Choosing between education and health care - this country is nuts.

I so appreciate you posting this!

I had heard the 'have to wait for care in Canada' thing, but really wasn't sure what it meant. Thank you for putting it in context for me.

When the 'universal healthcare' thing went around, I was for it. Mostly because... I felt like SOMETHING changing would be better than the current system. And I consider us lucky- dh has great health ins through his work. But I know too many people who can't/won't seek help for one reason or another. (my own mother needs to have her throat checked but won't.. because she is afraid she'll be labeled 'pre-existing condition' before she even gets any ACTUAL health insurance.)

 

For any of the Christians commenting on this thread, here is a thought. When we are talking about prioritizing people, how many of us would be willing to take ourselves out of the equation to offer our slot to someone else? In the end, we probably all think certain people deserve something for myriad reasons. There is no perfect way to ration healthcare. There are many times it would not have to be rationed if it were not for greed of those in control; however, there are limited resources for certain treatment. I know I would not want to be working in the claims department of an insurance company deciding who gets the heart.

 

Holy cow! I just got back online and have pages of this thread to read through! John is doing well - we got back out to the house today and started working. He said it hurt a bit to hammer hard and he wasn't lifting anything heavy at all. Still, we could get a little bit done.

It is looking like we'll have a work crew out there next week. We'll plug away at it this week and get what we can done - and then they'll come out next week and should be able to get a lot done. It's so nice that people are willing to help.

 

Oh wow! I have so much to say. I will have to bite my tongue in a few places. First

2 Thessalonians 3 around verse 10 "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” The rest of the chapter talks about that as well.

The bible does tell us to take care of the widows, orphans. As a church we are suppose to take care of those who need help willingly, out of our good will.

The evilness in Socialism is that we are forced to pay taxes that are then given to people for things the government deems worthy. Many things we do not wish our hard earned dollars to pay for. My husband works 80+ hours a week so 30 cents of every dollar we earn is going to people who are sitting on their hinny not working, just because they can get "free" money. I have so many examples I could type a book of people I know personally who have CHOSEN
to not work because they get paid by the government to stay home. The reason we are told to give in the bible is because it changes us, it makes us better people, more Christ like. I know watching my tax dollars being wasted and used for things like abortion which I believe is wrong, that doesn't help me be more Christ like. There is a difference between being forced to do something and doing it out of the goodness of your heart. You can force your kids to share, but you know it is different when they choose to do it on their own good will. The spiritual leaders were asking you to do something within your own heart, to change you so that you will care for those in need. They were not asking for the government to steal your money and waste it as they see fit.

With the fires in Texas I know first hand that people from all over have given time, money and anything they could to help them. It was given quickly and above the need. A local fire that burned 70 homes was turning away donations a day or so after the fire. They were overwhelmed with support and help. It is amazing to see people give sacrificially for the good of those in need. It is not amazing to see FEMA come in two weeks after the fire is over, and after standing in lines for hours, filling out paper work 2 inches thick, then receiving a visa card worth $130 because that is your "need" when your house burned to the ground and all you have is the clothes you had on. That is not amazing, but that is what happens when we let the government do the charity work. An organization out of Tennessee sent a semi loaded with over $80,000 in donations. That semi was here on like day 3 of the fire. Weeks before FEMA.

So you are right there are needs and we the people need to step up and take care of those in need. Mark 14:7 "The poor you will always have with you,[a] and you can help them any time you want. But you will not always have me." The evil in socialism is the waste, the people who are ruined because they are greedy and do not work. The the evil in socialism are people who are not helped because the local churches are pushing people away because "the government" will take care of them. The evil in socialism is how hard hearted people have become because they do not donate, sacrifice, or share because that has become the job of the government.

 

:lol: I've got a lot to say, too. I practically wrote a novel...

What about the working poor? Most of the statistics argue that the majority of poor people have jobs or have been recently laid off. They're working hard (harder than than the rich, in most cases!), but they simply aren't making enough money to support themselves and their families.

Taxes are paid in capitalist countries, too. Plus, your taxes don't just go to your ne'er do well friends and/or relatives, they also go to maintain the roads you use to get to work, to provide hospitals, schools, libraries, the army, the fire department, the police department and traffic lights and sidewalks and garbage pick up and all sorts of things you would miss very much if you weren't paying taxes.

The social safety net (ie welfare) came about because people were quite upset to see young American children with swollen bellies and their hair falling out during the Great Depression. Voluntary giving simply wasn't enough to carry people through in the 1930s. It's still not enough in many third world countries today.

And you really don't want pay-as-you-go water sanitation - that's not going to end well!

"Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s." Mark 12:17

In a multicultural country we do not get to impose our religious beliefs on others. That means we cannot deny condoms to men and women, even if our religion says it's wrong to have non-procreative relations.

Essentially, you pay your taxes, obey the law, and pursue a spiritual life. Jesus's main commandment is to love, not to condemn. That was his new covenant for us!

FEMA may not have had their act together, but in no way was FEMA interfering with the other charitable efforts. If all you got was 130 $ from them, but tons of help from others, you're still 130 $ richer than you were before. And gov't will respond to need, even when there's no money coming to you from other people.

Also, during crises, Gov'ts frequently match funds to charitable organizations, supporting them as well.

One of the problems with voluntary charitable giving is that it is not evenly distributed. A few big catastrophes on the heels of one another, less appealing victims, any number of factors can cause donor fatigue to set in. Also, people are really good at responding right away to a crisis, but they don't do well over the long haul. Do you know anyone who has recently made a donation to Haiti?

That wasn't about charity, that was about prioritizing and allowing yourself the occasional luxury. We aren't obliged to wear sackcloth and ashes 24/7, just because there are poor people. We can enjoy the good things in life.

Jesus liked his scented oils. But he wasn't saying, "Forget about the poor, they don't deserve anything!" That was definitely not the message. The message was, you can spend a little more for scented coloured markers when you homeschool. Jesus is cool with that.

What? There's no greed in capitalism? What about all those Wall Street execs with their million dollar bonuses for financially ruining companies, banks and entire countries, causing no end of misery for average working folks (many of whom ended up on welfare with no jobs and no pensions)? I think these guys are a heck of a lot more dangerous to society than a welfare mom.

I really think churches help to the best of their ability. Most charities do. I do not believe that if the government stopped supporting the poor tomorrow that the churches would have the resources to step in. In fact, if anything, I've been seeing churches and charities on the news complaining that the gov't is offloading more and more of the burden onto them and they can't keep up.

If the gov't stopped supporting the poor, I think you'd see children living in the streets, a lot more crime, starvation and disease. All of which will impact your quality of life. Think about those countries where there is no social safety net. They're not happy places to live.

Do you donate? Do you sacrifice? Do you share? I know I do. And I take a certain comfort in the fact that even if someone doesn't like me, or approve of my religion, or my race, or my way of life, if I was in a terrible disaster I'd still get help from the gov't.

I can't think of anything more hard-hearted than saying that because someone has (perhaps) made bad choices in life, they don't deserve a roof over their head, food in their bellies, or the ability to educate their children.

 

Just stepping in for a split second....I think most of us who dislike the socialist mindset is because of the way it creates a culture of expectation and apathy. The poor during Jesus' day were typically poor because of health or other issues. Society was harder on an able-bodied lazy person than on people who were poor by circumstances out of their control. Jesus said a lot about helping the poor; however, He also said a lot about idleness and free-loading. One example is that He said to help the widows. He also qualified that command by stating the younger widows needed to remarry so as not to put an undo burden on the church.

Also, I don't care too much for looking at our society as either socialist or capitalist. It's like thinking there are only two ideologies that exist for us to choose from. Just my thoughts. Carry on.

 

I would disagree that most of today's poor are idle or lazy... I think lack of education and poor physical and mental health play huge roles in modern poverty.

But I agree with you completely about the socialist/capitalist dichotomy. There's no pure system anywhere in the world, and I think that's a good thing - extremist systems tend to hurt people, whether they're economic or religious or cultural.

As a friend of mine explained it (her degree is in sociology and modern economics), the ideology behind Capitalism is "Freedom TO", while the ideology behind Socialism is "Freedom FROM". Ideally we should try to chart a course between the two, giving our citizens the freedom to pursue their life goals and improve themselves, while also giving them freedom from want and privation.

 

I agree with MegCanada. But I'd go one step further and say that it DEPENDS on your definition of poor.

We have enough that I can stay home. I consider us lower middle, I suppose, BECAUSE we have that choice. We could have more- I could go to work, too. BUT at this season in our lives, we choose less income for the sake of a better upbringing for our children.

But I know plenty of people who's parents worked 2 jobs each to support the kids. Those kids grew up saying they were NEVER POOR, but imho they were or their parents wouldn't have had to work so much!

I would also add that at our poorest (when we were truly poor), we worked our buns off to stay warm and fed. A close relative doesn't ever work and when they have no money coming in, the state helps them. When their income goes up, the state gives them less so there is an actual incentive to DO LESS. Dh and I have too much pride to settle for that, but there are plenty of people who do. NOT the majority though.

Studies equating poverty with less stellar academics make me furious because I DID grow up poor. I had practically no toys, no running water. But we ALWAYS had books, ALWAYS, and our upbringing was academically focused. Poor doesn't mean ignorant, that's just a darn excuse.

Sorry for the soapbox there I think there are plenty of adults who pretend they aren't poor because they don't want the stigma. It's time to be honest about what poor is and what it isn't.

 

I had to reread my post in case I actually said that most of today's poor are idle and lazy. I didn't. However, I did say that Jesus remarked on widows in the church, and when I think about it, I am sure it was in one of Paul's letters. Anyway, the point is not to say today's poor (myself hovering on the verge) are poor because they are lazy. The point was that those who look at Jesus as a socialist need to look again.

 

I misunderstood what you were saying to be that the poor of yesteryear were poor due to circumstances beyond their control, unlike today's poor. I'm glad to clarify that!

But I agree with you about "Jesus wasn't a socialist"... all that I wrote above aside, I really don't believe Jesus was a capitalist, a socialist, a Democrat, or Republican, or anything else. He specifically said he wasn't interested in politics and running countries. "Render under to Caesar..." etc.

Depending on how you read his teachings, I think there are elements you can apply to any system of economics, any system of government. Christianity was the religion of the poor and dispossessed, but then it was the religion of the ruling classes. Blessed be the poor, but wealth has become a sign of God's favour.

Two other things that occurred to me today, not connected to your post....

1. It's important not to confuse capitalism and democracy. They are not the same thing, and in fact unrestrained capitalism often acts to subvert democracy and human rights (ex. China).

2. Meghan - I didn't mean in any way to suggest in my previous post that poor people are uneducated. I was trying to say that poor education can lead to fewer opportunities, and thus poverty. I grew up "poor" as well, with a single mother scraping by on multiple temp jobs and food stamps. But I consider myself wealthy because of the education she gave me. I have research skills and the ability to think logically, and I'm capable of understanding the fine print. My mom is awesome. :love:

 

Oh no! Honestly, that wasn't even directed at your post

Just my standard rant on the poor= uneducated dirty masses, which is an absolute crock. Far too many politicians think that having no money means having no class, no goals, no hopes, no love. I think a lot of young people (and some not so young) buy into that as well, and therefore declare they AREN'T POOR BY GOSH, even though in reality they are (or were). To hide the realities of people trapped in poverty, it is assumed that poor = dumb, because you can't really fix that. Or that poor = lazy, because you can't really fix THAT, either. So saying the poor are this or the poor are that just becomes code for, "well, they are POOR so don't expect much." Poor people aren't the only ones who abuse their spouses or neglect their kids. You just don't hear about the rich ones as much because they have better lawyers. Being poor definitely means less choices, and I think a lot of poor people get beaten down by the constant treadmill of just trying to survive. But that doesn't mean poor people give up altogether, or want less for their children (except for dh's relatives, who seem to think it's a-ok if their kids never get anywhere in life.. but that's a different rant for a different day.)

Apologies if it seemed directed at you in any way!

 

Oh, we are SO on the same page! :lol:

 

Personally, I think Christians in America hate socialism because they are Americans (and not because they are Christians) - and then go in search of Bible verses to support their opinion. Christians in virtually every other part of the world are more left-wing than right-wing. Indeed, the most Christian states in India often vote in communist leaders.

The Bible does not support capitalism. The Bible does not support socialism. The Bible tells us to obey government leaders, no matter what the form of government, and to willingly pay taxes. We're also commanded to give to those in need until there is equality (conveniently overlooked). The entire concept of the Year of Jubilee, when all Israelites had to give up their land and were then reapportioned an amount equal to everyone else, is also conveniently overlooked.

But I'm digressing from healthcare.

 

No wonder they lived in tents. Even if you are a "New Testament" Christian, people overlook that "all things were common".

As someone else pointed out, though, the difference is a willingness to share vs. a govermental takeover. No, it isn't right to resent it, but I do. Mostly because my family busts our butts to work, scrimp and save and God provides the rest. Quite honestly, I'm jealous of the people who don't have the scruples to work hard and yet they are going to college for free, renting a home for pennies, pay hardly any utilities, get twice as much in food stamps as they need to live on, etc. Yes. I'm jealous. Admitting it is the first step to repentance, right?

 

Brooke gets me!
I totally disagree with some of the others. :lol:

I am one of those, for most of my married life we have qualified as being below the poverty level (like way below the line). We qualified for all of the government aid until 2 years ago. I still think that they do not "need" all the help they are getting. With the "aid" we qualified for ( and never took) the amount of food stamps would have tripled the budget I fed us on. WE made it just fine, nobody starved, we didn't eat steaks to often but we lived just fine. Has it been easy nope, but we have pride. There were times my husband would have made more on the government dole then making a paycheck. That is WRONG!! We were below the poverty level for 2 people and had a family of 5 without gov. aid, and really without aid from anybody else. Our neighbors would give us their leftovers, or something like that but no money, and not much else. I do think that the levels of poor people are way over reported. Mainly because as Americans most do not really know the difference between needs and wants.
It messes with the economics when that is going on. There is a store in town that has not taken down his help wanted sign for 2 years. He can't get people to work for him ( I have in the past and know that it is an ok place to work) Because they get more in unemployment, and government "aid" With 9% unemployment and help wanted signs up?
But even if you are not worried about it messing with the workforce. What about what it does to the person. There is a reason that the bible speaks so much against lazy people. It is bad for them! They have bad health, they are mentally not being challenged, they sit around and are not striving to better themselves. Yes I do think people fall on hard times ( again I have been there speaking from experience), that is what families, friends, and churches are for. Maybe at a last resort the (local) government. But that is not what is going on in the broken country of ours. The government has stepped in and tried to be the family ( school from 3 yo who is the parent?) , and they are taking the churches part in giving and providing for the needy. Our federal government is suppose to be constrained and limited by the Constitution, and it has way over stepped its bounds. Because no where in there does it say that the federal government is suppose to provide food, clothing or shelter to the needy. I know that sounds harsh but that is not in there.
I have a cousin who is in Africa right now as we speak. He is doing missionary work over there, and has for the last 6 years. I know from speaking to him, first hand, that they would be better off without all the "aid" they receive. He says it has "ruined the whole country." He told me that the farmers will not grow crops, because they can't sell them, there is no market for people to buy things they can get for free if they stand in a line. There is a huge black market where the corrupt gov. officials are selling things that are donated to the poor in Africa. He said that they have to spend twice as much to import things that would help raise the Africans out of poverty ( like plows and such) because the gov. officials will make less money if the "donations" from other countries go down. He says that the Africans he deals with have lost hope and focus they are the ones who are "poor" because of to much "charity" Huge amounts of people there do not have urge to make a living, they only sit with their hands out. That is not good for anybody! Our hard earned dollars are going over there to increase the power of corrupt over bearing government leaders, who benefit when more children die of hunger, not less. It is wrong!!! It isn't working and needs to be fixed, and not with higher taxes.

 

I know that taxes are paid, and due. The problem is the scope of the Federal government. The Constitution does not give the federal government the right to tax me and pay for health care for anybody, it doesn't have the power to tax me and pay for a museum for Woodstock, or even for education system. That is abuse of power, and it is over reaching the bounds set forth in the Constitution. Just because it has been done doesn't mean it is really in the Constitution. I do believe that each state has the right to tax you into poverty if they so choose to pay for roads, hospitals etc. But that would depend on each states Constitution. That would be the same for local districts like cities and counties. But those are local issues and not something for the federal gov. to be interfering in. If the locals controlled it we would be able to decide what is really needed, what is really wanted. Do I really want a new road to no where ,or would i rather keep my tax dollars in my pocket.

You are right the 1930's were hard, they are over! But the welfare didn't end. We are not a 3rd world country either.

Yes I understand the rendering thing. I pay my taxes like I am suppose to, but it doesn't really make me happy. The point of that was taken out of context. But if we do not step up and defined our rights we soon will not have any.
As for the condoms, I am not saying that they should not be available. That would be stepping on peoples freedoms and rights, but I do not feel like I have the freedom to not pay for them! If I have to respect their rights they should respect mine as well, because it is a two way street. I am in no way trying to force my beliefs on others, but the same way I wish for my rights to do as my religion instructs me to. I could be a Hindu and not wish for my tax dollars to go to the slaughter of cows to feed those hungry children. I think that if the Federal Gov. would get out of the business of doing everything and stick with Treaties and Armies the states could do what they see fit. It would be more controlled by the local people and if I felt convicted about my money going to cow slaughtering I could go to a state that chose to not spend extra money building a slaughter house.

Since Obama is not really happy with Texas he did not declare it a disaster area until it became a national report that he refused to sign it the first time. He also refused it for a different fire as well earlier in the year. So that isn't just a blanket everybody gets help. It is picked and placed where it will help somebody politically not even and 'fair'. At a smaller local fire where only 4 houses burned on the exact same week as the big fires. They are not going to get any help from FEMA, because they are 10 miles from the big fire. They have gotten lots of help from the locals. That isn't "fair" or even. It is based on who looks bad if somebody doesn't get money.
Yes it does interfere too, because the amount of money given is lower. People think that it doesn't matter the gov. will give them the money they need. I already pay taxes, why should I give them more. I have heard people say that more then once. I have also heard people who do not have insurance on their things "because the gov. will give me new things if it burns why should I have pay for insurance" Stupid ideas but it is out there.
As for the Haiti question. Yes I have large group friends who have gone to Haiti twice this summer ( 2 weeks each) to help build homes. Our church has supported them, with donations and supplies. We have a fund set up to continue to help with people who go to help in situations like those.

I don't think it read the way I was meaning for it to. I simply wanted to point out that we will never be without poor. No matter how high the taxes, no matter how many rules trying to make life "equal and fair" the poor will always be there. The thought or frame of mind that we will get to point where there will not be poor people is leading everybody down a dead end road.

 

YES!!!!!! To everything you said!!!!! I totally agree!!!! Nice to see someone else that gets it

I have to add this tho. If America sucks so bad. If we have the worst healthcare system, so many poor, etc etc why does everyone break their backs getting here? America has ALWAYS come to the aid of every country that has needed it and I for one and sick and tired of it getting a bad rap.

 

Oh and the whole 24 hours before being treated while waiting for insurance confirmation is BS. I rushed my father to the hospital in the middle of a massive heart attack. I had none if his info on me and they treated him immediately. I wasn't hassled or anything else. NO ONE is turned away. As far as healthcare goes from my personal experience the people that actually go to the doc for every little thing are the ones WITHOUT insurance. I have really excellent insurance but I use it wisely, those with Medicaid do not. Those that do not pay for things themselves also do not value them. That goes for anything in life pretty much. Anyway rant over, but I'm sick to death of people that DO NOT live in this country spreading falsehoods.

 

Sometimes ppl without coverage are the way they are because they can't afford it, not because they don't value it.

But I don't think there is one, foolproof, political fix to the issue.

 

I think you're missing my point. By not valuing it I mean they don't personally pay for it so they think nothing of abusing it. It's there and it's costing them nothing so they run to the doc for every little sniffle. That is ridiculous. If I couldn't afford insurance and had Medicaid or whatever my state offered I would not take advantage it. Our ERs are filled with people there for colds. I have family members in healthcare and mental health and I see and hear about the system being abused so this is a really tough subject for me.