Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
NASCAR, I'm a bit confused as to what, exactly your health coverage is- are you saying that, because of your military service, you are getting veteran's benefits? If you are, great; as it's generally considered some of the best health care in the country. And it's a government program.
This is what I don't understand about this debate- so many of the people who are so angry about the reform, and making comments about government takeovers, government interference, etc., have spent a large portion of their working life as government employees or are currently on government programs. And I'm truly not trying to pick on NASCAR; my uncle, who is a big proponent of whatever Rush tells him to think, was Navy and then a state trooper- he was a government employee his entire working career. And he lives on his government pension and government-provided health care. Of all the calls I heard during the 10 hours I watched C-SPAN on Sunday, the one that most stuck out to me was a guy yelling about how the government can't run anything- not the post office, not Social Security, not anything. His health plan? Medicare, as is his wife's. A friend's brother, screaming about "Obamacare," is married to a woman on permanent disability, paid for by the government, and their kids are on Medicaid with her. For that matter, so many right-wing people live in states that get more in federal money than they pay in. Most of the "red" states are living off the largess of the blue ones. (Texas being an exception, but Texas is geographically lucky in oil)
And I'm not resentful about any of these things- I think military should be taken care of when their service is over; I think the elderly should have a safety net and I think good governing means looking out for those of us in areas that aren't doing as well as others. But I don't understand why so many of those who have already received or are receiving money or services from government programs get so up in arms when it's suggested that maybe others who are struggling should have an opportunity to benefit, too. I really just don't understand it. It seems like the ultimate in "I got mine; **** the rest of you all."
As a screaming liberal, I think this is not a good bill. But it's much better than the status quo, and it's a baby step in the right direction.
|
Perhaps those people who have been entrenched in the "govt" system arent happy about further govt expansion because of their experience with that same govt? Instead of ridiculing them perhaps you should heed thier advise being that they have dealt with the system that you are blindly praising?
The idea that red states live off the largess of blue states like NY (broke), NJ(broke) and CA (broke) is an interesting theory.
And this blanket statement that covers all govt jobs simply misses the point. A local police dept and an entitlement program are completely different animals.
Medicare by the way is a massive moneyburner that was just made much larger and we are supposed to believe that because we standardize forms that it suddenly will become efficent and burn less money?
That being said there are some positive and much needed steps included in the bill. The problem is that the way they are paying or attempting to pay for them absolutely has no shot of succeeding. Remember that Social Security and Medicare were all supposedly self sustaining programs when they were proposed. Nothing could be further from the truth.
03-23-2010, 07:41 PM
Linear Mode
