Moving to Russia

[IAMX 3,055]

I think I hear a welfare person crying about lazy people..

i think i hear an idiot crying about something they don't know about. imagine that

i wonder what insightful comment she will have to my reply.

Evidently giving free checks to Alaskans for doing nothing isn't "spreading the wealth".

And Palin's supporting it must inherently mean it's not spreading the wealth, either.

Strange how people just love to say a bunch of #######, but look foolish when they do. This is why so many cooked-### politicians get into office.

[Blues Fairy 0]

How is healthcare a human rights issue? Does the fact that you have to pay for it seem somehow inhumane?

when i can't afford it and face dying, yes? or do you think my dying of a disease i can't afford to treat is humane?

Dying is very inhumane, yes. I would like to live forever if possible.

[IAMX 3,055]

It seems paying for it is rather inhumane. Ask those who hate taxes why they hate humanity.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

that is all well and good, but how about when economic and human rights issues overlap? for example with healthcare.

How is healthcare a human rights issue? Does the fact that you have to pay for it seem somehow inhumane?

Well, when life-saving treatment costs as much as a house, something is amiss (i.e., someone is getting hosed, and it's probably the sick person). I'd say that pricing necessary medical care out of the reach of a sizeable portion of the population in a wealthy country is morally wrong.

Whether it's a rights violation is open to debate, because the concept of rights (and indeed ethics) is pretty tricky.

[akdiver 3]

The best way to shut her up is to cash the free oil check you Alaskans get ($3,000+ this year?) for doing nothing, and send her off to Victoria's Secret. Two issues, one stone.

Actually, it's only $2000, and we do not have a Victoria Secret. FWIW, they government collects a lot more from us than the pissant amont it it gives back via the PFD.

[rocks 494]

Ask those who hate taxes why they hate humanity.

they just don't see the bigger picture.

i'm sorry to everyone that i got a bit emotional about it.

[IAMX 3,055]

The best way to shut her up is to cash the free oil check you Alaskans get ($3,000+ this year?) for doing nothing, and send her off to Victoria's Secret. Two issues, one stone.

Actually, it's only $2000, and we do not have a Victoria Secret. FWIW, they government collects a lot more from us than the pissant amont it it gives back via the PFD.

Hope she hasn't benefited from "spreading the wealth", i.e you never cashed one of those checks. She just might not look very smart complaining.

Edited November 7, 2008 by SRVT

[Sassy1natl 0]

i'm facing the possibility of not being able to afford the medical treatment i require.

There's a lot of things in life I can't afford. There will be even less if my taxes go up.

ahh i c interesting.. i think we should start a thread of the vj'ers typing dexterity, if they use all their fingers to type, or just the index and middle finger

When replying to some posts, I just use the middle finger. For most others, I use all the fingers on my left hand, and three of the ones on my right hand.

FWIW, I've had hand surgery on both hands, to repair broken bones and knife wounds. My right hand has seen some damage, giving even less dexterity than it would otherwise have.

I use my middle finger alot also, when replying to posts. But hubby says it's not ladylike.

[Blues Fairy 0]

Well, when life-saving treatment costs as much as a house, something is amiss (i.e., someone is getting hosed, and it's probably the sick person). I'd say that pricing necessary medical care out of the reach of a sizeable portion of the population in a wealthy country is morally wrong.

On the other hand, mandatory financing of universal healthcare at the expense of taxpayers, regardless of the effort each particular person inputs into staying healthy and not being a public burden, seems rather morally wrong, too.

There are plenty of charity and government financing options available just not everyone is aware of them and ready to work on his/her options. But when healthcare is nationalized and unified, all kinds of trouble and corruption begins. I also have experience with socialism and believe me, I've had more than enough of it.

[akdiver 3]

Hope she hasn't benefited from "spreading the wealth", i.e you never cashed one of those checks. She just might not look very smart complaining.

Actually, they direct deposit.

For 2007, we gave government about $22,000 more than we received back.

I'd be more than happy to decline the small amount of the PFD in exchange for keeping the money we paid in.

Edited November 7, 2008 by akdiver

[IAMX 3,055]

Hope she hasn't benefited from "spreading the wealth", i.e you never cashed one of those checks. She just might not look very smart complaining.

Actually, they direct deposit.

Even better.

[Ling Ling 22]

Isn't this a long way to move just so you can say,

"I can see Sarah Palin from my house"?

I mean...YOU can already say that now (

[Welshcookie 17]

I just thought it was funny that a foreigner from a communist country gets it - while many of those who were born and raised here do not (:

Because it's new and novel...it will soon wear thin

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Well, when life-saving treatment costs as much as a house, something is amiss (i.e., someone is getting hosed, and it's probably the sick person). I'd say that pricing necessary medical care out of the reach of a sizeable portion of the population in a wealthy country is morally wrong.

On the other hand, mandatory financing of universal healthcare at the expense of taxpayers, regardless of the effort each particular person inputs into staying healthy and not being a public burden, seems rather morally wrong, too.

There are plenty of charity and government financing options available just not everyone is aware of them and ready to work on his/her options. But when healthcare is nationalized and unified, all kinds of trouble and corruption begins. I also have experience with socialism and believe me, I've had more than enough of it.

All kinds of trouble and corruption abound in private healthcare as well. And charity and government financing options are not available to everyone, and the burden shouldn't be on a very ill person to call around for help. The U.S. government (i.e., the taxpayer) already accounts for nearly half the healthcare dollars spent in the U.S., and the majority of us pay through the nose for health insurance and copayments on top of that. If you're lucky enough to have an employer-sponsored group plan, perhaps you should harass your smoking coworkers about their bad habit increasing your premiums.

Government options for people with average incomes, property, or any assets are very limited, and there are very few charity hospitals as compared with the population. Even then, there is substantial cost shifting. In short, we all end up paying.

I think the best plan would be a single-payer scheme to cover basic, necessary services for everyone, and if you want to buy your own supplementary plan (as is the case in many other countries) to cover certain services or stay in a swanky hospital, you can do that. This type of supplementary insurance is common in a lot of countries as an employer-paid benefit. But the supposed health care choice in the U.S. is virtually nonexistent. It's a real racket.

[rocks 494]

Well, when life-saving treatment costs as much as a house, something is amiss (i.e., someone is getting hosed, and it's probably the sick person). I'd say that pricing necessary medical care out of the reach of a sizeable portion of the population in a wealthy country is morally wrong.

On the other hand, mandatory financing of universal healthcare at the expense of taxpayers, regardless of the effort each particular person inputs into staying healthy and not being a public burden, seems rather morally wrong, too.

There are plenty of charity and government financing options available just not everyone is aware of them and ready to work on his/her options. But when healthcare is nationalized and unified, all kinds of trouble and corruption begins. I also have experience with socialism and believe me, I've had more than enough of it.

All kinds of trouble and corruption abound in private healthcare as well. And charity and government financing options are not available to everyone, and the burden shouldn't be on a very ill person to call around for help. The U.S. government (i.e., the taxpayer) already accounts for nearly half the healthcare dollars spent in the U.S., and the majority of us pay through the nose for health insurance and copayments on top of that. If you're lucky enough to have an employer-sponsored group plan, perhaps you should harass your smoking coworkers about their bad habit increasing your premiums.

Government options for people with average incomes, property, or any assets are very limited, and there are very few charity hospitals as compared with the population. Even then, there is substantial cost shifting. In short, we all end up paying.

I think the best plan would be a single-payer scheme to cover basic, necessary services for everyone, and if you want to buy your own supplementary plan (as is the case in many other countries) to cover certain services or stay in a swanky hospital, you can do that. This type of supplementary insurance is common in a lot of countries as an employer-paid benefit. But the supposed health care choice in the U.S. is virtually nonexistent. It's a real racket.

someone i knew in the states died because there was nothing available for him health care wise. he worked all his life, apparently, for no one to help him out when he was unable to work and needed medication.

i think the general well-being of society is important for everyone to live harmoniously.