# Charity begins at home, not with the US Govt



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

I'm really getting sick of those on the left telling those on the right how heartless we are for not supporting Obamacare. Yes, there are people who need help, but the people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government. What the government is doing is taking away our ability to do one of the things that has made this a great nation. It's taking away our ability to help our neighbors.


----------



## beccachow (Nov 8, 2008)

Sonny, I give up. :shrug: Unless something changes, we are scr*wed, and by the time the left realizes how much so, it will be way too late. I am prepping like there is no tomorrow. When the left realizes there ARE no free lunches, with the entitlement mentality what is next to keep them from deciding my food should be theirs, too?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

I know what you mean. It's frustrating because some believe the government is the answer to everything, when the reality is that it's the people that made America a great nation and now our hands are being tied at every level. I grow twice the amount of food my family needs in order to feed our elderly neighbors. We give eggs and milk to a few of our neighbors that are either elderly or single parents, but with the government coming down on people giving food to the homeless I wonder how long I'll be able to do what I'm doing. This fiasco of a health care law may be the final nail in the coffin when it comes to charitable giving. It's sad.


----------



## Smalltowngirl (Mar 28, 2010)

My one and only comment about neighbors helping neighbors. Where were my neighbors when I found out that the medications I need for my type of cancer would run $4786 a month for the rest of my life? I live in a small town filled with good people but if I had no insurance, there's no way my neighbors could/would be able to continue to pay for just the medications let alone the doctors visits, biopsies and weekly bloodwork.
I work as much as my disease allows which is about 28 hrs a week & I pay most of my paycheck towards the deductible & co-pays. I am one of the lucky ones; I am still able to work although at reduced hours & I have insurance. Just in the last 3 months, my medical bills from the medication, the doctors & the cancer center visits has topped $23000! Without the insurance, my choice would be to let the disease run it's course because not many people can afford to put out that type of money for medications monthly and for the doctors/hospital visits every 6 weeks.
My community is small(>4000) and although filled with kind, loving people, do you really think they could month after month offer that kind of monetary outlay to just one person let alone more who may also be in need?


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2012)

Yes, they want tax payers to pay for food stamps, send the kids to our doors for canned goods, want our garden produce and expect we will prep for them.
i will tell you why we don't help. We are done. We have helped till we no longer have the heart to. If they have a problem with that they need to look to their ownselves. This is the beginning of the end on the free ride.
They say people help each other, but they think that means they can take and take. It's all over, but the crying..


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

I won't be posting n that thread in Countryside families anymore either. I had a post deleted, was called 'mean" and threatened with an infraction. But the liberals up there can say whatever they want, including this horrible post:


Zilli said:


> There is a total lack of compassion and empathy evident on this thread.
> 
> So many here are terrified they might have to pay a few pennies (or even dollars) that will benefit those less fortunate that they absolutely HATE those potential recipients, even if those recipients are babies and kids.
> 
> They would rather let those innocent kids die from starvation and lack of medical care.


This makes my blood boil!


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Smalltowngirl said:


> My one and only comment about neighbors helping neighbors. Where were my neighbors when I found out that the medications I need for my type of cancer would run $4786 a month for the rest of my life? I live in a small town filled with good people but if I had no insurance, there's no way my neighbors could/would be able to continue to pay for just the medications let alone the doctors visits, biopsies and weekly bloodwork.
> I work as much as my disease allows which is about 28 hrs a week & I pay most of my paycheck towards the deductible & co-pays. I am one of the lucky ones; I am still able to work although at reduced hours & I have insurance. Just in the last 3 months, my medical bills from the medication, the doctors & the cancer center visits has topped $23000! Without the insurance, my choice would be to let the disease run it's course because not many people can afford to put out that type of money for medications monthly and for the doctors/hospital visits every 6 weeks.
> My community is small(>4000) and although filled with kind, loving people, do you really think they could month after month offer that kind of monetary outlay to just one person let alone more who may also be in need?


Maybe if the government didn't take so much from them they would have been able to help. I know that when my home burned to the ground and my 2 kids died, I didn't have insurance. The neighbors joined together and payed for both funerals, gave us a house, rent free until we were able to get back on our feet, gave so much furniture, clothing and food that we had to actually put a notice in the newspaper asking them to stop giving. Not only did they pay for the funerals, but I was 3 months pregnant at the time. They had collected enough for the birth of my premature baby and his hospital care for the 2 1/2 days he survived. This was a town with a population of 4,182 in their 2000 census.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Deleted


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Smalltowngirl said:


> My one and only comment about neighbors helping neighbors. Where were my neighbors when I found out that the medications I need for my type of cancer would run $4786 a month for the rest of my life? I live in a small town filled with good people but if I had no insurance, there's no way my neighbors could/would be able to continue to pay for just the medications let alone the doctors visits, biopsies and weekly bloodwork.
> I work as much as my disease allows which is about 28 hrs a week & I pay most of my paycheck towards the deductible & co-pays. I am one of the lucky ones; I am still able to work although at reduced hours & I have insurance. Just in the last 3 months, my medical bills from the medication, the doctors & the cancer center visits has topped $23000! Without the insurance, my choice would be to let the disease run it's course because not many people can afford to put out that type of money for medications monthly and for the doctors/hospital visits every 6 weeks.
> My community is small(>4000) and although filled with kind, loving people, do you really think they could month after month offer that kind of monetary outlay to just one person let alone more who may also be in need?


I'm sorry, could you repeat that?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Sonshine said:


> Maybe if the government didn't take so much from them they would have been able to help. I know that when my home burned to the ground and my 2 kids died, I didn't have insurance. The neighbors joined together and payed for both funerals, gave us a house, rent free until we were able to get back on our feet, gave so much furniture, clothing and food that we had to actually put a notice in the newspaper asking them to stop giving. Not only did they pay for the funerals, but I was 3 months pregnant at the time. They had collected enough for the birth of my premature baby and his hospital care for the 2 1/2 days he survived. This was a town with a population of 4,182 in their 2000 census.


Aw Sonshine! I'm so sorry this happened! But your neighbors PROVED what you are saying about charity in this thread! Wow! This brought tears to my eyes! Both for your terrible losses and for your neighbors generosity.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Common Tator said:


> I won't be posting n that thread in Countryside families anymore either. I had a post deleted, was called 'mean" and threatened with an infraction. But the liberals up there can say whatever they want, including this horrible post:
> This makes my blood boil!


I had noticed that some got deleted for quoting another post, yet another one that quoted the same post is till there, or was the last time I checked. I even posted asking why it wasn't deleted and got no answer.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Funny, I would imagine that if I didn't agree with you I would be considerd conservative. Is liberal those who don't agree with you? I'm confused.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Common Tator said:


> Aw Sonshine! i'm so sorry this happened! Buy your neighbors PROVED what you are saying in this thread! wow! This brought tears to my eyes!


I forgot to mention that when the fire happened, I was taken to the hospital where I stayed for a week. Neither the hospital nor the doctor took a penny for my stay. When I asked about it they told me they were just going to write it off.

I was shown another act of kindness when I first enlisted in the USAF. I was an airman basic and the pay for airman basic was so low that most are eligible for food stamps, etc. The Air Force encourages new recruits to live on base, but because I was having issues with nightmares, reliving the fire in my dreams, I did not feel comfortable sleeping in the barracks. I got a small, cheap apartment off base, but the Air Force would not give me BAQ, so money was so tight that I bought very few groceries. I didn't have a vehicle, so a couple of the guys I worked with gave me a ride to and from work. One day I heard my doorbell ring. No one was there, but there were a couple of sacks of groceries. This happened several times and I'm pretty sure they were left there by my co-workers, even though they always denied it. I made a promise to myself that when my finances improved I would pay it forward and have been trying to do that. This is why I say that the citizens of the USA would step up to the plate if the government would stop taking so much from us. It upsets me when I hear people say they give up, but I do understand where they are coming from. Unfortunately more and more people are saying they feel they can no longer give because of how much is taken from their pay.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Wow! They were very liberal with you!


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

If charity was beginning at home, this would all be mute. If Christians were living as Christians, this would all be mute. Christian Conservative is an oxymoron.
You can be one. You can't be both.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)




----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

vicker said:


> If charity was beginning at home, this would all be mute. If Christians were living as Christians, this would all be mute. Christian Conservative is an oxymoron.
> You can be one. You can't be both.


How do you figure a Christian conservative is an oxymoron? And that whole point of this thread is based on charity beginning at home, but how difficult the government is making it. If the government would stop trying to give our money and instead allowed us to give I think you may be surprised at home much more people would give to help others.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Well, it would tickle me to be surprised.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

It hasn't worked so far. When exactly are y'all planning to start giving?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

When uncle Sam quits taxing you?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Personally, I wish y'all would call yourselves something else. I'm going to have to change the name of my religion. Thanks.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Gee, I am a heartless person. I am blessed to have missed that thread. Wow, See I missed it because a family was in need ==emergency the community got together and I am now the emergency goat milker. (milking by hand 17 goats a day is going to be fun--plus the white doe hates me they are full size it was day two for me) yeah, local who know each other can and have common sense to split up the work. 

When my brother was in the hospital for over 2 years the town for month took care of everything. Till they learned that I might have been 10 but I knew how to cook and clean --All I really needed was transportation. That was dealt with giving me a list of people who would be willing to drive per day of the week.

I am now poor when it comes to money but we can make it. Dh has insurance and does my son via Native --I do not I used to self pay for it and got with via my employers well I qualified. I have had 3 bouts of cancer paid cash for 2 rounds and insurance of 1 round. I deal with a few medical issues and I make choices that I can live with. I know that with or with out medical care or insurance I will die --so will you all. There are other way that I wish to handle my health needs. I do not want traditional medical care. Now will this mandatory allow me the choice or simply extract money from everyone and then play God with our former choices.


----------



## MushCreek (Jan 7, 2008)

That's what's bad about labels. I am a fiscal conservative, but somewhat more liberal on my social views. So what does that make me? I also believe in allowing and encouraging people to help each other. When I take those political aptitude tests, I'm labeled a libertarian. One way or the other, I am a Christian first.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

vicker said:


> It hasn't worked so far. When exactly are y'all planning to start giving?


There've been a couple of studies showing the conservatives give WAAAAY more than liberals. They give more time, more money and more BLOOD! So if you've got some beef w/conservatives, think we don't give, then you'll have to show us where you get that info. 
Or just lose your credibility here.

PS-take a look at some of the non-liberals in the news of late. Rommy gave ALL his inheritance to charity.
Biden gave about .0001% of his income to charity. Clinton was a tiny bit more generous. Gave some used underwear he wrote off.
How many foster children did Michelle Bachman raise? In additon to her own 5? I'll let you answer that.


----------



## wwubben (Oct 13, 2004)

How does the government hinder helping your neighbor?Our community does well at helping each other,but we could not handle the whole load.The numbers are too great.We have people that have met their max payments from insurance on cancer treatment.You are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.Housing is another big one around here.So many of the government programs cannot be paid by individuals,especially if they think the program is not necessary.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Well don't know what little label ya want to put on me, I'm not Christian but Heathen, believe in personal responsibility and taking care of my family first, than friends and community next.. As to the federal government I would prefer they did only what the constitution prescribes.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Smalltowngirl said:


> My one and only comment about neighbors helping neighbors. Where were my neighbors when I found out that the medications I need for my type of cancer would run $4786 a month for the rest of my life? I live in a small town filled with good people but if I had no insurance, there's no way my neighbors could/would be able to continue to pay for just the medications let alone the doctors visits, biopsies and weekly bloodwork.
> I work as much as my disease allows which is about 28 hrs a week & I pay most of my paycheck towards the deductible & co-pays. I am one of the lucky ones; I am still able to work although at reduced hours & I have insurance. Just in the last 3 months, my medical bills from the medication, the doctors & the cancer center visits has topped $23000! Without the insurance, my choice would be to let the disease run it's course because not many people can afford to put out that type of money for medications monthly and for the doctors/hospital visits every 6 weeks.
> My community is small(>4000) and although filled with kind, loving people, do you really think they could month after month offer that kind of monetary outlay to just one person let alone more who may also be in need?


Therein lies the problem. Good luck helping a neighbor coming home from surgery in a corrupt profit-based medical institution with a 250k hospital bill and a monthly 4k prescription bill owed to Big Pharma from there on out...


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Follow the money.. 

Along with the financial lobbies, the pharmaceutical and health products industries have historically been one of the biggest and most powerful lobbies in Washington. Drug companies enjoy more power and influence in America than with any other government in the world. Pfizer Inc, one of the major political contributors of the pharmaceutical industry, spent more than $25 million dollars in 2009, ensuring that the Obama administration&#8217;s health care reforms didn&#8217;t rock the boat overmuch. As it stands, drug companies stand to gain a huge increase in their already bloated profits after the new healthcare reforms go through; prescription drug prices are set to remain steady, despite already being the highest in the world, but an estimated 32 million Americans are going to be newly insured.

10 of the Biggest Lobbies in Washington | Business Pundit


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Sonshine said:


> I'm really getting sick of those on the left telling those on the right how heartless we are for not supporting Obamacare. Yes, there are people who need help, but the people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government. What the government is doing is taking away our ability to do one of the things that has made this a great nation. It's taking away our ability to help our neighbors.


My sister in law has cancer. In one year her bill is over 100,000 dollars. I will send you her address so you can have a bake sale for her. Thanks, you rock!!!


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

kasilofhome said:


> Gee, I am a heartless person. I am blessed to have missed that thread. Wow, See I missed it because a family was in need ==emergency the community got together and I am now the emergency goat milker. (milking by hand 17 goats a day is going to be fun--plus the white doe hates me they are full size it was day two for me) yeah, local who know each other can and have common sense to split up the work.
> 
> When my brother was in the hospital for over 2 years the town for month took care of everything. Till they learned that I might have been 10 but I knew how to cook and clean --All I really needed was transportation. That was dealt with giving me a list of people who would be willing to drive per day of the week.
> 
> I am now poor when it comes to money but we can make it. Dh has insurance and does my son via Native --I do not I used to self pay for it and got with via my employers well I qualified. I have had 3 bouts of cancer paid cash for 2 rounds and insurance of 1 round. I deal with a few medical issues and I make choices that I can live with. I know that with or with out medical care or insurance I will die --so will you all. There are other way that I wish to handle my health needs. I do not want traditional medical care. Now will this mandatory allow me the choice or simply extract money from everyone and then play God with our former choices.


So your town take care of the medical bills and hospital bill for your brother for two years??? Wow!!! Where do you live? I want to move to that town!!!


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Ambereyes said:


> Well don't know what little label ya want to put on me, I'm not Christian but Heathen, believe in personal responsibility and taking care of my family first, than friends and community next.. As to the federal government I would prefer they did only what the constitution prescribes.


So you don't want the government fixing roads, building bridges, helping when a tornado destroys a town? You don't want the government helping to fund hospitals, schools? You want your community to do all that? How long do you think that would last?


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> There've been a couple of studies showing the conservatives give WAAAAY more than liberals. They give more time, more money and more BLOOD! So if you've got some beef w/conservatives, think we don't give, then you'll have to show us where you get that info.
> Or just lose your credibility here.
> 
> PS-take a look at some of the non-liberals in the news of late. Rommy gave ALL his inheritance to charity.
> ...


Um, Romney made 23 million on his investments last year. He hasnt WORKED in many years. He wrote off his wife's dressage horse on his taxes in 2010 to the tune of 77,000 dollars. I betcha fox news didn't tell you that, did they? And Bill Gates and Warren Buffett give billions to charity. More smoke and mirrors and propaganda.


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

Sonshine said:


> I forgot to mention that when the fire happened, I was taken to the hospital where I stayed for a week. Neither the hospital nor the doctor took a penny for my stay. When I asked about it they told me they were just going to write it off.


And have the rest of society pay for it.

"Obama care" is not free. People pay for it. If I had my way, we would be able to buy into the same health care system Federal Employees have. As long as people don't have an opportunity to buy into a health insurance plan the rest of society will continue to pay for the treatment of those people.

What I find interesting is that several members on this board enjoy government benefits whether they need it or not. I don't see anybody up in arms about that.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

The Government doesn't want the citizens to be charitable, they want people to go to the Gov. The Gov. wants the control. They want Votes-nothing more than that.They do not care, the $ thay take from one and give to another,has absoutly nothing to do with careing or kindness. They all make me sick and I don't belive a word of them saying they "care". It's too easy for them to "care" with someone elses money.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

nancylee said:


> So you don't want the government fixing roads, building bridges, helping when a tornado destroys a town? You don't want the government helping to fund hospitals, schools? You want your community to do all that? How long do you think that would last?



State government has the legal imperative to do that and collects taxes for such. Not the Feds. Big difference.


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

kasilofhome said:


> Dh has insurance and does my son via Native --.


I assume by "Native" you mean the Native American community. Who, exactly, do you think pays for that?


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

nancylee said:


> Um, Romney made 23 million on his investments last year. He hasnt WORKED in many years. He wrote off his wife's dressage horse on his taxes in 2010 to the tune of 77,000 dollars. I betcha fox news didn't tell you that, did they? And Bill Gates and Warren Buffett give billions to charity. More smoke and mirrors and propaganda.



Link?


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Nancylee, you are trying hard to buck thousands of years of accumulated wisdom in that it is a given.....take from the working man, by force, to give to the "needy", and you will eventually kill both.

I appreciate your emotional benevolence toward your fellows, I hope, but there are historians, founding "fathers", long standing documents of law, a whole lot of angry Americans and even the scriptures that stand solidly against the notion of forced charity.


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Ambereyes said:


> State government has the legal imperative to do that and collects taxes for such. Not the Feds. Big difference.


Didn't you say you want your local community to run things? What if your state decides to to fix the bridges, like happened in minnesota, then the bridge collapsed? Are you ok with that? States's rights, and all that.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

nancylee said:


> Didn't you say you want your local community to run things? What if your state decides to to fix the bridges, like happened in minnesota, then the bridge collapsed? Are you ok with that? States's rights, and all that.


You have a little problem with the constitution? Did you not notice the conversation was about charity? Is road repair a charity? :hijacked:


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Forerunner said:


> Nancylee, you are trying hard to buck thousands of years of accumulated wisdom in that it is a given.....take from the working man, by force, to give to the "needy", and you will eventually kill both.
> 
> I appreciate your emotional benevolence toward your fellows, I hope, but there are historians, founding "fathers", long standing documents of law, a whole lot of angry Americans and even the scriptures that stand solidly against the notion of forced charity.


Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. 

There have always been those who want private charity to work, but the poor, sick and old get exploited. It is not just benevolence! I don't want to live in a country like India, where families live in cardboard boxes! Where is their benevolence? Where was the benovelence caring for old people, many of whom lived in abject poverty, before social security. Where was the benevolence when businessmen locked women and children into factories, to die in fires? Let's go further back To 19th century England. Where was the benovelence of good Christians when children 5 and 6 years old were forced to work long hours, and if they lost an arm in a machine, they would die. No healthcare, no disability, no social security. 

You may believe in the generosity of your fellow man, but as a history buff, I prefer my government keep an eye on those in power and those who claim to love their fellow man!


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Ambereyes said:


> You have a little problem with the constitution? Did you not notice the conversation was about charity? Is road repair a charity? :hijacked:


I think you were the one who brought up your local community doing all things. I asked how they do that. So I think it was you who :hijacked:


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

nancylee said:


> Um, Romney made 23 million on his investments last year. He hasnt WORKED in many years. He wrote off his wife's dressage horse on his taxes in 2010 to the tune of 77,000 dollars. I betcha fox news didn't tell you that, did they? And Bill Gates and Warren Buffett give billions to charity. More smoke and mirrors and propaganda.


But does Buffet pay his taxes?


----------



## nancylee (Mar 8, 2011)

Ambereyes said:


> Link?


Is drudge a good enough source for you? 


Romney Deducted $77K for Horse | Drudge Retort

Ok, that is a spoof on drudge. Here you go:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/u...m.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimespolitics&seid=auto

Google is your friend!


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

nancylee said:


> I think you were the one who brought up your local community doing all things. I asked how they old do that. So I think it was you who :hijacked:


Huh? ound:ound:ound:ound: You got to that result from this comment?


Originally Posted by *Ambereyes*  
_Well don't know what little label ya want to put on me, I'm not Christian but Heathen, believe in personal responsibility and taking care of my family first, than friends and community next.. As to the federal government I would prefer they did only what the constitution prescribes._


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

nancylee said:


> Is drudge a good enough source for you?
> 
> 
> Romney Deducted $77K for Horse | Drudge Retort


Thanks just asking, guess it's legal, thanks big government..


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

nancylee said:


> Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.
> Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
> 
> There have always been those who want private charity to work, but the poor, sick and old get exploited. It is not just benevolence! I don't want to live in a country like India, where families live in cardboard boxes! Where is their benevolence? Where was the benovelence caring for old people, many of whom lived in abject poverty, before social security. Where was the benevolence when businessmen locked women and children into factories, to die in fires? Let's go further back To 19th century England. Where was the benovelence of good Christians when children 5 and 6 years old were forced to work long hours, and if they lost an arm in a machine, they would die. No healthcare, no disability, no social security.
> ...


Your health care bill and general tendency to look to an authority smarter and more forceful than yourself for your provision and salvation will put Americans in cardboard boxes, and worse, soon enough.

I'll thank you in advance.


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2012)

nancylee said:


> Didn't you say you want your local community to run things? What if your state decides to to fix the bridges, like happened in minnesota, then the bridge collapsed? Are you ok with that? States's rights, and all that.


So what are you saying,the feds are the only ones to get things right? 
When did that start I must of missed it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

nancylee said:


> So you don't want the government fixing roads, building bridges, helping when a tornado destroys a town? You don't want the government helping to fund hospitals, schools? You want your community to do all that? How long do you think that would last?


I think you know what she ment...well, maybe not, the ignorance of some never ceases to amaze me.

At the risk of being misunderstood, I'd like to say that while all of us are created equal we do not all have to have the same stuff, all our $$ does NOT have to be spread around to be equal.
There are folks to have a terrible time in their lives. That's how it is. Those of us who help others know this & help s much as we can. NOT up to the gov't. 
Some people are born w/deformities. I give thanks daily that I was not. But there is not much I can do about facts. I can help but cannot take away the fact that someone has CF, for instance. Or MS. or MD. 
People have gone on & on about hi med bills. One reason is ins. Yep, ins. Human nature to yuck up on 'free'. Its one reason HMOs are not doing so well. Too many run to doc for sniffle, costing $$$. If there was ins tailored to what individuals want, I'd certainly be for that. But as long as everything is paid for people will GIMMEEEGIMMEE & force up ins costs.

Its beyond me how folks will buy a home for 250K but balk at financing 25000 for an operation to save their lives. 
How much are cars these days? Yup, too expensive, yet folks keep financing them. 
If I were diagnosed w/cancer or another fatal illness, & weighed the pros & cons as to how long I'd live w/treatment, etc, I'd sell my home b/c what is more important?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

nancylee said:


> Um, Romney made 23 million on his investments last year. He hasnt WORKED in many years. He wrote off his wife's dressage horse on his taxes in 2010 to the tune of 77,000 dollars. I betcha fox news didn't tell you that, did they? And Bill Gates and Warren Buffett give billions to charity. More smoke and mirrors and propaganda.


Betcha you'd LOSE that bet!
Or course I know that. Do you know what the Kennedy's make? Kerry? Why's it ok for "Ds" to make $$$ but not "Rs"?? Especially when conservatives give way more to charity than libs.

So you're jealous of Rommy? You want MS like his wife has? She using horse therapy b/c it helps her MS. Do you have any clue what MS is like?? 
What did Rommy do with ALL the $$$ he inherited from his dad? ALL OF IT? GAVE it to charity.
Did MSNBC tell you that? No, they'd rather not tell you that or about Ann's MS.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

vicker said:


> If charity was beginning at home, this would all be mute. If Christians were living as Christians, this would all be mute. Christian Conservative is an oxymoron.
> You can be one. You can't be both.


Mute, not moot huh?

If you understood Christianity you could never say this. You really believe that Christ was a liberal? You think that Christ loves confiscatory taxes? Loves abortion? Do you think Christ loves the hatred of Christians that liberals have been heaping on us?

Liberals are generous with other people's money. Not their own. They use it to buy votes and loyalty. Conservatives are more generous with their own money, their own time and their own blood.

I am a conservative Christian. Here is a challenge for you. You and I submit our tax returns for the past 10 years to a third party here at homesteading Today, (someone neutral that we both agree on) and let them look at our charitable giving as a percentage of our income. And then we start a new thread showing whether the liberal of the Christian conservative gives more.

Until then, while it is fun to point fingers at others and call them hypocrites, (or imply at least, as you did). But until we have looked at hard figures, your point is moot, or as you said, *MUTE*.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html
_"This holiday season is a time to examine who&#8217;s been naughty and who&#8217;s been nice, but I&#8217;m unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.

Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates."_ 

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Conservatives More Liberal Givers

_"-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood. "_

Religious Conservatives Are More Generous. But That's Only Half the Story - God & Country (usnews.com)

_Yes, Putnam says, religious people are more generous&#8212;measured by such behavior as charitable giving and volunteering&#8212;than secular folks. For instance, Putnam's recent polling shows that about half of the most secular Americans say that people need to look after themselves and not worry about others. Only about 1 in 5 of the most religious Americans, by contrast, feels that way._


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Dutchie said:


> And have the rest of society pay for it.
> 
> "Obama care" is not free. People pay for it. If I had my way, we would be able to buy into the same health care system Federal Employees have. As long as people don't have an opportunity to buy into a health insurance plan the rest of society will continue to pay for the treatment of those people.
> 
> What I find interesting is that several members on this board enjoy government benefits whether they need it or not. I don't see anybody up in arms about that.


You have no proof of that snide remark about HT members.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Forerunner said:


> Nancylee, you are trying hard to buck thousands of years of accumulated wisdom in that it is a given.....take from the working man, by force, to give to the "needy", and you will eventually kill both.
> 
> I appreciate your emotional benevolence toward your fellows, I hope, but there are historians, founding "fathers", long standing documents of law, a whole lot of angry Americans and even the scriptures that stand solidly against the notion of forced charity.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Dutchie said:


> And have the rest of society pay for it.
> 
> If I had my way, we would be able to buy into the same health care system Federal Employees have.


That's what we did. Here's how we did it. BTW, we still pay hundreds per month on this plan.

USAJOBS - The Federal Government&rsquo;s Official Jobs Site


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> Mute, not moot huh?
> 
> If you understood Christianity you could never say this. You really believe that Christ was a liberal? You think that Christ Confiscatory taxes? Loves abortion? Do you think Christ loves the hatred of Christians that liberals have been heaping on us?
> 
> ...












Seems its ok to be filthy rich of your a lib, but not if your comservative!
Last study I read on wealth stated "Ds" are wealthier than "Rs". 
Oh, the HORROR!


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> You have no proof of that snide remark about HT members.


Nothing snide about it.

Who is the poster who is getting food from a foodbank? Not because he needs it, but because he is entitled?

That is the first one that popped into my mind.

There are others who are getting government assistance for children etc. 

So lets call a spade a spade, eh?

Furthermore, if one doesn't believe in universal healthcare that makes health insurance not only affordable but also attainable (which it isn't for many of us at this time), one should NOT go and request donations from society. I don't see anything different between the two.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

pancho said:


> But does Buffet pay his taxes?


Ouch! No, but I hear his secretary does!


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Dutchie said:


> Nothing snide about it.
> 
> Who is the poster who is getting food from a foodbank? Not because he needs it, but because he is entitled?
> 
> ...


I don't know. Who? It isn't up to us to make your point for you.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


> Seems its ok to be filthy rich of your a lib, but not if your comservative!
> Last study I read on wealth stated "Ds" are wealthier than "Rs".
> Oh, the HORROR!


Thanks! :sing:

Actually, the third link I provided says that liberals earn 6% more, and still give 30% less than conservatives.

So I'm a little sick of the sneering about "rich republicans" meme. And I'm a little sick of the hypocrisy.


----------



## Chuck (Oct 27, 2003)

vicker said:


> It hasn't worked so far. When exactly are y'all planning to start giving?


You may not want to believe it, but American Christian conservatives are the most charitable people group on the planet bar none.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Forerunner said:


> Nancylee, you are trying hard to buck thousands of years of accumulated wisdom in that it is a given.....take from the working man, by force, to give to the "needy", and you will eventually kill both.
> 
> I appreciate your emotional benevolence toward your fellows, I hope, but there are historians, founding "fathers", long standing documents of law, a whole lot of angry Americans and even the scriptures that stand solidly against the notion of forced charity.


Ever notice some can't separate the fact our Constitution is being destroyed more every day ,because personal responsibility is not in their world . And that free will charity and compassion is a entirely different thing that can never be Gov replaced or imposed .

Gov .uses the threat of fines and prison to take from one and give to another ,thus making us all slaves to their system. And many a Comrade wanting to extract more freedom's from a once free people in the name of compassion :soap:


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

And you need look no farther than Obama's cabinet to know that liberals are more likely to be tax cheats. And because of this, it will be conservatives who bear the brunt of the cost of Obama care.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Nancy NO the community did not it was my self employed father who had just started his first company he invested in his business an one of the ways he did was what today would be called a Cadillac insurance plan it covered the family and his one employee's family. He also had a large life insurance on all of us and his employee's family (which was 2 more people). Now add in that the accident was covered to a cap by the neighbor's homeowner policy. also Nancy right away the neighbors were told that there would be no lawsuit --it was an accident they had 8 children of their own. Also seeing how my brother was so burned that he should have died, and when the kid did not my brother became of interest to the medical field. My parents signed away any and all rights to sue as a condition of my brother being a human test. 

So, Nancy what made a difference was* Common Sense, self responsibility, The community. and SELF CONTROL where it came to LAW SUITS.*

The neighbors homeowners insurance quickly jumped to cover to the cap --
The neighbors were grateful that they were now blamed (longer story on that lets just say the 10 year old boy who's actions to casuse the fire did not kill himself --Thank you mom for nipping that in the bud 20 minutes after the fire and trusting that boy's mother to tend you your burned son while you protected the other child. Thank God those to women had the sense to know that Joanne the home owner had more knowledge of medical than my mother and that is why Joanne took the life saving first steps and mom took care of the other children and another teenager took care of the fire duties while that teens mother freaked out on the ten year old boy that started the fire to the point where he was attempting to cause harm to himself but mom rushed in and Wow I never saw mom act that way but she shut that woman up and to Johnny in her arms and kept telling his if was an accident that the two boy could had been switched. That mom was grateful that Johnny did not have a scratch. 

Having Doctors and hospital free from worries that there would not be any suits made the biggest change for Kev.

There were mistakes that did happen in the hospital --Most of which were very serious.
a machine to peel off the skin from his chest slipped 3 millimeters. that is how they harvest skin for graphing the only areas not burnt are his chest and his butt His chest looks like it was burnt but it was that accidents.


And it was like it was like4 month past 2 years if one wants to get snippy (he came home on Columbus day) plus medical care continued for years.

So, if my father did not select a top notch insurance plan and self pay for it.
If my parents were snotty to the neighbors
If my parents were sue happy
if another person was burnt so bad and agreed to be a test subject.before kev-he would not have been needed

What aided us as a community was that every needed emergency service was and to this day is volunteer, fire, medical 

Nancy it has been done in many communities if it has not happened where you live take a moment and wonder why not where YOU have lived could it be that you have lived were people do not do for each other. Why would you want to live there or are you the mother of the teenager who railed on to a 10 year old boy--blaming not working to improve thing just demanding that you face no hardships.

I am very PC--PUBLICLY CLEAR. Sorry but the pc has Censored common sense out the door cause we can't say the truth as it might offend someone.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

nancylee said:


> Um, Romney made 23 million on his investments last year. He hasnt WORKED in many years. He wrote off his wife's dressage horse on his taxes in 2010 to the tune of 77,000 dollars. I betcha fox news didn't tell you that, did they? And Bill Gates and Warren Buffett give billions to charity. More smoke and mirrors and propaganda.


FYI
My father wrote off the purchase, installment, of a heated swimming pool during the 1970's gas shortage 9t was gas heat. It was set up to operate 24-7 365 days a year in out side of Buffalo.

There were lots of crazy medical needs for my brother--very costly too. Just because you do not see the need for something you see to be complaining that he himself paid for a medical item for his wife out of pocket and the man did his taxes and got a small amount of the money credited to paying his tax bill. When a person deducts medical cost not 100% is a write off. 

So, slam a man for paying his choice of medical care. I guess you want the goverment to select and limit what care is used for a person--not a doctor or medical person.


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2012)

vicker said:


> It hasn't worked so far. When exactly are y'all planning to start giving?


It's statements like this that will stop me from helping. i'll send my extra groceries and produce to the dump before I share again.

You guys are doing a poor job of convinsing me that this bill is a good idea, and i would qualify for free insurance.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Dutchie said:


> Nothing snide about it.
> 
> Who is the poster who is getting food from a foodbank? Not because he needs it, but because he is entitled?
> 
> ...


So now you're agin getting gov't care for CHILDREN? I do not believe you that HT folks are getting care for kids who do not need it. & if there's someone here getting food when they do not need it, shame on them. But that's a rarity.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> Thanks! :sing:
> 
> Actually, the third link I provided says that liberals earn 6% more, and still give 30% less than conservatives.
> 
> So I'm a little sick of the sneering about "rich republicans" meme. And I'm a little sick of the hypocrisy.


You're welcome, C. Tator. And I don't think you're common at all!
:cowboy:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Chuck said:


> You may not want to believe it, but American Christian conservatives are the most charitable people group on the planet bar none.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

veggiecanner said:


> It's statements like this that will stop me from helping. i'll send my extra groceries and produce to the dump before I share again.
> 
> You guys are doing a poor job of convinsing me that this bill is a good idea, and i would qualify for free insurance.


No you won't, canner. You'll continue to be a good person.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Tricky Grama said:


> Its beyond me how folks will buy a home for 250K but balk at financing 25000 for an operation to save their lives.
> How much are cars these days? Yup, too expensive, yet folks keep financing them.


I can assure you that someone in a 250k+ home would pay for a 25k procedure without a second thought. On the other hand, 25k is a massive %, if not 100% or more of the annual salary for many Americans. Most Americans are not buying expensive homes, because they cannot afford them or get financing for them.

Tell me how people other than the wealthy are supposed to get financing for a 500k medical bill, 4k per month in prescription bills, and ongoing fees for treatment once sent home? Right now we live in a Country where survival of the wealthiest who can afford wellness exams/preventative care and medical treatment have the "right to live". Most self-proclaimed impoverished HT'ers would fall into the failure to afford and "right to die" category.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Emotional hand-wringers would do well to discover that one cannot cry a country into prosperity, much less tax it to that end.


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2012)

Tricky Grama said:


> No you won't, canner. You'll continue to be a good person.


No, i quit taking food to the food bank last fall. I am done with the mooches.
Does it make a person a good person to enable people to spounge off others?

If it does, why do you guys have so much problem with the health care bill?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Haven said:


> I can assure you that someone in a 250k+ home would pay for a 25k procedure without a second thought. On the other hand, 25k is a massive %, if not 100% or more of the annual salary for many Americans. Most Americans are not buying expensive homes, because they cannot afford them or get financing for them.
> 
> Tell me how people other than the wealthy are supposed to get financing for a 500k medical bill, 4k per month in prescription bills, and ongoing fees for treatment once sent home? Right now we live in a Country where survival of the wealthiest who can afford wellness exams/preventative care and medical treatment have the "right to live". Most self-proclaimed impoverished HT'ers would fall into the failure to afford and "right to die" category.


I couldn't afford to go without health insurance which is why we have it.


----------



## Sanza (Sep 8, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


>


Thread drift.....there's 3 on this page alone.....which *one* is the post of the day? 


I think some are missing the point here - the insurance companies rates are getting out of hand so a lot of people can't afford insurance any more. The government is trying to do away with these companies that are gouging you. Give it time and it should work out better then what you have right now.....anything is better then what you have right now! 
Of course the whole problem stems from the huge amount of people on assistance and if a majority of them were removed the $ balance should level off. It took decades for the US to get into this hole that has created hardships for a lot of you: 
1. it will only be made better by a series of changes that many will be resistant to.
2. it will not happen overnight


----------



## Guest (Jul 1, 2012)

But they are not removing people from assitance, they are adding them as fast as they can, so your theory doesn't wash.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

The whole problem stems from the fact that sixty percent of the population has their hand out waiting for someone else to fill it, and the forty percent are getting tired.

When the forty percent are crushed under the load, there will be _no_ health care.


----------



## wwubben (Oct 13, 2004)

Chuck said:


> You may not want to believe it, but American Christian conservatives are the most charitable people group on the planet bar none.


You are correct with this statement.Charity only touches the tip of the iceberg.People would have to give much more than they do to help much.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Sanza said:


> Thread drift.....there's 3 on this page alone.....which *one* is the post of the day?
> 
> 
> I think some are missing the point here - the insurance companies rates are getting out of hand so a lot of people can't afford insurance any more. *The government is trying to do away with these companies that are gouging you.* Give it time and it should work out better then what you have right now.....anything is better then what you have right now!
> ...


Some are missing the point here. THIS government, headed by a Marxist socialist wants to do away with insurance company entirely. They want to go with a single payer system with the government being the single payer.

That fundamentally changes the relationship between the government and the citizen. It places the government between the patient and doctor. It gives the government the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to make life and death decisions. You have an expensive disease? TOUGH NUGGIES. That means you have a duty to die. The duty to die is explained here: âFutile careâ duty to die may be coming to a hospital near you | The Daily Caller

And in England, they are killing off the elderly in huge numbers: Top doctor's chilling claim: The NHS kills off 130,000 elderly patients every year | Mail Online

NHS restricting elderly care to save money, claims Harriet Harman | Society | guardian.co.uk

We know that part of Obama care is to deny some services to people over the age of 75. That is written into the law. Since when do Americans want the government issuing death sentences to people who have never been charged with a crime?

Finally, we are not a democracy. We are a free, representative republic. The vast majority of Americans don't want this. We didn't vote for this. Even the democrats in congress who voted for this were lied to. They didn't red the bill. They had no idea about the huge amounts of confiscatory taxes were involved. Many have said they would never have voted for it if they knew what was in it.

This is not a good or charitable law. It is horrendous!

And, it isn't the role of government to "do away with" companies. We are a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Businesses will succeed or fail naturally based on whether they provide goods and services that people want. Bad businesses fail.

This president has taken it upon himself to target businesses and entire industries that don't fit into his socialist, enviro-whackizoid model. He declared war on ATM machines, the coal industry, private jet manufacturers. He decided that energy prices would necessarily skyrocket, and he made it happen. Under Obama, Electricity Rates Are âNecessarilyâ Skyrocketing - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

He stole the GM stock that was owned by pensioners, and eventually they were given pennies on the dollar for their value. They didn't offer it for sale. Being the thin skinned, vengeful guy he is, he had the car dealerships owned by republicans shut down, and allowed the ones who were democrat campaign owners to stay open.

And you want THIS GUY making health care decisions?

And then he poured tons and tons of taxpayer money into enviro-whackazoid industries that were destined to fail.

Remember Solyndra? there are others like them, falling like dominoes, and every one with millions of dollars of taxpayer cash that we will never get back. Can The Media Even Keep Track Of What 'The Next Solyndra' Is Anymore?

I still can't get over the fact that you think it is the role of government to play the role of kingmaker in industry. They don't get to pick winners and losers in business, and they don't get to choose who lives and who dies in the health care debate.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

wwubben said:


> You are correct with this statement.Charity only touches the tip of the iceberg.People would have to give much more than they do to help much.



That is the kind of statement that has me questioning what is wrong that there are so many that are unable to care for themselves? So many that the ones that work and contribute must have there hard earned wages taken from them.. Maybe it is time that some learn the hard way there are no free lunches. I see to many that really need help doing without so those that could take care of themselves won't have to.. 

I volunteer at a community run food bank when work permits, it is a frequent occurrence to have young healthy people push the old or infirm out of line or threaten them.. It is often that the law has to be called to remove some of these "poor" folks that only want their free food.. Meanwhile across the road there are help wanted signs. One of our biggest problems is cleaning up after these people, cigarette butts everywhere, beer cans and fast food wrappers.. The tend to use the side of the building for there urinal or worse. The older folks are scared at times to walk to there cars, we have to escort them.. 

I am sorry but having worked in the world I do and seen the attitude and actions of some of the "poor" I really don't have much compassion left for them.. And it has nothing to do with color because lazy and shiftless is not a color but an action..


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Common Tator Ever notice when folks think they are getting free or cheap :icecream: they could care less if Hitler himself was passing out the cones .

And forget the Constitution it is to simple for the feeble minded to grasp :cowboy:


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Common Tator Ever notice when folks think they are getting free or cheap :icecream: they could care less if Hitler himself was passing out the cones .
> 
> And forget the Constitution it is to simple for the feeble minded to grasp :cowboy:


Sir, you are correct on both points.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Sanza said:


> Thread drift.....there's 3 on this page alone.....which *one* is the post of the day?
> 
> 
> I think some are missing the point here - the insurance companies rates are getting out of hand so a lot of people can't afford insurance any more. The government is trying to do away with these companies that are gouging you. Give it time and it should work out better then what you have right now.....anything is better then what you have right now!
> ...


What will happen when more people are sitting IN the cart than are pulling it?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> Some are missing the point here. THIS government, headed by a Marxist socialist wants to do away with insurance company entirely. They want to go with a single payer system with the government being the single payer.
> 
> That fundamentally changes the relationship between the government and the citizen. It places the government between the patient and doctor. It gives the government the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to make life and death decisions. You have an expensive disease? TOUGH NUGGIES. That means you have a duty to die. The duty to die is explained here: âFutile careâ duty to die may be coming to a hospital near you | The Daily Caller
> 
> ...












(only b/c there's NO POST OF THE YEAR!
Not that they'll read this & care.
They're to concerned about rommy writing off 77K (legally BTW) of his wife's MS therapy. 
Can't imagine a group so very concerned what rommy does w/his $$ but cares not how the community organizer big zero sockpuppet "OWE" spends OUR $$$!


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I know first hand that churches and local people do more to get people WHOLE in a time of crisis. 9 years ago our world fell apart today we are not wealth but we have learned from locals and here at HT to provide for ourselves. I want you to know that though 27 came to build the home everyone in the community was involved. We try to mirror those who reached out to us as they are truly at peace despite their own personal struggles. 

Food stamps and cash assistance kept us breathing but the support from locals who could see how to really aid us to stand up to be there for someone eles in the future able to reach out to someone else.

The whole newspaper has been printed out before here at HT. I stand with those know that when God is at the center and the reason for doing great things do happen. When the government in trying to help it is not personal it is cookie cutter help programs that does not work to truly provide long term help. 
*
Ducks and geese swirl around Jim MacRae following a late-afternoon feeding. Meat and eggs from the birds have helped the MacRae's as they rebuild.

Photo by M. Scott Moon*

Before Aug. 10, 2003, Dianne MacRae, her husband, Jim, and son, Taylor, looked forward to leaving Anchorage behind for the quiet beaches of Kasilof. Climbing stairs in their three-story condominium proved too much for Jim's back, and since he commercial fished on the Kenai Peninsula, the concept of owning their own land appealed to him and his wife.

*Before Aug. 10, 2003, Dianne MacRae and her husband had enough money to not only provide for themselves and their son, but to provide for other children as well.

After Aug. 10, 2003, the MacRaes found themselves cheated out of $30,000, living in an 8-by-10-foot metal shelter on the beach while the structure that should have been their new house was nothing more than a concrete basement sitting in a hole with winter setting in.



Photo by M. Scott Moon

After Aug. 10, 2003 Dianne found herself in Kasilof Community Church asking a stranger if she would take her little boy home for a bath.

"She said not unless you all come for dinner, too," Dianne said.



Photo by M. Scott Moon

Twenty-seven members of the Kasilof Community Church built a cabin for the MacRaes not far from their unfinished house out on Coho Loop, donated soap, toilet paper and built a wood stove. Before 2003, the MacRaes would never have envisioned themselves living like this. Even with the help they received, Dianne had to choose between toys for her son and a working boiler.

"We made a decision that my fur coat wasn't of value," Dianne said. "To me a boiler was more important."

When she talked about making priorities, Dianne said a lot of their legal documents, such as birth and marriage certificates, were destroyed because they could only store them in Rubbermaid containers outside the cabin. All the photos they had before 2003 are gone because they couldn't find a climate-controlled environment to store their computer in.

Dianne, who had always grown up independent, realized she had to ask for help.

"It's hard for people to let others know they can't do this by themselves," Jim said.

In the house Dianne and Jim designed, she knew where the salt and pepper shakers were going to go. But when the owner of the business that was to build their house ran off with their $30,000, she found herself driving from Anchorage to Kasilof contemplating suicide so her family could benefit from her $135,000 life insurance policy.

"I sought mental health for myself," she said. "I knew it was selfish, that was my escape (and it wasn't) a good one."

With a 9-year-old boy to feed and a disabled husband to take care of, Dianne said they had no money for outings, so the pastor of her church suggested that they go to another member's farm and watch them butcher a cow.

"Taylor went over to the chickens," Dianne said. "He'd never seen chickens."

Soon the MacRaes found themselves taking care of nine chickens. With no money for toys, Dianne spent $10 for the nine chickens the owner said weren't laying and thought at the very least they would be good eating. When butchering time came around, they discovered that, despite the owners' assertion, their chickens had laid.

"We incubated that egg," Dianne said.

Starting out three years ago with nine chickens, over 200 birds of all colors and sizes now scratch and peck at the dirt around the MacRae cabin, accompanied by 14 geese, 40 ducks, three dogs, two goats and two cats.

"It's funny to watch a hawk come in on 100 chickens," Jim said.

Not only have the chickens provided eggs to supplement the MacRae's income as well as the occasional chicken dinner, their scratching and pecking have transformed the MacRae property from a forested plot of land with sandy soil to a richly tilled patch of earth perfect for asparagus, raspberries, blueberries, peppers and tomatoes. Dianne said once the ducks start laying, they will sell those eggs while the geese they use for meat and down, and the goats for milk.

"It's become a home-school project and a job to do," Dianne said.

*


the story goes on but somehow these things are forgotten. It has been years since that but the work that they did snowballed into so much. Yes, we needed food stamps and with poor housing every cent went to heat the place. The locals allowed us to stop pouring every cent into oil a wood stove and a maul and insulation did so much. Learning to make use of our land and to farm provides for us much and allows us to be a resource to ot others 

I would like to inform that the "MERRY MEN" who did this had done 11 other homes on the QT. They have continued doing these works since our place.

Thur out my life I know that it is the people not the government that touches the hearts and lives of the people. The Government is to protect us and to safe guard our freedoms. Every person in the military is providing what the government was meant to do.


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> I'm really getting sick of those on the left telling those on the right how heartless we are for not supporting Obamacare. Yes, there are people who need help, but the people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government. What the government is doing is taking away our ability to do one of the things that has made this a great nation. It's taking away our ability to help our neighbors.


That works until you realize a few things...

1. Most folks don't KNOW their neighbors, let alone who is in need. We just don't socialize as much as we used to. Also, someone with long term medical needs is NOT going to get their care taken care of by their neighbors because...
2. People are judgemental. Don't believe me? Look how many times "mooch" has been used in this thread alone. Most folks here think that all folks using the food banks are mooches who just need to get a job. That's not the case. There are some mooches, but a lot of folks there are really in need. 
3. Churches can't afford to pick up the slack. Don't believe me? Call 10 random Churches and see if they already have a medical ministry and if they can afford to chip in say, $1,000 a year for each person who walks through their doors so they can have medical care. Most Churches are struggling to keep the lights on.
4. Many churches now will insist on helping only people who go to their Church. That works until you realize that we live in a society that has athiests, agnostics, and many folks of different faiths. What happens then? Who helps those folks? Would you be OK with a forced conversion in order to recieve medical care? What about if you lived someplace like Detroit that has a large Muslim population and you convert to Islam? 


If you can take care of your neighbor, then great! I suggest you go to them tomorrow morning and offer to pay their medical bills. I'm guessing that if you have a neighbor with serious medical concerns you'll both be sleeping in the streets soon.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Any person who have a home burn down will get 500 dollars cash on the spot. Other needs are addressed as needed to fill the gap with what (if any other norm the red cross is involed with in 24 hours and locals fine a shelter (lots of tourist cabins and lodges here people owning them have taking down vacancy signs and forgo income to provide for one in need. Also note this not limited to just members of this church. And the two churches work hand and hand with the community. My son is a member of both churches and their youth groups. The big difference is one does tongues and one does not. There is a christian medical pool that will not cut the mustard for qualifing for the Obama care insurance deal. Many of the locals do use it when insurance is not provided as and option at work. Those that have used it are quite pleased including one with diabetes who got knee surgery and a stomach reduction. I do not know everyones medical issues but I know 3 who had cancer 2 died after years of care --liver cancer is tough.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Tricky Grama said:


> You have no proof of that snide remark about HT members.


To be honest, I really don't know who payed the hospital bill. I know the doctor just didn't charge anything. Since I was in shock from losing my first two kids I didn't check to see if they just wrote the bill off or not. I do know that the community banded together to help with other things, for all I know they took care of the hospital bill, but again, I really don't know.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Dutchie said:


> Nothing snide about it.
> 
> Who is the poster who is getting food from a foodbank? Not because he needs it, but because he is entitled?
> 
> ...


I assumed you were speaking of me because I did not pay the hospital bill. The hospital never gave me a bill and I was told the bill would be written off. I get no government assistance and never have. I have raised other people's children and never asked for any assistance. I have lived in my car and never asked for any assistance. Now that I'm in a better position financially I help others as I am able, whether it's growing extra food in my garden to help my neighbors or sending money to people I know are facing difficult times. Or it may just be staying with someone's child when their sitter is sick, or staying with an elderly person so their caregiver can have a bit of free time. I don't usually post the ways I try to give because to be quite honest, it's no one's business but mine and God's, but too many on the left are too quick to judge the HT's on the right about being cold hearted, ect and my entire point was that no one really knows what each of us is doing to help others.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> It's statements like this that will stop me from helping. i'll send my extra groceries and produce to the dump before I share again.
> 
> You guys are doing a poor job of convinsing me that this bill is a good idea, and i would qualify for free insurance.


Do you give to impress others or out of the abundance of your heart? Not saying that to sound mean, but if you give from your heart then no matter what others say you'll continue to do so.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> No, i quit taking food to the food bank last fall. I am done with the mooches.
> Does it make a person a good person to enable people to spounge off others?
> 
> If it does, why do you guys have so much problem with the health care bill?


There are many reasons I have a problem with the health care bill, but my biggest problem with it is not even the free medical care that others will get, it's the part where the government can now tax us for not buying something. That's a big can of worms that can take us many places that I don't think any of us wants to go. As for being done with the mooches, this is why I say that charity begins with us, not the government. When we start giving we know who actually needs help and won't be as apt to give to someone who will misuse the gifts. The government doesn't have a very good record for preventing fraud in their vast system of hand outs.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

wwubben said:


> You are correct with this statement.Charity only touches the tip of the iceberg.People would have to give much more than they do to help much.


People would have more to give if the government didn't have their hands so deep in our pockets. Also, the number that truly need help is not as high as the government would lead us to believe. They have so many that take assistance fraudently that it raises the percentage. This is why it's best to handle it locally. Locals have a pretty good idea of who is scamming the system, at least a better idea that Washington bureacrats.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> That works until you realize a few things...
> 
> 1. Most folks don't KNOW their neighbors, let alone who is in need. We just don't socialize as much as we used to. Also, someone with long term medical needs is NOT going to get their care taken care of by their neighbors because...
> 2. People are judgemental. Don't believe me? Look how many times "mooch" has been used in this thread alone. Most folks here think that all folks using the food banks are mooches who just need to get a job. That's not the case. There are some mooches, but a lot of folks there are really in need.
> ...


Sorry to disappoint you but I presently give a monthly donation to a family for just this reason, and these people do not attend my Church. The church I attend has helped others with medical expenses, as well as rent and food.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

vicker said:


> If charity was beginning at home, this would all be mute. If Christians were living as Christians, this would all be mute. Christian Conservative is an oxymoron.
> You can be one. You can't be both.


Then you don't understand what either of those words mean.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> Do you give to impress others or out of the abundance of your heart? Not saying that to sound mean, but if you give from your heart then no matter what others say you'll continue to do so.


Obviously Canner does give but I see what she's saying. People have come to the foodbank who can take care of themselves, have bullied the poor & infirm. 
Better to seek out those who are in need & give that way.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Sonshine said:


> People would have more to give if the government didn't have their hands so deep in our pockets. Also, the number that truly need help is not as high as the government would lead us to believe. They have so many that take assistance fraudently that it raises the percentage. This is why it's best to handle it locally. Locals have a pretty good idea of who is scamming the system, at least a better idea that Washington bureacrats.


Wonder why, since LBJ instituted the 'war on poverty' that trillions have been spent & yet there's more 'poor' than ever?


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Forerunner said:


> Nancylee, you are trying hard to buck thousands of years of accumulated wisdom in that it is a given.....take from the working man, by force, to give to the "needy", and you will eventually kill both.
> 
> I appreciate your emotional benevolence toward your fellows, I hope, but there are historians, founding "fathers", long standing documents of law, a whole lot of angry Americans and even the scriptures that stand solidly against the notion of forced charity.


If taxes were really forced charity you would be right. However, taxes in America are not forced. The services provided with tax money are not charity. We have free and fair elections. There are many good reasons for taxes in a civil society. I agree the taxes and services by local, state and feds don't always make sense. However, this time I believe that both the Repubs and the Dems voted for this law. If Romney was president, he would have signed the law (at least that is what his history has shown).


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


> Wonder why, since LBJ instituted the 'war on poverty' that trillions have been spent & yet there's more 'poor' than ever?


You've got that right! 

Here is video, made by Nancy Pelosi's daughter. She is on Bill Mahar's show. For the first three minutes they talk about her previous videos, about poor toothless Republicans in the south. At about 3 minutes in, she start talking about that night's video, which is freeloading welfare queens looking for "Obama bucks".

They were standing in line in front of an employment office, but didn't go in to that office. They were perfectly healthy people waiting for the welfare office next door. One was asked if he wanted a job, or just the check. He said he just wanted the check.

There are more poor than ever because it pays too well, and nothing is expected of them.

Pelosi's Daughter: HBO Execs Uncomfortable With 'Freeloading Welfare Queen' Video


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

FreeRanger said:


> If taxes were really forced charity you would be right. However, taxes in America are not forced. The services provided with tax money are not charity. We have free and fair elections. There are many good reasons for taxes in a civil society. I agree the taxes and services by local, state and feds don't always make sense. However, this time I believe that both the Repubs and the Dems voted for this law. If Romney was president, he would have signed the law (at least that is what his history has shown).


Try not paying income tax a few years or property tax then get back to us ,on not being forced . They may not make you pay but they sure can make you wish you had .


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Wonder why, since LBJ instituted the 'war on poverty' that trillions have been spent & yet there's more 'poor' than ever?


Yes, I too wonder why the wealthy are even more wealthy than ever? The middle class standard of living is dropping at this time. 

Could it be money is buying elections? Could it be too many people vote for the politicians that know how to "create wealth" but don't care enough to "create jobs?" Why aren't all the disable and elderly full cared for now? No one is stopping the wealthy from taking less and giving more. Sad that many people want to eliminate minimum wages and reduce benefits of public employees. Bring back slavery! Bring back anarchy! I have my prepps, I can live *forever *on my farm with out the help of others! (sarcasm) 

The Constitution doesn't say this new law can be implemented. The Constitution also doesn't say this new law can't be implemented. That's what was determined this week. Don't the law, move away or elect someone else (of course many others need to elect someone else too).


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

Taxes are not forced huh?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

FreeRanger said:


> If taxes were really forced charity you would be right. However, taxes in America are not forced. The services provided with tax money are not charity. We have free and fair elections. There are many good reasons for taxes in a civil society. I agree the taxes and services by local, state and feds don't always make sense. * However, this time I believe that both the Repubs and the Dems voted for this law*. If Romney was president, he would have signed the law (at least that is what his history has shown).


Could you please give us the names of the Republicans that voted for this? I would provide a link proving that not a single republican voted for it, but I have found that most of the lefties on this site will refuse to look at any link provided by a conservative. And you will learn if you do it for yourself.

I'm not sure if you were paying attention in 2009 when this vote happened. It was huge news at the time. But this was done to us by the democrats, and in fact some of the democrats voted against it.


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Sawmill Jim said:


> Try not paying income tax a few years or property tax then get back to us ,on not being forced . They may not make you pay but they sure can make you wish you had .


I like the public services provide for police/fire/roads etc. I have enough money and most importantly, I have free will that I can leave. I choose to stay and pay to stay in this safe country. So I am not being forced. No one is making me dig holes or fight their battles. You are free to leave if you don't like it here.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Ambereyes said:


> Taxes are not forced huh?


True. All these people volunteered to go to prison for not paying them- NOT!

Wesley Snipes, Leona Helmsley, Richard Hatch, Al Capone, and many, many more.


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> Sorry to disappoint you but I presently give a monthly donation to a family for just this reason, and these people do not attend my Church. The church I attend has helped others with medical expenses, as well as rent and food.


That's well and nice and all, but what if one of them had a heart attack and ran up a $100K hospital bill? Would you pay that, too? 

I've worked with enough Churches to know that they can't begin to take care of even the most dire situations in their community. One person having a catastrophic medical condition can wipe out the whole community's funds. I live near a town of about 10,000 people. Most folks don't go to Church, let alone give to one. They have a food pantry/utility help place that all of the Churches contribute to. The budget for the food pantry/utility help place is about $250,000. Sounds like a lot, but they burn pretty quick. If it wasn't for volunteers they wouldn't make it. As it is, they turn away over 30% of folks asking for help. How is this going to cover all who have needs? 

Another thing people are forgetting is that the more a preacher talks about money the more the attendance goes down. What will happen is that we'll have fewer and fewer people attending church and in turn supporting the down trodden. It's a vicious circle that will end badly for everyone involved.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

The problem is separating the needs from the wants.. I too work at a food pantry and there are way to many wants.. If the ones that can do will it would solve the problem of not enough for the ones that really need. But when the ones with jobs will only work a certain amount in a year because they won't get their food stamps, subsidized housing and medical care, not to mention the large tax refunds the ones with kids get, that makes it hard on everyone.. 

IMHO all food stamps housing and medical care that is paid for with tax money should be considered income for those that use them..


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Common Tator said:


> True. All these people volunteered to go to prison for not paying them- NOT!
> 
> Wesley Snipes, Leona Helmsley, Richard Hatch, Al Capone, and many, many more.


so you are saying you don't need any roads? You don't want a police force or an army? You don't benefit from living in America? You are not enjoying the "few" freedoms available in the United States of America? You really live out in the ocean in "internal waters" and have no need for a civil society! Really..hard to believe that.

Don't get me wrong...I think we are loosing MANY freedoms in USA. This healthcare issue isn't one of them. You are being provided with three choices on healthcare. 1.You can choose to purchase a policy yourself, 2. You can choose to work for a company (a wealthy man or group of individuals) or 3. You can choose not to do either 1 or 2. In that case, the government is going to choose it for you. In the past by not choosing either of the first two options, you were a burden on the rest of us that did pay up front. Your selfishness raised the cost of medical care for those of us that were pre-paying. 

Times have changed, elderly and disable no longer can count on the goodwill of their immediate family to meet all their needs. The standard of living for the healthy population has risen greatly. Who among us wants to go back to the old days? Why must we pretend that the elderly, mentally ill, disabled etc. aren't part of our community?


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> Wonder why, since LBJ instituted the 'war on poverty' that trillions have been spent & yet there's more 'poor' than ever?


Being poor has become a job. It pays well. Lots of benefits and the time off is great.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> That's well and nice and all, but what if one of them had a heart attack and ran up a $100K hospital bill? Would you pay that, too?
> 
> I've worked with enough Churches to know that they can't begin to take care of even the most dire situations in their community. One person having a catastrophic medical condition can wipe out the whole community's funds. I live near a town of about 10,000 people. Most folks don't go to Church, let alone give to one. They have a food pantry/utility help place that all of the Churches contribute to. The budget for the food pantry/utility help place is about $250,000. Sounds like a lot, but they burn pretty quick. If it wasn't for volunteers they wouldn't make it. As it is, they turn away over 30% of folks asking for help. How is this going to cover all who have needs?
> 
> Another thing people are forgetting is that the more a preacher talks about money the more the attendance goes down. What will happen is that we'll have fewer and fewer people attending church and in turn supporting the down trodden. It's a vicious circle that will end badly for everyone involved.


I see you pick and choose the parts you like in posts. Right now there are many people who recieve government assistance that don't need it. The number of disabled and elderly are not too much for others to handle. Also, it's not just Christians that give to help the needy. I do believe the healthcare system needs to be reformed, but taking more taxes won't change that. As for the rich getting richer, everyone has the same chance of making money in this country, so I don't begrudge those who have succeeded in life and most of those who are successful, if they are conservatives, seem to give generously to charities.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

FreeRanger said:


> I like the public services provide for police/fire/roads etc. I have enough money and most importantly, I have free will that I can leave. I choose to stay and pay to stay in this safe country. So I am not being forced. No one is making me dig holes or fight their battles. You are free to leave if you don't like it here.


Now that is the worst side step and spin I ever saw .:hysterical:ound:

Trickey can you come up with a spin of the day award :hysterical:


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

At one time just about all of the govt. benefits was a good thing. People paid into many of these programs. It was supposed to be there if they ever were in need of it.

Now we have people making a living off these same programs that have never paid a cent into them. Nothing can continue very long doing that. We need for the people who work in these programs to do their jobs. Just because a person walks into a govt. office and says they need something does not mean they should get it.

It is our fault for letting these govt. employees collect a pay check for not doing their job. Time for them to go.


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Ambereyes said:


> The problem is separating the needs from the wants.. I too work at a food pantry and there are way to many wants.. If the ones that can do will it would solve the problem of not enough for the ones that really need. But when the ones with jobs will only work a certain amount in a year because they won't get their food stamps, subsidized housing and medical care, not to mention the large tax refunds the ones with kids get, that makes it hard on everyone..
> 
> IMHO all food stamps housing and medical care that is paid for with tax money should be considered income for those that use them..


What are those people thinking? food, shelter and clothing those are all wants?

Yes the problem is the needs and the wants. Unfortunately too many people want to live BIG. (Even in my own house) The percentage of people needing help is growing.

IMHO, all the subsidies to businesses needs to STOP. No more TIF districts, no more tax credits, no more grants for business expansions to "create" jobs, no more farm price "supports." Only then do we need to start worrying about food stamps, housing, and medical care paid for with tax dollars. Until then people who complain about taxes going to a few lazy people are ...... (can't put it in writing, I will be censored.)


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

FreeRanger said:


> I like the public services provide for police/fire/roads etc. I have enough money and most importantly, I have free will that I can leave. I choose to stay and pay to stay in this safe country. So I am not being forced. No one is making me dig holes or fight their battles. You are free to leave if you don't like it here.


Police fire and roads are local services aid by city, county or state taxes. I support these functions too. However I live in California and we are facing a massive shortfall to pay for bloated pensions for some of these people, and a terribly mismanaged pension fund. Most of these folks will be receiving more in retirement than most Americans earn while working, and the feds will probably have to bail them out. Will you be glad to know that your federal taxes are going to pay for $200,000 per year retirement pensions for Californians?

California has a democrat in the Governors office, and huge majorities in both houses of the Assembly. They do not care that they are driving businesses out of the state. They over regulate and over tax. and Thier ONLY answer to solve the issue is to raise taxes. They WILL NOT even consider pension reform! The unions won't allow it, and they are in bed with the unions.

And then there is welfare, food stamps and other social services to a huge number of Californians, and a huge number of illegal aliens, who sign up as soon as they get here.

So, enjoy paying your tax bill!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Sonshine said:


> people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government.


That's an interesting premise. What do you base it on?


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

pancho said:


> At one time just about all of the govt. benefits was a good thing. People paid into many of these programs. It was supposed to be there if they ever were in need of it.
> 
> Now we have people making a living off these same programs that have never paid a cent into them. Nothing can continue very long doing that. We need for the people who work in these programs to do their jobs. Just because a person walks into a govt. office and says they need something does not mean they should get it.
> 
> It is our fault for letting these govt. employees collect a pay check for not doing their job. Time for them to go.


Panch has it half way right. It is our fault for letting it happen. But it's not the front line government employees that are the problem. Most do their jobs (work) and get paid less than the private sector. The problem is the elected officials that write these bad laws. And the voters who vote for them.



pancho said:


> Just because a person walks into a govt. office and says they need something does not mean they should get it..


Are you suggesting gov employees should break the laws? Are you suggesting when Gov Scott Walker gave Jack Links a $45,000 tax credit last year that the Department of Revenue should have ignored him? Are you suggesting when Scott Walker instructed the Department of Transportation give $172,000 this January to give a grant to the city of Minong, Wisconsin to build a wider paved driveway to Jack Links that the employees not send them the money? All for the "creation" of seven (7) new minimum wage jobs on a $6.8 Million dollar production expansion. (no I am not going to provide you the links to Scott Walkers press releases for the past year).


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

FreeRanger said:


> If taxes were really forced charity you would be right. However, taxes in America are not forced. The services provided with tax money are not charity. We have free and fair elections. There are many good reasons for taxes in a civil society. I agree the taxes and services by local, state and feds don't always make sense. However, this time I believe that both the Repubs and the Dems voted for this law. If Romney was president, he would have signed the law (at least that is what his history has shown).


Hon, not one "R" voted for this tax bill. Not one. However some "Ds" voted against it!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> You've got that right!
> 
> Here is video, made by Nancy Pelosi's daughter. She is on Bill Mahar's show. For the first three minutes they talk about her previous videos, about poor toothless Republicans in the south. At about 3 minutes in, she start talking about that night's video, which is freeloading welfare queens looking for "Obama bucks".
> 
> ...


Stossel frequently goes to these lines & talks w/folks. Seems more than 1/2 are able bodied...I realize jobs are few & far b/w however. & I know that unemployment among black people is the highest ever.


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Common Tator said:


> Police fire and roads are local services aid by city, county or state taxes. I support these functions too. However I live in California and we are facing a massive shortfall to pay for bloated pensions for some of these people, and a terribly mismanaged pension fund. Most of these folks will be receiving more in retirement than most Americans earn while working, and the feds will probably have to bail them out. Will you be glad to know that your federal taxes are going to pay for $200,000 per year retirement pensions for Californians?
> 
> California has a democrat in the Governors office, and huge majorities in both houses of the Assembly. They do not care that they are driving businesses out of the state. They over regulate and over tax. and Thier ONLY answer to solve the issue is to raise taxes. They WILL NOT even consider pension reform! The unions won't allow it, and they are in bed with the unions.
> 
> ...


Are you sure none of that happen while a republican was in office?
You do have a mess there. And YES the nation may have to bail California out. Just don't throw the baby out with the bath water.


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2012)

Sonshine said:


> Do you give to impress others or out of the abundance of your heart? Not saying that to sound mean, but if you give from your heart then no matter what others say you'll continue to do so.


Your kidding right?
Your statement is wrong on so many levels.
I have no intention of impressing any one but myself. 
Please tell me why my family should go with out, while others critisize the free stuff they get from the food bank. Why should i give our hard work so people can have drugs.


----------



## Ambereyes (Sep 6, 2004)

FreeRanger said:


> What are those people thinking? food, shelter and clothing those are all wants?
> 
> Yes the problem is the needs and the wants. Unfortunately too many people want to live BIG. (Even in my own house) The percentage of people needing help is growing.
> 
> IMHO, all the subsidies to businesses needs to STOP. No more TIF districts, no more tax credits, no more grants for business expansions to "create" jobs, no more farm price "supports." Only then do we need to start worrying about food stamps, housing, and medical care paid for with tax dollars. Until then people who complain about taxes going to a few lazy people are ...... (can't put it in writing, I will be censored.)


Spin again there Ranger, if a person has wants they need to get out and work for them. They are responsible for themselves not the rest of us.. I take care of my family, friends when I can and volunteer for community work when possible. 

I do agree no subsidies for and businesses but that also includes the people that make a business of living off the public's hard earned tax dollars. By the way if you think there are only a few of them I got a bridge to sell ya.. :hysterical:


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> That's well and nice and all, but what if one of them had a heart attack and ran up a $100K hospital bill? Would you pay that, too?
> 
> I've worked with enough Churches to know that they can't begin to take care of even the most dire situations in their community. One person having a catastrophic medical condition can wipe out the whole community's funds. I live near a town of about 10,000 people. Most folks don't go to Church, let alone give to one. They have a food pantry/utility help place that all of the Churches contribute to. The budget for the food pantry/utility help place is about $250,000. Sounds like a lot, but they burn pretty quick. If it wasn't for volunteers they wouldn't make it. As it is, they turn away over 30% of folks asking for help. How is this going to cover all who have needs?
> 
> Another thing people are forgetting is that the more a preacher talks about money the more the attendance goes down. What will happen is that we'll have fewer and fewer people attending church and in turn supporting the down trodden. It's a vicious circle that will end badly for everyone involved.


Actually, most of us on HT gave $$ & help to a mod who was in nearly that same situation. (not cardiac tho) Fund raisers in their town too.
And, yes, I've helped many w/bills who were not related to me.
How many folks do you know who finance a $150K home? $30K car? Why is it ok to have those bills yet horrific to have to finance life-saving procedures?? Where are priorities?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

FreeRanger said:


> Panch has it half way right. It is our fault for letting it happen. But it's not the front line government employees that are the problem. Most do their jobs (work) and get paid less than the private sector. The problem is the elected officials that write these bad laws. And the voters who vote for them.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting gov employees should break the laws? Are you suggesting when Gov Scott Walker gave Jack Links a $45,000 tax credit last year that the Department of Revenue should have ignored him? Are you suggesting when Scott Walker instructed the Department of Transportation give $172,000 this January to give a grant to the city of Minong, Wisconsin to build a wider paved driveway to Jack Links that the employees not send them the money? All for the "creation" of seven (7) new minimum wage jobs on a $6.8 Million dollar production expansion. (no I am not going to provide you the links to Scott Walkers press releases for the past year).


Ah, couldn't wait to bring this up, huh. Like its the only thing Walker did. 
How's your "THIS is what democracy looks like" workin' for ya now?

I see WI is already doing wonderful under his governing. 
I look forward to that being a model for other liberal states that are going under!


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Sonshine said:


> I see you pick and choose the parts you like in posts. Right now there are many people who recieve government assistance that don't need it. The number of disabled and elderly are not too much for others to handle. Also, it's not just Christians that give to help the needy. I do believe the healthcare system needs to be reformedAs for the rich getting richer, _everyone has the same chance of making money in this country, so I don't begrudge those who have succeeded in life and most of those who are successful_, if they are conservatives, seem to give generously to charities., but taking more taxes won't change that.


That has been something that really bothers me. This morning I posted a link to a piece done by Alexandria Pelosi interviewing people standing in line at the welfare office. They were young, healthy. They were big strong men, some doing pushups in line while waiting. The line for the welfare office extended down the sidewalk, in front of the employment office. They didn't want jobs. They weren't willing to go into that office. They just wanted their "Obama bucks". Why should the rest of us support them?

I can see helping someone out, temporarily. Things happen in all of our lives, and it is nice to have a little help in an emergency. As long as you make an effort to better yourself or your circumstances. 

However these folks are lifelong parasites on society. One of the men, who had no intention of working said he has 5 children by 4 different women. One said "I'm here to get a CHECK! XXXXX*, I want a check!"

So how many of these people are themselves the children of lifelong parasites on society? How many generations of parasites are we supposed to support? Healthy people who don't work because the democrats refuse to address the problem, and scream about racism when republicans try to address it. 

There are plenty of people who really qualify for disability, but drag themselves into work every day because they would never consider _not working_. Personal pride and personal responsibility. Why are these people supposed to now pay for health care for others that they can't even really afford for themselves?

They support their families. They are there for them, and they make sure that they keep the lights on and food on the table. They may be doing this from a wheel chair, or in intense pain, but that is who they are. And then there are people like the ones in the video, who feel they have it coming. They are reasonably intelligent. They are physically fit. The ones in the video look very fit, with one doing push ups on the sidewalk. Our tax burden would be so much less if we weren't providing them with housing, food, health care, and money. All things they are perfectly capable of earning on their own, just like the rest of us.

Lets get the parasites ff the welfare rolls. Get them to support their own children.

For those who missed the link, here it is:
Pelosi's Daughter: HBO Execs Uncomfortable With 'Freeloading Welfare Queen' Video


----------



## sirquack (Feb 18, 2009)

Ambereyes said:


> Follow the money..
> 
> Along with the financial lobbies, the pharmaceutical and health products industries have historically been one of the biggest and most powerful lobbies in Washington. Drug companies enjoy more power and influence in America than with any other government in the world. Pfizer Inc, one of the major political contributors of the pharmaceutical industry, spent more than $25 million dollars in 2009, ensuring that the Obama administrationâs health care reforms didnât rock the boat overmuch. As it stands, drug companies stand to gain a huge increase in their already bloated profits after the new healthcare reforms go through; prescription drug prices are set to remain steady, despite already being the highest in the world, but an estimated 32 million Americans are going to be newly insured.
> 
> 10 of the Biggest Lobbies in Washington | Business Pundit


We have many problems and one of them biggest if the influence of big business in our legislation. The new health care law FORCES people to get insurance or get taxed. Thank you insurance lobby groups. No where in the new law does is mandate lowering of the premium or cost of health care. That is what every says it the end result, but no one is willing to put it on paper. I looked and the family "PENALTY/TAX" is 1% of income or over $2000, which ever is greater, in 2016 if you don't get the MANDATED coverage. How many of us will easily pay that amount? And there is no guarantee of what the cost of the premiums will be for those of us working for small to medium size businesses. I work for a large employer, over 10k employees, and my premiums are hundreds of dollars a month and that is for a plan that requires I pay for $350 upfront before anything is paid and then 20% after that. 
What do you think is going to happen when my employer knows I can't opt-out and they can lower the benefits, except those mandated benefits and raise my premium, which are not controlled by the health care mandate?
I see this all going down hill in a hurry.


----------



## unregistered41671 (Dec 29, 2009)

Hey CT, I posted this link a while back too and look at some of responses that were posted. We even had one that said that they thought the video was staged. 
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/sp...t/439996-obama-bucks-welfare-food-stamps.html


----------



## FreeRanger (Jul 20, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Ah, couldn't wait to bring this up, huh. Like its the only thing Walker did.
> How's your "THIS is what democracy looks like" workin' for ya now?
> 
> I see WI is already doing wonderful under his governing.
> I look forward to that being a model for other liberal states that are going under!


Yes, Wisconsin is doing wonderful, last place in job creation. Middle class continues to loose ground while the wealthy are getting more tax breaks...lowering the standard of living, that is a cause worth fighting for! NOT. 

Wisconsin is not a liberal state. As they say "good spin" but not the truth. Wisconsin is a good mixed bag of individuals. They have had a pretty good public education system here for decades. Now some think we should provide money for private education. Shift the wealth, and create more "lazy" people to stand in the welfare lines. The disabled and elderly I know are just living large! Yes all my disabled friends are just super happy that Scott Walker doesn't follow any federal law that he doesn't like. Wisconsin's fully funded public pension is about to be raided so that he can payoff the financial sector. Why can't the family farmer join the state health care system? The support structure is already there. It's already a "profitable" service, adding more people will only make it better. You get three choices of HMO's. You don't have to participate if you don't want to.

By the way, I didn't like the past Dem governor either. But rather than complain, I am putting myself out there by expressing my opinion. democracy is working just fine here, except when millions of dollars from outside wealthy people are dumped on the media. I am still waiting to see a single photograph of all the "union thugs" bused in from neighboring states. Never happen, doesn't happen in the elections either, voter fraud is a blame game on both sides. There were no riots last spring, just a lot of people ----ed off that Scott Walker is a liar. Don't give the public employees raises for years, then cut their benefits too. Meanwhile he took his raise as an elected official. Not hard to see why any current government worker would not want to go the extra mile when Scott Walker and the Repubs have written into law that there is no funding for cost of living raises.

So back to the original thread, giving begins at home. And continues on a larger scale with the government. Why are we fighting wars over the ocean? Why are we giving money to other governments? it's not a simple answer. Picking on the lazy and weak is easy. Not so easy to pick on the wealthy and powerful.


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2012)

FreeRanger said:


> Yes, Wisconsin is doing wonderful, last place in job creation. Middle class continues to loose ground while the wealthy are getting more tax breaks...lowering the standard of living, that is a cause worth fighting for! NOT.
> 
> Wisconsin is not a liberal state. As they say "good spin" but not the truth. Wisconsin is a good mixed bag of individuals. They have had a pretty good public education system here for decades. Now some think we should provide money for private education. Shift the wealth, and create more "lazy" people to stand in the welfare lines. The disabled and elderly I know are just living large! Yes all my disabled friends are just super happy that Scott Walker doesn't follow any federal law that he doesn't like. Wisconsin's fully funded public pension is about to be raided so that he can payoff the financial sector. Why can't the family farmer join the state health care system? The support structure is already there. It's already a "profitable" service, adding more people will only make it better. You get three choices of HMO's. You don't have to participate if you don't want to.
> 
> ...


Aren't you the one who said We should make sure our neighbor doesn't become envious and angry?

Why do you want to make every one angry?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

FreeRanger said:


> so you are saying you don't need any roads? You don't want a police force or an army? You don't benefit from living in America? You are not enjoying the "few" freedoms available in the United States of America? You really live out in the ocean in "internal waters" and have no need for a civil society! Really..hard to believe that.
> 
> Don't get me wrong...I think we are loosing MANY freedoms in USA. This healthcare issue isn't one of them. You are being provided with three choices on healthcare. 1.You can choose to purchase a policy yourself, 2. You can choose to work for a company (a wealthy man or group of individuals) or 3. You can choose not to do either 1 or 2. In that case, the government is going to choose it for you. In the past by not choosing either of the first two options, you were a burden on the rest of us that did pay up front. Your selfishness raised the cost of medical care for those of us that were pre-paying.
> 
> Times have changed, elderly and disable no longer can count on the goodwill of their immediate family to meet all their needs. The standard of living for the healthy population has risen greatly. Who among us wants to go back to the old days? Why must we pretend that the elderly, mentally ill, disabled etc. aren't part of our community?


Not what I said at all Go back and read my post, and don't EVER put words in my mouth!

As for the elderly and disabled, they are already provided for. They have Social security, Social security or state, or private insurance disability for income AND and medicare or medicaid. So since they are already provided for, they are not the subject of this health care legislation. Throwing them into this discussion is a gratuitous effort on your part to evoke sympathy for people who don't need it. and it is an effort to paint myself and the other conservatives here as big mean bullies who want to deny the disabled and elderly access to doctors. 

If you want to find a bully in this situation, look no farther than Barack Hussein Obama. *He stole $500 BILLION from medicare* to fund this monstrosity! Medicare: How much more will they cut? - Oct. 21, 2011

But now lets talk about you. You said that republicans voted for Obama care. A lie. I asked you to provide a link, and instead, you refused to answer that. Instead you raised a bogus issue, that of the elderly and disabled, who already have money and healthcare provided for them. 

So again I am asking you to provide a link to PROVE that any republicans voted for this bill. And I will continue to ask until you either fess up, that you lied or provide a credible link. 

And I'm asking others to help out here. If someone says something that is blatantly untrue, we hold their feet to the fire. 

Obama care was passed because of lies. "You get to keep your doctor and you get to keep your insurance." "This is not a tax." "No one earning less that $250,000 per year will pay an extra dime in taxes." Lies, lies, lies. And we point them out and provide links. Perpetrating more lies does not add to the discussion, and it doesn't help the undecided come to an informed decision.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

wwubben said:


> How does the government hinder helping your neighbor?Our community does well at helping each other,but we could not handle the whole load.The numbers are too great.We have people that have met their max payments from insurance on cancer treatment.You are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.Housing is another big one around here.So many of the government programs cannot be paid by individuals,especially if they think the program is not necessary.


Let me ask you a question, where is the government getting the money to help these vast numbers you are referring to? From the people. Yet the people have no say in where that money is going so a lot of it goes to fraudulent claims or into the pockets of the bureacrats. If the money was left with the people, they could give it to the areas where the needs are the greatest and have a better idea on who is really needing a hand up and not a hand out.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

nancylee said:


> My sister in law has cancer. In one year her bill is over 100,000 dollars. I will send you her address so you can have a bake sale for her. Thanks, you rock!!!


First get the government out of our pockets and I'm sure more would be willing to help your sister. Where do you think the government is getting the money?????


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Possum Belly said:


> Hey CT, I posted this link a while back too and look at some of responses that were posted. We even had one that said that they thought the video was staged.
> http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/sp...t/439996-obama-bucks-welfare-food-stamps.html


As if Nency Pelosi's daughter would "stage" a video that makes democrats look horrible, and Bill Mahar would air it!

Thanks PB!


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

nancylee said:


> So you don't want the government fixing roads, building bridges, helping when a tornado destroys a town? You don't want the government helping to fund hospitals, schools? You want your community to do all that? How long do you think that would last?


In cases of National emergencies it's usually the charity based organizations that are first on the scene.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Dutchie said:


> And have the rest of society pay for it.
> 
> "Obama care" is not free. People pay for it. If I had my way, we would be able to buy into the same health care system Federal Employees have. As long as people don't have an opportunity to buy into a health insurance plan the rest of society will continue to pay for the treatment of those people.
> 
> What I find interesting is that several members on this board enjoy government benefits whether they need it or not. I don't see anybody up in arms about that.


Either way we're paying for it. I'd rather have a say in what I'm paying for because I don't think any of us should pay the bills for those who can but won't work.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> Your kidding right?
> Your statement is wrong on so many levels.
> I have no intention of impressing any one but myself.
> Please tell me why my family should go with out, while others critisize the free stuff they get from the food bank. Why should i give our hard work so people can have drugs.


I'm not talking about giving to drug addicts or those who refuse to work, but to give to those who are unable to work due to health issues, etc.


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

Sonshine said:


> I see you pick and choose the parts you like in posts. Right now there are many people who recieve government assistance that don't need it. The number of disabled and elderly are not too much for others to handle. Also, it's not just Christians that give to help the needy. I do believe the healthcare system needs to be reformed, but taking more taxes won't change that. As for the rich getting richer, everyone has the same chance of making money in this country, so I don't begrudge those who have succeeded in life and most of those who are successful, if they are conservatives, seem to give generously to charities.


We actually agree on a lot of things. 

I agree that healthcare needs to be reformed, but when the first ones at the Reform Table are the insurance companies and lobbyists, what kind of change is going to happen? If you notice, not a peep has come out from the insurance companies about how horrible ObamaCare is. Wonder why that is? 

As for the disabled...I agree that there are too many who don't deserve it who are getting it. There's also a lot of folks who should be on it who aren't. That system, too, needs reform. 

While we're at it, I started a FB page a long time ago that says that food stamps should be run like WIC. You get what you get and you don't throw a fit. Don't get me started on that one!


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2012)

Sonshine said:


> I'm not talking about giving to drug addicts or those who refuse to work, but to give to those who are unable to work due to health issues, etc.


Here you cann't tell the food bank don't give my food to druggies.

I have had a couple of experiences since the economic crashes. 
A young man told us he needed money for milk for his kid. We gave him a job that we could have done our self to do and payed him for it. He did not tell his wife he was getting paid to do the job, and did not use it for the baby milk. he bought drugs.
The elderly lady next to us complained she couldn't make it through the month on what they had coming in. So i gave her some food. She has 3x's as much as we do coming in. I couldn't beleive it when I found out.
So I have tryed it both ways now, and i am done, No more food bank and no more helping others.
A guy who is on disability and food stamps got in my husbands lunch box last week and ate a quart jar of sliced ham. He won't spend his money on food, instead mooches off others. this really upsets me as my dh is diabetic and needs his lunch. He must be selling his own food stamps, I don't know. 
If this all makes me seem heartles, i no longer care.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

KnowOneSpecial said:


> We actually agree on a lot of things.
> 
> I agree that healthcare needs to be reformed, but when the first ones at the Reform Table are the insurance companies and lobbyists, what kind of change is going to happen? If you notice, not a peep has come out from the insurance companies about how horrible ObamaCare is. Wonder why that is?
> 
> ...


We really do agree on quite a log of things. The whole insurance scene needs to be looked at and reformed, as well as some of the ridiculous law suits. As for the disabled, I'm one of those disabled folks that get no assistance, although I did check into it briefly on the advice of my doctor, but never really applied, since the laws show I wouldn't be able to get it because I have not worked in several years and DH makes too much money. I also agree with the whole food stamp issue. The WIC program seemed to keep at least some of the fraudulent claims at bay. I don't believe Obamacare is the answer, in fact, I believe it will just increase the problems we now see. I'm a firm believer in less government is better. I have seen first hand the charitable nature of my fellow citizens and have no doubt that given the opportunity would step up to the plate in most cases.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> Here you cann't tell the food bank don't give my food to druggies.
> 
> I have had a couple of experiences since the economic crashes.
> A young man told us he needed money for milk for his kid. We gave him a job that we could have done our self to do and payed him for it. He did not tell his wife he was getting paid to do the job, and did not use it for the baby milk. he bought drugs.
> ...


No, not heartless, but discouraged. I don't give to food banks, but do give to individuals. One of my neighbors is an elderly couple. He was a pilot and was involved in a plane wreck. Caused severe head injuries. They are on a fixed income now (he's in his 80's) and they have no family close by. DH and I have increased our gardens to grow enough to feed them and I fix meals for them a few times a week because he's not able to eat much (the wreck messed up his mouth, so he can't chew) and she won't cook balanced meals for just herself. I try to send food to them that she can mash up for him. We also give them milk and eggs. I know that they aren't abusing the gifts and the times she is able to leave him she tries to help with the gardening. She's also watched our DS several times so I can get a break. (I have a special needs son and it's hard to find a sitter for him). We also have some neighbors a few doors down that the economy has really hit them. They took a pay cut and it's been hard to meet their bills. They have been coming down here to learn how to raise their own food. We gave them a couple of hens, a rooster and a couple of goats. They in turn have been quick to come to our house when DH is out of town to help me with the chores on our little homestead. I heard of a family that was struggling financially due to several circumstances and DH and I, after much prayer, started sending this family money each month to help with their expenses. There are others that we have tried to help when we realize there is a need. Some of the people I have given money to I have no idea if it was spent for the needs I sent it for, but as a Christian, I felt led by God to give to them, so I did it out of obedience. We each have our own reasons for giving or not giving. I don't expect others to do what I do, just do what they feel led to do.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

sirquack said:


> We have many problems and one of them biggest if the influence of big business in our legislation. The new health care law FORCES people to get insurance or get taxed. Thank you insurance lobby groups.


 Blaming the lobbiests is lots of fun, and it absolves the elected officials from ANY responsibility for their actions. Why would you do that? This entire bill is the product of the democrats that wrote it and voted for it. Every letter and every punctuation mark on every page, and there are at least 2800 pages. Do you really believe that senators and representatives allowed lobbiests to go down to the senate floor and the house floor and cast their votes for them? That would be a massive scandal in it's own right. why wasn't that on the news? Or is it possible that those democrats went to the house and senate floors and cast their own votes?

In the video I posted earlier, Alexandria Pelosi said something that we should all take to heart. She said *"Own your party."* Great advice! Accept that the democrats that voted for this bill allowed themselves to be corrupted by the lobbyists.

Note:_ Sir Quack, I don't know your party affiliation. I do know that your anger is misplaced. Hold the politicians accountable for their own actions. Lobbyists only have the power that is freely given to them by the politicians._



sirquack said:


> No where in the new law does is mandate lowering of the premium or cost of health care. That is what every says it the end result, but no one is willing to put it on paper. I looked and the family "PENALTY/TAX" is 1% of income or over $2000, which ever is greater, in 2016 if you don't get the MANDATED coverage. How many of us will easily pay that amount? And there is no guarantee of what the cost of the premiums will be for those of us working for small to medium size businesses. I work for a large employer, over 10k employees, and my premiums are hundreds of dollars a month and that is for a plan that requires I pay for $350 upfront before anything is paid and then 20% after that.
> What do you think is going to happen when my employer knows I can't opt-out and they can lower the benefits, except those mandated benefits and raise my premium, which are not controlled by the health care mandate?
> I see this all going down hill in a hurry.


 Right. Those of us who have been responsible all along, and carried insurance are going to see steep increases on our premiums. Because insurers are going to be forced to cover people with preexisting conditions, you and I will have to pay more for our premiums to cover their costs. That will cost hubby and I more than $1,000 per year EXTRA. And the democrats who voted for this thing, never bothered asking any of us if we could afford it.

The money has to come from somewhere. The government doesn't have any "Obama bucks" They have taxpayers that are taxed for every penny they spend, except that they are spending faster than we can earn it so we have a massive deficit. We borrow from the Chinese and others to make up the difference, and since we are already deficit spending, this borrowing will increase too. Even the Chinese may not have enough money to pay for Obama Care.


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2012)

What you are saying is you work with others that think it is good to help each other. It's not that way here.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> What you are saying is you work with others that think it is good to help each other. It's not that way here.


What I am saying is to give to those who you know are in need. I have been blessed many times when people gave out of the abundance of their hearts. I don't know what I did to deserve it, but there it was. As a result I have tried to help others who have fallen on hard times.


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2012)

It seems people are in need any more if they don't have more than the next guy.
I gave you 3 examples of what has happened to me when i tryed to give.
I am glad it is working for you.
But the way i look at it is i am in charge of what i have to give or not give, if i give it to the mooches what will i have to give when some one really is in need? I have to be responcible about this. Just like now we are seeing our own goverment taking care of those who could take care of them selves and not really helping many who could use some help, because the goverment doesn't have it to give any more.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

veggiecanner said:


> It seems people are in need any more if they don't have more than the next guy.
> I gave you 3 examples of what has happened to me when i tryed to give.
> I am glad it is working for you.
> But the way i look at it is i am in charge of what i have to give or not give, if i give it to the mooches what will i have to give when some one really is in need? I have to be responcible about this. Just like now we are seeing our own goverment taking care of those who could take care of them selves and not really helping many who could use some help, because the goverment doesn't have it to give any more.


I agree, we have to be responsible in giving. There's a difference between helping someone who is facing rough times and supporting someone because they aren't willing to help themselves.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

FreeRanger said:


> However, taxes in America are not forced.


Really? If you don't pay your taxes you will be fined. Armed police can come into your home, jail you, confiscate your bank account and property. But other than that, you are correct, taxes are not forced in America.:bash:


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

CesumPec said:


> Really? If you don't pay your taxes you will be fined. Armed police can come into your home, jail you, confiscate your bank account and property. But other than that, you are correct, taxes are not forced in America.:bash:


That is just about as close as you can come to forced.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> However these folks are lifelong parasites on society. One of the men, who had no intention of working said he has 5 children by 4 different women. One said "I'm here to get a CHECK! B*[email protected], I want a check!"
> 
> So how many of these people are themselves the children of lifelong parasites on society? How many generations of parasites are we supposed to support? Healthy people who don't work because the democrats refuse to address the problem, and scream about racism when republicans try to address it.
> 
> Lets get the parasites ff the welfare rolls. Get them to support their own children.


I agree with you - EXCEPT - your premise the Republicans are not every bit as culpable as the Democrats.

Either the Republicans are equally responsible or they are totally ineffectual. I think it's the former, but if it's the latter, maybe it's time to think about another party.

In Texas, the problem is the illegals and their overburdening of the welfare system. President Bush, by most people's thinking, a republican was our governor for years while we were being flooded, then he was president for 8 years while the flood just overwhelmed us. I didn't see him doing anything about that. In fact, I heard him state one of his first goals would be amnesty. I saw him vocally support and champion illegals. Some of our lawmakers did stop their statements about 'bringing them out of the shadows', etc., etc., but did nothing about the drain on our state. 

We aren't going to fix anything until we really sit down and think hard and realize none of this could have happened without both parties working together to get it done. It just couldn't have happened.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

I hear ya Trixie! And I was outraged with Bush for his amnesty efforts. All the problems you have in Texas with illegals, we have too.

However in Texas, you at least have some Republicans in powerful positions. Here in California, Governor Moonbeam and the vast majorities of both houses are democrats. And they want to grant privileges to illegals that citizens don't get. Like financial aid for illegals enrolled in college.

California allows college aid to illegal immigrants | Reuters


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> That has been something that really bothers me. This morning I posted a link to a piece done by Alexandria Pelosi interviewing people standing in line at the welfare office. They were young, healthy. They were big strong men, some doing pushups in line while waiting. The line for the welfare office extended down the sidewalk, in front of the employment office. They didn't want jobs. They weren't willing to go into that office. They just wanted their "Obama bucks". Why should the rest of us support them?
> 
> I can see helping someone out, temporarily. Things happen in all of our lives, and it is nice to have a little help in an emergency. As long as you make an effort to better yourself or your circumstances.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

FreeRanger said:


> Yes, Wisconsin is doing wonderful, last place in job creation. Middle class continues to loose ground while the wealthy are getting more tax breaks...lowering the standard of living, that is a cause worth fighting for! NOT.
> 
> Wisconsin is not a liberal state. As they say "good spin" but not the truth. Wisconsin is a good mixed bag of individuals. They have had a pretty good public education system here for decades. Now some think we should provide money for private education. Shift the wealth, and create more "lazy" people to stand in the welfare lines. The disabled and elderly I know are just living large! Yes all my disabled friends are just super happy that Scott Walker doesn't follow any federal law that he doesn't like. Wisconsin's fully funded public pension is about to be raided so that he can payoff the financial sector. Why can't the family farmer join the state health care system? The support structure is already there. It's already a "profitable" service, adding more people will only make it better. You get three choices of HMO's. You don't have to participate if you don't want to.
> 
> ...


Sorry I said 'liberal' instead of "D".
I read your rant, I will keep my opinions as is until I see otherwise. 
There's a surplus in your state.
Frankly, I'm happy that public workers have to pay some of their benefits like the rest of us. I'm glad they don't get a raise, its a depressed economy!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Interesting article about Obama's mentor and HC.
Articles: Supreme Court Helps Obama Fulfill Dreams from His Communist Mentor


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Common Tator said:


> I hear ya Trixie! And I was outraged with Bush for his amnesty efforts. All the problems you have in Texas with illegals, we have too.
> 
> However in Texas, you at least have some Republicans in powerful positions. Here in California, Governor Moonbeam and the vast majorities of both houses are democrats. And they want to grant privileges to illegals that citizens don't get. Like financial aid for illegals enrolled in college.
> 
> California allows college aid to illegal immigrants | Reuters


It doesn't matter that we have Republicans here, they are the working tooth and tonails to keep the illegals. This was allowed to grow by their refusal to even admit we had a problem for years, then we begin to get the touchy feely statements regarding how much they add to our state, etc. They realize the feeling of the people and are not as vocal, but they do pander to the Mexicans. When I say Mexican, I don't mean Americans of Mexican descent, I mean illegals. 

Our representative, a republican, had a blurb on his website that stated he had his 'hispanic council that advised him on border issues', as if only the hispanics (whatever that is) could have any idea or any right in the discussion.

I don't know for a fact how much aid illegals get as far as college goes. It's sometimes hard to find out exactly what help, benefits, etc., the illegals are getting. The government and the media work overtime on perception management, on that subject.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Nothing on earth is preventing you from helping your neighbors, and no amount of government subsidized healthcare can take the place of a friend walking over to a neighbor who is suffering and lending them a helping hand or a listening ear. You can volunteer as a hospice worker, etc. 

On the other hand, if I had to depend upon charity for dental care, therapy appts, routine health care, etc, none of that would ever get done. People might take up a collection if one of my kids got badly burned or broke a bone, but they are unlikely to want to pay for developmental therapy for the same child on a weekly basis, even though that therapy might make the difference in that child becoming a productive member of society who can hold down a job.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Nothing on earth is preventing you from helping your neighbors, and no amount of government subsidized healthcare can take the place of a friend walking over to a neighbor who is suffering and lending them a helping hand or a listening ear. You can volunteer as a hospice worker, etc.
> 
> On the other hand, if I had to depend upon charity for dental care, therapy appts, routine health care, etc, none of that would ever get done. People might take up a collection if one of my kids got badly burned or broke a bone, but they are unlikely to want to pay for developmental therapy for the same child on a weekly basis, even though that therapy might make the difference in that child becoming a productive member of society who can hold down a job.


So, pay for your own stuff.
The gov't should step in when its something of a really dire nature.


----------



## TJN66 (Aug 29, 2004)

Sanza said:


> Thread drift.....there's 3 on this page alone.....which *one* is the post of the day?
> 
> 
> I think some are missing the point here - the insurance companies rates are getting out of hand so a lot of people can't afford insurance any more. The government is trying to do away with these companies that are gouging you. Give it time and it should work out better then what you have right now.....anything is better then what you have right now!
> ...


Really...so my husband who has wonderful healthcare insurance for both of us with reasonable deductions that is figured into his contract with work will have better insurance with the gov? 

Now that makes me laugh really really hard!


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

:banana:


Tricky Grama said:


> So, pay for your own stuff.
> The gov't should step in when its something of a really dire nature.


I can't give you 'Post of the day' (no smiley), so here's a dancing banana! :banana:


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Tricky Grama said:


> So, pay for your own stuff.
> The gov't should step in when its something of a really dire nature.


I agree. Charity is to help the needy, but when someone has a special needs child, the parents should either get a job that offers insurance benefits, purchase their own insurance, or pay for the treatments required out of their own pockets.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Sonshine said:


> I agree. Charity is to help the needy, but when someone has a special needs child, the parents should either get a job that offers insurance benefits, purchase their own insurance, or pay for the treatments required out of their own pockets.


I just wanted to add that I can relate to having a special needs child, since my DS has special needs. He sees a developmental specialist too. DH is in the Air Force, so we do get medical care for DS, but if he was not in the Air Force we would either buy insurance that covered his needs or make arrangements to pay out of pocket.


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

Wouldn't some special needs kids be covered under SSDI? Wouldn't medicaid come with that?


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Post deleted. Sorry I even thought of posting that.  
I probably deserve an infraction anyway.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


> So, pay for your own stuff.
> The gov't should step in when its something of a really dire nature.


I like the sound of it but it is still no business of the Gov. to give other tax payers money to anyone dire or not . The state maybe if voted on by the people but again where in the Constitution does individual and dire come in at :cowboy:

That very thing of making one small exception is what has led us to today and as Dr Phill says how is that working for you . :sob:


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Well I know that my sleepy community raised over 27k for the medical care of a local.

about 6 times a year someone is in real need here. House fires in winter --I would list the names of recent people who we have raised thousands of dollar to aid them but out of respect of the people you have to go my my word. 

We hold dinners with auctions (hunt trips and fishing trips stays at local b&bs) are big dollars items which for the donor is gas, time and sweat. There have been chickens (wink) too. I love living in a small town were people care. Now I do know that not everyone has the personality to get along. In being standoffish or self centered or scared to socialize those people will never know just what is offered and shared with those INVOLVED with the community.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

Dang, another post self deleted. I'm getting good at this.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

So far I have 3 self administered infractions. How many before I have to ban myself?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

You're there now.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

This thread title reminded me of a joke:



> The United Way realized that it had never received a donation from the
> city's most successful lawyer. So a United Way! volunteer paid the
> lawyer a visit in his lavish office.
> 
> ...


My husband was a tax preparer for a few years. Most of his clients were moderately wealthy -- retirees who had earned enough investment income to require filing returns. I once asked him what percentage of his clients reported charitable donations of any kind. His answer was, "Very few."


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Sonshine said:


> I agree. Charity is to help the needy, but when someone has a special needs child, the parents should either get a job that offers insurance benefits, purchase their own insurance, or pay for the treatments required out of their own pockets.


No health insurance that I know of, offered through an employer, covers developmental disability related therapy. It is about $100 an hour for a therapist, PSR is close to that. For a child on the autism to learn the skills necessary to be successful in mainstream life, early intervention is critical. For example, many autistic kids get IBI. 40 hours of IBI a week is not uncommon. I don't know how much IBI costs per hour, but assuming $20 an hour (pretty sure it costs way more than that), that's $3,200 a month in IBI alone, not counting speech therapy, OT, etc. Paying for this out of pocket is not an option for the majority of parents. They can throw their kid under the bus and hope for the best, or they can see about getting Medicaid or Social Security for their child.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

But, I'm sure they intend to one day.


----------



## nebula5 (Feb 4, 2003)

willow_girl said:


> This thread title reminded me of a joke:
> 
> 
> 
> My husband was a tax preparer for a few years. Most of his clients were moderately wealthy -- retirees who had earned enough investment income to require filing returns. I once asked him what percentage of his clients reported charitable donations of any kind. His answer was, "Very few."


I have to say this---- Just because they don't report them, doesn't mean they don't make donations.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> So, pay for your own stuff.
> The gov't should step in when its something of a really dire nature.


Social Darwinism? I am continually perplexed by people who preach creationism but misapply Darwinism in a societal sense.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

As for tax deductions many people refuse to give credit to the tax code for what they wish to give to God. Simply many do not list charity on there taxes. I know that is true of the band of "Merry Men" --But the receipt were checked to asure the air miles gained from the credit card were correct to be used for mission work. 


chamoisee What is IBI, How old is your child, Are you invoked with a school district. What groups have you check with. Is there a stone soup group. Have you an IEP there is another alpha classification which might be more in your needs I could look it up. Are you connected to you community?

SSI is set up for this have you started this, Have the dr.'s pushed for this.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Chamoisee

if needed help I am willing to look into groups that are out there doing things with that issues. I know of some as many of the education groups I was introduced to for my son also reached in to aspergers and autizem as FAS also reached into socialization, learning, and speech issues. You are not alone but if you wish too that is to be respected. Many people willing to help do not know there is a need or what is really needed or if the person in need really is ready for outsiders to help. So many people helped us out of respect for those people it should be past on. PM


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

I just believe anyone who thinks this bill has anything to do with cutting the profits of the insurance industry needs to make a reality check. We have to know, surely we do, that money runs our government. The insurance industry has tons of money. They are invested and own so much more of the business in this country. Their profits aren't all made from premiums - in fact for life insurance, a lot of the profits are from investment of those premiums.

There is no way, no way, the insurance industry would allow this to be passed if they were going to be adversely affected. Trying to believe anything else is just naive and wishful thinking.

Yes, insurance rates are getting high, but so is the cost of healthcare. When a doctor raises his office visits from $60 to $150 in just two years, something is going on. I won't defend the insurance industry, but I always wonder why everyone is so quick to jump on it. Maybe it's because they don't really look at the bills they are getting from the hospitals and doctors or questioning the treatment and prescriptions of the doctors.

Someone said the big hospitals will collapse like the mortgage industry - I don't see that happening. I do think there is a possibility this healthcare boondoggle will mushroom, and there will be so much corruption, so much profit taking and scamming - then it may collapse and the government will be left holding the bag. To that extent, I think it might be like the mortgage industry. Like the mortgage industry, the big guys who caused it, who really made the profits, and the politicians who were paid to do their part, will all get out soon enough and have theirs tucked away in an offshore account.


----------



## Forerunner (Mar 23, 2007)

Just remember......there are no mistakes in deep politics.

If it happens, it was planned that way. FDR said that first.....


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Common Tator said:


> Wouldn't some special needs kids be covered under SSDI? Wouldn't medicaid come with that?


I have no doubt I could get our DS covered, BUT, I prefer not having the government involved any more than we have to. I don't trust them, and IMO, the less involved they are in our lives, the better.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> No health insurance that I know of, offered through an employer, covers developmental disability related therapy. It is about $100 an hour for a therapist, PSR is close to that. For a child on the autism to learn the skills necessary to be successful in mainstream life, early intervention is critical. For example, many autistic kids get IBI. 40 hours of IBI a week is not uncommon. I don't know how much IBI costs per hour, but assuming $20 an hour (pretty sure it costs way more than that), that's $3,200 a month in IBI alone, not counting speech therapy, OT, etc. Paying for this out of pocket is not an option for the majority of parents. They can throw their kid under the bus and hope for the best, or they can see about getting Medicaid or Social Security for their child.


I know that Tri Care covers it, since my son, even thought he's not autistic, he has many of the same traits and they cover him.

There's also a group called Scottish Rite that I believe helps with children on the spectrum.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> This thread title reminded me of a joke:
> 
> 
> 
> My husband was a tax preparer for a few years. Most of his clients were moderately wealthy -- retirees who had earned enough investment income to require filing returns. I once asked him what percentage of his clients reported charitable donations of any kind. His answer was, "Very few."


Must've had a lot of lib clients!
Study after study shows that conservatives give way more to charity than libs. Way more $$, more time, more blood. Also, "Ds" are more rich than "Rs."


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Social Darwinism? I am continually perplexed by people who preach creationism but misapply Darwinism in a societal sense.


Are you referring to me? B/c you quoted my post. You couldn't be more wrong again.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Yes, insurance rates are getting high, but so is the cost of healthcare.


Both insurance companies and the medical profession have been incentivized to drive health care costs as high as possible ... as long as people are willing and able to pay.

It's easy to see why doctors and hospitals want to charge as much as possible for their services (don't we all?). But the insurance industry wants to pay, too, and I've seen evidence that they've colluded with the medical profession to drive up costs. Why, you might ask? Well, most state insurance commissioners limit the percentage of earnings insurance companies are allowed spend on administrative costs (think "salaries of the CEO and his buddies"). So if you aspire to be an executive earning a $1 million salary (as quite a few do), or even a $100 million salary (yes, that happens too), you have to take in enough money to make that possible while not running afoul of your state's regulations. Thus the relentless drive to increase premiums, even while banking enormous surpluses.

(Before someone asks, "Got a link for that?" I'll go ahead and post some: 

CEO pay: Health Care CEOs Earn Top Pay - Health Blog - WSJ ... CEOs of top health plans rake in up to $20 million - amednews.com

Insurance companies stockpile profits: Insurance surpluses don't stop rate hikes - UPI.com ... Insurance News - Two Non-profit Health Insurers Hit Record $1 Billion Surpluses ... )


And for a long time, this worked just fine and dandy. Keep in mind that health insurance originated first as a way for businesses to dodge post-WWII wage caps. Later, it became a way for businesses to avoid taxes. (Would you rather pay an employee an extra $5,000, and pay the employers' share of taxes on it, or give him a $5,000 health insurance policy, tax-free? The choice is clear.) 

By the time health insurance started becoming really pricey, it had become so much a part of American business culture that most employers were compelled (often by union contracts) to go on coughing up the bucks. But with the decline of the manufacturing sector and the dwindling of union jobs, that imperative has been vanishing. Public-sector employees were the insurance industry's last stronghold, but now those unions are slated to be busted, too, and with them will go those expensive benefits. And few people can afford the high cost of an individual policy.

So it became necessary for the health insurance industry to fill its ranks with new customers. What better way than by getting government to compel every citizen to buy a policy? Or getting government itself to pick up the tab. Or some combination thereof. 

Enter Obamacare ... :shrug:


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Messed up, again.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

I did say I wouldn't defend the insurance companies.

The only reason it bothers me the insurance companies - and only insurance companies are being blamed is because it has led people to demand the government take over - deluding themselves the insurance companies would not be involved.

*It's easy to see why doctors and hospitals want to charge as much as possible for their services (don't we all?)* The part played by healthcare providers in this is being just given a shrug - but the insurance companies are being blamed.

We were played like a fiddle in this. Rather than blame the doctor who raises his visits from $60 to 150$ in two years, the hospital who charges for things you don't get, charges $400 for 2- 4 x 4 gauzes and a piece of tape - etc., etc., we can blame that big old insurance company.

The links just proves my point, the media worked overtime to convince people it was the insurance companies. 

This way, the government has one 'bad guy' and everyone wants to hate the insurance company, anyway. They were not asked to think about why the cost of healthcare is so high - government involvement, corruption in the healthcare industry, over charging, over medicating, out right fraud. No, that's too much for us to think about. So they just throw us the idea it's all the insurance companies fault - and we ran with it.

Then it wasn't hard to convince people the only way to do away with bad old insurance company is to have government healthcare. Geez, did no one think the outcome would be mandatory customers for the insurance company - it seems not.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

I didn't intend to downplay the role the healthcare industry has played in driving up costs, but merely to highlight the insurance companies' part because it seems counterintuitive. One would assume that insurers would want to hold down costs (if for no other reason than to maximize their profits!) but that is not really the case. 

When everyone involved, except the patient, is incentivized to make health care as expensive as possible, why, of course costs will be high! Which is why Americans pay more than the rest of the First World for health care, while experiencing similar or worse outcomes.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

I read a report the other day that stated that the price of an appendectomy in a US hospital costs ranged from around $3000 to over $120000. I'm sorry I can't provide the link, but the point is that they charge whatever they want to and think they can get, with no rhyme or reasoning in the criteria for what they charge.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Sonshine said:


> I'm really getting sick of those on the left telling those on the right how heartless we are for not supporting Obamacare. Yes, there are people who need help, but the people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government. What the government is doing is taking away our ability to do one of the things that has made this a great nation. It's taking away our ability to help our neighbors.


Sonshine,

I agree with you wholeheartedly, but am afraid that most people don't. They expect the government to provide for them and will sit there and wait for whatever help they expect.

It is shameful. But that is what people think will happen. I have heard it with my own ears "the govment is gonna git me lectricity," or Obama gon pay my mortgage ( I honestly was told that by a lady at Target who said that "Obama gone pay my mortgage and I ain't gone haf to pay nuthin and I git to keep my house"..I honestly looked at her like she had grown three heads. 

I was raised to work. I have been working since I was 17. I have paid taxes since I was 17. I have paid FICA, and all the other taxes, state and federal since I was 17.

I have never been unemployed, never drawn welfare or food stamps and have never drawn unemployment. I am 53 years old and MOVED from the only home I have ever known since 1986 so I could stay employed.

I hate to hear those folks that say "I can't move" Hell I moved. I left my farm that I built to keep a job and stay off unemployment. Do NOT tell me that YOU CANNOT MOVE. Get your butt in gear and find JOB.

I did. I* have NEVER been unemployed.* EVER. * I* will move first. 

and that is why most people say " I can't git no job" no you dont want a job bad enough to move.

*MOVE WHERE THE JOBS ARE. If you can't move, then find something in your area that is needed and then provide that need. There is always something that someone will pay for.
*


----------



## 36376 (Jan 24, 2009)

You know, I'm really sick of hearing that those of us who don't have health insurance are a burden on society. We were without health insurance for over two years and never once asked for any help paying for our medical bills or asked the hospital to write anything off! The bills we had were not small. We paid our bills ourselves and that was with my husband being without a regular job for five years and not being on unemployment! I frankly resent being called a burden. This healthcare law that will "make the decision for us" is punishing those of us who do take care of ourselves and taking any "choice" out of our hands. We couldn't afford insurance, it was literally putting us in debt. So our "choice" would be to be put on government issued healthcare and on the government dole? Thanks for the "choice".

To the poster who lost her children, I am so glad to hear that there are communities out there that pull together to help those who need it. What a wonderful community you have and I am so so sorry you had to go through that horrific loss. I can't even imagine what you went through. 

The people who think it's ok to take my money for THEIR causes are a burden on society IMHO.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

I am Christian. I am also a Bible literal conservative. 
Every one wants to quote about love and taking care of each others.

They forget however that one of the main themes is first making sure you and yours are taken care of so you have extra to care for others. 

Read Proverbs 31, Philippians 4 and 2 Thess. 3. These places and there are more, make it clear we are to work to fill our own needs so we are not dependent on others. We are to be able to support our parents if need be and other family, by working as a family group. Then once that is done we can reach out to others. Moreover our care is specifically ordered for the orphans and widows indeed. A widow indeed according to the Bible is about 67 years old. 

The gov keeps saying we are all one. We are not. God says if a man will not work, he should not eat. The government offers money to those who will not work. Where do they get it? From taxes paid by those who do work. That is theft. God says work in quietness so you do not need to depend on aid from another. Yes I know there are no jobs... however I am seeing signs up saying help wanted all over town.

This is not heartless. Even Christ had limits to his compassion. He told people how to live and it was not off hand outs. Yes we are to help those in need. Not the lazy. Not those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves. The church was tasked with helping itself and taking care of her members, not the world at large. 

The Bible was written to those who follow God and those who want to study to follow him. It was not written to those who reject HIS authority. One should group not be made responsible for the other.


----------



## Guest (Jul 8, 2012)

Thank You!


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I didn't intend to downplay the role the healthcare industry has played in driving up costs, but merely to highlight the insurance companies' part because it seems counterintuitive. One would assume that insurers would want to hold down costs (if for no other reason than to maximize their profits!) but that is not really the case.
> 
> When everyone involved, except the patient, is incentivized to make health care as expensive as possible, why, of course costs will be high! Which is why Americans pay more than the rest of the First World for health care, while experiencing similar or worse outcomes.



Let me see if I can express my thoughts. I believe the insurance companies will make their profits regardless of how much they pay in claims. In other words, they will get enough in premiums, to keep their profit margin high. 

There, therefore, no incentive to keep the costs low - and maybe there's a benefit to having more money coming through the company, even though the profit margin is the same - am I making any sense.

Insurance companies negotiate with hospitals and pay less than the hospitals have charged. The harm to the patient is the deductible paid by the patient is based on what is charged, and they do end up paying more than, say 20%, of the bill, because the insurance company pays less than is charged.

As far as charitable giving, some people don't list their donations, some don't keep receipts. My husband has never said no to anyone or any need that's been asked, and never even remembers how much - or how often.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

sidepasser said:


> I hate to hear those folks that say "I can't move" Hell I moved. I left my farm that I built to keep a job and stay off unemployment. Do NOT tell me that YOU CANNOT MOVE. Get your butt in gear and find JOB.
> 
> I did. I* have NEVER been unemployed.* EVER. * I* will move first.
> 
> ...


What about when you have joint custody of children who are fairly young? Am I, as a mother, supposed to abandon my children in order to make more money? I would rather make minimum wage than to do that.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Are you referring to me? B/c you quoted my post. You couldn't be more wrong again.


Yes, because "Pay for your own stuff" implies that if one cannot afford healthcare, one should not get healthcare, even if, apparently, it is absolutely, critically necessary. The result is that without healthcare, people will die needlessly from preventative causes, ergo, only people who can afford healthcare should get it and poor people can just die, sicken or whatever...which is social darwinism.


----------



## Melissa (Apr 15, 2002)

Many people, about 1 in 7 who work full-time still don't have health insurance. Around here one can generally get a job or find some sort of work to pay the bills, but not many jobs offer insurance.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2011/CPSHealthIns2011/ib.shtml


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

chamoisee said:


> What about when you have joint custody of children who are fairly young? Am I, as a mother, supposed to abandon my children in order to make more money? I would rather make minimum wage than to do that.


Most judges here will undo joint custody if one has a good job offer elsewhere :sob:

We have a girl that lives in another state and have even offered her a free house to move here and if her ex bum of a husband fussed we would hire a lawyer to break him for life .:hobbyhors


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

MJsLady said:


> I am Christian. I am also a Bible literal conservative.
> Every one wants to quote about love and taking care of each others.
> 
> They forget however that one of the main themes is first making sure you and yours are taken care of so you have extra to care for others.
> ...


I agree about taking care of your family first, but one of the things I have learned through the years is that when you help others, God has a way of blessing you for it, and that enables you to help even more. I'm not talking about just monetary help, which is what most people think of, but even if you don't have much money it doesn't take that much extra to cook a little more when making a meal for your family, to share with another family that may be in need. My DH and I are not wealthy in the sense of finances, but God has blessed us with an abundance in so many areas and it seems the more we give, the more God blesses us. A church I went to when I was younger use to sing a song about you can't beat God giving and I have learned this to be true.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

I agree Sonshine. There are many ways of giving that are not cash involved.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Yes, because "Pay for your own stuff" implies that if one cannot afford healthcare, one should not get healthcare, even if, apparently, it is absolutely, critically necessary. The result is that without healthcare, people will die needlessly from preventative causes, ergo, only people who can afford healthcare should get it and poor people can just die, sicken or whatever...which is social darwinism.


States DO provide for children who's parents cannot provide for them.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> States DO provide for children who's parents cannot provide for them.


Agreed, but the state paying for the health care of children is *not* in line with "Pay for your own stuff".


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Agreed, but the state paying for the health care of children is *not* in line with "Pay for your own stuff".


Extenuating circumstances, but usually -yup-pay for your own stuff.
If I had a handicapped child I'd take care of him as I did my other children. Would NOT expect gov't HC.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

And if you couldn't, he'd get thrown under the bus. How is this different from social darwinism again?


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

chamoisee said:


> And if you couldn't, he'd get thrown under the bus. How is this different from social darwinism again?


As has already been discussed, special needs kids are usually eligible for SSDI and medicaid.


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2012)

The collaspe of our health care system is being caused by the day to day abuse of people using it to treat their scrapes, scratches, and sniffles and not paying for it. Not the more horiffic diseases.
there are many programs that people can get on to assist them with out having this outlandish health care bill.
Of course they would never think they should have to help pay some of their own way. Bunch of spoilt brats.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

veggiecanner said:


> The collaspe of our health care system is being caused by the day to day abuse of people using it to treat their scrapes, scratches, and sniffles and not paying for it. Not the more horiffic diseases.
> there are many programs that people can get on to assist them with out having this outlandish health care bill.
> Of course they would never think they should have to help pay some of their own way. Bunch of spoilt brats.


I absolutely agree on that. What some people need is a little education.

The other side of the coin, however, is that people can't really abuse the system without the complicity of a doctor. I know it isn't true all the time, but quite often.

Government healthcare has caused a lot of this, and when HMO's became prevalent - it really grew. When people had to pay for their own office visits, medication, etc, and hospitalization was for hospitalization or out patient procedures, there was less of this.


----------



## Hollowdweller (Jul 13, 2011)

Sonshine said:


> I'm really getting sick of those on the left telling those on the right how heartless we are for not supporting Obamacare. *Yes, there are people who need help, but the people have and will always do a better job of taking care of their neighbors that the government. *What the government is doing is taking away our ability to do one of the things that has made this a great nation. It's taking away our ability to help our neighbors.


Can you spare $100,000 for a bypass for a buddy of mine?

There is nothing in the ACA that prevents us from helping our neighbors. I don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Trixie said:


> I absolutely agree on that. What some people need is a little education.
> 
> The other side of the coin, however, is that people can't really abuse the system without the complicity of a doctor. I know it isn't true all the time, but quite often.
> 
> Government healthcare has caused a lot of this, and when HMO's became prevalent - it really grew. When people had to pay for their own office visits, medication, etc, and hospitalization was for hospitalization or out patient procedures, there was less of this.


I don't put much blame on the doctors, because so many have learned to scam the system. I use to work in medical collections. I had a lady sent to me that was trying to be admitted for hemrhoid surgery, but she had several outstanding accounts, so I was forced to tell her that unless the doctor changed it to an emergency admission I could not sign off on her being admitted. She came to the emergency room later that night, after most business offices were closed. She had an insurance card that was not expired, but could not be verified. She had quit her job and was no longer eligible for the health insurance, but got her surgery any way.


----------



## Hollowdweller (Jul 13, 2011)

veggiecanner said:


> The collaspe of our health care system is being caused by the day to day abuse of people using it to treat their scrapes, scratches, and sniffles and not paying for it. Not the more horiffic diseases.
> there are many programs that people can get on to assist them with out having this outlandish health care bill.
> Of course they would never think they should have to help pay some of their own way. Bunch of spoilt brats.



This is wrong. Health care inflation is mainly caused by expensive end of life care and care for the treatment of the end result of chronic illness.

When a person has something like diabetes or hypertension and doesn't keep it under control because they can't afford medical care, then they end up very sick. Generally then they qualify for medicare and the cost to the taxpayers is way more than if we just paid for preventative care up front.

Our current system is "Penny Wise and Pound Foolish"


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

Hollowdweller said:


> Can you spare $100,000 for a bypass for a buddy of mine?
> 
> There is nothing in the ACA that prevents us from helping our neighbors. I don't know what you are talking about.


If your buddy needs the surgery and has no insurance, I'll be helping to pay for it regardless. Why doesn't he have insurance? What prevents us from helping is they are taking the money from us to give to who they choose rather than allowing us to give where we feel it would benefit the most. There are also many states that are passing regulations that makes it impossible for the average person to give food to the homeless. It's not the government's job to take money from some to pay for others.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

veggiecanner said:


> The collaspe of our health care system is being caused by the day to day abuse of people using it to treat their scrapes, scratches, and sniffles and not paying for it.


This was what was promised by the HMO Act of 1973; managed healthcare. Traditional insurance had to follow suit by offering routine care coverage to compete with HMOs. Over the past 40 years this is what people have come to expect.

The HMO Act was a republican issue, and these are the unintended consequences. You can't offer people managed healthcare, then blame them for using it.

The question now is how we can reverse the effects of the HMO Act. We are at a crossroads. We either have to find a way to go back to the days before managed healthcare, or go all the way to a single-payer system so costs can be controlled. It's obvious that what we have today is not sustainable.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Nevada said:


> The question now is how we can reverse the effects of the HMO Act. We are at a crossroads. We either have to find a way to go back to the days before managed healthcare, or go all the way to a single-payer system so costs can be controlled. It's obvious that what we have today is not sustainable.


Before Hillarycare was proposed, there were a lot of smaller, conservatively run hospitalization companies that offered a plan for families at an affordable rate. It paid for hospitalization, out patient surgery, ER costs - not doctor's visits, not medication, etc.

After the defeat of Hillarycare, the HMO's became very prevalent, and the little companies could not compete. Also there were changes in the laws about the way insurance companies did business - this did put a lot of those smaller companies out of business.

I read an article in an insurance association newsletter. I don't remember exactly what the association was - it was something to do with smaller companies.

The article stated that 5 major insurance companies had met with the Clintons prior to the election and agreed to support them and to support what we called Hillarycare. They wanted a plan that divided the country into 5 sections and the government would put in a place a national plan that would be administered by those five companies - within their own sections.

While it doesn't seem to be working out that way - I don't know enough to say - but we certainly can say they are going to benefit greatly from this forced purchase of insurance. 

*I don't put much blame on the doctors, because so many have learned to scam the system.*

Oh, I can. They are a very big cog in the machinery that has increased the cost. Charging exorbitant prices because 'the government/insurance will pay' is wrong. It may be legal, but it's morally wrong and it has had a huge effect on the cost. Prescribing expensive medications when something cheaper or OTC would do as well, and even prescribing when none is necessary is wrong - morally wrong and adds greatly to the cost.

My Mother had a heart condition and finally at 63 had open heart surgery. After a couple of years, she seemed to be no better. I looked at all the medications she was taking and it floored me. The hospital was a long distance from her and after she was released by the surgeon, she saw a local doctor.

I suggested, strongly, she return to the doctor and hospital who had done her surgery and take all those medications and show them what she was taking. She did, and although she had to be hospitalized for a week - they took her off all but 3 of them. Some were actually hurting her, some were working against others that had been prescribed.

My friend has a business that liquidated estates and I helped her. Their medical bottles, sometimes actual left medicines would be in the house and it would amaze most people at the amount of medications that are prescribed for the elderly.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Hollowdweller said:


> Can you spare $100,000 for a bypass for a buddy of mine?
> 
> There is nothing in the ACA that prevents us from helping our neighbors. I don't know what you are talking about.


Towns/communities do fundraisers all the time for the unfortuante. Or your bud could finance thru the hosp., like you would a home. They'll take whatever he can pay per mo.


----------



## nebula5 (Feb 4, 2003)

Sonshine said:


> There are also many states that are passing regulations that makes it impossible for the average person to give food to the homeless.


You've mentioned this a few times. Are you talking about food donations to food cupboards, or giving brown bag lunches to homeless people? Can you fill in some details- like what states?


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Common Tator said:


> As has already been discussed, special needs kids are usually eligible for SSDI and medicaid.


But as I have mentioned several times now, these people also consider SSDI and medicaid welfare handouts and not "paying for your own stuff", therefore SSDI and medicaid are not acceptable alternatives in their book.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Sonshine said:


> What prevents us from helping is they are taking the money from us to give to who they choose rather than allowing us to give where we feel it would benefit the most.


I appreciate the honesty here. what I am reading is that it isn't so much that you begrudge helping people with medical expenses, it's giving up the *control* of being able to choose who gets it and when, and how.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Towns/communities do fundraisers all the time for the unfortuante. Or your bud could finance thru the hosp., like you would a home. They'll take whatever he can pay per mo.


So, people should wait until the fundraiser has come up with the money? If they have cancer that is still operable, with a chance of being cured, they should wait until all the money's been raised and take the risk of it being too late? I suppose that then the cash could be given to the person's widow/widower and kids, but that'd probably be small comfort....


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2012)

chamoisee said:


> I appreciate the honesty here. what I am reading is that it isn't so much that you begrudge helping people with medical expenses, it's giving up the *control* of being able to choose who gets it and when, and how.


No, i don't think that is what she is saying. She should be able to decide how much she can give and when. maybe some times she needs it for her own family.
But liberals don't care about that do they? And they call the right selfish.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

Exactly VC.

I give up a lot for others. I do not tell the irs about it.

What I do for others is between myself and God. It is no one else's business. Nor is it their right to tell me that I am not doing enough just because they can do more than I can.


----------



## Guest (Jul 11, 2012)

the poor have gone to far and will soon see much hardship for them selves. Unless they see fit to look for a different future on their own.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

nebula5 said:


> You've mentioned this a few times. Are you talking about food donations to food cupboards, or giving brown bag lunches to homeless people? Can you fill in some details- like what states?


Tick Tock Sheptock: The World Is Telling U.S. Gov.: "Help Your Homeless and Poor!"

Cities crack down on homeless: Could it be compassion fatigue?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> I appreciate the honesty here. what I am reading is that it isn't so much that you begrudge helping people with medical expenses, it's giving up the *control* of being able to choose who gets it and when, and how.


Partly yes. I don't mind helping anyone in need. I do take issue with the government dictating who needs help. The government can never do as good of a job of policing charitable gifts as the giver can. This is why we have so many that really don't need help getting hand outs. There is no way the government can properly supervise things. I still believe that there are enough decent people in America that are more than willing to help those who need help, but so many are frustrated that more and more taxes are being taken by the government to give to those who won't work. Notice I didn't say can't work, but those who are able bodied but won't work. I have seen people give to those who really need help and know from first hand experince the generosity of them, but on the other hand I see a tightening of regulations on those who want to give and see others getting frustrated about those who are recieiving help that don't really need it.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> So, people should wait until the fundraiser has come up with the money? If they have cancer that is still operable, with a chance of being cured, they should wait until all the money's been raised and take the risk of it being too late? I suppose that then the cash could be given to the person's widow/widower and kids, but that'd probably be small comfort....


Usually, in the cases Tricky is talking about, the money is raised very quickly, not always though. Then again, having dealt quite a bit with hospitals in recent years I have found that it can take some time to get the insurance to approve the claims too and some doctors and hospitals won't do anything until they get that approval from the insurance companies.


----------



## nebula5 (Feb 4, 2003)

Thank you, Sonshine for the links. Wasn't aware of this problem. 


Food not Bombs website: FOOD IS A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> So, people should wait until the fundraiser has come up with the money? If they have cancer that is still operable, with a chance of being cured, they should wait until all the money's been raised and take the risk of it being too late? I suppose that then the cash could be given to the person's widow/widower and kids, but that'd probably be small comfort....


Why should they have to wait? Treatment will be given. Payment schedule set up. Perhaps b/c you have not helped out in such a charity is why you don't know how it could work?


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

nebula5 said:


> Thank you, Sonshine for the links. Wasn't aware of this problem.
> 
> 
> Food not Bombs website: FOOD IS A RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE


You're welcome. This is one of the reasons I'm so rankled. People say that conservatives won't help, yet when they try to help we are slapped with regulations that make it almost impossible for the average person to help.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Why should they have to wait? Treatment will be given. Payment schedule set up. Perhaps b/c you have not helped out in such a charity is why you don't know how it could work?


One more question, what if the medical issue is embarrassing and the person who needs it doesn't want the entire neighborhood to know their business?


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> One more question, what if the medical issue is embarrassing and the person who needs it doesn't want the entire neighborhood to know their business?


I'm kinda thinking there may be ways around that as 'huge medical bills' a 'serious illness', etc.

Then again, one may have to make a choice between getting help with medical bills or being embarrassed.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

chamoisee said:


> One more question, what if the medical issue is embarrassing and the person who needs it doesn't want the entire neighborhood to know their business?


Would sound like the neighborhood all ready knows their business or the whole neighborhood needs testing one :shocked: :run:


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> One more question, what if the medical issue is embarrassing and the person who needs it doesn't want the entire neighborhood to know their business?


Then they need to figure out how to pay for it themselves.


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

And there, my friends, you have it.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Sonshine said:


> Then they need to figure out how to pay for it themselves.


I see. So if a woman is prolapsing or has been bleeding for months due to endometriosis, everyone and their neighbor should know about it and decide whether this is an issue worthy of being taken care of or not? And then, of course, everyone also gets to speculate about the quality of her love life, the state of her vagina, etc.... If a guy has testicular cancer or torsion, everyone gets to gossip about whether or not he'll be impotent and who his wife is going to screw instead of him, poor dude? 

I realize that gossip is what small towns are made of, that it's an integral part of living in a small community, but I'm pretty sure that there are folks who would rather die than to endure the humiliation of divulging info that they're embarrassed to even discuss with their own doctor, with every busybody in town. I suppose there are folks who think it's their right to know ALL of other people's business, but I'm not one of them. :indif:


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> I see. So if a woman is prolapsing or has been bleeding for months due to endometriosis, everyone and their neighbor should know about it and decide whether this is an issue worthy of being taken care of or not? And then, of course, everyone also gets to speculate about the quality of her love life, the state of her vagina, etc.... If a guy has testicular cancer or torsion, everyone gets to gossip about whether or not he'll be impotent and who his wife is going to screw instead of him, poor dude?
> 
> I realize that gossip is what small towns are made of, that it's an integral part of living in a small community, but I'm pretty sure that there are folks who would rather die than to endure the humiliation of divulging info that they're embarrassed to even discuss with their own doctor, with every busybody in town. I suppose there are folks who think it's their right to know ALL of other people's business, but I'm not one of them. :indif:


Then they need to figure out a way to pay for it themselves. Simple solution. If they can't afford it, and don't want to be traumatized, then they can do without! Healthcare "rights" have only been a recent issue. There is no "right" to healthcare. Before, folks just died if they couldn't afford it, the way it should be.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> Then they need to figure out a way to pay for it themselves. Simple solution. If they can't afford it, and don't want to be traumatized, then they can do without! Healthcare "rights" have only been a recent issue. There is no "right" to healthcare. Before, folks just died if they couldn't afford it, the way it should be.


And this is the position I have said exists on the right, Social Darwinism. Poor people should die.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

JeffreyD said:


> Then they need to figure out a way to pay for it themselves. Simple solution. If they can't afford it, and don't want to be traumatized, then they can do without! Healthcare "rights" have only been a recent issue. There is no "right" to healthcare. Before, folks just died if they couldn't afford it, the way it should be.


I take it you dont believe in nationwide group health insurance to keep the private corporation death panels out of the equation? 

It just depends if you want to build a nation and keep the workforce healthy or you want to have a small wealthy class that uses food, fuel, housing, healthcare to put the clamps on their fellow citizens to maximize profit.

Nobody wants a free ride, they want the greedy scumbags to get their hands out of the pie. Everybody needs healthcare at sometime, lets make it affordable for all instead of a cash cow for the rich. And let everybody's taxes go up to pay for it. If we all buy it as a country, it should be far more economical than every individual paying a highly inflated retail price. Pay doctors/nurses/etc a fair wage. Get them out of trying to be a buisiness person worried about maximizing profits and make them a salaried professional working for we the people doing the job they do best, doctoring. Those that want mega profits need to become bankers or hedge fund gamblers or something. They are probably lousy doctors anyway if just in it for the bucks.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> And this is the position I have said exists on the right, Social Darwinism. Poor people should die.



Social darwinisim, what a stupid term. Sounds like something a socialist would come up with!
It exists on the left just as well, though it's hard for them to admit it. Not all who don't have insurance are poor, and not all poor don't have insurance. My point is that folks need to take the responsibility for themselves. What did the poor do 30/60 years ago? I donate because i KNOW where and how my donation is spent. The government, not so much. When i see welfare/ section 8 recipients driving brand new suv's, they have enough to pay for healthcare, they don't need anyone's help.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> I take it you dont believe in nationwide group health insurance to keep the private corporation death panels out of the equation?
> 
> It just depends if you want to build a nation and keep the workforce healthy or you want to have a small wealthy class that uses food, fuel, housing, healthcare to put the clamps on their fellow citizens to maximize profit.
> 
> Nobody wants a free ride, they want the greedy scumbags to get their hands out of the pie. Everybody needs healthcare at sometime, lets make it affordable for all instead of a cash cow for the rich. And let everybody's taxes go up to pay for it. If we all buy it as a country, it should be far more economical than every individual paying a highly inflated retail price. Pay doctors/nurses/etc a fair wage. Get them out of trying to be a buisiness person worried about maximizing profits and make them a salaried professional working for we the people doing the job they do best, doctoring. Those that want mega profits need to become bankers or hedge fund gamblers or something. They are probably lousy doctors anyway if just in it for the bucks.


I want folks to take the responsibility for themselves, that's all. I do it, so can you!


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> When i see welfare/ section 8 recipients driving brand new suv's, they have enough to pay for healthcare, they don't need anyone's help.


Oh yeah, that old saw again. I want to know where my SUV is! Wait, no. SUV's use too much gas. Hey, I would settle for getting my old beater of a truck fixed. Other than stuff like toilet paper and toothbrushes, I can't think of much that I buy brand new...let alone a car. :shocked:


----------



## TJN66 (Aug 29, 2004)

So healthcare workers should all be salaried? As a nurse I can tell you that working over 12 hour shifts is not conducive to providing the care needed for my patients. If you think that the hospitals won't make the staff work longer than 12 hours some people are sadly mistaken.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Oh yeah, that old saw again. I want to know where my SUV is! Wait, no. SUV's use too much gas. Hey, I would settle for getting my old beater of a truck fixed. Other than stuff like toilet paper and toothbrushes, I can't think of much that I buy brand new...let alone a car. :shocked:


That "old saw" is the truth, some, apparantly can't or won't admit it! Your suv is waiting for you at the dealership! Go apply for welfare and you too could be the owner of a fine new suv, paid for with taxpayer money!


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> That "old saw" is the truth, some, apparantly can't or won't admit it! Your suv is waiting for you at the dealership! Go apply for welfare and you too could be the owner of a fine new suv, paid for with taxpayer money!


Aw shucks, reality sets in. Surprise! I cannot get cash assistance in Idaho and neither can most people. There is a lifetime limit of 2 years, including that received in any state, ever...IF you qualify.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Aw shucks, reality sets in. Surprise! I cannot get cash assistance in Idaho and neither can most people. There is a lifetime limit of 2 years, including that received in any state, ever...IF you qualify.


Good for your state. In my state, it's pretty much for life! They are advertising to get more signed up! And if the authorities to to investigate any fraud, the aclu jumps in with "racist, bigot, discrimination, homophobe, hater" lawsuits, so the people get screwed again.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> I see. So if a woman is prolapsing or has been bleeding for months due to endometriosis, everyone and their neighbor should know about it and decide whether this is an issue worthy of being taken care of or not? And then, of course, everyone also gets to speculate about the quality of her love life, the state of her vagina, etc.... If a guy has testicular cancer or torsion, everyone gets to gossip about whether or not he'll be impotent and who his wife is going to screw instead of him, poor dude?
> 
> I realize that gossip is what small towns are made of, that it's an integral part of living in a small community, but I'm pretty sure that there are folks who would rather die than to endure the humiliation of divulging info that they're embarrassed to even discuss with their own doctor, with every busybody in town. I suppose there are folks who think it's their right to know ALL of other people's business, but I'm not one of them. :indif:


So, don't these hypothetical people you're talking about have any friends? Most people talk to their friends about even the embarrassing medical issues. Or course I don't expect them to blurt out things they're embarrassed about to every busy body in the neighborhood, but if they don't have a friend they can go to, then they are in worse shape than the medical problems.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> Oh yeah, that old saw again. I want to know where my SUV is! Wait, no. SUV's use too much gas. Hey, I would settle for getting my old beater of a truck fixed. Other than stuff like toilet paper and toothbrushes, I can't think of much that I buy brand new...let alone a car. :shocked:


So you're saying that there are no welfare recipients that drive new vehicles? None are scamming the system?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Aw shucks, reality sets in. Surprise! I cannot get cash assistance in Idaho and neither can most people. There is a lifetime limit of 2 years, including that received in any state, ever...IF you qualify.


Your state is awesome:

Local News | Idaho Welfare Recipients Not Swarming In | Seattle Times Newspaper

Since changes in welfare tightened eligibility standards and reduced benefits last July, an astounding 70 percent of Idaho's welfare caseloads have disappeared, the biggest drop in the country. Lewiston lost 63 percent of its former cash-assistance clients.

They had to be going somewhere, officials surmised at first.

Panicked, Washington adopted a law last year requiring newcomers to wait a year before cashing in on the state's higher level of benefits.

But that was before the real and quite unexpected figures came in. Washington's caseload didn't balloon in response to Idaho's tight restrictions. Only 108 families from lower-paying states have moved to Washington since the state started counting in November, five of them moving from Lewiston to Clarkston.

Alternatives to leaving state

Idaho's caseload drop, it now appears, is due not so much to people leaving the state as simply finding other alternatives: a job, in the case of at least half of them; a place to live with friends or relatives for many others.

"No one in their wildest imagination ever projected a 63 percent drop in caseload," said Kathi Arnold of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. "But it's a very small number of people who consider cash assistance a lifestyle. . . . A lot of people said, `*This (new program) is just too much of a hassle - I'm going to go get a job*.' "

Why couldn't they do this before?


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Sonshine said:


> So, don't these hypothetical people you're talking about have any friends? Most people talk to their friends about even the embarrassing medical issues. Or course I don't expect them to blurt out things they're embarrassed about to every busy body in the neighborhood, but if they don't have a friend they can go to, then they are in worse shape than the medical problems.


You say this as a woman, but men are notorious for not wanting to spill their guts about medical stuff. The man who needs to see a doctor but won't is classic. IMHO it's a big part of why they don't live as long as women do. I can just imagine what would happen if they had to seek the approval of lots of people and tell everyone what was going on every time they needed to see a doctor or go to the hospital. There'd be a lot of widows and a lot of orphaned kids. But of course, the neighbors would help the mothers and orphans could be put into charity orphanages, etc.....sigh........


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> Why couldn't they do this before?


They've had the 2 year lifetime limit for at least 16 years or more.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> They've had the 2 year lifetime limit for at least 16 years or more.


That's even better!! Go Idaho!


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

JeffreyD said:


> That's even better!! Go Idaho!


Well, my point is that "why didn't they do this before", isn't exactly accurate since they haven't offered cash benefits except under very specific and limited circumstances for a long time. 

And that the people who are getting medicaid here, if they can get it at all, certainly aren't welfare queens driving brand new SUVs. I honestly have never seen such a thing before.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Well, my point is that "why didn't they do this before", isn't exactly accurate since they haven't offered cash benefits except under very specific and limited circumstances for a long time.
> 
> And that the people who are getting medicaid here, if they can get it at all, certainly aren't welfare queens driving brand new SUVs. I honestly have never seen such a thing before.


Come to Kalifornia, and you will see it first hand, over and over again. Some cities have tried to enforce laws about fraud, but the aclu sues or threatens to sue, and the ahj just back away. The cities of Palmdale and Lancaster tried enforcement because it was costing so much that these cities were going bankrupt trying to support these welfare frauds, but again, a liberal judge sided with the aclu that it was racialy motivated. So now those two cities have high crime rate, poor roads and infrastucture, closed public areas, etc... Some lady just got arrested for helping get folks on welfare for a fee. She was bribing government social workers to get her "clients" enroled.


----------



## TJN66 (Aug 29, 2004)

Come to ny...it is for life here also. Just because it is not happening in some places does not mean it is not happening anywhere else.


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

Looks like we left Lancaster just in time then, and it was getting rough there 18 years ago when we left.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

JeffreyD said:


> Come to Kalifornia, and you will see it first hand, over and over again. Some cities have tried to enforce laws about fraud, but the aclu sues or threatens to sue, and the ahj just back away. The cities of Palmdale and Lancaster tried enforcement because it was costing so much that these cities were going bankrupt trying to support these welfare frauds, but again, a liberal judge sided with the aclu that it was racialy motivated. So now those two cities have high crime rate, poor roads and infrastucture, closed public areas, etc... Some lady just got arrested for helping get folks on welfare for a fee. She was bribing government social workers to get her "clients" enroled.


Several years ago I knew a woman who was on govt. benefits in Ms.
She got word from others who had already done it that movint to Calif. would be a great increase in benifits.
She and her 4 kids moved to Calif just for the govt. benefits given out so freely and in such abundance.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> I see. So if a woman is prolapsing or has been bleeding for months due to endometriosis, everyone and their neighbor should know about it and decide whether this is an issue worthy of being taken care of or not? And then, of course, everyone also gets to speculate about the quality of her love life, the state of her vagina, etc.... If a guy has testicular cancer or torsion, everyone gets to gossip about whether or not he'll be impotent and who his wife is going to screw instead of him, poor dude?
> 
> I realize that gossip is what small towns are made of, that it's an integral part of living in a small community, but I'm pretty sure that there are folks who would rather die than to endure the humiliation of divulging info that they're embarrassed to even discuss with their own doctor, with every busybody in town. I suppose there are folks who think it's their right to know ALL of other people's business, but I'm not one of them. :indif:


If you have lived in the same kind of small towns I have, everyone already knows.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> I take it you dont believe in nationwide group health insurance to keep the private corporation death panels out of the equation?
> 
> It just depends if you want to build a nation and keep the workforce healthy or you want to have a small wealthy class that uses food, fuel, housing, healthcare to put the clamps on their fellow citizens to maximize profit.
> 
> Nobody wants a free ride, they want the greedy scumbags to get their hands out of the pie. Everybody needs healthcare at sometime, lets make it affordable for all instead of a cash cow for the rich. And let everybody's taxes go up to pay for it. If we all buy it as a country, it should be far more economical than every individual paying a highly inflated retail price. Pay doctors/nurses/etc a fair wage. Get them out of trying to be a buisiness person worried about maximizing profits and make them a salaried professional working for we the people doing the job they do best, doctoring. Those that want mega profits need to become bankers or hedge fund gamblers or something. They are probably lousy doctors anyway if just in it for the bucks.


There is no way getting the government involved in healthcare is going to make it any cheaper. It will only continue to get more and more expensive until the governments begins to make the life and death decisions to keep the prices down.

Government in healthcare is exactly what has made it so expensive. If they were out of it and no one had free healthcare for everyday stuff, you would see the prices begin to drop. As long as the healthcare industry knows half the people are going to have their bill paid by the government - they are going to pay that system like a fiddle - and they do.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Trixie said:


> Government in healthcare is exactly what has made it so expensive. If they were out of it and no one had free healthcare for everyday stuff, you would see the prices begin to drop.


You see the contradiction there? Healthcare became expensive because of the HMO Act, since traditional insurance had to offer routine medical coverage to compete. When people stopped paying the bills for routine care, they stopped shopping around. Why should they?

I could go into more detail, but I think you can figure out the rest yourself.


----------



## Sonshine (Jul 27, 2007)

chamoisee said:


> You say this as a woman, but men are notorious for not wanting to spill their guts about medical stuff. The man who needs to see a doctor but won't is classic. IMHO it's a big part of why they don't live as long as women do. I can just imagine what would happen if they had to seek the approval of lots of people and tell everyone what was going on every time they needed to see a doctor or go to the hospital. There'd be a lot of widows and a lot of orphaned kids. But of course, the neighbors would help the mothers and orphans could be put into charity orphanages, etc.....sigh........


The men that would be too embarrassed to confide in a friend or a wife are usually too embarrassed to see a doctor to begin with. Some people will allow pride to interfere with their medical care, regardless of who is paying for it.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

And the implications seem to be that a wife would blab her husband's secrets all over town until everyone knows his medical business, that taking up a collection for his medical care that he's already reluctant to go to wouldn't hinder his health at all, and that we should have artificial selection for people who have no sense of privacy or dignity when it comes to medical care. 

I do live in small towns. The people in these towns don't know the intimate medical business of the men I've been with. They don't know which one has a hernia that needs attention, which one has only one testicle, which one has prostate issues and can hardly pee sometimes, or which ones have which kind of trouble in bed. I guess I figured that these things weren't their business....imagine that.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> And the implications seem to be that a wife would blab her husband's secrets all over town until everyone knows his medical business, that taking up a collection for his medical care that he's already reluctant to go to wouldn't hinder his health at all, and that we should have artificial selection for people who have no sense of privacy or dignity when it comes to medical care.
> 
> I do live in small towns. The people in these towns don't know the intimate medical business of the men I've been with. They don't know which one has a hernia that needs attention, which one has only one testicle, which one has prostate issues and can hardly pee sometimes, or which ones have which kind of trouble in bed. I guess I figured that these things weren't their business....imagine that.


It only would become the business of someone else if there paying for it! I always like to know what I'm paying for, otherwise someone could just make something up to steal my money. These "men" you know should man up and take care of things themselves, is that too much to ask?


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

What planet do you live on? Men don't take care of themselves, haven't you ever seen one get a cold??? Half the fun in having a man is fussing over him and taking care of him..... :-/


----------



## MJsLady (Aug 16, 2006)

JeffreyD said:


> It only would become the business of someone else if there paying for it! I always like to know what I'm paying for, otherwise someone could just make something up to steal my money. These "men" you know should man up and take care of things themselves, is that too much to ask?


Agreed.
If it is none of my business, it is not my money's business to pay for it either. 

Something simple like a jar at the grocery that says to help pay for cancer will get a donation from me. Help need cash desperate will not.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Well, I can't imagine anyone wanting to take up a collection for STD testing either...nevertheless people should be getting tested, poor or not, so as not to infect other people unknowingly.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> And the implications seem to be that a wife would blab her husband's secrets all over town until everyone knows his medical business, that taking up a collection for his medical care that he's already reluctant to go to wouldn't hinder his health at all, and that we should have artificial selection for people who have no sense of privacy or dignity when it comes to medical care.
> 
> I do live in small towns. The people in these towns don't know the intimate medical business of the men I've been with. They don't know which one has a hernia that needs attention, which one has only one testicle, which one has prostate issues and can hardly pee sometimes, or which ones have which kind of trouble in bed. I guess I figured that these things weren't their business....imagine that.


I think you might be surprised at what people in a small town know about each other.

Do you honestly think you are the only one who knows this?


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Nevada said:


> You see the contradiction there? Healthcare became expensive because of the HMO Act, since traditional insurance had to offer routine medical coverage to compete. When people stopped paying the bills for routine care, they stopped shopping around. Why should they?
> 
> I could go into more detail, but I think you can figure out the rest yourself.


Contradiction? Healthcare began being expensive when they put medicare into place, then climbed a little more when we got all the free healthcare for welfare, etc. Then more and more as each group got the freebie.

I don't know if it is lack of shopping around, not sure how you go about that. I think it is much more of going to the doctor - and being treated - when it isn't necessary. Getting a prescription from a doctor when it isn't necessary. A doctor charging what the third party (government) will allow. I don't know if it is as bad in other age groups, but for the elderly, overprescribing is a real problem.


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Trixie said:


> I think you might be surprised at what people in a small town know about each other.
> 
> Do you honestly think you are the only one who knows this?


Oh, their former/subsequent partners may have said something, but these guys weren't very active at all, so who knows?


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

That's my point, a secret can only be kept by one.

Once again, you'd be surprised what people know about each other in a small town.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Trixie said:


> That's my point, a secret can only be kept by one.
> 
> Once again, you'd be surprised what people know about each other in a small town.


A secret can be kept by two if one of them is dead :teehee:


----------



## chamoisee (May 15, 2005)

Well, there's an awful lot of stuff I haven't told. I don't really buy into the idea that small towns involve ESP, however appealing that might be to the busybodies of the world....


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

That is true it is really all about what they think they know. Years ago my sister once worked in a little insurance company in the little town. One lady had a desk that allowed her to look at main street. She told my sister one day that she had seen me drive by smoking a joint. Lol! Now, just think about that for a moment.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Trixie said:


> Contradiction? Healthcare began being expensive when they put medicare into place, then climbed a little more when we got all the free healthcare for welfare, etc. Then more and more as each group got the freebie.


Medicare started about 8 years before the HMO Act, so they were both created in roughly the same era, but I think you are hanging you hat on the wrong event. Routine doctor visits were affordable until after the HMO Act make routine care coverage common.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Sawmill Jim said:


> A secret can be kept by two if one of them is dead :teehee:


Does that mean if I tell you, I have to kill you?


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

chamoisee said:


> Well, there's an awful lot of stuff I haven't told. I don't really buy into the idea that small towns involve ESP, however appealing that might be to the busybodies of the world....


It's not ESP - it's just people are closer, for lack of a better word, due to limited number of people. Also, many small towns, there are lots and lots of familial connections -

Remember the suggestion when talking about someone, be careful, you're probably talking to a relative.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Medicare started about 8 years before the HMO Act, so they were both created in roughly the same era, but I think you are hanging you hat on the wrong event. Routine doctor visits were affordable until after the HMO Act make routine care coverage common.


I said 'healthcare' - in general.

I'm not hanging my hat on anything other than government's involvement in healthcare.

Prices began to go up when medicare came into being - and with each and every succeeding government program, it put more and more people on government healthcare. When you have people who are getting free healthcare, there are bound to be those who abuse it - patients and doctors.

Of course, HMO had a part to play in it - but government helped that along also.

Government involvement -

Healthcare, like every other thing the government offers us and we lap it up willingly, is not done in one fell swoop. It's done over time in increments - that's the way it was with healthcare.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Trixie said:


> Does that mean if I tell you, I have to kill you?


Or vise versa :angel::runforhills:


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Trixie said:


> When you have people who are getting free healthcare, there are bound to be those who abuse it - patients and doctors.


That's not just when healthcare coverage is free, abuse is going to occur with any kind of healthcare coverage. The problem isn't that healthcare coverage is a bad idea, it's just that coverage of routine medical care was a bad idea. The question now is how to turn back the clock to before 1973.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Nevada said:


> That's not just when healthcare coverage is free, abuse is going to occur with any kind of healthcare coverage. The problem isn't that healthcare coverage is a bad idea, it's just that coverage of routine medical care was a bad idea. The question now is how to turn back the clock to before 1973.


We are going to have to disagree on that.

If we had no HMO's, we would still have all the various government programs that are being abused by both patients and doctors - although it is a puzzle to me how a person can abuse a healthcare plan - unless a doctor is complicit in it.

It isn't just routine medical care that has escalated - and it isn't just routine medical care that is being scammed by doctors and overused by patients.

It's all of it - combined -


----------

