-Caveat Lector-
Your points are well taken, E. There's always a certain percentage of the
population that is unable to work for a variety of physical/psychological
reasons...disabilities, mental health problems, etc. Also, you must take
into consideration that all of us are subject to "the thousand natural
shocks which flesh is heir to..."
The biological clock works against human beings.... When you're in your
twenties, you can spend hours upon hours doing heavy physical labor, and
your physical body is resilient and strong enough to take the stress....
(Of course, years later, your body will show the effects of those carefree
earlier years.) But after a certain point in time, you no longer can
perform as well as an eighteen year old. Corporations know this....notice
how the preferred worker in industrial America is usually very
young...with few health problems... In order to take advantage of all of
those strong resilient younger bodies, the corporations often place their
factories out in the middle of the corn belt in order to take advantage of
that cheap and healthy labor supply. Of course, after they've used you,
they let you go.
Am I against this kind of dynamic? Well, there's not much we can do about
it... But I would only point out that framing the issue in terms of "free
ride" tends to reduce things down to a very narrow, simplistic and,
ultimately, distorted level. The issue is a bit more complicated.
First off, the government subsidizes businesses, bails out foreign despots
around the world, while it simultaneously also does a splendid job of
ensuring that those
who have will get more.... This more spectacular "free ride" at
taxpayer's expense tends to be ignored.
Instead, the argument about government "handouts" tends to be centered
around the very visible millions of have-nots in our society. The less
conspicuous "welfare queens" who live in Grosse Pointe, Westchester,
Bel-Air and the hills above Palo Alto are not targeted.
When the Mexican peso bailout (handout) was arranged in order to save the
bad investments of American investors, both political parties signed onto
it with hardly a squeek of protest.
OK. So you're righteously against all of these giveaways and we find
common ground on this point. Great.
I would only suggest to you that in my experience, I have never found
anyone who is actually proud of having to receive financial assistance
from the government. Of course, I've seen many lazy and
dishonest workers...individuals who do not have a strong work ethic and
who
ARE interested in abusing the system. Sure. I don't deny that...nor will
I deny the fact that there is a "culture of poverty." But we also have
middle-class cheaters and bums.... so what else is new.
But I don't think you, Eagle, would really enjoy living in a HUD
subsidized project, would you? Nor would you enjoy trading places with
a welfare recipient? Of course not.
The majority of welfare recipients are children. They major crime is that
they're poor. They had the misfortune of being born to the wrong
parents. So, if you want to kick the hell out of the parents by
eliminating food stamps, go ahead. The only ones who will suffer will be
the children.... and until we as a nation begin to solve the structural
problems of the economy....you can probably expect them to grow up to be
the future muggers, killers and welfare cheats that we complain about
today.
So, what's the answer? Well, it's definitely NOT more deregulation, MORE
handouts for big business, and a "free ride" for the privileged classes in
America. MORE "free trade" and MORE "open borders" will only continue to
destroy us.
We need to change the political agenda and place American issues first on
the list.
On Thu, 3 Jun 1999, Eagle 1 wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> You know, I really can see nothing wrong with providing health care for
> children between the ages of -9 months, and 0 to 18 years of age. But after
> that,
> unless the parent(S) are totally disabled, or have a legitimate
> malfunction...
> Strong and able-bodied parents, can work, and earn, and pay for their own
> health care, just like the rest of the working class do . . .
> Giving a free ride is exactly what some want, for the rest of their entire
> life.
>
> I have had the experience of knowing a woman who was a fourth generation
> welfare
> recipient. Her child became a fifth generation welfare recipient... now
> her
> child is a sixth generation recipient. They don't want to go to work, and
> have no
> intentions of getting a further education to go to work, because they are
> happy,
> living on the river in a HUD subsidized house, where they pay no rent, and
> swing on
> the porch swing, sipping sweet tea, watching the working class come and go
> everyday.
>
> How much do you think this six generations of welfare, food stamps,
> health care and miscellaneous expenses, came out of YOUR tax
> and social security pocket??? Money you could have used in an emergency
> situation at one time or another. Money that is being used by the
> government
> for whatever reasons.... gaining interest for them, but not for you. (???)
>
> When you don't have social security to help you through the lean years of
> your
> senior life, (should you ever need that boost... )
> just remember and think about where it went.
>
> I still say "no" to national, socialized health care. It simply won't
> work, because
> there is a bigger generation formed and out there who doesn't want to work
> to earn it.
>
> eagle1
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Date: Thursday, June 03, 1999 1:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [CTRL] Say "NO" To Socialized Health Care Today!
>
>
> > -Caveat Lector-
> >
> >For affluent Americans, the adoption of a health care system comparable to
> >a European system (Norway or Sweden come to mind) would be a loss of
> >sorts....
> >
> >I think those fears are somewhat justified. How does one know that one
> >will receive quality care...the question of choice, etc. All of those
> >issues are legitimate...
> >
> >But I would only point out to you that "some" care is preferable to our
> >current "no" care. We have millions of Americans who are underinsured or
> >without ANY health insurance. They postpone medical treatment because
> >they lack money.
> >
> >And what I find particularly criminal is the fact that many of those who
> >lack health coverage are children. As a society, we're saying to the
> >nation's kids: "look, kids. If you have money in America, you can get
> >health care...if you don't, we don't care about you. Go to hell."
> >
> >Now, perhaps some of the CTRL folks find that acceptable, I don't. I
> >think it's criminal.
> >
> >My wife's sister-in-law is Norwegian. In Norway, EVERY member of that
> >society has health care. Young, old, rich, poor, white, black,
> >whatever... She has three children, and she wouldn't trade the Norwegian
> >health care system for the American one. In Norway, you don't have people
> >walking around in need of medical treatment.
> >
> >Do the Norwegians want to trade their system for the American "quality
> >care system"? uh....just ask them.
> >
> >Of course, the US has enormous amounts of capital to put into
> >research/high tech treatment, etc. And there are the well-publicized
> >stories of poor kids from Uganda or Rwanda being treated at our clinics..
> >but for the most part, the expensive treatments are naturally reserved for
> >those who can afford them. But what about the millions of Americans who
> >lack BASIC care?
> >
> >Surely, with all of the inventiveness and genius to be found in this
> >country, we can come up with a reasonable solution to the problem. We
> >could look at a variety of different models...Japan, Canada, Norway,
> >Sweden, France...etc... and come up with a reasonable solution.
>
> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
> ==========
> CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
> screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
> and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
> frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
> spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
> gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
> be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
> nazi's need not apply.
>
> Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
> ========================================================================
> Archives Available at:
> http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
>
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
> ========================================================================
> To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
> SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Om
>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
