when skateboarding and needed to go to the hospital? Why should I pay for someone who has had a heart attack because they decided to continually eat terrible? Why should I pay for someone who has lung cancer because they smoked their entire life? They made their choices.
I guess there's no point discussing this any further. I think you should pay for those things because it's the right thing to do. Clearly you disagree.
Yeah, it's a tragedy that things happen to people as well that didn't make those choices and ended there anyways. But there's no reason I should be forced by law to pay for their disabilities. I assume all of you have at least a few extra dollars spending cash, why don't every single one of you donate ALL your money to Africa to save dying children? Your hypocrisy astounds me. The argument I've seen over and over is that it's "people's lives," etc. So now because of what country you live in lives are valued differently? The amount of money it takes to save one person from dying from cancer could save a hundred kids from starving each year in another country. Why not take 10% out of EVERYONE'S paychecks from now on to help them? There's a difference between killing someone and failing to save someone. One is causing something and the other is omission of action. And I know a lot of you have some extra cash or you wouldn't have any internet access.
Well, it's difficult to snap your fingers and save a dying child; a few dollars doesn't literally translate to a life saved. A few hundred might. I donate a chunk of money to tuberculosis vaccines and immunization via GiveWell, which ranks charities by efficacy. I don't donate it all because I'm selfish and human. I'm not bragging, though; I think it would be a lot more moral and admirable for me to donate almost all of it.
I don't understand how you defend yourself for not helping people enough, by attacking others for not helping them enough. We should all be helping.
On August 24 2010 22:46 Floophead_III wrote: People shouldn't have to make $8/hour handling toxic waste if they didn't sit around smoking dope for 35 years.
This is America, there is no excuse why anybody ever should have that kind of job at her age.
Are you saying all the younger people should be working these jobs? She was younger once too but working a job like that usually leads to continuing to work a job like that. Or are you saying that no one in America should be working these jobs? Somebody has to do them.
It's true that you can look at any individual and find a way for them to achieve a good career but you can't look at a nation and find a way for every citizen to have a good career, even if they're all willing and able. Lots and lots of shitty jobs are out there and they need to be done. You shouldn't devalue and trash the person who ends up with a shitty job.
Well, the fact is that perhaps times are tough at a point, or someone has dicked off all through school (or just dropped out) and honestly did nothing, they can land a job like that just to live. But after a few years, they should be looking to move out since it is NOT a job you should take for the long term. Either move up to management level, look for a different company - hell, move to another area. People get complacent and then when their decisions bite them in the ass they bitch and moan. You could see this problem coming from 20 years away.
And then of course people like that should think twice before starting a family. There's no way to support kids, have them grow up with a proper environment, and have them grow up to be beneficial for society and successful if you don't have the income. Honestly, I know it's harsh, but poor people shouldn't have kids. If you can't provide for them, don't have them. Focus on getting your own shit together first.
The fact is, I see people do jack shit all day and still pick up a real job at age 18. They probably live better lives than she does. It can't be that hard.
I don't have health insurance and I've never been denied, in fact as far as I know the hospital must treat your injuries no matter how simple. Hell I've been to the ER for plenty of things that were not life threatening. The ER is a surefire way to get treated if you have no money or insurance, it will leave you with a massive bill that you can either pay or not pay, but you will get treated. P.S. not paying nets you annoying people calling you 5x a day.
it's obv there's a lot of people in this thread who never had to deal with these issues because their parents take care of everything for them, you shouldn't be talking down on anyone if your parents are making you who you are considering you haven't done shit to be where you are.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
The Canadian system is just fine. My mother and her 2 sisters have mammograms regularly, when their doctors recommend them. They have not had to wait months for them. If your family physician suspects something they will bump you right up (like they did for my mom, but found nothing cancerous).
My father passed out and hit his head on a metal railing due to kidney failure, was set up on a dialysis program that still allowed him to work and all at no cost out of his pocket. He since had a kidney transplant and the anti-rejection drugs are no cost to him.
My grandfather has had two heart attacks, a quadruple bypass, had a vein in his leg transplanted to his heart, and takes 7 different pills at various times in the week for his condition. And he is retired and able to live comfortably.
At age 15, my brother was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, which means his pancreas no longer produces insulin, which we all need. The insulin he needs, the doctor and specialist doctor visits he needs are all covered by our national healthcare system.
I had my tonsils removed in 1993, I haven't been to the hospital for myself since then, and I gladly pay my share of the taxes that go towards the healthcare in this nation.
I'm sorry that your aunt's diagnosis may have been screwed up, she had a shitty doctor, or whatever happened there, but to generalize an entire system because of one instance is the same as me generalizing the system as perfect because it has been good to my family. It has its flaws, I agree, but it and every other first world health care system is better than America's system.
I'm not saying the doctors or specialists or nurses are bad, some of the finest in the world work in America, but the insurance system you have is terrible and this most recent healthcare reform bill has done very little to make it comparable to the rest of the civilized world.
Good post, I have a really hard time believing everything that "fabledintegral" said, there has to be something else to that story. Some of my good friends live in Canada now and they are absolutely happy about the healthcare and education system.
On August 25 2010 05:02 muse5187 wrote: I don't have health insurance and I've never been denied, in fact as far as I know the hospital must treat your injuries no matter how simple. Hell I've been to the ER for plenty of things that were not life threatening. The ER is a surefire way to get treated if you have no money or insurance, it will leave you with a massive bill that you can either pay or not pay, but you will get treated. P.S. not paying nets you annoying people calling you 5x a day.
it's obv there's a lot of people in this thread who never had to deal with these issues because their parents take care of everything for them, you shouldn't be talking down on anyone if your parents are making you who you are considering you haven't done shit to be where you are.
Agree with this, I've been to ER multiple times and they do everything that they have to, blood work, x-rays, mris, cat scans, operations regardless of whether you have insurance or not.
Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
This is basically what I was thinking, thank you for posting.
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
The Canadian system is just fine. My mother and her 2 sisters have mammograms regularly, when their doctors recommend them. They have not had to wait months for them. If your family physician suspects something they will bump you right up (like they did for my mom, but found nothing cancerous).
My father passed out and hit his head on a metal railing due to kidney failure, was set up on a dialysis program that still allowed him to work and all at no cost out of his pocket. He since had a kidney transplant and the anti-rejection drugs are no cost to him.
My grandfather has had two heart attacks, a quadruple bypass, had a vein in his leg transplanted to his heart, and takes 7 different pills at various times in the week for his condition. And he is retired and able to live comfortably.
At age 15, my brother was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, which means his pancreas no longer produces insulin, which we all need. The insulin he needs, the doctor and specialist doctor visits he needs are all covered by our national healthcare system.
I had my tonsils removed in 1993, I haven't been to the hospital for myself since then, and I gladly pay my share of the taxes that go towards the healthcare in this nation.
I'm sorry that your aunt's diagnosis may have been screwed up, she had a shitty doctor, or whatever happened there, but to generalize an entire system because of one instance is the same as me generalizing the system as perfect because it has been good to my family. It has its flaws, I agree, but it and every other first world health care system is better than America's system.
I'm not saying the doctors or specialists or nurses are bad, some of the finest in the world work in America, but the insurance system you have is terrible and this most recent healthcare reform bill has done very little to make it comparable to the rest of the civilized world.
Good post, I have a really hard time believing everything that "fabledintegral" said, there has to be something else to that story. Some of my good friends live in Canada now and they are absolutely happy about the healthcare and education system.
Yeah, the whole you'll die from disease because canada makes you wait for this or that and has "death panels" is typical propaganda from a certain political party in america, these "claims" are directed towards the uneducated and ignorant as a way to block any type of reform. You'll notice these people are always repeating some dumb crap they heard on FOX, and they will believe it. Yea, most of this is directed at fabledignorance and company. Anyway guys enjoy your life of privilege, and keep telling yourself you deserve it!
On August 25 2010 03:17 Motiva wrote: lol I can feel for her pain. I don't blame her for what she did. Furthermore all of the spoiled kids in this thread make me laugh. You people clearly are not aware of how difficult it is making $8/hr while being uninsurable in the private market...
This is just another day in a world where health maintenance requires insurance. Sure it works for the middle-uper and even some of the lower class, but the idea that because the system leaves out some people, that it's their fault. I know this might be a shock to many of you kids, but the real world is actually very difficult and unforgiving. Anyone sitting there making comments about this woman clearly deserve a punch in the face. :D What do you know about her life choices, her financial situation, her intelligence? Maybe she's just not very smart? Are you suddenly interested in attacking slow people?
My point is simply that the people in this thread are quick to point fingers, make comments, tell stories, but all these are is bias justification for your inability to relate. Like the story above me about someone flying to a different country to get health services, over other health services... Ok, but what if you made $8/hr and had 2 kids and there wasn't socialized healthcare or hell, even cheap healthcare. Oh right you'd just do X Y Z and dodge the problem because you actually can't relate at all /rant
LOL so now I have to pay money because people aren't as smart as me? We should have a friggin' IQ test and I'll tank it on purpose to receive welfare from the government. Really? You really want to argue that people who are less smart are going to deserve my money because I'm smarter?
Life isn't fair. I have my own life and I don't want it to be affected by other people's poor decisions. No, I don't know about her history and don't care to. She made her own choices in her life that led up to this situation.
Well fortunately since you care so little, your opinion matters about as much.
Don't worry, your opinion is equally worthless to me, don't flatter yourself.
Do I really want to argue that people who are less smart deserve anything? No, I'm not sure I did anything to merit the sort...
You said her actions could potentially be justified if she were slow. There is no other way to interpret "you people need to be punched in the face ... maybe she just isn't very smart." Clearly you are arguing that she would deserve it because she isn't very smart. Please enlighten me on how it could be interpreted otherwise.
Are you interested in arguing things that have nothing to do with anything?
Arguing things that have nothing to do with anything. Bravo. Elaborate?
You don't want poor decisions affected your life, I don't want to have to reply to poorly thought out posts.
Your's has clearly been worse thus far.
Or we could stay on topic, and you could just read my words and take the meaning for what it is, instead of having to pretend i'm arguing something when I'm really just being like wtf @ all the bias in this thread. Suddenly a not very bright woman does something and theres a 10 page thread of well of people condemning her. I'm not asking you to pay her anything, and if someone says you have to pay her something, well then, complain to them, not to someone who has nothing to do with it. Me.
You clearly attempted to justify her actions in your post. You also incorporate how some people aren't living in the "real world" (because ours is fake..?) and would be "shocked." While that is just as much irrelevant in itself, it is compounding on the ideas already presented.
However, I must say it's a startling revelation that you don't want poor decisions caused by others to affect you... However, she made her own choices, we can both assume this, I'm down. However to say that her situation isn't affected by the same fucking retarded people making retarded decisions all over teh world is asinine. Not your point perhaps, but you made your point several posts ago, why are you asking me OT questions?
If you want to make the point that everyone's lives are affected by certain other people's choices, then that's fine. But that's not very (possibly minutely) relevant to the own choices she made in her own life. Presented with the options she had, whatever they were, she ended up in this situation. No one forced her into it, and that's the point, no one should force her to do anything, just as no one should force me to do anything because of what she does.
If you have a problem with my problem with people insisting on their superior world view, or interpreation there-of. So be it... Just making my point.
No, I was clearly debating. The "LOL" comment was merely in response to what I deemed to be a hilariously absurd notion.
On August 25 2010 05:00 Motiva wrote: @Fabled
It really wasn't necessary to repost the same thing I just replied too...
And to your other reply to my comment... I'm not going to take the time. My posts speak for themselves, no need to repost the same thing. If you don't understand basic things like Actually Having knowledge vs Actually having knowledge + Degree and if you want to actually turn this into a political debate when we're all just sharing our opinions on an event that happened in the world. Take a chill pill or reread what I meant because this is not a debate thread. If your really interested, I'd be willing via PM to converse.
Accident, my mistake. And I have no idea on what your interpretation of "actually having knowledge" even is.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
PS. My aunt died of breast cancer. She lived in Canada. Her scheduled mammogram (when she just turned 50) made her wait months to actually get in. If she was in the United States and got in immediately they would have detected the cancer sooner and she would have had a better shot at living. My grandfather also had a critical eye injury that they wanted to make him wait over 3 weeks in order to get surgery (which is very short compared to normal wait lists in Canada for surgery, save life threatening ones). He flew to the US to get it done. To save his vision. The Canadian system sucks dick.
The Canadian system is just fine. My mother and her 2 sisters have mammograms regularly, when their doctors recommend them. They have not had to wait months for them. If your family physician suspects something they will bump you right up (like they did for my mom, but found nothing cancerous).
My father passed out and hit his head on a metal railing due to kidney failure, was set up on a dialysis program that still allowed him to work and all at no cost out of his pocket. He since had a kidney transplant and the anti-rejection drugs are no cost to him.
My grandfather has had two heart attacks, a quadruple bypass, had a vein in his leg transplanted to his heart, and takes 7 different pills at various times in the week for his condition. And he is retired and able to live comfortably.
At age 15, my brother was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, which means his pancreas no longer produces insulin, which we all need. The insulin he needs, the doctor and specialist doctor visits he needs are all covered by our national healthcare system.
I had my tonsils removed in 1993, I haven't been to the hospital for myself since then, and I gladly pay my share of the taxes that go towards the healthcare in this nation.
I'm sorry that your aunt's diagnosis may have been screwed up, she had a shitty doctor, or whatever happened there, but to generalize an entire system because of one instance is the same as me generalizing the system as perfect because it has been good to my family. It has its flaws, I agree, but it and every other first world health care system is better than America's system.
I'm not saying the doctors or specialists or nurses are bad, some of the finest in the world work in America, but the insurance system you have is terrible and this most recent healthcare reform bill has done very little to make it comparable to the rest of the civilized world.
Good post, I have a really hard time believing everything that "fabledintegral" said, there has to be something else to that story. Some of my good friends live in Canada now and they are absolutely happy about the healthcare and education system.
Yeah, the whole you'll die from disease because canada makes you wait for this or that and has "death panels" is typical propaganda from a certain political party in america, these "claims" are directed towards the uneducated and ignorant as a way to block any type of reform. You'll notice these people are always repeating some dumb crap they heard on FOX, and they will believe it. Yea, most of this is directed at fabledignorance and company. Anyway guys enjoy your life of privilege, and keep telling yourself you deserve it!
I never said you'll die from disease and I clearly stated that if it was fatal you would not have to wait. But thanks for rewording what I said. I also have a strong distaste for FOX news, and identify more towards Democratic policies than Republican.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
On August 25 2010 02:02 FabledIntegral wrote: And maybe your friends should have gotten
1. A better resume 2. A better GPA 3. Gone to more career fairs 4. Majored in a better field with more job openings
Guess what? I'm majoring in Business Economics. Job market is god awful for my major. Know what I did? Picked up a minor in accounting. Now I work for a CPA firm and have a side job as a valet on Fri/Sat nights. I'm aware there's unemployment. But out of every 100 looking for jobs, only ~15 can't find them. So how about you don't be in the bottom 15%. I assure you if they had gotten a 3.5 of above they would have no trouble finding jobs. Are they also being smart about it? When they apply to Ralphs, does their resume say that they graduated with a bachelors? If it does, they need to stop being stupid and take it off their resume. Most employers for basic retail will immediately discard your resume if you're a college graduate - because they are overqualified.
Play the market. Sell yourself.
Maybe they should have, but there are more people than jobs. If they were all twice as good at marketing themselves and had a flawless academic record, they'd just edge out a dozen other candidates from the pool, and then we'd be talking about those people, instead.
Fundamentally, I don't understand why you are committed to this view where if you haven't done all these things, you then deserve to toil in shit and shouldn't get any sympathy. I think that's immoral. I don't think it's reasonable to leave hard-working poor people without any accessible health care because they didn't go to enough career fairs or (gasp) didn't attend college.
That's why you work hard when you're young...you work hard early in life, you can relax more later. you slack off early in life you will pay for it later an have to work harder. the world isn't perfect, people will always suffer. No one likes suffering, but in order for there to be rich there must be poor and vice versa. In order for there to be a normal there must be an abnormal. If there is a smart there has to be a stupid, or more stupid. In order for there to be a diamond league, there must be a copper league.This is how things are. I don't like it but its not gonna solve the root problem.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
I know they do, and I disagree with all the programs you quoted. I do not want, or support, any government program that is funded by theft and coercion.
Do you know what I would give up? For one, my property would be forcefully confiscated from me for the arcane "greater good". Secondly, with every government program comes a loss of liberty. Every mandate, program, regulation, etc that is put in place by the leviathan state chips away at my freedom.
Then by all means find some open desert where you can live out your anarcho-libertarian fantasies.
On August 25 2010 00:29 EpiCenteR wrote: Sad story indeed. However, it does not justify stealing other peoples money to fix it.
On August 25 2010 00:29 thrslimde wrote: But there is a undeniable truth, which is that every person with a serious health issue (and that also includes non-lethal issues that mess up your live or prevent you from living it normally) needs a treatment.
And this truth ends with a fullstop. There are no if's in it. To me there is no argument that could ever be made to counter this statement. And any health care system should fullfil this, even if that means that we need to pay 50% income tax, smoke Cuban cigars all day, and wear oversized sunglasses. Even if the system gets abused as shit. Even if the uncovered people are immigrants. Even if it would destroy the economy, crash the stock exchange and destroys millions of jobs.
Just contrasting the previous two posts. There's a real value issue here. Saying it's "stealing" doesn't convince anyone, and neither does saying "any health care system should fulfill this." This is why I don't think serious reform is coming in this generation; half of the population couldn't give a shit about "fairness" or "justice" when it gets in the way of people's health, and the other half couldn't give a shit if their neighbor curls up and dies when it gets in the way of fairness. You can't really reconcile these two positions easily.
Whats "fair" and "just" about forcefully confiscating ones property (money) and giving to to another which did not earn it? If I see someone hurting, or needing help, I will do what I can to help out another person. I am sure most people are the same. However, one should not use the heavy and omnipotent hand of the State to fix social "problems".
They can and do for other social institutions. Schools, police, medicare/medicaid. How is this any different? Shouldn't we stop these existing institutions because they too force you to pay money for the benefit of others? Tell me, what exactly would you be giving up for this person to receive basic medical treatment?
There's only really two things driving the people that seem to blame this women, greed and ignorance of reality.
I know they do, and I disagree with all the programs you quoted. I do not want, or support, any government program that is funded by theft and coercion.
Do you know what I would give up? For one, my property would be forcefully confiscated from me for the arcane "greater good". Secondly, with every government program comes a loss of liberty. Every mandate, program, regulation, etc that is put in place by the leviathan state chips away at my freedom.
Then by all means find some open desert where you can live out your anarcho-libertarian fantasies.
Want to actually try to refute what I said?
For the record you disagree with school. police, and medical services provided by the state? What would you like everyone going to christian or catholic schools? What is there to refute? All I see is your paranoia.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
Excellent post and well worded. It's amazing how many "liberal-minded" people talk and talk about we're all heartless bastards but in the end they don't realize how much more money they'd have if they didn't have to pay, or consequentially how much their "compassion" costs.
The average, middle-class person pays way way way more in taxes than they need to. Why is this? The rich invest everything into business, trust funds, and other loopholes to avoid the absurd taxes. Some of this is good because it can create jobs and growth (and the law should work in such a way as to promote business investment), but sometimes it's not. The poor pay nothing and receive MASSIVE compensation from the bloated welfare state (take a look at our national budget. Look how much is in SS, welfare, medicaid and medicare.) It's ridiculous that people think we don't do enough, because clearly when our budget for welfare is over twice our defense budget something is wrong with the gov't. Our primary objective sure isn't to give handouts.
Unfortunately, we "republicans" do live in the real world. In the real world, sometimes shit happens, and sometimes some people have shitty lives. Is this perfect? No. Do we want this? No. But is it realistic to believe we can give everybody everything? No, it's really not.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
Ironically, it is you who is the ignoramus.
Yeah, all those taxes = income taxes, no I didn't think so. Even including these other taxes it still will not reach close to 50%.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
When you're done making up numbers and stories do come back to post!
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
Ironically, it is you who is the ignoramus.
Yeah, all those taxes = income taxes, no I didn't think so. Even including these other taxes it still will not reach close to 50%.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
Ironically, it is you who is the ignoramus.
Yeah, all those taxes = income taxes, no I didn't think so. Even including these other taxes it still will not reach close to 50%.
Yes it does, and 90% of that is income.
I'm not going to argue with someone who uses bait and switch to attempt to get his views across. Second at no time was anyone talking about property tax, sales tax, or any of this shit you are bringing in. And if you're paying 50%+ taxes maybe you should get a pro like fabledignoramus to do them for you, he's obv. a very intelligent being.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
Ironically, it is you who is the ignoramus.
Yeah, all those taxes = income taxes, no I didn't think so. Even including these other taxes it still will not reach close to 50%.
Yes it does, and 90% of that is income.
I'm not going to argue with someone who uses bait and switch to attempt to get his views across. Second at no time was anyone talking about property tax, sales tax, or any of this shit you are bringing in. And if you're paying 50%+ taxes maybe you should get a pro like fabledignoramus to do them for you, he's obv. a very intelligent being.
end of ranting to teenagers who know everything.
But... but... I'm not a teenager
Also I haven't ranted. I just reviewed every post. You ranted. You flamed. Your posts were filled with name calling towards me. I didn't do any of that.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot. After the world wars, the top bracket was getting taxed 85%-93%!!! AND THEY ARE STILL FILTHY RICH.
What a great business student you are, don't even know tax brackets. Or did you make that up also to "support your view"?
I wasn't rewording anything you said, in fact that post wasn't even for you. But you do fit the bill for the ignoramus know it all part.
I might be double posting, but you're so stupid it warrants it.
8% taxes is very possible since he probably gets some big writeoffs for having student loans and such. It might not be the amount taken from his paycheck but I bet he gets a big return or something. There's a lot of little exceptions in the code.
As for nobody paying over 50%, almost everyone from my area (N. VA) pays that much. The average income is very high because the cost of living is just as high (I think it's like 90k for a family of 4 is the estimate.) It's not like we're all rich, we just pay insane taxes. I think my family pays close to, if not more than 50%. You have to keep in mind it's not all federal, probably 35% federal but then there's state, local, property... you get the picture I hope.
The reason the top bracket never actually loses 90% of their money is it's all hidden in investments, trusts, and business. Nobody has that much money in capital. That'd be retarded.
Ironically, it is you who is the ignoramus.
Yeah, all those taxes = income taxes, no I didn't think so. Even including these other taxes it still will not reach close to 50%.
Yes it does, and 90% of that is income.
I'm not going to argue with someone who uses bait and switch to attempt to get his views across. Second at no time was anyone talking about property tax, sales tax, or any of this shit you are bringing in. And if you're paying 50%+ taxes maybe you should get a pro like fabledignoramus to do them for you, he's obv. a very intelligent being.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: ... If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Wheres the moral line in the sand between a saint like you and a sick and disgusting person? A dollar a month? Every dollar you spend could go towards saving some else's life- you could live in a smaller place, sell your car, live on bread and water and live like a monk. Every one of those dollars could go towards saving lives. You aren't asking for charity from people, you are demanding forced labor towards ends you think are noble. Every dollar you demand is minutes of some taxpayer's life, try to realize that the policies you think are black and white have trade-offs.
Why don't these people, who don't want to chain themselves together quite as tightly as you think is morally demanded, form their own country and live by different rules? maybe we can call it the USA. As far as your ridiculous aside on living outside of society, why would those who are most dependent on others for their food, water, clothing and health care fare better in the wild?
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
Nobody is making the argument that life is completely fair- you seem to think we can make it fair through social programs though. Thats what I would call a fantasy world. If you remove all of the shitty results that are heaped on people who make shitty decisions, you get more people making shitty decisions. Its unavoidable, life is unfair.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you want to force people to pay to support less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society.
Charity is noble, taking money from others to fund charity is theft.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
An important point that is seldom brought up is that the US government spends enough on social programs (all of them put together at all levels) that they could cut checks for every person under the poverty line to bring them up to it. How much more money should they spend?
On August 25 2010 06:04 Floophead_III wrote: Unfortunately, we "republicans" do live in the real world. In the real world, sometimes shit happens, and sometimes some people have shitty lives. Is this perfect? No. Do we want this? No. But is it realistic to believe we can give everybody everything? No, it's really not.
There's a difference between "giving everybody everything" and "providing free health care and college education like most first world countries seem to do".
Do you think providing universal health care is impossible in the US? Congress could do it right now. Let's just hold off invading oil fields held by weak third world dictators for a decade and you already have enough money in the budget to pay for health care like 10 times over.
its unfortunate but that is the cruel reality of life. health care isnt free in many other parts of the world too. i had to live with the same situation myself.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
Getting a tax return does not in ANY way mean you aren't paying the taxes. Your arguments are so ridden with bait and switch and strawman it's almost impossible to keep track of the bull you have stated already.
How is it that in one breath, you guys say, life is unfair. Then in the next breath, you say that it's not right to take your money to help someone else? Why not? I think it's right.
On August 25 2010 04:39 nttea wrote: I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
So your definition of compassion is that people are entitled to others wealth?
Yeah kind of. What's your definition of compassion?
On August 25 2010 04:39 nttea wrote: I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
So your definition of compassion is that people are entitled to others wealth?
Yeah kind of. What's your definition of compassion?
On August 25 2010 04:39 nttea wrote: I am utterly disgusted at the amount of people lacking basic human compassion in this thread... So she made some mistakes in her life? you really think she doesn't deserve healthcare because she was stupid enough to 1. Smoke (which is something ALOT of people do, and it's addictive and very hard to quit for most people. Probably even harder for someone with a life that sucks ass) 2. worked with toxic waste. Guess what, someone has to do it. You know the world could be a much better place if you weren't such assholes.
So your definition of compassion is that people are entitled to others wealth?
Yeah kind of. What's your definition of compassion?
Attacking countries and "liberating" them!!!!!
User was temp banned for this post.
meh he was an emotional poster but i guess this is purely ironical this time. also he did not made up much of an arguement else than attacking. too well informed misslead. but come one..
ban for this one? that was his first smart ironic one. (lurking this thread some time, this FabledIntegral made some good point tho, i am not sure to kick this tax one to another level... there is much more to know if you are willingly. gonna check reasoning, well deserverd, but i would have called the ban on some of his senseless rants before than this well made pun, just me, is okay)
On August 24 2010 14:52 teekesselchen wrote: Rubric "A news and the story behind" in the german "SPIEGEL" 33/2010.
Title: The Rescue Shot - "How a patient tried to solve an insurance issue."
"Ms. Myers, 41 years old, homosexual, smokes, worked with toxic waste for 23 years, with asbestos, with radioactive material. The nightmare of every insurance company, high risk candidate for cancer, asthma, skin diseases. She would have had to pay more than a thousand dollars a month. Sorting waste earned her 8$ an hour."
She suffered a very painful shoulder injury when walking the dog.
""There is no mortal danger", said the doctor at Lakeland Community Hospital in Niles, Michigan, "we can't treat your shoulder, because you have no health insurance." The nurse gave her a painkiller. [...] Myers swallowed some pills, continued her work, the pain in her shoulder got worse. She voted for Obama, partially because of the health care reform. Nothing changed yet. 47 million Americans without health insurance, Myers one of them. She passed out at the assembly line. Next day she called her employer, reported sick. "You don't need to come anymore at all" they told her. At that point she, daughter of a cashier and youngest of six childs, made a decision: She would make politics herself, set an example."
Afterwards, she shot her shoulder to make the injury a life threatening one and called 911.
"The ambulance came and brought her to the hospital, 500$. In the hospital they radiograph her shoulder. The gunshot wound only is a flesh wound, nothing serious. They inject a pain killer in her arm. They give her two slices of bread, a cookie and a glass of tea. Six hours later she leaves the hospital, 1800$. [...] "The whole thing didn't achieve me anything" Myers says and takes a pull of her cigarette. She laughs humorless, "the pain is exactly as bad as before." [...] She is charged with an lawsuit for unathorized use of a gun inside a city area. Myers hopes for imprisonement. "In jail" she says, "they even have a dentist.""
Just one more story that makes it totally unbelievable and even disgusting to me that there still are Americans who deeply refuse a health care reform. A nightmare for affected people as well as doctors who aren't allowed to treat ill or injured people.
You can't give everyone things we can't afford. It's economics. It doesn't matter how necessary it seems: when things cost more than a country makes, the country shouldn't buy them. Unfortunately Congress doesn't listen (~3 trillion dollar debt added by Obama administration in 1.5 years; 5 added by Bush in 8).
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
What I find really weird is that you blame welfare for stealing your money. I live in a country famous for being the one welfare state.I am also a pretty standard worker at the moment working in IT. I'm taxed at 31% which gets deducted to roughly 24-26% because of write-offs. Yet I get free health care, I pay less than 15 dollars a month and I'm covered for any hospital expense no matter how high. I live in a country were everyone gets to go on welfare aslong as they don't have any funds to support themselves. I also have more disposable income than the average Amercian. So if a country can offer welfare to pretty much everyone that wants it aswell as supporting free healthcare to everyone can manage to give their workers higher disposable income, then the logical conclution would be that welfare isn't the money drain.
On August 25 2010 07:57 Hynda wrote: What I find really weird is that you blame welfare for stealing your money. I live in a country famous for being the one welfare state.I am also a pretty standard worker at the moment working in IT. I'm taxed at 31% which gets deducted to roughly 24-26% because of write-offs. Yet I get free health care, I pay less than 15 dollars a month and I'm covered for any hospital expense no matter how high. I live in a country were everyone gets to go on welfare aslong as they don't have any funds to support themselves. I also have more disposable income than the average Amercian. So if a country can offer welfare to pretty much everyone that wants it aswell as supporting free healthcare to everyone can manage to give their workers higher disposable income, then the logical conclution would be that welfare isn't the money drain.
Unfortunately we live in a country where welfare costs a higher percent of our budget and aids a smaller percent of people then in your country. This is in part because we have so many more people in our country that it's harder to design entitlement programs and regulate them, in part because we have more entitlement programs, and in part because our congress is full of fucktards.
It seems like there are two main groups of people. One group thinks of the woman as a victim. One group thinks of the woman as reaping what she has sown.
Is she really a victim? Are more fortunate souls merely lucky? Some people have worked really hard to get to where they are today and have accomplishments to their name. Others twiddled their time away not achieving anything of importance. For these two kinds of people, is the difference in wealth justified? I would hope so.
There is talk of the luxury of higher education, but higher education is hardly the differentiating factor. The futures of the successful and the unsuccessful diverge as early as childhood with the the successful putting in much more work and investing a lot more time into useful skills. Do successful people benefit from having good mentors? Undoubtedly. Yet, it's undeniable that the successful crowd invested more sweat and tears into their future. Their success is not purely accidental and is the accumulation of smart choice after smart choice over long long periods of time. Is it unfair to reward them for that? Is it unfair to punish the unsuccessful crowd for their indiscretions and destructive behavior. (There is of course luck and corruption - but those are other matters.)
A third group seems to think that health is a kind of sanctified matter that society should guarantee to the individual. Then what of self-destructive behavior? Should the smoker be allowed to trade away future health of his lungs in exchange for a short nicotine high? Should the woman even be allowed to get paid 8 dollars an hour for sorting waste? (She apparently was willing to mortgage her future health to put some food on her table and some money in her pocket.) Should anyone be allowed to ski mountains for pleasure or race cars as sport? Will there be someone jumping to people's bedrooms to check if men and women are using condoms?
There are a lot of dangerous activities that fly in the face of society's guarantee of individual health. If society is going to coddle the individual on paying for health care, then there will be a lot of private activities that society will soon deem its business.
On August 25 2010 08:03 TanGeng wrote: It seems like there are two main groups of people. One group thinks of the woman as a victim. One group thinks of the woman as reaping what she has sown.
What's fucked up is that the first group wants the second group to pay for her expenses, essentially.
On August 25 2010 07:57 Hynda wrote: What I find really weird is that you blame welfare for stealing your money. I live in a country famous for being the one welfare state.I am also a pretty standard worker at the moment working in IT. I'm taxed at 31% which gets deducted to roughly 24-26% because of write-offs. Yet I get free health care, I pay less than 15 dollars a month and I'm covered for any hospital expense no matter how high. I live in a country were everyone gets to go on welfare aslong as they don't have any funds to support themselves. I also have more disposable income than the average Amercian. So if a country can offer welfare to pretty much everyone that wants it aswell as supporting free healthcare to everyone can manage to give their workers higher disposable income, then the logical conclution would be that welfare isn't the money drain.
Unfortunately we live in a country where welfare costs a higher percent of our budget and aids a smaller percent of people then in your country. This is in part because we have so many more people in our country that it's harder to design entitlement programs and regulate them, in part because we have more entitlement programs, and in part because our congress is full of fucktards.
Then it's still not welfare that is the problem but rather the system used and the foundation of how you buildt your society. Hence going welfare is horrible and will make everyone pay 50% taxes is just wrong. Saying that you can't provide for welfare in your current situation, that I can agree with, but acting as if it's a bad concept is just silly when it has been proven to work. The most important thing my example shows is that people wants to work, people don't want to be on welfare, it's not fun. You get by, but that's pretty much it. Ofcourse it's possible to find some guy that loves being on welfare, but the it shows that the general public still only go on welfare when they have no other options.
On August 25 2010 08:03 TanGeng wrote: It seems like there are two main groups of people. One group thinks of the woman as a victim. One group thinks of the woman as reaping what she has sown.
Is she really a victim? Are more fortunate souls merely lucky? Some people have worked really hard to get to where they are today and have accomplishments to their name. Others twiddled their time away not achieving anything of importance. For these two kinds of people, is the difference in wealth justified? I would hope so.
There is talk of the luxury of higher education, but higher education is hardly the differentiating factor. The futures of the successful and the unsuccessful diverge as early as childhood with the the successful putting in much more work and investing a lot more time into useful skills. Do successful people benefit from having good mentors? Undoubtedly. Yet, it's undeniable that the successful crowd invested more sweat and tears into their future. Their success is not purely accidental and is the accumulation of smart choice after smart choice over long long periods of time. Is it unfair to reward them for that? Is it unfair to punish the unsuccessful crowd for their indiscretions and destructive behavior. (There is of course luck and corruption - but those are other matters.)
A third group seems to think that health is a kind of sanctified matter that society should guarantee to the individual. Then what of self-destructive behavior? Should the smoker be allowed to trade away future health of his lungs in exchange for a short nicotine high? Should the woman even be allowed to get paid 8 dollars an hour for sorting waste? (She apparently was willing to mortgage her future health to put some food on her table and some money in her pocket.) Should anyone be allowed to ski mountains for pleasure or race cars as sport? Will there be someone jumping to people's bedrooms to check if men and women are using condoms?
There are a lot of dangerous activities that fly in the face of society's guarantee of individual health. If society is going to coddle the individual on paying for health care, then there will be a lot of private activities that society will soon deem its business.
One point I see alot of people miss is the fact that most if not all the things this woman has worked with was once "THE NEW MIRACLE SUBSTANCE THAT IS NO WAY DANGEROUS!" Nobody knew abestos was harmful when it came out, it was great new material you used. It's the same with people working with oil nobody knew that was harmful untill they all got cancer and then they realised they need saftey suits. It's so easy to look in hindsight and say "Well you shouldn't have worked with poisonous stuff" when it's not that easy when nobody actually knew it was poisonous.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: ... If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Wheres the moral line in the sand between a saint like you and a sick and disgusting person? A dollar a month? Every dollar you spend could go towards saving some else's life- you could live in a smaller place, sell your car, live on bread and water and live like a monk. Every one of those dollars could go towards saving lives. You aren't asking for charity from people, you are demanding forced labor towards ends you think are noble. Every dollar you demand is minutes of some taxpayer's life, try to realize that the policies you think are black and white have trade-offs.
Why don't these people, who don't want to chain themselves together quite as tightly as you think is morally demanded, form their own country and live by different rules? maybe we can call it the USA. As far as your ridiculous aside on living outside of society, why would those who are most dependent on others for their food, water, clothing and health care fare better in the wild?
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
Nobody is making the argument that life is completely fair- you seem to think we can make it fair through social programs though. Thats what I would call a fantasy world. If you remove all of the shitty results that are heaped on people who make shitty decisions, you get more people making shitty decisions. Its unavoidable, life is unfair.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you want to force people to pay to support less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society.
Charity is noble, taking money from others to fund charity is theft.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
An important point that is seldom brought up is that the US government spends enough on social programs (all of them put together at all levels) that they could cut checks for every person under the poverty line to bring them up to it. How much more money should they spend?
well, are you even sure about what you are saying? or just repeating your political standard people you follow. because it seems like political overrepeated statements that makes no sense to me, sorry.
on-moral line: as high as it can get, thats an aim, not a special point, ever. your constitution... anyone?
on-it costs minutes of taxpayers work to help people heavily tormented: what about spending better what is there ? waste? fraud? missorganisation? industrial lobby activitism? oil ? millitary-lobby-undustrial-producers+mercs. consider. win a elect without? no way.
on-life is not fair: because it is not fair, shit on it even trying? NO. try as hard as it is possible. humanity deserves. but are we worth it ?
on-People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion.: If someone has the oppinion he is stronger than you, takes all what you have and dump you. and does coming through it. your arguement is actually valid. if you would like to live in that world.But. there are standards. basic needs. basic laws. shit on them, consider shit on them for you aswell, like in many many countries you benefit from. like your own. go to point one. if there is a point to even things out, that would not hurt you much, but save other peoples lifes and secures your state of beeing. it is not an option.
on-An important point that is seldom brought up is that the US government spends enough on social programs (all of them put together at all levels) that they could cut checks for every person under the poverty line to bring them up to it.: So, do even you realize there is something going WRONG ?
One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way.
Now let's focus on the act of shooting herself in the shoulder. By making it into the news, this woman has made herself a teachable example. Reward this example with pity and you set the stage for many copycats inflicting injuries on themselves to get free health care, and society is well on its way to hell. Stigmatize the example and you dissuade others from trying similar tactics and society avoids one of many possible self-destructive activities.
By her own words, she was trying to game the system so that she could force the hospitals to treat her ailing shoulder, and the result was no change in the condition of her shoulder and a couple thousand dollars of expenses to be paid by someone - probably by those paying for health insurance. And at the very end, the woman has learned nothing from this experience. She's thinking how she might have been able to game the system better if she had inflicted an even more serious injury on herself. That's just insane!!!
I don't understand how anybody can have sympathy for this woman.
On August 25 2010 08:35 TanGeng wrote: One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way.
Now let's focus on the act of shooting herself in the shoulder. By making it into the news, this woman has made herself a teachable example. Reward this example with pity and you set the stage for many copycats inflicting injuries on themselves to get free health care, and society is well on its way to hell. Stigmatize the example and you dissuade others from trying similar tactics and society avoids one of many possible self-destructive activities.
By her own words, she was trying to game the system so that she could force the hospitals to treat her ailing shoulder, and the result was no change in the condition of her shoulder and a couple thousand dollars of expenses to be paid by someone - probably by those paying for health insurance. And at the very end, the woman has learned nothing from this experience. She's thinking how she might have been able to game the system better if she had inflicted an even more serious injury on herself. That's just insane!!!
I don't understand how anybody can have sympathy for this woman.
experimantally. i totally dissagree.
how can someone not have totally sympathy for this woman. she is super baller although and despite having a fucking bad live.
You are telling me you feel no sympathy for a woman who was in so much pain, she shot herself in the god damn arm to try and get something done for it and not only was nothing done, they charged her 1800$ for what seems to be an xray, some pain meds, and a bandage?
And now she is thinking jail might not be so bad if she can actually get this pain resolved, and you see nothing wrong with that, nothing wrong at all?
People way less fortunate then ourselves get put into shitty situations, and have no way of getting out of them. Not everyone asking for healthcare reform or 'on the dole' is a lazy bum who never wants to work in his life, nor have they chosen their disabilities or injuries.
In your previous post you asked if we were merely fortunate souls, and hell yes we are. The fact that we can debate about this on the internet means we are much more fortunate then probably 95% of all the humans to ever live. Of course there will always be people who work harder, make more money, and are able to afford luxuries that others can only dream of, just as we need someone to serve us at Wendy's or Bestbuy or whatever. To say that the taxes we all pay to live in such a civilized society, with the protections it provides, is choking the rich and the middle class, is ridiculous.
It's a philosophical difference, I suppose. In almost, if not all other first world nations, the governments and people have decided that access to health care is a something that, whether rich or poor, all should be able to access. The people of the United States feel differently, which is something I do not understand, but it is not for me to. It is your country.
I think that smoking is one of the dumbest things someone can start doing with all we know about the health problems that it will most likely cause, but if someone was to get lung cancer, I'd still feel sympathy for what they're going through, and I'd like to think, at least, so would everyone else.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind.
True, taxes are by no means small. However, to enable universal health care you don't need to impose new taxes. There are other means of obtaining the needed money such as cutting useless, unimportant expenses or restructuring inefficient institutions. Through setting new priorities and shifting budget money it would be perfectly feasible to achieve universal health care with a minimal or no tax increase.
But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary.
I don't know about what taxes you are talking about but it surely can't be income tax. I would have been highly surprised if anywhere in the US people have to pay income taxes higher than in Germany, which is notorious for very high taxation. It turns out, if you are lucky enough to live in Hawaii or NJ and make more than $370k you actually do pay more. However, fed+state income tax would get you to max 46% in those two. There are many states where the max taxation is 40% or even 35%.
Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
First of all, do you mind to explain what a "welfare tax" is? As far as I know such a term does not exist. Welfare is funded by the government, but there is no specific welfare tax. Income tax in the US cannot reduce your $5000 paycheck to $2700. Even in the most unfavorable situation you will still get about $3500 if you're married with a non-working wife/husband you will get at least $4000. I'd imagine you know better than giving such an example. It almost feels like you are trying to bend the truth to make your point... I'm also pretty positive that the fatass makes up only a tiny fracture of what your taxes are spent on...
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
You'd be surprised but every European believes that the world is unfair. This exactly is the reason why many believe that the more privileged have a moral and social obligation to help out making the world somewhat fairer.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should.
And I'm saying that the government should force people to pay for supporting the unforunate simply because people tend to be careless, selfish assholes with a limited grasp on what's going on in the country they live in and exactly because nobody would ever come to the idea to spend 25% of his income on welfare.
Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
Ok, I'd give it a try. First of all, the "imaginary" border is a major reason, only that it isn't imaginary. Relating to somebody in your country is far easier than relating to somebody living in a land you don't even know it exists. Not many people could relate to being a starving black kid. Also comparing paying (high) taxes to donating to a third world country is an unfitting example. Donating would be "just" feeding some "dude" and basically mending an ever growing hole. Paying taxes on the other hand can be seen as paying back your country for the opportunities you have received. The people that profit from welfare or universal health care can be seen as tiny parts of the construct that has helped you reach the place where you are right now. Also, you effectively help to improve the conditions in your country, which more or less affects you, too. And after all, it seems most adequate to try to eliminate the problems in your country first before trying to help others. Of course, selfishness is a reason, too. People work, so they can improve their own situation after all. They want to feel that they are "living" and materialistic gain seems to work quite well for the overwhelming majority. However, there is a big difference between spending everything you can afford on charity and allocating only a part of your income to "charity" through taxation. The later ensures that while the society benefits from you, you are still able to be content and can enjoy yourself. Btw if hypothetically everybody was to spent all his excess income on donations to Africa it would lead to an economic collapse of your country in less then a decade. Donations to Africa lower your country's GDP, so theoretically everytime you do it, you harm yourself and the society you live in :p
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
Excellent post and well worded. It's amazing how many "liberal-minded" people talk and talk about we're all heartless bastards but in the end they don't realize how much more money they'd have if they didn't have to pay, or consequentially how much their "compassion" costs.
The average, middle-class person pays way way way more in taxes than they need to. Why is this? The rich invest everything into business, trust funds, and other loopholes to avoid the absurd taxes. Some of this is good because it can create jobs and growth (and the law should work in such a way as to promote business investment), but sometimes it's not. The poor pay nothing and receive MASSIVE compensation from the bloated welfare state (take a look at our national budget. Look how much is in SS, welfare, medicaid and medicare.) It's ridiculous that people think we don't do enough, because clearly when our budget for welfare is over twice our defense budget something is wrong with the gov't. Our primary objective sure isn't to give handouts.
Unfortunately, we "republicans" do live in the real world. In the real world, sometimes shit happens, and sometimes some people have shitty lives. Is this perfect? No. Do we want this? No. But is it realistic to believe we can give everybody everything? No, it's really not.
I do know in fact that welfare spending is the biggest expenditure of the German government. I still support it. Health care costs a lot, too, but I view it as essential. I wonder what do you base your assumptions on?
So you are concerned with the fact that your "budget for welfare is over twice [y]our defense budget", but you are not concerned with the fact that your defense budget accounts for 50% of the world's military spending? Since you "primary object is not to give handouts", I'd guess it is to find creative ways of blowing up people? (by the way, most developed countries have a welfare to military spending of 10:1 while the US has 2:1, you sure are compassionate)
I don't know about "you" the republican, but if I were you I'd refrain from comparing myself to the ignorant, backward, brainwashed people as which most republicans are viewed all around the world (makes you wonder why people all over the world share a single opinion on this topic?)
On August 25 2010 06:08 FabledIntegral wrote: Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
I cannot know for sure how it is handled in the US, but in Germany it is absolutely impossible to pay 0% taxes on a $50,000 salary. It is perfectly possible to not pay income taxes if you are self-employed and make 100k per year for the reason that you can boost your expenses in every way you can imagine, but not paying taxes on salary is unheard of. Can you give me an example of how anyone with 50k salary would come even close to 0% taxes?
@Floophead_III The highest income tax rate in Virginia is 40,75% at an annual income of $373k. The city you live in might impose another income tax, but I highly doubt that it is 10%. Btw property tax is by no means an income tax...
my old man collects 2% of what he bills for treating patients in the Emergency Room. That's our free healthcare right there. Granted, it's only for serious stuff (see the OP) but it's a crap situation for doctors too. The people who pay nothing are also more likely to sue
One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way.
But is it really necessary for someone to potentially die from a condition that was primarily caused by the hazardous working place? Its like saying soldiers should come up with the money for healthcare issues produced by war injuries. As i see it, if an american soldier was to be injured and didnt get healthcare it would be an outrage. But as pointed out before you need people like this woman as much if not even more than soldiers. SOMEONE has to do jobs that put you into hazardous environments and MOST of them are not nearly as well paid as they should be. Shooting herself might not have been the right decision, and smoking certainly didnt help her health as well. But theres so much more things you guys who critized her do that arent good for your health. Obesity, drinking, excessive computer gaming (LOL). Why should you get healthcare if she doesnt. So to even this out everyone should at least get basic healthcare. If you want the good stuff you can always get a private insurance for those extra bucks it would cost compared to public healthcare. Man up people ... the world isnt just about yourself but about everyone.
On August 25 2010 09:30 MamiyaOtaru wrote: my old man collects 2% of what he bills for treating patients in the Emergency Room. That's our free healthcare right there. Granted, it's only for serious stuff (see the OP) but it's a crap situation for doctors too. The people who pay nothing are also more likely to sue
Im looking into getting into medicine, and if theres one thing im sure about is that you should not become a doctor if you just want to make money off your job. Also if you dont screw up during an operation the patient probably wont sue you. So as long as you dont fuck up there should be no reason not to "safe a life".
As horrible as I feel for this lady (assuming that her story is true, and it is tragic), I do believe that people can do better for themselves, even when born into a shitty situation. Yes, US is in a hard time and there aren't TONS of jobs available, but I moved out on my own at 17 when the recession hit and got a job at togos, no benefits, lived in a cheap place, and moved my way up to where now I have a job, a house, and benefits. My point is, I believe that one can start from nothing and make something of themselves if they really have that inner fire (warcraft pun).
and this thread is about healthcare, so I won't derail it and talk about the people on wellfare who don't want to get their promotion because then they would not collect their wellfare check anymore....
On August 25 2010 10:03 slappy wrote: As horrible as I feel for this lady (assuming that her story is true, and it is tragic), I do believe that people can do better for themselves, even when born into a shitty situation. Yes, US is in a hard time and there aren't TONS of jobs available, but I moved out on my own at 17 when the recession hit and got a job at togos, no benefits, lived in a cheap place, and moved my way up to where now I have a job, a house, and benefits. My point is, I believe that one can start from nothing and make something of themselves if they really have that inner fire (warcraft pun).
and this thread is about healthcare, so I won't derail it and talk about the people on wellfare who don't want to get their promotion because then they would not collect their wellfare check anymore....
The problem is not everyone CAN get into the situation you are. As long as we are in a society like ours there will always be more poor than rich people, however you define those terms doesnt matter, there will always be more people with less money than with more. So even though you increase your chances to get a better job by working harder towards your goal thats all youre doing: raising your CHANCES.
Because of this unfairness i think everyone deserves to recieve some support from society. Just my humble opinion.
On August 25 2010 09:39 ChinaRestaurant wrote: Im looking into getting into medicine, and if theres one thing im sure about is that you should not become a doctor if you just want to make money off your job. Also if you dont screw up during an operation the patient probably wont sue you. So as long as you dont fuck up there should be no reason not to "safe a life".
The USA is a litigious society. He was sued for giving a lady an inflatable boot right after a hurt foot instead of a cast. This is standard procedure. As the swelling goes down, a plaster cast applied earlier would no longer fit. The boot allows for adjustments. Her parents thought that was wrong and threw a fit and went and had someone else put on a cast (that needed to be taken off and redone later) and took him to court. The judge threw it out with prejudice, but you never know. That's just the most recent one. People sue when they are unhappy or don't understand something, not just when something happens like the wrong leg getting amputated.
And sometimes shit happens. One of the other docs in town was doing a procedure to fuse two vertebrae. The patient was super obese, and it was stupid difficult to feel his vertebrae through the fat to count down to the right ones, so the wrong two got fused. Not life changing in the least, but the doc had to pay 1.5 million dollars.
Yeah, clearly money is not the objective. But he has to pay salary for the PA, the secretary, the assistant, the x-ray tech, the IT / billing guy, transcription service, medical supplies etc etc. He pays rent on two facilities. There's malpractice insurance (so you don't die to shitty lawsuits). Ideally you don't go into it to become rich, but you need some cash to stay in business, and collecting 2% of billed from ER patients doesn't do it. Neither does getting a fraction of what's billed from government paid medicare/medicaid (which are still going bankrupt. Will be great when the government is paying for even more people). All his paying patients end up subsidising his work on the freeloaders, which is bullcrap.
It's a shitty career (here). 13 years of higher education, and every day you work you face the possibility of losing everything you worked for your whole life. I know he was a lot happier when he was in the military, just doing operations all day and not dicking around with paperwork, bills and billing. As it is, he can't wait to retire and it's a shame, he's a damn good doc.
I'm reminded of something I heard the other night on radio which goes something like: "When people lose everything, and have nothing to lose, they lose it". Quite true
Well especially the US have huge potential for better distribution of tax money. But i guess thats a bit off topic, dont want to upset anyone by suggesting your government is wasting money on playing world police.
The sueing part: true, sorry i forgot that sueing is like a national sport over there.
She's just finished shooting herself in the shoulder at great cost and to no great effect, and her first response to it was to tell the interviewer that it didn't fix the pain and that maybe she should have aimed it at the bone so she could have sustained a more serious injury?
I'm supposed to like her self-centered destructive attitude?
On August 25 2010 09:39 ChinaRestaurant wrote: But is it really necessary for someone to potentially die from a condition that was primarily caused by the hazardous working place?
She supposed strained her shoulder while out with her dog. It's not directly to work. If it was at work, I'd argue that work should cover it even though legally that might not be the outcome. If work maliciously placed her at risk, she should sue for damages as well.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
How does skin cancer fit into your model? Some asshole spent too much time sitting in the sun? How about brain tumors? Some asshole spent too much time reading books? These are all events that are unpredictable and the whole point of having health insurance is to place an average price on uncontrollable events.
Here's what's missing in the debate though. There's economies of scale in health insurance. So while you may end up paying for some asshole having too many cheeseburgers in a socialized health insurance scheme, you actually end up paying less. The socialized health insurance plans don't have to deal with advertising and they can trap more young people into the system. The private free market companies are perfectly fine trapping in young people with mandates. But in the end, it's young people paying for some asshole's health insurance, and you'll be that asshole in twenty years. So you may aswell stop complaining, because forced charity through the socialized systems saves each citizen as a whole on their health insurance.
On August 25 2010 08:35 TanGeng wrote: One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way. .
Russia transformed itself from an agrarian society to an industrial society. I'm not sure if they had their heroes and idols in their society, but they still made the leap to a superpower without corporate executives and small business icons.
On August 25 2010 08:35 TanGeng wrote: One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way. .
Russia transformed itself from an agrarian society to an industrial society. I'm not sure if they had their heroes and idols in their society, but they still made the leap to a superpower without corporate executives and small business icons.
They were forced to by dictators... 5 year plans anyone?
On August 25 2010 11:21 DetriusXii wrote: Here's what's missing in the debate though. There's economies of scale in health insurance. So while you may end up paying for some asshole having too many cheeseburgers in a socialized health insurance scheme, you actually end up paying less. The socialized health insurance plans don't have to deal with advertising and they can trap more young people into the system. The private free market companies are perfectly fine trapping in young people with mandates. But in the end, it's young people paying for some asshole's health insurance, and you'll be that asshole in twenty years. So you may aswell stop complaining, because forced charity through the socialized systems saves each citizen as a whole on their health insurance.
It's a nice idea until costs spiral out of control. Then the young people will be screwed because the system won't be around long enough for them to enjoy foisting their own costs on someone else. (wait that sounds like Social Security.)
Europeans...They are the worlds great antennae to the suffering of others. They are capable of such profound and powerful feelings of pity. Perhaps this is why they are... pitiful.
On August 25 2010 05:10 StarBrift wrote: Some of you heartless people really need to live in pain for a couple of years to put the real world in perspective. You've lived an extremely lucky life if you're healthy and make decent wage. The attitude that some people have that they don't want to pay for others is simply unacceptable. Other people help you live your life, that's what society is about. If you can't even find it in you to pay like an additional dollar a month to help save peoples lives you are truly truly sick and disguisting as a person. If you hate cooperation between people (economically or in what ever way) then why don't you live outside of society? Build a hut from sticks you find in the woods and eat only what you hunt. Half of you pretentious pricks that whine about miniscule taxes wouldn't even be able to survive in the wild if you were forced to.
Alot of people here also live in the fantasy world where everything is fair and if someone is poor or has a hard time it must be their fault. It seems like people can't understand that not everyone has a father that pays your way through college and gets you a job at his firm etc. Some people that are in trouble (medically or economically) really has just had a fucking shitty chance at life. To not help these people based ont he illusion that they had good chances that they fucked up due to lazyness or that they have made bad choices is just appalling.
People have their right to difference in opinion. If you say you don't want to pay a dime to less fortunate people then by all means go ahead and have that opinion. But don't try make it seem like you're morally superior or what you are doing is actually good for the society. Its pure selfishness and inability to comprehend very simple facts.
Take note that this isn't directed to anyone in this thread specifically. But in every single one of these threads this type of person comes in and tries to undermine the entire point of health care and financial aid. Just because a very small ammount of people use the system to get things for free (which isn't easy if the system is regulated properly) that isn't a good enough reason to not help people who are living in pain and suffering.
What you say sounds nice and all if only it were true.
First of all, taxes are barely considered to be "minute," and if it were the matter of merely paying a dollar I assure you almost no one would mind. But guess what, while some people are being taxed like ~8% of their salary like I am (and I have a $5,500 student loan out, so I'm not exactly swimming in money), others are paying over 50% of their salary. Don't say it's small, the accumulation of all the welfare taxes is CRAZY. Imagine your work telling you you're going to receive a $5,000 paycheck every 2 weeks and when you receive it... it's only $2,700. And guess why you're paying that much? Because some asshole you don't even know had a heart attack from eating too many double cheeseburgers and large fries.
Of course there are the few exceptions where people are fucked. You seem to be highly misguided on what you think [most Republicans] think of fairness. What most think is quite simply that the world isn't fair, but you can't use that as a reason to make everyone care about everyone else.
There's a massive difference between what you're saying as well and what I'm saying. I'm saying the government shouldn't FORCE people to pay a dime to the unfortunate. If people want to help their fellow members they should do it because they want to, not because they are forced to. I don't know how old you are, but say your country suddenly cuts 100% of its welfare and your paycheck now increases by 25%. Are you now going to donate that extra 25% back to welfare? Probably not. But it wouldn't be any different for you really and by your principles you should. Please tell me why you aren't acting purely selfish for failing to donate your extra dollars to those in Africa who are starving. Maybe there's a fallacy in that argument but no one in this thread has yet to even attempt to address it. Are their lives worth less because they don't live in a certain imaginary border?
No one is only paying 8% taxes in USA. So based on the fact that you're making false claims, I'm just goint to stop reading there. You obv. are some troll or kid that doesn't know anything about the world and real life. Also no one is getting income taxes at 50% since the maximum is 35% as of now. So please stop making up bullshit to support your point, it's so easy to spot.
I am taxed around 9-10% on every paycheck. The maximum FEDERAL income tax is 35%.
I work at a CPA firm, my father is a CPA, and I am an accounting minor. Over 50% might have been a slight exaggeration, but far more accurate than you stating a specific false number. You sure you know what's easy to spot out?
If you're getting taxed 10% you're making under 5.8k a year, in which i suggest you get a new job and "stop taking the first job that comes around".
So you agree, both arguments you used to support your claims that I was wrong were entirely false?
Nope, like i said before no one is getting taxed as low as 8% and also no one is getting taxed even remotely close to 50%. How do you not understand? Is there something wrong with you? Why do you make things up to support your views? Are you that brainless? I understand it's hard to argue something thats completely false so why don't you just call it a day and go play outside with your friends.
Bahahaha you know absolutely nothing about taxes. Take an accounting course and get back to me. You can pay 0% tax on a $50,000 salary if you have enough deductions. Stop arguing with someone who is currently working in a CPA firm. Even just to check because I wasn't sure, I just asked our senior tax manager at the firm and he said you were full of shit. You had me doubting all I had learned for a sec.
What I find really weird is that you blame welfare for stealing your money. I live in a country famous for being the one welfare state.I am also a pretty standard worker at the moment working in IT. I'm taxed at 31% which gets deducted to roughly 24-26% because of write-offs. Yet I get free health care, I pay less than 15 dollars a month and I'm covered for any hospital expense no matter how high. I live in a country were everyone gets to go on welfare aslong as they don't have any funds to support themselves. I also have more disposable income than the average Amercian. So if a country can offer welfare to pretty much everyone that wants it aswell as supporting free healthcare to everyone can manage to give their workers higher disposable income, then the logical conclution would be that welfare isn't the money drain.
Prepare to have someone tell you that your country can save money on defense because everyone knows the US will come help you if someone attacks
What if Obama played Starcraft, a team melee game and he was in charge of resources, as in macro, buildings, and upgrades? He'd promise this and that and then realize that there isn't enough resources, his team mates would get mad and they'd lose? Just an opinion. Honestly though, that's a horrible thing to have happen. It just shows that sometimes people are greedy to the point that they don't realize people will not have healthcare, and they don't even care, and they won't do anything to help. Well the people on Wall Street want to have their year end bonus, so they just create a huge problem and screw everyone over.
On August 25 2010 11:21 DetriusXii wrote: Here's what's missing in the debate though. There's economies of scale in health insurance. So while you may end up paying for some asshole having too many cheeseburgers in a socialized health insurance scheme, you actually end up paying less. The socialized health insurance plans don't have to deal with advertising and they can trap more young people into the system. The private free market companies are perfectly fine trapping in young people with mandates. But in the end, it's young people paying for some asshole's health insurance, and you'll be that asshole in twenty years. So you may aswell stop complaining, because forced charity through the socialized systems saves each citizen as a whole on their health insurance.
It's a nice idea until costs spiral out of control. Then the young people will be screwed because the system won't be around long enough for them to enjoy foisting their own costs on someone else. (wait that sounds like Social Security.)
Except that the US leads in total cost expenditures in health care from OECD reports. The nations with socialized health care are saving its citizens' money. So your criticism is made out of ignorance. If costs are going to spiral out of control, they'll spiral out of control in the US first, the most free market of the first world nations.
On August 25 2010 08:35 TanGeng wrote: One of the things I've noticed is that human society needs individual examples of success and failure to be successful as a whole. People need examples of successes to emulate and they need examples of failures to warn them away from screwing up their own lives the same way. .
Russia transformed itself from an agrarian society to an industrial society. I'm not sure if they had their heroes and idols in their society, but they still made the leap to a superpower without corporate executives and small business icons.
They were forced to by dictators... 5 year plans anyone?
Why does that matter? The argument was made that there needs to be business icons in order for the society to advance. Russia under communist rule transforming itself into a industrial superpower exists as a counter argument.
The video makes her look like a pain killer addict. She probably was in pain because she couldn't get any drugs. I'm sure this isn't the first time somebody has done something completely stupid to get pain medication. Her dog honestly pulled her arm to the point she was in so much pain she would rather inflict more pain? I think she should be on the next episode of "Intervetion" on A&E lol
On August 25 2010 12:34 DetriusXii wrote: Why does that matter? The argument was made that there needs to be business icons in order for the society to advance. Russia under communist rule transforming itself into a industrial superpower exists as a counter argument.
Industrial superpower? What!?
For a country that size, it was horribly poor. During the early years, they had an effective politburo but managed to kill millions of people. Success was making it into the inner party. Failure was living your life out in the gulags.
Later in the 20th century Soviet Union economy was a basket case and they got left behind. While Intel was making microprocessors and CPUs the soviets were making cement blocks and waiting in line for bread. What a superpower.
WHY oh WHY would you work with toxic waste for 8$ an hour for that long let alone ever?? Bullshit she couldn't find another job
The funny thing is this was a decently smart move on her part, she got a news story and now theres gonna be tons of stupid people that are gonna mail her money or something stupid like that
EleanorRigby, you betray your name, your country, and your species.
"There was a time when nobody was [supporting this cause], really... somewhere in a prison camp in the 1950s or so, 18 negroes broke their legs with sledgehammers to bring attention to the condition that they were in... and slowly, bit by bit, I became involved in this issue." + Show Spoiler +
EPT
