View Poll Results: Are Entitlement Neccessary?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    20 50.00%
  • No

    14 35.00%
  • Sometimes.

    5 12.50%
  • Don't know.

    1 2.50%
Page 9 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 146

Thread: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

  1. #81
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    If you lower literacy any more how are the people going to know where the doctors are?

    How do you lower poverty?
    he said lowering illiteracy. Sorry for nitpicking.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  2. #82
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,427

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    he said lowering illiteracy. Sorry for nitpicking.
    I see that now. Wow I must really be tired. I didn't see the il

    Thanks

  3. #83
    Sage

    Mason66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,427

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Why would anybody vote that entitlements are always neccessary?

    Sometimes they are and sometimes people can fend for themselves.

  4. #84
    Professor
    NGNM85's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Last Seen
    11-10-17 @ 11:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    1,571

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    If you lower literacy any more how are the people going to know where the doctors are?
    ILLiteracy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    How do you lower poverty?
    There are a number of ways we could do that. Ultimately, I think the means of production should be publicly owned, etc., however, even very small, basic changes could make an enormous difference. You can also tackle two birds with one stone. One very simple, modest initiative would be to adopt single-payer healthcare, and let the government negotiate on drug prices, like they do in many other countries. This would make medical care substantially more accessible, more efficient, and lower costs, allowing more Americans to get the treatment they need. It also happens to be what the majority of Americans have wanted, for many years, or, as John Kerry put it; 'Not politically possible.', which is a testament to the state of democracy in this country. This would have a substantial effect on the economy, as the high costs of medical care is one of the leading causes of debt and bankruptcy. It would also probably improve productivity as Americans would get the treatment they need, and get it sooner, so they can get back to work.
    Last edited by NGNM85; 05-30-11 at 01:23 AM.
    Economic Left/Right: -7.25, Authoritarian/Libertarian:-7.13
    All over the place, from the popular culture to the propaganda system, there is constant pressure to make people feel that they are helpless, that the only role they can have is to ratify decisions and to consume. -Noam Chomsky

  5. #85
    Sage
    RamFel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,090
    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I don't think in a civilized government that anyone should starve to death or die because a disease went untreated. I do think that citizens of our country are entitled to food and healthcare. It would be barbaric to deny people these things especially when we live in a prosperous country.
    I think that it's really cool getting money from the Govt. It really is. But it's not the Govt's job to provide health care. It's easy to side with those who want to provide these things because it looks like you're a caring person, and us republicans like bad people.

    But there are those with bad intentions. They want to lull us into a false sense of security. To grow the Govt. To have the power over our lives.

    The best thing for us is to have smaller Govt. I don't want go live under a repressive regime.
    We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, 1939

  6. #86
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,142

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mason66 View Post
    Why would anybody vote that entitlements are always neccessary?

    Sometimes they are and sometimes people can fend for themselves.
    I think the question was whether they are necessary to have available in a first-world society. Not that every individual needs some sort of entitlement.

  7. #87
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    I do feel that entitlements are necessary and think that that the only poor folks in this country should be those that wish to be homeless and there are some out here that due to their mental health are very happy living up in the streets.

    There is no damn good reason to where ANYBODY living in the U.S.A. legally should have to suffer without food, shelter and a J-O-B. And how the hell can we expect folks to find jobs when they sending em all away? Do not blame the victims. Blame the Powers That Be that are holding folks down all the while making mad money per year.

    lf we/U.S.A can send money to all these countries to help their peeps? Why can't we do it here at home. We could feed, clothe and assure a job for all people if we would just get our stuff straight
    ~Following My Own Flow~

  8. #88
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,142

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by RamFel View Post
    I think that it's really cool getting money from the Govt. It really is. But it's not the Govt's job to provide health care. It's easy to side with those who want to provide these things because it looks like you're a caring person, and us republicans like bad people.

    But there are those with bad intentions. They want to lull us into a false sense of security. To grow the Govt. To have the power over our lives.

    The best thing for us is to have smaller Govt. I don't want go live under a repressive regime.
    The problem is that 16% of America is uninsured. Not all of them qualify for something like MediCaid. And some of them aren't lucky enough to live in places where other resources are available.

    I am. In Minneapolis, we have independent programs that provide free health options. It's good to know I can go to the clinic for free if I really need to, since I am having a lapse in insurance for the next couple months.

    But Minnesota has a pretty decent economy, compared to a lot of places in the US right now. Not everywhere does. Not everywhere can afford it.

    I'm not more deserving of health care than someone living somewhere less well-off. I'm just lucky.

    You seem to be under the false impression that in order to have public health, we would need to get rid of private. Most countries with public health care still have private insurance. And here's what's cool.

    The reality of having to compete with public health care drives the prices of private health care down to a fraction of the cost, and with all the same benefits and more. It also means private insurance companies break coverage down into more customizable chunks, so you don't have to buy anything other than what you need.

    Let's say you buy insurance for a particular kind of specialist coverage, because you have a disease requiring specialist attention. It may expidite the referral process, allow you more doctors to choose from, and possibly reduce wait times (though wait times are often exaggerated by those against public health care). And the rest of your health coverage needs can be covered by the public sector, since you don't require specialist attention.

    Even if you opt to go entirely private, the cost would be much less than what you pay now. Even if you include the taxes you pay for the public system.

    This is the sort of flexibility and cost effectiveness I've seen in Europe and New Zealand, which I spent a combined 3.5 years living in.

    I had to go to an English A&E once (like our ER). This was in London, which is obviously a huge city. Going to the ER in any huge American city means waiting for 4-6 hours and even if you have insurance, paying a co-pay. If you don't, you're looking at a bare minimum of $350, going all the way to tens of thousands of dollars.

    I was in-and-out in under an hour. And I didn't pay a dime. And still the UK pays proportionally way less for their healthcare than we do for ours.

    Having a public option doesn't take away your options. It actually increases them, but introducing heavy competition. Nothing is more competitive than "free." And it is possible to run public health efficiently and cost-effectively.
    Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 05-30-11 at 02:26 AM.

  9. #89
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by MistressNomad View Post
    I think the question was whether they are necessary to have available in a first-world society. Not that every individual needs some sort of entitlement.
    I saw first hand day in and day out that assistance is necessary. The word entitlement sounds dirty and its use of late is meant to sound that way. I saw people up front and personal that needed our assistance and could not survive without it.
    Theres alot of americans as intelligent and educated as they are have a level of naivette about what life really is way below them.
    In their defense, its something you have to see with your own eyes, you cant read about it or have someone explain it to you to realize, that public assistance is necessary for some people.
    Having said that, I believe theres too many grubbers and phonies suckin on the govts teat that not only dont deserve it but dont need it.
    The teaparty and the far right and the young callous rich kids need to come to the realization that there are millions of americans that really really CANNOT afford to buy the basics and pay for thier own healthcare and save for retirement, because its not going to change and one way or the other they will pay for it.

  10. #90
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Basic Shelter/Food/Medical Entitlements Neccessary in First World Governments?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Baron View Post
    Take a "first world" nation--take what belongs from those who have earned what they have on the basis that "everyone" has a "right" to shelter, food and medicine and PRESTO!...you will have a second world nation.
    We are the U.S.A and can do these things to where we do not have to take anything from anyone. The first step would to be create a law to where any and all food establishments (and places that serve any kind of food be it canned, boxed, fresh, etc) have a right to feed the hungry due to the waste they have to toss out cannot be sued by the people they are helping. Set up check places where any and all food are free for the taking as long as you sign off on a waver that says you are taking this food to eat and blah, blah, blah (legal jargon) and this would also create jobs for these places as they would have to set up and hire people to hand out this food, make people sign off, etc. The same thing could be done in reguards to clothing and other goods that get tossed. We waste so much of this stuff when it could be going for the better good of/for the people.

    BTW, I do mean stuff that is NOT expired, fresh and just has to be tossed cause they are ending a day. I am not saying to feed anybody the crap. I am talking about perfectly good food, clothing, etc, that gets tossed due to having to be tossed over BS sue saftey rules.
    Last edited by Kali; 05-30-11 at 02:41 AM.
    ~Following My Own Flow~

Page 9 of 15 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •