search results matching tag: over medicated

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (5)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (17)   

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Paid Family Leave

newtboy says...

I feel like both of you likely made mistaken 'assumptions' in your arguments.
I can't understand how a survey can say 'consumer prices are 36.9% higher there' yet 'local purchasing power is 14.29% higher in the US'...Those numbers don't seem to jibe, or really mean anything without more info. Is that per dollar, per capita, average salary, mean salary, what? If things really cost 36.9% higher there, we SHOULD have near 25% more 'purchasing power' per dollar here, not 14....but you also have to ignore that they have far more dollars per person (even after paying higher taxes) to make your point...and you must also count 'national oil revenue' as 'personal tax' to come up with your numbers...if you did the same for the US, I would accept that, but you don't...as if the fed only gets money from personal taxes.

EDIT: Also, are your numbers AFTER tax income? I note they are AVERAGE incomes, and in the US, most people make far less than the average, because the top 5% takes 50%GDP (+-). Remove the top 5% and the bottom 5% and you'll see the numbers change drastically, and it will give you a much more realistic picture of the average person's income. I seriously doubt the wage disparity is nearly as pronounced in Norway, but I don't really KNOW.

All you complain about them paying for (whether they use the service or not) is the same in the US, yet the (underfunded) services provided in the US for the money are almost useless, so a near TOTAL waste. Do you not understand that? We have decided that, in a society, it benefits YOU if your neighbors children get educated, and also if your neighbors don't go bankrupt over medical bills, and it benefits you to not throw destitute elderly out on the streets, and even if you don't drive, it benefits you to have roads in your area...etc.

I find it hilarious that YOU are outraged and indignant FOR THEM, while they are apparently MUCH happier with the system they live in than you are with yours. You might think about that a minute.

Mordhaus said:

They have less than half the debt for other reasons, many of which are due to the fact that they have an exportable national resource.

The 3 times wage is an assumption. Norway's average monthly salary is 4,451 Euros, equivalent to 5,056 US dollars. The average US salary is 3,640 US dollars per month. I have no idea where he got his numbers from, but these are factual and not anecdotal.

Their cost of living is ludicrous compared to ours, so you have to factor that in when you compare their slightly higher wages.

Consumer Prices in United States are 36.90% lower than in Norway

Consumer Prices Including Rent in United States are 34.18% lower than in Norway

Rent Prices in United States are 27.12% lower than in Norway

Restaurant Prices in United States are 52.31% lower than in Norway

Groceries Prices in United States are 25.87% lower than in Norway

Local Purchasing Power in United States is 14.29% higher than in Norway

Their system is also inherently unfair if you do not use the 'free' stuff. Don't have kids because you are responsible? Doesn't matter, you are paying for them. Don't get unemployed because you show up to work on time and do your job well, doesn't matter, you are paying for others. We do the same in the US, but it is far below the per capita level they pay.

What they don't get, and what some people here are obviously oblivious to as well, is that NOTHING is free. Someone pays, even if you don't. Their system simply nationalizes almost every single company and forces everyone to pay for everyone else, no matter what they do or how responsible they are. Also, note that they nationalized most companies, because a company in any type of free market system faced with draconian rules and corporate taxes like Norway's will simply cut their losses and offshore their work.

So, their system is only sustainable if the government owns the companies, everyone gives up most of their personal wealth, and they are lucky enough to have oil. Yeah, I am soooooo jealous of them.

Fight Over Medical Marijuana

Fight Over Medical Marijuana

criticalthud says...

>> ^Gutspiller:

"I don't feel like a criminal."
Yeah, neither did Hitler. Somebodies been smokin' a wee bit.
You don't have to feel like a criminal to be considered a criminal.
If you're going to picket a cause, at least do it with some proper thinking behind your words.


there is a slight difference between this guy and hitler. ok?

the idea behind his words gets to the core issue: violence to another is criminal, is knowingly criminal, and FEELS fucking criminal. growing a plant is not. nor is caring for the sick.

Changing Education Paradigms

Ant fungus? Try human face fungus. (Gross but moving)

4mybroMT says...

Mark was my baby brother. I only today found this video and site. A lot of information has been left out in this report. I don't think intentionally ....but simply by lack of information. Much will never be known. Forinstance no one mentions his wife deserted him in a hospital and when he was put in a nursing home she didn't visit nor did attend his funeral. (Only a brief appearance at the Funeral Home. The "mold" Organization is using Mark to raise money and have no permission and have been asked to stop. His funeral bill has not been completely paid nor does he have a headstone. This is wrong. I wish there reports were accurate.....Mark has no records of Mold being the cause of this terrible fungus and these people jumped on it before he died and continue to use it for there "$$$$ raising" I certainly would like this to stop.
Mark helped with much education and information on Mucormycosis. The University of Kentucky was wonderful and did everything they could to help both Mark and his wife. He was amazing and always wanted his face protected when he went out so he did not scare or disturb others, especially children. Mark was brave and certainly trying as anyone could understand. Much disipointment, pain and over medicated at his own hands. I loved my brother, as did my younger sister and our brother that died befor Mark. Please stop with the misuse of Mark's name.

Sincerely
Linda

Insurance Company Issues Death Sentence to Customer

Drachen_Jager says...

Notice what's getting airplay these days. Insurance companies KNOW they're on thin ice so they're probably acting more careful than ever about dropping these bombs right now, this has been severely underreported and only because it's gaining momentum towards reform are any major news organizations covering it now.

What was the figure? 44,000 people a year dying due to denial or lack of coverage? 450,000 people a year going bankrupt over medical bills?

Crazy crazy...

peggedbea (Member Profile)

enoch says...

i am so sorry miss peggy /hugs
i deal with many who are considered "mentally ill" and do my best to help,i end up being a shoulder most of the time.
i did find that diet helped tremendously.
i cannot imagine the hell it must have been for you to watch your husband dis-intergrate in front of you.
tragic..very tragic.

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
i've been bitching about this for years. my exhusband has a very real psychiatric disorder, but in the years we sought treatment he was over medicated over medicated over medicated, which only turned a sick man into a monster.

anti-psychotic meds prescribed for children

peggedbea says...

i've been bitching about this for years. my exhusband has a very real psychiatric disorder, but in the years we sought treatment he was over medicated over medicated over medicated, which only turned a sick man into a monster. we were spending over $1000/month on his meds, with health insurance. he had siezures, hallucinations, cried uncontrollably, lost his sex drive, lost the ability to feel love, lost his hair, gained or lost weight rapidly, had the shakes, and visual disturbances (very dangerous considering he was an electrician and a welder and built massive cranes for a living) etc. when i questioned the doc i literally got yelled at and called names. (we switched docs after that one of course) but its more of the same, none of them really know what to do and pharmacuetical kick backs are sweet! he was admitted to the psych hospital on several occasions, but on this one in particular, they admitted because he was so severely over medicated they needed to ween him off all that shit, then discharged him 3 weeks later with prescriptions for xanax, klonipin, wellbutrin, paxil, seroquel, and risperdal, WTF? its fucking sick. and in the end he chose to be unmedicated rather than go through that anymore.
now he lives under a bridge self medicates with meth and booze and gets beat up in homeless shelters.

my biggest fear for my kids is that they will inherit this shit, its coming at them from both gene pools. im even more terrified that i will either freak out at the first sign of mental instablity and rush to have them evaluated and medicated, or be so scared of diagnosing them of something they dont have, that i will ignore the warning signs until its too late.

its a scary balance.

Healthcare in the US vs Canada, Europe and Asia

Diogenes says...

things aren't always what they seem... and while i'm all for a *good* national healthcare system in the us, i think this piece is deliberately trying to compare disparate aspects of us and non-us healthcare systems... to prove a preconceived point (that mccain is *completely* wrong)

for example, i'm an american who has lived in taiwan for over 10 years now -- i am covered by taiwan's national healthcare system here (through employment and taxation), and i must say that it sucks

when this piece interviews a taiwanese doctor and asks how many taiwanese suffer medical bankruptcy in a year, to which the doctor answers, 'none' i believe that the point is completely misleading...

taiwanese don't go bankrupt over medical bills because if they can't afford the secondary care or an expensive life-saving procedure... well, they die -- the attitude here is different, and sadly, many asian countries put a much lower value on life -- heart bypass, organ transplant, chemo, etc, are *not* covered by the national healthcare system -- non-affluent taiwanese just get the word from the doctor on how much such procedures will cost them, nod, and never return... literally

national healthcare visits are provided by swiping your medical id card at any doctor's office or hospital and paying the minimum nt$150 fee (about usd$5) plus any overage on the alloted prescription value per visit -- waiting times aren't much more than a few hours, but the concept of bedside manner is missing completely - a doctor will spend an average of 5-10 minutes per patient, and i've even had them never look up at me from their note-taking (just tell me the symptoms, quickly)

it gets worse, doctors and hospitals are reimbursed through the goverment plan *per card swipe* ... so in virtually every case the healthcare provider will only do so much before telling you to return the next day for another swipe, err examination (you can only swipe once per day), even if this means leaving you in pain or allowing your condition to worsen -- imho, this has to be in contravention of the hippocratic oath (do no harm... even if through inaction)

so why not just return every day for a new swipe and follow-up visit? well, people have to work, and it's extremely unlikely that a person will take a week's worth of half-days just to get something fully checked out (in the work-ethic environment here, it would be tantamount to resigning from your job)

a recent dental checkup of mine went like this...

*swipe*
-wait 1.5 hours
-sit in the chair
-dentist uses a vibrating water-pick to knock some tartar off the back of my teeth
-rinse
-i ask for a flouride treatment (standard in the us) and am told to return the next day
(all of this in less than 10 minutes)
-i return the following day and swipe again to get the flouride, and am told by the dentist that he thinks i may have a cavity
-i'm told to return for another swipe the next day for an x-ray and treatment of the cavity
-i can't ask for another half-day from my employer, so i wait till the weekend and return for the remainder of the treatment
*postscript - the filling fell out while eating sushi two weeks later

for these reasons, most taiwanese with a bit of money buy *private* health insurance plans so that they have a *second* swipecard to whip out and save themselves some hassle and/or a more serious problem due to the mindboggling indifference and inconvenience

keep in mind that my personal experience happened in the capital city, taipei, where many doctors are western-trained and speak english -- i can only shudder to think what healthcare is like in the more rural parts of the island

so again, think twice before accepting any of the glib avowals/disavowals of these international healthcare professionals - imho, it's often a case of comparing one's *good* apple to america's *poor* orange

Parents Plead Not Guilty In Faith-Healing Death

GeeSussFreeK says...

>> ^spoco2:
I'm not going to watch this (I know the case in point), and I'm not going to comment on this video other than this, because this sort of thing REALLY, REALLY gets me going.
A child puts their faith in you, not religious faith, but faith that you will do the right thing by them, that you will protect them, that you have their best interests at heart.
They trust you.
And when you betray a child's trust to the point that you kill them because of a stupid belief in something that you have NEVER been shown to exist over medical science that has shown time and time again it can heal the affliction your child has. You should be medically made barren. NEVER allowed to have children again and held up as a shining example of the sort of absolute horror that blind faith can lead to.
Fuck them... no, actually don't, that might lead to more children.


Worst of all, a child that young can't do anything but trust in their parents, they don't even have the ability to speak for themselves . Everyone is a looser in this poor, f'ed up situation.

Parents Plead Not Guilty In Faith-Healing Death

spoco2 says...

I'm not going to watch this (I know the case in point), and I'm not going to comment on this video other than this, because this sort of thing REALLY, REALLY gets me going.

A child puts their faith in you, not religious faith, but faith that you will do the right thing by them, that you will protect them, that you have their best interests at heart.

They trust you.

And when you betray a child's trust to the point that you kill them because of a stupid belief in something that you have NEVER been shown to exist over medical science that has shown time and time again it can heal the affliction your child has. You should be medically made barren. NEVER allowed to have children again and held up as a shining example of the sort of absolute horror that blind faith can lead to.

Fuck them... no, actually don't, that might lead to more children.

NetRunner (Member Profile)

deedub81 says...

You bring up a lot of good points. I think you just raised the sophistication of my attitude towards this discussion.


Lemme tell you a little about Deedub81: I was raised with 5 siblings plus a foster sister. We lived in a 4 bedroom condominium in San Jose, CA. My parents got one room, my foster sister had another, my other two sisters had the third room, and us four boys shared the fourth. My mother and father both worked two jobs while I was in my elementary and middle school years, both of them have a BA from ASU. We ate oatmeal for breakfast, PB&J for lunch, and veggies from the garden with beans and rice for dinner. My mom would pick me up from school, when I was just 10 years old, and I would sit on the tailgate of our station wagon and throw the newspapers my mom had just rolled. I know "poor."

After I graduated high school, I took a job at the Grill on the golf course of a private resort in the Silicon Valley of California. The entry fee for membership in this club was $250,000. I was on a first name basis with many of the members -some of the wealthiest men in the world: John Chambers, Thomas Siebel, Ronnie Lott, and many others. Some of them would golf 7 or 8 times a month, often with only their caddy as a companion. One of the highlights of my job was the time I spent with these men as I served them their lunch on the terrace overlooking the golf course. My favorite thing to do was to ask them how they got to be where they were. How did they start? What made them successful?

Now I'm self-employed. I supply factory direct construction materials and arrange labor for large, custom built homes owned by some of the wealthiest men in Colorado. Today, for example, I spent all day working with a developer on his 15,000sf home. I've been working with him for the past 3 months and we're not done yet. In short, I know "wealthy."

The wealthy and the poor have more in common than you give them credit for. Many modern millionaires live in middle-class neighborhoods, work full-time and shop in discount stores like the rest of us. I tend to believe that millionaires are more average than most other people think.

In an article in the Reader's Digest, Kristyn Kusek Lewis writes, "The reality is that 80 percent of Americans worth at least $5 million grew up in middle-class or lesser households."

T. Harv Eker, author of Secrets of the Millionaire Mind says,“For the rich, it’s not about getting more stuff. It’s about having the freedom to make almost any decision you want.”

Being a self-made millionaire is the "American Dream" realized, isn't it? I'm not saying they don't have a responsibility to use their success for good. I do believe, however, that they should have the freedoms that we're all entitled to. They already pay a higher dollar amount than the rest of the country. Why isn't that good enough?



Back to McCain and his wealth: How could you possibly say that McCain led a life free of hardship? His family wasn't wealthy, he married into wealth. Also, consider the time he served in the military. Do you consider that "ease?"

Does the fact that Obama had, in your opinion, a tougher life than McCain make him a better candidate for President? Not at all. That has nothing to do with qualifications. When has Obama ever stood up to his party's leadership when he knows something isn't right? I can tell you when McCain has. What has Obama done to extinguish Pork Barrel spending? I can tell you what McCain's done. When has Obama reached across the isle to get legislation passed? Not very often.

Don't get me started (and I don't even like McCain)! I didn't choose John McCain to represent the republican party. It's just so hard to keep my mouth shut when the other option, at this point, is clearly a lesser candidate. All this talk of Obama's lack of experience is getting old, but they have a really good point. Of course, that's just my opinion.



I didn't mean for you to believe that I think the only cause of homelessness is laziness. What I mean to say is, thanks to the many social programs already in place, there is no reason for anyone to sleep without a roof over their head, warm clothes, and a full belly.


Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?

Some do. Some don't. I had great opportunities being born to a well-off family, and sent to private school. Most of my neighbors didn't have much opportunity, while many of my classmates wasted the opportunities that they'd been given.


I wholeheartedly agree that a lot of us waste opportunities. I'm curious, what opportunities did most of your neighbors not have?



This question remains unanswered: I still don't understand how republicans are taking my money and giving it to corporations.




Commentary on the more stable economy in other countries: I was in Japan this summer with my chamber choir. This was our second tour in Japan. I look up to the Japanese people for many different reasons. Americans could learn a lot from their attitudes, philosophies; not to mention their economy. One thing in particular stood out to me on this last trip. I couldn't ignore it. Everywhere I turned it was staring me in the face. "Made in Japan"


We have strayed too far from that kind of patriotism, haven't we?



I agree that there are many countries with great programs funded by the government. I just wouldn't want to live there. I don't want to pay higher taxes. I want the freedom to spend my money how I see fit. Let me give you an example: I donate a substantial portion of my income to non-profit organizations every year, almost 12% in 2007. I hand picked where I wanted to donate based on my personal research and opinions. Some of my donations go to assist the poor. 100% of my donated money goes straight to where it's needed because it's handled by unpaid volunteers, not salaried government workers and politicians.

I don't pay very much for my health care because I don't need much. I maintain a policy for emergency health care, and I pay my doctor in cash when I get an ear ache.

Tell me how my lifestyle (and the life of the families that benefit from my donations) would improve if my money was paid in taxes rather than donations?





In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
Wow, quite a straw man argument you started off with. I'm more thinking places like Germany and Sweeden, or even Japan as countries who manage their economies more wisely than we do.

Scandinavia is particularly highly ranked in schooling and health care statistics, and all of the countries involved use a mix publicly funded schooling (even at the university level), and a mix of nationally sponsored free healthcare, and privately available healthcare.

Only in their mix, they've made the public half so good that there's not a lot of demand for the private arms for each.

I strongly disagree with laziness being the only cause of homelessness. Many have mental health issues, or physical health issues...and government programs don't help as much as you're thinking, because no one's choosing to be poor or homeless.

"Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?


Some do. Some don't. I had great opportunities being born to a well-off family, and sent to private school. Most of my neighbors didn't have much opportunity, while many of my classmates wasted the opportunities that they'd been given.

I don't think there's any inherent superiority to people with money, nor inferiority (or laziness) in the poor. I buy my lunch from a deli across the street from where I work every day, and I guarantee you every one of those people work harder than I do. My education lets me earn more with less effort, and I see no reason why we couldn't make the same (or at least better) education available to everyone, because what I do isn't that much harder than making a sandwich (programming), it just takes longer to learn.

As for your comparisons, I get that it's part of your ideology to assume that all government programs suck, but in my opinion that's a self-fulfilling prophecy brought about by the conservatives who've wormed their way into government. Other countries make government solutions work, why can't we?

I don't know what's wrong with public schools, but the conservative argument that private schools have some magic power that public schools don't is simply silly. My private school was nice because a) they had a tremendous budget b) they had a high bar for acceptance, and c) only families with tons of resources could afford it, which all by themselves self-selects against having lots of kids from troubled homes, or mental/social disorders, underpaid/overworked teachers, and large classes.

In short, when you only let fairly gifted students in, it's going to have a better than average performance. I don't know what would happen if you pumped the same kind of money into an inner-city public school, but I imagine it would improve, but not to the degree where it could compete with my snooty upper-crust school.

As for saying the difference between rich/poor isn't a problem, how many top 1% income earners do you know personally? They're in a bubble, and most have no idea what life is like for the rest of us, because they were born to a life of privilege.

McCain was born into it to a certain degree (Dad and Grandad were both Admirals), and Cindy was born to it.

Obama wasn't. He had a decent enough situation, and his talent brought him good opportunities, but it wasn't like the life free of hardship the two McCains grew up in (and stayed in for the most part).

As someone with firsthand experience with the kind of people that grow out of a family with lots of money, I can say that their personal situation is very relevant to the kinds of policies they will try to enact.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
I still don't understand how republicans are taking my money and giving it to corporations.

Communism is great on paper. It makes you feel all warm inside, doesn't it? If we want a smaller gap between the rich and the poor, we need not change our economy and government. We could move to Cuba or North Korea; I hear they're great places to live. None of those evil corporations.

The rich already pay a larger tax than the poor. They are already punished for their success. The poor already have numerous social programs available to them in this country. There are also thousands of private and religious, non-profit organizations. The problem with governmentally run social problems (taxing the rich to support the poor): when the government is left in charge of an organization, they don't work as well as they should.

As for messing with the tax code to win elections, you've got to have noticed that both parties do that, right? Hell, even Libertarians and Greens do that (when people notice they exist at all).

Both parties have also generally moved the tax plan in their advertised direction (if not always right away, or to the degree they originally promised). Republicans generally flatten taxes (mostly by reducing the high end), while Democrats widen the differences at each end (often by raising taxes at the high end).


Have you ever been to a DMV? Why isn't the USPS as fast as FedEx? Is Public Education getting better or worse? If money and/or time was no option, would you send your children to public, private, or home school to get them the best education available? Most Americans would say private, and yet they vote to give the government more money for social programs. Why? Because they spend our money so well?

The wealthiest 1% of the country donate millions to charities so that they can get tax breaks. I'm not saying they're saints, I'm well aware that they are just working the system. BUT - I'd rather have their money going into the private sector where those charities can fund research, give scholarships, and provide assistance to the poor and unfortunate more effectively and efficiently than the government does.

Nobody in this country should go hungry. Nobody should ever have to sleep with no roof over their head, or not have access to a college education. Thanks to the many federally and privately funded social programs they don't have to. ...unless they're lazy. In that case, what do we do? Support them for life on food stamps?

The gap between the rich and the poor in this country isn't the cause. It's the result. The result of poor education, low expectations, over-medication, and constant distractions. We could talk about taxes.... but they're fine where they are. When somebody promises to lower taxes here, and raise taxes there simply to get elected, I just shake my head.

Why don't we debate more substantial and longer term solutions? "Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?

deedub81 (Member Profile)

NetRunner says...

Wow, quite a straw man argument you started off with. I'm more thinking places like Germany and Sweeden, or even Japan as countries who manage their economies more wisely than we do.

Scandinavia is particularly highly ranked in schooling and health care statistics, and all of the countries involved use a mix publicly funded schooling (even at the university level), and a mix of nationally sponsored free healthcare, and privately available healthcare.

Only in their mix, they've made the public half so good that there's not a lot of demand for the private arms for each.

I strongly disagree with laziness being the only cause of homelessness. Many have mental health issues, or physical health issues...and government programs don't help as much as you're thinking, because no one's choosing to be poor or homeless.

"Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?


Some do. Some don't. I had great opportunities being born to a well-off family, and sent to private school. Most of my neighbors didn't have much opportunity, while many of my classmates wasted the opportunities that they'd been given.

I don't think there's any inherent superiority to people with money, nor inferiority (or laziness) in the poor. I buy my lunch from a deli across the street from where I work every day, and I guarantee you every one of those people work harder than I do. My education lets me earn more with less effort, and I see no reason why we couldn't make the same (or at least better) education available to everyone, because what I do isn't that much harder than making a sandwich (programming), it just takes longer to learn.

As for your comparisons, I get that it's part of your ideology to assume that all government programs suck, but in my opinion that's a self-fulfilling prophecy brought about by the conservatives who've wormed their way into government. Other countries make government solutions work, why can't we?

I don't know what's wrong with public schools, but the conservative argument that private schools have some magic power that public schools don't is simply silly. My private school was nice because a) they had a tremendous budget b) they had a high bar for acceptance, and c) only families with tons of resources could afford it, which all by themselves self-selects against having lots of kids from troubled homes, or mental/social disorders, underpaid/overworked teachers, and large classes.

In short, when you only let fairly gifted students in, it's going to have a better than average performance. I don't know what would happen if you pumped the same kind of money into an inner-city public school, but I imagine it would improve, but not to the degree where it could compete with my snooty upper-crust school.

As for saying the difference between rich/poor isn't a problem, how many top 1% income earners do you know personally? They're in a bubble, and most have no idea what life is like for the rest of us, because they were born to a life of privilege.

McCain was born into it to a certain degree (Dad and Grandad were both Admirals), and Cindy was born to it.

Obama wasn't. He had a decent enough situation, and his talent brought him good opportunities, but it wasn't like the life free of hardship the two McCains grew up in (and stayed in for the most part).

As someone with firsthand experience with the kind of people that grow out of a family with lots of money, I can say that their personal situation is very relevant to the kinds of policies they will try to enact.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
I still don't understand how republicans are taking my money and giving it to corporations.

Communism is great on paper. It makes you feel all warm inside, doesn't it? If we want a smaller gap between the rich and the poor, we need not change our economy and government. We could move to Cuba or North Korea; I hear they're great places to live. None of those evil corporations.

The rich already pay a larger tax than the poor. They are already punished for their success. The poor already have numerous social programs available to them in this country. There are also thousands of private and religious, non-profit organizations. The problem with governmentally run social problems (taxing the rich to support the poor): when the government is left in charge of an organization, they don't work as well as they should.

As for messing with the tax code to win elections, you've got to have noticed that both parties do that, right? Hell, even Libertarians and Greens do that (when people notice they exist at all).

Both parties have also generally moved the tax plan in their advertised direction (if not always right away, or to the degree they originally promised). Republicans generally flatten taxes (mostly by reducing the high end), while Democrats widen the differences at each end (often by raising taxes at the high end).


Have you ever been to a DMV? Why isn't the USPS as fast as FedEx? Is Public Education getting better or worse? If money and/or time was no option, would you send your children to public, private, or home school to get them the best education available? Most Americans would say private, and yet they vote to give the government more money for social programs. Why? Because they spend our money so well?

The wealthiest 1% of the country donate millions to charities so that they can get tax breaks. I'm not saying they're saints, I'm well aware that they are just working the system. BUT - I'd rather have their money going into the private sector where those charities can fund research, give scholarships, and provide assistance to the poor and unfortunate more effectively and efficiently than the government does.

Nobody in this country should go hungry. Nobody should ever have to sleep with no roof over their head, or not have access to a college education. Thanks to the many federally and privately funded social programs they don't have to. ...unless they're lazy. In that case, what do we do? Support them for life on food stamps?

The gap between the rich and the poor in this country isn't the cause. It's the result. The result of poor education, low expectations, over-medication, and constant distractions. We could talk about taxes.... but they're fine where they are. When somebody promises to lower taxes here, and raise taxes there simply to get elected, I just shake my head.

Why don't we debate more substantial and longer term solutions? "Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?

NetRunner (Member Profile)

deedub81 says...

I still don't understand how republicans are taking my money and giving it to corporations.

Communism is great on paper. It makes you feel all warm inside, doesn't it? If we want a smaller gap between the rich and the poor, we need not change our economy and government. We could move to Cuba or North Korea; I hear they're great places to live. None of those evil corporations.

The rich already pay a larger tax than the poor. They are already punished for their success. The poor already have numerous social programs available to them in this country. There are also thousands of private and religious, non-profit organizations. The problem with governmentally run social problems (taxing the rich to support the poor): when the government is left in charge of an organization, they don't work as well as they should.

Have you ever been to a DMV? Why isn't the USPS as fast as FedEx? Is Public Education getting better or worse? If money and/or time was no option, would you send your children to public, private, or home school to get them the best education available? Most Americans would say private, and yet they vote to give the government more money for social programs. Why? Because they spend our money so well?

The wealthiest 1% of the country donate millions to charities so that they can get tax breaks. I'm not saying they're saints, I'm well aware that they are just working the system. BUT - I'd rather have their money going into the private sector where those charities can fund research, give scholarships, and provide assistance to the poor and unfortunate more effectively and efficiently than the government does.

Nobody in this country should go hungry. Nobody should ever have to sleep with no roof over their head, or not have access to a college education. Thanks to the many federally and privately funded social programs they don't have to. ...unless they're lazy. In that case, what do we do? Support them for life on food stamps?

The gap between the rich and the poor in this country isn't the cause. It's the result. The result of poor education, low expectations, over-medication, and constant distractions. We could talk about taxes.... but they're fine where they are. When somebody promises to lower taxes here, and raise taxes there simply to get elected, I just shake my head.

Why don't we debate more substantial and longer term solutions? "Not being wealthy" isn't a disease. All people need is food, shelter, and opportunities.

Don't Americans already have these things?


In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
Yeah, straw men are everywhere already.

Mostly I'm referring to McCain's plan to keep tax breaks for oil companies, and other corporate subsidies in place, while promising a shallower tax cut for the middle class than Obama, but a huge one for the top 1%, while Obama raises taxes in that range.

As for taking from the rich to give to the poor...not directly. I think the rich should be responsible for subsidizing better public education, universal healthcare, and unemployment protections, among other things.

What was it Karl Marx said, "from each according to ability, to each according to need"? I think a little of that is a good idea for everyone, rich included (not that they need help).

I think government programs should most benefit those who have the least, and find the revenue primarily from those who're producing the most.

I'm not in favor of some absolute socialist setup, but I think there needs to be a "compressing" pressure on income disparity, and in the last 8 years the Bush policies have been aimed at removing that pressure, and it's driven income disparity to near record highs in less than a decade.

I think there should be a bottom limit to how low we allow people to sink in terms of poverty. I think children born into poverty should have the opportunity to reach their full potential, despite whatever failings their parents had.

I think there's more than enough money in the country, and more than enough money passing through government to do all that, likely without even raising taxes a dime, just by shifting what we use government for.

I think tax cuts aimed at the rich are redistributionary -- in the wrong direction, and that supply-side economics in a nutshell is to say "in order to best help the poor, give more money to the rich" which is on its face insane, and only gets worse as the explanation goes on. It's a policy invented by the rich for the rich, of the rich. The "take more of my money, and give it to big corporations, because they'll spend it better than me!" is what I think 90% of the people voting for Republicans are unknowingly saying with their vote.

That's more than you asked for, and more than I originally intended to write, but I go on a tear sometimes.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Which corporations does McCain propose to give your money to after he takes it away?

Do you believe that the government should increase taxes on the wealthy and redistribute wealth to the poor?

P.S. Just so we're clear, I dislike McCain. I just like to focus on the facts instead of propagating straw man arguements.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
^ It's a metaphor for the other problems with John McCain, such as thinking the economy is just fine, that tax cuts should be largely skewed to the highest income individuals, and that generally speaking we're better off than we were 8 years ago.

If we must boil everything down to money, shouldn't everyone vote for who will give them the biggest tax cut?

For 90% of the country, that's Obama.

A vote for McCain is to say "take more of my money, and give it to big corporations, because they'll spend it better than me!"

Michael Savage says Children with Autism are Faking It

11735 says...

I wish it were true that they didn't medicate kids with ASD, captbarbiturate, but most of the ASD children I've worked with were actually over medicated. Because the cause and mechanisms of the disorder is such a mystery, parents are often willing to try just about any possible treatment they can find.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon