Personal responsibility vs. Public safety net

[Bern80]

What kind of country do we want to be?

Do we want people begging in the streets to feed their children?
Do we want people sleeping in the streets?
Do we want people wandering among us carrying infectious disease?
Do we want people dying in the streets?

That is how third world countries operate. There is no "safety net" in third world countries. You live or die based on your lot in life.

We are the wealtiest country on earth. How do we want to be known based on our treatment of citizens?

Shouldn't we strive for the best?

All of those are incredibly ambiguous, general, vagueries. 'Shouldn't we strive for the best'? The best what? Best at giving people as much as humanly possible? Best at making sure everyone's needs are taken care of? That won't create the 'best' society by any stretch of the imagination.

You're 'Do we want' list implies that those things would happen if someone else didn't do them for them. You don't live and die based on your lot in life. You live or die by the strength of your motivation or lack of it.

When you list all these doomsday notions about what you think will be if we don't provide all these things you do other things as well. You lower expectations for society as whole. Don't worry we don't expect you to feed yourself. We don't expect you to actually pay for your house. etc.

When it is understood that certain things are not expected of you, in most cases, you're not going to do them. You are going to DO less. You will be challenged less and as a result you will become weaker. Is that really what's best for society?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Well, Fishmonger- I commend you for being responsible.

Wow, name-calling for no reason. I have always been responsible and a saver, FYI, and so have all of my what you would label "progressive" friends. In fact, most of them are doing quite well, thank you. Kinda punches a hole in your handout rant, huh. Why are you calling me a fishmonger? That makes no sense.

The fact that you and your lefty friends do well and take care of yourselves does nothing to disprove my belief about the effects of handouts.

 

[Nosmo King]

Yes, encouraging mediocrity. Having govt provide what the individual should provide. I like your phrase "We deserve the highest standard of living we can maintain"- very leftist. You deserve the highest standard of living you can afford. No "we" should be involved with your standard of living.

When your elderly relatives require hospitalization, is it their sole responsibility to pay the bill, regardless of their means to do so? If it is, they could surly die due to lack of income and funds. Capitalism kills another old person in the name of the bottom line.

When your neighbor losses his job due to no fault of his own, then losses his home, it will most certainly go vacant. Why? Because if your neighbor looses his job, probably others in your community will be in the same boat. Now, you have vacant homes peppering your neighborhood.

Tell me, Capitalist, what becomes of your investment then? Do vacant homes enhance property values? Do dead grandparents burnish the image of Capitalism?

Thus the "we" in my post.

The regular course of life is that you get the services you pay for. In the case of the elderly, or anyone else, that requires hospitalization- there are safety nets for them. But yes, ultimately, their care is their responsibility. And when one lives in a house they cannot afford- they usually lose the house. Seems pretty fair, actually. And when you purchase a home- it carries the risk that the neighborhood will go south.

Tell me, Socialist- do you think you are entitled to good health and a nice home? At whose cost?

If you over buy in the housing market, it's your fault. If you are employed and lose your job due to circumstances not of your making, some provision should be in place to help your family in order the community at large does not suffer.

And the current health care system is obviously broken. Premiums and co-pays are on the rise (I myself have not had a raise in 4 years because the health care premiums have sucked the budget dry) and the services provided are eroding. Capitalism has failed to provide economical, effective health care.

 

[Ravi]

My medical bills were divided up between dozens of providers. And what part of negotiated settlement do you not understand? At least I took the time and energy to dig myself out of a self-created hole- I did not whine and cry about how the governmnet failed to protect me. Pussy.

And that changes exactly what? Fact is, you stuck the health care providers with $20,000 in non-payment. Basically what you are is someone that doesn't give much thought to personal responsibility...you have no problem not paying your debts and you have no problem with the hospitals passing on the cost of YOUR treatment to others.

You're a fraud.

No, I did not "stick" them with anything. Two sides negotiated an agreement for a reduced debt, which I paid. That is the essence of fairness. You are a dope.

Nope, they had to settle for what you could give them, hence the "settlement." This happens to hospitals and doctors all the time, it's not feasible for them to go after all the dead beats so they take what they can get.

And if they performed back surgery on you, it was emergency surgery...otherwise they would have made you pay in advance.

All this makes you an entitlement junky with no real personal responsibility.



The guy you've been arguing with that paid off his knee surgery actually knows the definition of personal responsibility that eludes you.

 

[amrchaos]

I think manifold is hitting on "the Individual versus the Collective" question that arises in the creation of a society.

There is no consistant balance here. In some cases, the individualist concepts win out, others the collectivists concepts win. Sometimes a mixture of both is necessary.

What you think is the correct direction depends on your own perspectives of how people should live. This is really a very subjective Philosphical problem without a ready answer.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

So, if personal responsibility is so big with you, why did you feel it was ok to take out a loan from the government to go to school? Do you feel the government should offer low interest loans to let kids get an education? If not, didn't you go against your principles?

 

[judyd]

Yes, encouraging mediocrity. Having govt provide what the individual should provide. I like your phrase "We deserve the highest standard of living we can maintain"- very leftist. You deserve the highest standard of living you can afford. No "we" should be involved with your standard of living.

When your elderly relatives require hospitalization, is it their sole responsibility to pay the bill, regardless of their means to do so? If it is, they could surly die due to lack of income and funds. Capitalism kills another old person in the name of the bottom line.

When your neighbor losses his job due to no fault of his own, then losses his home, it will most certainly go vacant. Why? Because if your neighbor looses his job, probably others in your community will be in the same boat. Now, you have vacant homes peppering your neighborhood.

Tell me, Capitalist, what becomes of your investment then? Do vacant homes enhance property values? Do dead grandparents burnish the image of Capitalism?

Thus the "we" in my post.

The regular course of life is that you get the services you pay for. In the case of the elderly, or anyone else, that requires hospitalization- there are safety nets for them. But yes, ultimately, their care is their responsibility. And when one lives in a house they cannot afford- they usually lose the house. Seems pretty fair, actually. And when you purchase a home- it carries the risk that the neighborhood will go south.

Tell me, Socialist- do you think you are entitled to good health and a nice home? At whose cost?

When one partner of an elderly couple gets a debilitating illness that requires months or even years of nursing care, generally the other one has to sell off everything in order to pay for the care. They are virtually left homeless because of illness. This does not happen in any other country but the US.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

When your elderly relatives require hospitalization, is it their sole responsibility to pay the bill, regardless of their means to do so? If it is, they could surly die due to lack of income and funds. Capitalism kills another old person in the name of the bottom line.

When your neighbor losses his job due to no fault of his own, then losses his home, it will most certainly go vacant. Why? Because if your neighbor looses his job, probably others in your community will be in the same boat. Now, you have vacant homes peppering your neighborhood.

Tell me, Capitalist, what becomes of your investment then? Do vacant homes enhance property values? Do dead grandparents burnish the image of Capitalism?

Thus the "we" in my post.

The regular course of life is that you get the services you pay for. In the case of the elderly, or anyone else, that requires hospitalization- there are safety nets for them. But yes, ultimately, their care is their responsibility. And when one lives in a house they cannot afford- they usually lose the house. Seems pretty fair, actually. And when you purchase a home- it carries the risk that the neighborhood will go south.

Tell me, Socialist- do you think you are entitled to good health and a nice home? At whose cost?

If you over buy in the housing market, it's your fault. If you are employed and lose your job due to circumstances not of your making, some provision should be in place to help your family in order the community at large does not suffer.

And the current health care system is obviously broken. Premiums and co-pays are on the rise (I myself have not had a raise in 4 years because the health care premiums have sucked the budget dry) and the services provided are eroding. Capitalism has failed to provide economical, effective health care.

The "provision" that should be in place to help the unemployed individual is what? Unemployment? Mortgage insurance? How about maybe....savings? What you are really stating is that government should eliminate risk and uncertainty in life- for the greater good. Which is bullshit.

And the current system is not broken. It needs some changing. You have not had a raise in 4 years because of what? Maybe you are a shitty employee?

Capitalism seems to have provided over 200 million individuals with insurance, most of whom are happuy with it.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

So, if personal responsibility is so big with you, why did you feel it was ok to take out a loan from the government to go to school? Do you feel the government should offer low interest loans to let kids get an education? If not, didn't you go against your principles?

Because it was a loan- not a handout. I have to pay that 75k back. And educational loans are smart investments. An educational handout is a different story.

 

[Ravi]

So, if personal responsibility is so big with you, why did you feel it was ok to take out a loan from the government to go to school? Do you feel the government should offer low interest loans to let kids get an education? If not, didn't you go against your principles?

Because it was a loan- not a handout. I have to pay that 75k back. And educational loans are smart investments. An educational handout is a different story.

Student loans are subsidized by taxpayers.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

the effects of handouts

What handouts?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

I prefer somewhere in between, but I certainly do not fool myself into thinking you can have the best of both.

I'd agree with this. Where the right line is remains the crux of the debate.

It is important to have some level of social safety net. Without a safety net you risk creating a permanent under class or seeing whole cities and families slip into a third world existence. At the same time, it is necessary to remember that the safety net is there to help provide a chance for upward mobility. People are not meant to stay at the bottom if it can be helped at all.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

And that changes exactly what? Fact is, you stuck the health care providers with $20,000 in non-payment. Basically what you are is someone that doesn't give much thought to personal responsibility...you have no problem not paying your debts and you have no problem with the hospitals passing on the cost of YOUR treatment to others.

You're a fraud.

No, I did not "stick" them with anything. Two sides negotiated an agreement for a reduced debt, which I paid. That is the essence of fairness. You are a dope.

Nope, they had to settle for what you could give them, hence the "settlement." This happens to hospitals and doctors all the time, it's not feasible for them to go after all the dead beats so they take what they can get.

And if they performed back surgery on you, it was emergency surgery...otherwise they would have made you pay in advance.

All this makes you an entitlement junky with no real personal responsibility.



The guy you've been arguing with that paid off his knee surgery actually knows the definition of personal responsibility that eludes you.

I guess they were forced into the settlements. Fuckin moron.

And yes- it was emergency surgery. As for the entitlement junky part- I qualified for various means of state assistance for my catastrophic injury. Could have passed it off to the state- who would have paid the providers less than I did. And when two private entities negotiate a setttlement of debts- there is no "entitlement" involved. Nice try, though- but keep going on about how irresponsible I was in paying my medical debts....

 

[Ravi]

No, I did not "stick" them with anything. Two sides negotiated an agreement for a reduced debt, which I paid. That is the essence of fairness. You are a dope.

Nope, they had to settle for what you could give them, hence the "settlement." This happens to hospitals and doctors all the time, it's not feasible for them to go after all the dead beats so they take what they can get.

And if they performed back surgery on you, it was emergency surgery...otherwise they would have made you pay in advance.

All this makes you an entitlement junky with no real personal responsibility.



The guy you've been arguing with that paid off his knee surgery actually knows the definition of personal responsibility that eludes you.

I guess they were forced into the settlements. Fuckin moron.

And yes- it was emergency surgery. As for the entitlement junky part- I qualified for various means of state assistance for my catastrophic injury. Could have passed it off to the state- who would have paid the providers less than I did. And when two private entities negotiate a setttlement of debts- there is no "entitlement" involved. Nice try, though- but keep going on about how irresponsible I was in paying my medical debts....

You said you paid off $30,000 of a $50,000 debt. That means you gouged the system, and the taxpayers. You're a fraud, that is all there is to it.

Ass.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Because it was a loan- not a handout. I have to pay that 75k back. And educational loans are smart investments. An educational handout is a different story.

But why a government loan? Why didn't you take out a loan from the public sector?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

So, if personal responsibility is so big with you, why did you feel it was ok to take out a loan from the government to go to school? Do you feel the government should offer low interest loans to let kids get an education? If not, didn't you go against your principles?

Because it was a loan- not a handout. I have to pay that 75k back. And educational loans are smart investments. An educational handout is a different story.

Student loans are subsidized by taxpayers.

some student loans are subsidized by taxpayers.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Nope, they had to settle for what you could give them, hence the "settlement." This happens to hospitals and doctors all the time, it's not feasible for them to go after all the dead beats so they take what they can get.

And if they performed back surgery on you, it was emergency surgery...otherwise they would have made you pay in advance.

All this makes you an entitlement junky with no real personal responsibility.



The guy you've been arguing with that paid off his knee surgery actually knows the definition of personal responsibility that eludes you.

I guess they were forced into the settlements. Fuckin moron.

And yes- it was emergency surgery. As for the entitlement junky part- I qualified for various means of state assistance for my catastrophic injury. Could have passed it off to the state- who would have paid the providers less than I did. And when two private entities negotiate a setttlement of debts- there is no "entitlement" involved. Nice try, though- but keep going on about how irresponsible I was in paying my medical debts....

You said you paid off $30,000 of a $50,000 debt. That means you gouged the system, and the taxpayers. You're a fraud, that is all there is to it.

Ass.

Two sides mutaully agreeing to cash in hand over payments does not amount to gouging, but think what you want. If it was you in the position, you'd have cried to mommy.

 

[Nosmo King]

The regular course of life is that you get the services you pay for. In the case of the elderly, or anyone else, that requires hospitalization- there are safety nets for them. But yes, ultimately, their care is their responsibility. And when one lives in a house they cannot afford- they usually lose the house. Seems pretty fair, actually. And when you purchase a home- it carries the risk that the neighborhood will go south.

Tell me, Socialist- do you think you are entitled to good health and a nice home? At whose cost?

If you over buy in the housing market, it's your fault. If you are employed and lose your job due to circumstances not of your making, some provision should be in place to help your family in order the community at large does not suffer.

And the current health care system is obviously broken. Premiums and co-pays are on the rise (I myself have not had a raise in 4 years because the health care premiums have sucked the budget dry) and the services provided are eroding. Capitalism has failed to provide economical, effective health care.

The "provision" that should be in place to help the unemployed individual is what? Unemployment? Mortgage insurance? How about maybe....savings? What you are really stating is that government should eliminate risk and uncertainty in life- for the greater good. Which is bullshit.

And the current system is not broken. It needs some changing. You have not had a raise in 4 years because of what? Maybe you are a shitty employee?

Capitalism seems to have provided over 200 million individuals with insurance, most of whom are happuy with it.

I explained why I and all my colleagues have not received raises. The premiums charged by our health care provider have sucked any excess out of our budget. Thanks, Capitalism! I am now working to fund an insurance company!

And those with health care are seeing their benefits erode while the premiums continue to rise beyond the costs of everything else. Thanks again, Capitalism!

And savings is a worthy thing. But to have half a town thrown out of work when the mill or factory shuts down and ships the machinery to Asia to start all over, savings won't pay the health care premiums, the electric bill, the mortgage and the kids food bill very long, will it?

Many of our woes are the result of catering to Capitalists. "Free" trade?!? Ask any working (or formerly working) person in this part of our country how well that opening of Mexican markets has worked out! But, the board of directors of the large corporations get more face time with law makers than us poor working stiffs. So the gravy goes to them. All in the name of "the greater good". Thanks, Capitalism! You have enriched the Capitalists beyond even their capacity for greed would permit them to believe! Let the poor working class fend for themselves! What a solution!

 

[Ravi]

I guess they were forced into the settlements. Fuckin moron.

And yes- it was emergency surgery. As for the entitlement junky part- I qualified for various means of state assistance for my catastrophic injury. Could have passed it off to the state- who would have paid the providers less than I did. And when two private entities negotiate a setttlement of debts- there is no "entitlement" involved. Nice try, though- but keep going on about how irresponsible I was in paying my medical debts....

You said you paid off $30,000 of a $50,000 debt. That means you gouged the system, and the taxpayers. You're a fraud, that is all there is to it.

Ass.

Two sides mutaully agreeing to cash in hand over payments does not amount to gouging, but think what you want. If it was you in the position, you'd have cried to mommy.

I would have paid my debt instead of sucking off the taxpayers by gouging the hospital for $20,000.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

All in the name of "the greater good". Thanks, Capitalism! You have enriched the Capitalists beyond even their capacity for greed would permit them to believe! Let the poor working class fend for themselves! What a solution!

Could you be a bigger pussy? Geeze.. stop whining.