I understand that it is easy for people to think that government healthcare is "compassionate". In a perfect world politicians would be genuinely interested in being compassionate. Does anyone here actually believe that Ted Kennedy was compassionate? Obama? Hilary Clinton? Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? Barney Frank? If you actually believe that, then you are hopelessly lost, and there is no logical evidence in the world that will save you. A quick look at any of the political proponents of healthcare "reform" is all it takes to make you understand that it was NEVER about compassion, but
always about political power.
Socialized healthcare and welfare are DIRECTLY related. They are entitlements provided by taxpayers, but
given away by politicians in exchange for votes from their victims. Once again, for special cases where there is need due to the loss of a job or other emergency, then assistance is justified, but we already had a system in place for that: THAT'S WHAT MEDICAID WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR!!! Instead, Medicaid turned out to be welfare. A life-long benefit from taxpayers
of any sort is nothing more than a government dependency program designed to trick people out of their votes.
Social Security retirement benefits are provided to those who worked and paid in, so that's entirely fair, but terribly mis-managed by the federal government.
Medicare benefits are also provided to those who worked and paid in, so again fair, but as we know, also terribly mis-managed by the federal government.
Bobby, the OLD 50th was on Albany Crescent, Just a block east of Bailey Ave and 230th st. The NEW 50th is in Riverdale, probably since the mid 1970's. I did, in fact, live in Riverdale several years later, when mom was married, but when she separated after two years, we moved over near Tracey Towers at Mosholu Parkway and Jerome Avenue. I lived there until I got my own place on Gun Hill Road near Jerome Avenue when I was sixteen.
And this isn't about "anger" Bobby. This is about
actually helping people. I've been there. I know how the poor think, and act, and vote, and react to politicians. If you take a minute to think about it beyond the politics, do you really think life-long hand-outs have EVER helped the poor -- or just hurt them more?
Well Iggy, let me put it to you this way. I was born in the Bronx to a single, teenaged mother. She worked her butt off at the local police station (The OLD 50th pct, which used to be on Albany Crescent back then, for any fellow Bronx alumni readers) as a dispatcher. Of course, she could not make ends meet on the salary NYPD paid her as a civilian. When things really got tight, she eventually swallowed her pride and went to the welfare office seeking help with child-care expenses (for me) so she could keep working full-time. There she was told that as long as she had a job, she could not qualify for any assistance whatsoever. The welfare agent went through some numbers with her, and showed her that if she quit her job, she could qualify for welfare benefits that exceeded her net pay from her job.
Now, I'm not one to say, "hey, they ought to give away more taxpayer money", but who the hell is more needy than a single, teenaged mother with an infant, who is working full-time to try and feed her family, and only asking for help with child-care so she can work? Are we supposed to believe that the neighbors, whose mother sat on her fat ass all day watching television, drinking coffee and getting pregnant were more deserving than me and my mother? That one made sure that she had a new kid every time the youngest was old enough to go to school full-time, so she could not ever be expected to go to work.
No. The motive behind the socialist entitlements is to squash the spirit out of people: Knock any pride and work ethic that they might have right the hell out of them. Make sure that if they have any inclination to do the right thing and be independent, that the very thought is annihilated. Don't let them think for a minute that they can take care of themselves. How dare they? Who do they think they are? They are too stupid to take care of themselves! We must do their thinking, their parenting, their everything for them, as they are not qualified. In return, we know that they will vote for us, because we "take care of them" and they no longer have the skills, the ability, or the ambition to do the right thing, or even to understand what is the right thing. That guarantees the socialist politicians neverending power and authority, all funded by the work of others (taxpayers).
But you see, Fuzzy, that's just it. Some people out there don't want to weed out the fraud and waste. They want more people to become dependent upon them (government) so that they can lock in their votes forever and ever.
Genuinely disabled people who need a hand up are certainly not the major problem in our society. Lazy people who feel "entitled" and are afraid to do the right thing for fear of losing their government handouts are not the cause of the problem either. Sneaky politicians who want to make people afraid to lose their government handouts are the problem.
So, if I'm understanding what you're saying, you're OK with the programs that exist and their purpose but you have a problem with the stringency, or lack thereof, in qualifying for the programs?
Does that sum up your position?
If it does then I think I've misunderstood you from the beginning. There's a very long leap between wanting to get help to folks who actually require it and wanting to abolish something like SSI based on an idealogical absolute.
If we agree on the first point then we're only a matter of degrees apart.
I don't know that we'll ever be able to see eye to eye on the implied secret society politicians inhabit and whatever overarching NWO philosophy might be in the quote above but maybe we're closer than I've thought on the first point?
OK OK, I understand the anger. You lived in Riverdale somewhere near the Yonkers border. I grew up till I was 13 across the BRP in the Northeast Bronx next to the Edenwald Projects closer to Mt. Vernon. What happened to your Mother os wrenching, but welfare has nothing to do with the Healthcare discussion.
With a better Healthcare system your working Mother and other single working Mothers would qualify for Healthcare benefits. You wanna talk only about welfare, you and I would not be a degree apart. More common ground.
The stated goal of the Healthcare bill to allow people who are working to be able to afford benefits. A lot of Companies just do not offer benefits, and Walmart was handing out forms and giving advice to employees how to fill out papwork to get State benefits. Yes Bill, Walmart the poster child of free enterprise was helping to drain the system of your tax dollars.
We have a member here who was working and their Company closed down. One Daughter was really ill and needed specialized tests and treatment in another City. The gas was eating them alive and the Hospital would not do the specialized test for free. He asked for prayer, I sent him links to the Law and ways to get to public officials. His girl qualified and the treatments are working. His wife was forced in to a nervous breakdown and depression. He found a job with no benefits, but the girl is still being treated, wife is doing well. He had chest pains which turned out to be a arterial blockage and it was fixed. Long story short, things are coming together. This family needed to get on their feet again, and they are. Hopefully with their renewed Health and outlook better jobs are coming.
The good news about welfare is they are making many of them work to get benefits, they have clamped it down so tight that you will be living under minimum wage levels. The free ride is coming to an end. 50 years too late, but it is coming.
