TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › John Edwards is at it AGAIN
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

John Edwards is at it AGAIN

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070902/...l_pr/edwards_2

You WILL go to the doctor whether you need to or not. Ahh, the freedom of America
post #2 of 25
What gets me is the democrats always propose this type of thing but NEVER have the money to back it up. Or they have to raise taxes to cover the cost of their "proposals".

Sounds like a consentration camp where you have to line up, be examined by the doctor and then go on your way. If the next year comes and you are not in line, then they come and find you and force you in line....geezzz
post #3 of 25
Texas is considering a proposal to require every school child to have an EKG. This will be done on the school campus.

Still to be decided is how often they will be done, who will do them (school nurses or outside company), who will read them, who will be responsible for the the followup care and who will pay for this program & equiement.

Currently we do screenings for vision, hearing, ancanthouse nigracans and scoliosis. If the AN screening is positive, we have to get height, weight and blood pressures on the child. Beginning this year, we also have to get weight & height on every child from third grade on up and calcuate the BMI. Fitness testing is done at the beginning and end of the school year.

At what point do parents have some responsibility for the health care of their child?
post #4 of 25
Mandatory preventive care? Does this include mandatory weight loss, quit smoking, no drinking programs too?

No....I don't like this one bit.
post #5 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom of 4 View Post
At what point do parents have some responsibility for the health care of their child?
They dont, the goverment is going to raise all kids now.
The people will just make them. AT the age of 5 they will be turned over to the goverment for education and care.
post #6 of 25
Lordy. If you devoted as much time to other things as you do to starting threads about John Edwards, think how much you'd achieve!
post #7 of 25
Thread Starter 
As Hillary was quoted saying, "It takes a village to raise a child"

I can see that happening Heidi, I really can.

Good question Golden Kitty, good question. He is saying he will fund it by recinding tax cuts for the rich. Riiiiight, like THAT will fund health care for 300 million people.

Gee Bruce, that sure brings back some memories of a country that did REALLY well.
post #8 of 25
The Democrats are always taking from the rich in taxes to try to support their programs. However, think about it - the rich are the ones that create a lot of jobs for the public. How many welfare people do you see creating jobs and paying salary.

The tax breaks for the rich help them to create more for the rest of us. BTW we are NOT in the rich people catagory either!
post #9 of 25
In Australia, the tax breaks for the rich are what has allowed them to buy multiple properties, negative gear them all and then drive up prices for the rest of us who now cannot afford to buy a home or even rent one.

How are the rich creating jobs for the public? I don't disagree with you (it's not something I know a lot about) but I'd be interested to see some examples.

My boss is very rich, and he's created two jobs. Mine, and my secretary's. The person on welfare across the street has `technically' created a job by needing welfare - therefore someone has to be employed to provide it.

It works both ways.
post #10 of 25
The rich open the businesses which employ people. How many people on welfare are opening businesses and hiring people?

Welfare is NOT a job - its a handout.
post #11 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by KitEKats4Eva! View Post
Lordy. If you devoted as much time to other things as you do to starting threads about John Edwards, think how much you'd achieve!
You know you love me Sarah.





(there's that word, again)
post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
The rich open the businesses which employ people. How many people on welfare are opening businesses and hiring people?

Welfare is NOT a job - its a handout.
I didn't say it was a job. Read my post. I said it could be technically argued that people on welfare provide jobs for others who work in the welfare system. It's not a `handout', either. Don't you agree with helping those in need?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
You know you love me Sarah.
You know I do, Cindy!
post #13 of 25
lol, they are (dem) are aminig for the small business which is where most people in american have there jobs. According to the dem i am rich, after all they see me as single with home, They love to tax me more. They still have some people fooled(like my father) who think they are for th working man, That may have been true, 40 years ago.
Now they are the hand out party, They really need to change there names.

welfare is a helping hand, but to many people have turned it into a way of life.
Goverment has no business in are personal life,at any level.
post #14 of 25
Thread Starter 
I believe in helping people that want to help themselves. I don't believe in generational welfare. We all know there are two types of poor people. The ones that need help to help themselves and the ones that just want handouts and don't want to work. And yes, welfare, is a hand out IMO for the people that wouldn't work if you handed them a job on a silver platter.
post #15 of 25
That's true. We had a survey done here of young people on the dole once. It was on the current affairs radio show I listen to on the way home from work. Sooo many of them were offered work by employers on air, and soooo many of them refused because it wasn't the kind of work they'd be interested in.

Um, huh??? If you're unemployed, you take a job, and get paid, and earn your living like everyone else. I was so angry about it, I really was. The sense of entitlement of some young people leaves a lot to be desired.

Now I sound like I'm 80
post #16 of 25
Some time back, one of our local news stations went out, with a landscaper, offering day work to men holding "will work for food" signs on street corners. They offered these men $2 above minimum wage, to do yard work. Out of about 20, only ONE accepted a job. The rest of them said, "WHY should I work? I make enough in handouts, to buy my beer."

Back on topic: I don't want a "nanny state". Government raising our kids? We might as well all get measured for our Mao jackets and move into crackerbox concrete dorms.
post #17 of 25
Sounds kind of creepy if you really let yourself think about it..something you might see in a freaky sci-fi culture. What's next, soilent green?
post #18 of 25
I'll have to say that even though I'm a Liberal I don't like the idea of being FORCED to go to the Doctor, if I don't want to. It seems like it's taking away my freedom, and I hate it when anyone feels they have the right to take away my freedom.
post #19 of 25
I agree with helping those in need for a short term - but not living on welfare nor raising the next generation on a "welfare" mindset. Seen it far too much in our own family (DH's) and on the outside.
post #20 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45 View Post
The rich open the businesses which employ people.
(I trimmed the above post a bit. I am choosing not to get into the welfare side debate)

The problem nowadays is that they're creating those jobs in other countries, i.e. 3rd world countries. Not here. One of my former bosses is filthy rich and he didn't want people in his shop who didn't have money. You know how many people he has working for him? One. He's not creating jobs. He should be taxed heavily, same goes for anyone else who makes above XXX amount per year.

As for the original topic, I'm a Dem, quite liberal, ThYVM, and I agree with Edwards to a point. I don't think we should have people being dragged to the doctor, but I see where he's coming from in this. If you get people on board with preventative care, our doctors would see us more often, hence they could monitor our general health.

If we weigh too much, they can send us to nutritionists to get back on track.

If we show the early signs of any long-term disease out there, they can catch it EARLY, thereby keeping our butts alive longer. (my aunt would probably still be alive today if she'd gone to the doctor for regular check ups... she didn't feel any symptoms until she was in the final stages of cancer in her liver and colon.)

If we take our children (those who have them), in to the doctor, they can monitor the juvenile obesity that's running rampant today.

So, maybe not MANDATORY visits, but Universal Health Care for EVERYONE should be on the table. Health care/insurance is a huge issue for me because I've had few employers offer it. I only have a bare bones coverage right now... I have one doctor visit available to me until January 1st. I need to see a podiatrist, but need a referral... so there's two visits there... I'm scr**ed. And when (not if, since it's a retail job) I leave that job, I'll be back to no insurance again... unless I get some kick-a** good paying job that has full benefits. But where are those jobs? Not here.

Anyway... I only came in to look around... I try to avoid IMO, but I had to say something here)
post #21 of 25
Mandatory preventative/maintenance visits probably wouldn't work, but universal health care is badly needed in the U.S.. I can't help but wonder how many Americans who are against it are middle-class citizens who can afford to pay for their own health insurance, or get it through their employers. Do they have any experience of a National Health Service, or universal health insurance that doesn't leave millions of people without coverage? I've seen how it works it the UK and Germany, and it's preferable to the U.S. system, which I'm all too familiar with. Is social solidarity now a foreign term to my fellow Americans?

Go ahead and scream about higher taxes - your tax dollars are now financing the debacle in Iraq, with nearly 4,000 dead U.S. soldiers, while 43 - 46 million of (y)our fellow citizens are without health insurance. Your tax dollars go to pay large pensions to members of Congress who have been forced to resign - are you complaining about that?
post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
Go ahead and scream about higher taxes - your tax dollars are now financing the debacle in Iraq, with nearly 4,000 dead U.S. soldiers, while 43 - 46 million of (y)our fellow citizens are without health insurance. Your tax dollars go to pay large pensions to members of Congress who have been forced to resign - are you complaining about that?
Amen! We're financing cr** that isn't necessary, while millions of us go without basic healthcare. Some without housing or decent food (and McDonalds does NOT qualify as decent food, I'm sorry). Crime is running rampant in this country, ruined cities (New Orleans, anyone) aren't getting the funding they need to rebuild, and our prisons are maxxed. No one here apparently cares about the healthcare or education systems, so they go underfunded and lacking in resources (that's more for education). Libraries get closed because no one gives a flying sh** about reading anymore. Yet, we're sending thousands of young men and women overseas to get killed or maimed. We're financing a 'war' that should never have happened.

Ahem. Sorry... that was blatantly off-topic (although most of this thread has been a bit off-topic anyway).

Apparently no one cares about their health. They'd rather sit on their a**es eating junk food and driving their cholesterol up. They'd rather get cancer and die too young. I'm not going to be one of those people. I refuse to sit down and let that happen to me. I'm not in ideal shape, but I watch what I eat (the chocolate is done in moderation), and walk as much as possible. I'm trying to do SOMETHING. Which is more than a lot of people in this country are doing. People I meet constantly whine about how hard something is to do (change jobs, lose weight, find a decent mate, etc) but they don't TRY. They'd rather whine. Not everyone is like that, mind you. I know that. But I see more and more who are. Is my life perfect? Heck no. (I wish.) But I'm working, albeit slowly, on making the changes i need to make. I accept the imperfections in my life. It's part of being human.

As I like to say: Either make your own path or sit down, shut up and hold on.

*steps off my soapbox* And now, I really do need to go run some errands... erg...

Amanda *ducking from all the rotten eggs the conservatives are about to throw at me*
post #23 of 25
I avoid doctors like the plague. What do they plan to do to people who refuse to go? Send them to jail?
post #24 of 25
I would go along with Universal Healthcare, but Mandatory is just not right. We don't need the Government taking care of us like we were children, and FORCING us to go to the Doctor. It probably would save lives, but I do think we should have the freedom of choice. I personally have an abnormal fear of Doctors and I would rather not be forced to go to one, UNLESS I felt I needed to go.

Oh and as far as taxes go, I do think the rich should be taxed more heavily and not get tax breaks, because they may or may not create jobs for the less fortunate. Maybe an employer who provides a nice working environment for his or her employee's, pays a more than fair wage, and is aware that WITHOUT his or her employee's, he or she would NOT be making any money at their place of business. However, all too many do NOT value to employee's, and do not even pay a living wage, let alone a fair wage. How are they entitled to tax cuts or tax breaks? Also, if the working person were given a break on his or her taxes, may that person could find a way to open up a business themself. The rich man is NOT going to miss a meal or have to get a 10 year old Mercedes, just because they are paying higher taxes.
post #25 of 25
Honestly, I might not be opposed to the idea of universal healthcare if the government didn't manage to hose up everything they touch.

New Orleans has gotten as much or more funding than the Mississippi coast, which actually did get the brunt of Katrina and had as much structural damage on a larger area than New Orleans. But Mississippi is light years ahead of New Orleans in terms of rebuilding. What's the difference? Mississippi doesn't have the totally corrupt government that New Orleans has (School Bus Nagin anyone?).

I look at what the government has done with any number of programs - over budget, under funded, funded on a hope and a prayer (i.e. the child's healthcare based on raising cigarette tax, but not accounting for the drop off in sales), so much red tape and beaurocracy that it makes even finding out the smallest bit of information nigh on impossible. If they could make anything run by the government run effectively and efficienctly, I might be willing to give healthcare a shot. But they don't, and I won't.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › John Edwards is at it AGAIN