Looks like it's getting personal again.  ummmmm, let's stick to the issues ;)

Czuch:

anastasia:I like these best.  The guys would be 

Russian
Prime Minister Vladamir Putin has said the US should take a lesson from
the pages of Russian history and not exercise “excessive intervention
in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence”.  

Czuch  Exactly!  And they can cut the excuse making.  I'm not buying any of that nonsense.  The problem with liberal philosophy is that they refuse to place the blame where it belongs. 

I have an idea for a national health care program.  If it were to go through, you have to qualify.  No fat people.  If you're overweight, lose the weight or your on your own.  If you smoke, quit or your on your own.  If your kids are fat, get them to a gym or they are not covered.  If you drink too much, and have any drinking related problems, you're on your own.

I'd make a list like this and people would have to qualify for coverage.  Not only that, but I'd force everyone to join a gym and they'd have to check in each week via a scanner.  I'd 1984 the people to the max.  And anyone wanting a kid has to ask permission of their congressman and get a certificate.  If anyone has a kid without permission, that child is not covered for health care.  Let's go all the way with government intrusion.

No more fast food restaurants.  Close down McDonalds, BKing and all the others.  They have to sell only health foods.

Or, people get scanned when going to a fast food restaurant.  And if you go to those places to eat, you can't be covered on government health care.

But no.  This is too intrusive for the left.  They want to live irresponsibly and have others pick up the tab.  And the government wants to reward bad behavior.  I follow the rule but will end up paying out of my pocket for the bozos that broke the rules and are now crying "help." 

(V):excuses, excuses, excuses

(V):   They are not being punished.  It's a logical consequence.  If you put your hand on a hot stove, you will get your hand burnt.  No use in saying that it's not your fault as you didn't know better (bad upbringing).  If you don't have the skills to properly parent, then don't have kids.  If you want kids, learn how it's done.  Take classes.  Get informed.  But don't offer me excuses.  You do something bad, it's YOUR fault.  Not your mom.  Not your dad.  Own up.

(V):  Americans are tying to get the Canadian costs for drugs, not medical care.  And Canadian are coming to the US in droves for our superior health care syste.

Czuch:   Exactly.  I don't see a reasonable answer to this point.  I also don't get why we should lump everyone into the same category and provide health care services to everyone via a national health program.  The waiting lines will be horrible.  People will not get what's best for them.  It will be assembly line care.  Good when you get your turn but while you are waiting.......not so much.

Czuch:   This is the crux of it.  All the web sites in the world don't change the fact that health care in the US is accessible to everyone.  Parents who neglect their children are at fault for their poor health condiditons.

The Usurper:You don't change an entire health care system on a hypothetical.  Where in the US has a child died because he/she didn't have access to health care?  There are free clinics in every state.  And even at our clinic, the one in my small town, there is a sign on the wall that all people are served regardless of ability to pay.  It's that way all over the US.   Some places try to get out of helping nonpaying patients, but many if not most don't.  At any rate, your pity play doens't work because it's not how our system works.  It's a nice strawman and I'm sure it gets those who share your view to nod their heads.  But it's not reality.

If you can't argue universal health care on all it's aspects and merits, then you  have nothing to say.  One hypothetical plea from pity isn't an argument of any substance.

The Usurper:Is the life of a child who dies for lack of health care as meaningless to you as the book in which you profess to believe? Or did I take those scriptures out of context? If so, in what context should I understand them?.....

A plea from pity is not a sound argument.  And the Bible has nothing to do with public policy.  Even atheists can weigh in on public policy.

.... a more effective, more just, more humane & equitable ...
According to you.  I don't believe that your socialist ideas can deliver on what you suggest.

Bernice: Truth is, it's not really free.  People are paying for it.  Someone has to.  But I do agree with you that people needing care should be able to get it regardless of ability to pay.  We do have free clinics in the US and in some States, hospitals cannot turn away patients because of an inability to pay. 

One of the biggest factors for lowering health care costs is for people to take care of themselves.  Exercise, watch what one eats, and live a healthy life.  People who smoke but want free health care should have to quit smoking or pay their own way.  But that gets into a slippery slope into other life style issues and it's not likely to become a policy.  I'm a tad overweight and there is no excuse for it when I have all the available info for staying healthy.  I have several gyms close by, a beautiful walking path very close to my home, and a treadmill in my garage.  If my weight is causing me problems (it will if I don't get off my butt) then I should do something about it.  Living healthy costs us nothing.  Yet people often don't put for the effort.  I'm for personal responsibility first.  Government help as a last resort and then only very temporary.  And the Federal govt is incompetent.  They should guard the boarders, protect the constitution, and stay out of our lives.

Bernice:

Bernice:I don't know that I agree that free health care is a God given "right."  I do think it's our God ordained responsibility to care for the needy.  But as you say, there are those trollops that suck off the system and contribute nothing.  They have no right to care.  Some people think that by virtue of being a human being, they are entitled to care - free of charge. But what if everyone wnated free health care but no one wanted to contribute to the costs?  An impossible idea. 

I don't know much about the system in your country but will check into it to see what I can find.  If you are happy with it, that say something positive about the system.  But as you point out, there are downsides (and of course I am not saying the US system is the best it can be nor am I saying it's where it should be.  I think there is much room for improvement.

What is the standard of care in your country with respect to waiting etc?  My neighbor just got a kidney transplant.  She had been on home dialysis for a while and then a compatible kidney came through.  How long do people wait for critical care and screening  tests?  Here it's not long at all.  But I know in England, there are long waiting lists for some types of care.  In Canada, and MRI test takes many months.

The Usurper:  Your Bible quotes are meaningless on me.  I just skip them.

It is a meaningless point that you offer because it's only ONE thing in a socialist system.  Free health care doesn't equate to a high quality of life.  Besides that, the health care system in England leaves a lot to be desired.  It's riddled with problems. The only benefit is that those that don't pay into the system don't have to worry about paying for care.  But that care isn't always the best and it isn't timely care.  Doesn't Canada have a similar health care system?  Odd isn't it that many Canadian citizens come to the USA for care.  There are long waiting lines in Canada.  There is a shortage of doctors and nurses.  And just try to get an MRI in Canada.  One man got tired of waiting for his "turn" and registered as "Fido" in an animal hospital because they had such a machine and the waiting list wasn't as long. 

There may be some small advantages in Englands health care system but it doesn't measure up to a free-market approach to health care.  Perhaps the US system isn't perfect, but it's not an improvement to go to a free health care system.  That is more than a step backwards.

The Usurper: Getting ahead, having opportunities to improve one's social and financial condition, becoming independent, is a far cry from simply getting free health care.  You cannot point to any country or system that has a track record of lifting millions of people from poverty to prosperity like a free market economy.  Only a free market system has a history that can do that.  Redistributing the wealth does not lift people out of poverty.  And you can't show any socialist system that has done so.  Pointing to free health care is a meaningless point. 

Czuch:It translates this way:  what I consider to be a better understanding of the world & politics, because it agrees with my view.

  Its another way of saying that you lack understanding of the world and politics.  It's a stealth.  It's the dreaded ad hominem again. 

I'm still waiting for anyone to give a good example of where socialism has worked for the average man.  In what socialist country has the socialist policies allowed the averege "joe" to "get ahead?"  Only a free-market system can do that.

How soon people have forgotten the economic lessons we learned in the Regan era.  Obama's policies will fail because they are built on false premises. 

Czuch:  I'm a totally independent far-right fundy 

Czuch:It's both in my view.  Clearly, some who are well off, but get involved in drugs, can find themselves in financial ruin (not to mention the physical toll drugs take on a person).   Others, who are depressed for whatever reason, self medicate through the drug of their choice.  I'm not sure of the stats on poverty and drugs. 

While I believe there is a connection between drugs and poverty, I don't think there is necessarily a causal relationship.  Except in some cases, one does not give birth to the other.  They are more like cousins.

The single most common factor to poverty is single parenthood.  A single mom has a 60 percent (it may be higher) greater chance to live in poverty than she would if she stayed motherless or was married. 

I'd have to look it up but somewhere I read that in many of the poorer homes, nobody works outside the home.  In many of these cases, the persons were capable of working, but chose not to work.  Instead, they relied on the government to fix things and take care of them.

Poverty is a huge problem around the globe.  All of us who are able should do what we can to alleviate the suffering of others.  Businesses and community should do everything possible to help the needy in our neighborhoods.  I'm not fully against some (read that limited) government assistance but I'm sure that it should NOT come from the Federal government as they waste money - it's better off out of their hands.  Perhaps State and local governments can help but the bulk of caring for the needy ought to come from the people in the community voluntarily.  (And people who can work, need to get a job, maybe two.  When my kids were young and I needed to make ends meet, I worked THREE jobs.  Suck it up, roll up your sleeves, get your fingers dirty and earn your bread!  That's always been my attitude.

The last thing the government should do is to saddle its citizens with oppressive taxes to support the life style of others.  I'm sure we all know or have known people on government assistance that clearly didn't need the help.  They were milking the system.  And we also know that our "representatives" will spend our money very easily - and they can't be trusted.  Even if they could be trusted, "spreading the wealth around" amounts to theft. 

Yes I recognize that there are people in our communities that need help and could fall through the cracks.  But limited assistance seems better than the crazy entitlement system we currently have.  It's out of  control spending that we can't afford and money we don't have.  But now I'm preaching to the choir.

Cheers~

Bernice:  That was a response to Snoopy.  And it' ok to have side discussions as long as they don't dominate.  See my post below ;)

Please note the "hot topic" above (in the description).  It basically means that that particular topic is the main topic of the board.  It doesn't mean that other pieces of news can't also be posted but it does mean that people should try to keep up with the main topic of the board.  The hot topic should be the dominate topic but other small side discussion are fine as long as they don't dominate.  Hope that makes sense.  If the Hot Topic is blank, then anything (reasonably) goes.

If this idea doesn't work, I'll stop using it. 

I can see that Awsome was right about the moderator on this board so I'm going to take a back seat to these discussions and put in my .02 only here and there.  In the meantime, I've decided to go ahead and tighten the parameters around here.  If anyone feels I personally violate the standards I've set, bring it to the attention of a global and they will deal with me. 

Please read what I've posted above.  Only feedback to my personal message box will be acceptable for now. 

From this moment on, all posts that aren't on topic may be deleted without notice.  Also, any posts that look like they are simply personal disputes, will also be zapped.

These rules go double for me.

Bernice:  I don't think people will really like tighter controls in the long run.  I think it will likely kill the board but we'll see. 

Bernice:  Well, political and religious discussion can bring out the claws in some of us.  I think I'm going to have to tighten things on this board, beginning with myself.  I hope that I don't wake up to a mess.  Today was the first day I considered putting the entire board on approval.  We all have to remember that there is a difference between the issue being discussed and the persons discussing it.

Bernice:  They do with the kids at school.  Some even grow hair and howl!

Bernice:  Read my cut and paste posts, at least they are shorter ;)

The Usurper:  Draw your own conclusions on the facts I shared.  But they are facts.  I've asked this before but never got an answer so I'll try again.  There is no system with a better track record for helping bring people out of situations of poverty like the system of free enterprise.  Can you point to even one system where this is not true?  It's certainly true in America and the facts support that.  Even the poor in the USA have riches that the world's poor only dream of.  Redistributing wealth has never worked.  But apparently you know better than the experts.  So where has a system as you describe it worked to create your utopia?

Bernice:Many of the poor in America are rich by history's standards and  rich certainly by the world's standards.

Czuch:I'll send you some government money 

Brian1971: Good food for thought.

Bernice:Those were perilous days.  I just finished watching the entire series from the History Channel on WWII.  Churchill's leadership was essential at that time in history.  But I suppose I can understand Obama's reluctance to keep the bust in the White House.  Sill, the incident with his great granddad can't diminish his positive contribution in WWII. 

Bernice:I'm supposed to be in Arizona but I've been sick for over a week.  All I've done is sit in this chair, watch TV, play on the puter, and fall asleep.  It's finally clearing up although the coughing give me a headache. 

I'm going to go find a good topic.  Usurper will be on maybe later and I'll bet that will help steer things a bit. Where is Czuch when I need him?

I'm confused. All I did was take a nap. 

Bernice:  Ouch. 

Bernice: Did you know that the mother looks a lot like Angelina Jolee?

Bernice: There is an understanding that you don't implant that many.  Other doctors have condemned his actions. 

Burris is getting thrashed in a press conference and it's clear that he's lied under oath and people are calling for his resignation.  lol   The guy is stammering over and over trying to spin away his guilt.  If he doesn't get booted from the Senate the the process is truly corrupt.  What an idiot.    

Bernice: Some are asking the question as to what to do now.  For some, there is the suggestion that the doctor that performed the procedure (the implanting) should lose his license, be fined, or my favorite, he should bear the financial responsibility of raising the 8 kids.  That would cure this sort of thing happening again.

The woman, clearly touched in the head and incapable of raising all 14 kids, should lose them all.  They need to investigate her competency and I think they will. 

Bernice:  she needs a bailout 

Bernice:You heard about the lady here in the States that had 8 kids?  I mean all at once?  She already had 6 at home.  And she's not married, not working, and lives with her mom and dad.  Some unethical doctor implanted 8 embryos and she carried them as long as she could.  She was as big as an elephant.  Guess who is  paying for it all? 

Bernice:

Bernice:Yeah, that was my fav.  lol.  As if he actually could have that kind of policy.  He'd had thousands of requests per day!  lol

Pedro Martínez: This from Urban Legends.

Bernice:Ahhh, never heard that term but I think I know why they use it! lol. 

Pedro Martínez:  How old was the girl?

Bernice: It does take two.  She needs to go to her room too. 

Bernice: Yeah, the little twerp is on an allowance!  That will really help him.  Of course, at 13 he has no clue.  He's not even through puberty yet!  His voice hasn't changed.