View Thread

Atheists Today » Power and Control » U.S. Politics
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
Starner Jones, MD
Sinny
Anyone get this in their e-mail?

http://spotlight....s-culture/

Well here's a counter to it [scroll to end]

http://www.snopes...tarner.asphttp://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/starner.asp
 
Theory_Execution
I don't think the reply went far enough, the doctor is recorded as a hunter, a fisher, a golfer and a college football player (american football).

As a doctor he should know how dangerous those things are as sports. The amount of injuries one can pick up would cost a poorer person a fair wad in medical treatment.

Does this doctor really mean to say that the poor should not persue happiness as it may increase their risk of needing medical aid?

Maybe he is, in the UK most doctors go into the profession to help people - seems some are just in it for the money.
 
Sinny
What I think he means is that since they are getting Government funds/taxpayer funds to have free health care and need that then where are they getting the money to afford luxuries most poor and working people can't afford.

I do agree with this Dr. to a point but not much. I went years without a cell phone and never had money to piss away on expensive over priced name brand sneakers. I sure as shit didn't pay $$ for a tattoo when I couldn't afford food and didn't have health care for myself and I didn't get rental assistance either. None of these products are necessity to me.

Now having said that the cell phone could have been donated to an organization the patient got from them. the sneakers well who knows maybe they were a gift as doubtful and unlikely that may be they could have been. The tattoo ...heh you're not so poor after all.
 
catman
Yeah...I'm torn about this one. One thought I have says, "Yeah, this person had screwed-up priorities", but another says, "How would you like to be judged by how much you've spent on musical instruments?"
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Hypatia
This is something I'm kind of drawn about too.

These days a lot of people don't have land line phones and use cell phones instead. A person does need a phone, for emergencies at least. And most phones come equipped with at least a few ring tones to choose from, so it doesn't mean a ring tone is an added cost. There are quite a few pay-as-you go cell phones these days that are relatively inexpensive compared to long term plans and the cost of having a land line.

Also, things like tattoos and gold teeth, etc., are things a person could have acquired before they were on public assistance of any kind, and name brand clothing can be found in many thrift stores, even sneakers.

It's amazing how people love to rattle off old adages like, 'Don't judge a book by its cover', 'Just be yourself', 'Live and let live', etc., etc., but rarely do we seem to actually live by them. We constantly judge books (read 'people'Wink by their covers, many have no interest in living and allowing others to live as they please, and when people are themselves what we often hear is something like, 'What's wrong with you? That's not how it goes/is done/should be', etc.

At the same time, I know there are plenty of people who look for and take every free ride they can find, and then take if for as many more rides as they can.
 
Bob of QF
(first, I must say, NONE of my following commentary applies to anything anyone has said on A.T-- and I most certainly am NOT directing the following at Hypatia or anyone else herein)

-------------------------------------

Hypatia wrote:
...At the same time, I know there are plenty of people who look for and take every free ride they can find, and then take if for as many more rides as they can.


Yes, there are:

My reply? So fuckin' what?

We are supposedly the richest nation on earth-- can we not afford a few freeloaders? What is the actual percentage of these freeloaders, compared to actual wage-earners? 1%? 10%? 50%?

If the numbers are less than 1% as it was the last time I looked (late 90's), we can easily afford to entertain a few of these deadbeats. It's their life-- if they want to waste it on do-nothing, let'em, I say.

The numbers who abuse the safety-nets are far, far lower than the numbers of unfortunate folk who need an occasional safety-net to keep them from being entirely destitute. And the overall numbers of both? Still low, when compared to the total numbers of working/contributing people.

What happened to the spirit of charity, where people who have fallen on hard times, get a hand-up?

I see selfishness, greed, and "I got MINE, so fuck the rest of you" attitude coming from people who's religion is supposed to teach them charity, humbleness and love-of-fellow man.

<gag>

It rankles me to see selfish people bellyaching that some poor sot is "getting a free ride on the system".

I've actually looked at "the system" and it's "free ride". It is horrible. It is worse than the wages paid to part-time McDonald's employees.

Which is why the majority of people on public assistance typically get off it, within 6 months to a year.

Sure, there are a minor percentage of hangers-on, who subsist on it endlessly, with no thought or ambition of getting out.

'So what?' Says I.

We are a rich nation [relatively speaking]. We can afford a few deadbeats here and there.

It's better than them going 100% into criminal activities instead.... as such low-ambitious people are often want to do.

That doctor?

At the head of the article?

Can kiss my ass-- he is the very epitome of selfish "I got MINE-- FUCK THE REST OF YOU" attitude.

Makes me sick.
Edited by Bob of QF on 03/09/2010 13:28
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
catman
When a distinction can be made between those 'few deadbeats' who abuse the system, and the other people who are actually down on their luck through no fault of their own, I say let's make the distinction.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Sinny
All have very good logical reasoning for both sides of this. There are a lot of variables most people don't consider when we all see people who need help and seem to have more than most other people without help have. I think it's more than just a few free-loafers who take way advantage today simply because they found out they can do it and no one will or can stop them. I have seen women wearing expensive fur coats and they weren't imitation they acquired while on rental assistance. Of course I know what they did to get those expensive coats and the jewelry to match.

I think the reason people like this Dr. get so upset is because he see's people who don't even have what that patient has and can't get any kind of assistance because they either don't have children or don't have a disability to get that assistance and free medical care to go with the assistance. Others get upset because they see it as they are paying for them to have what they have with their tax dollars.

Hypatia and Bob I know you are right in that most people did acquire what they have over time and very possibly before they lost their jobs, etc. and if the % isn't very high it's not biggie but to many people today who are struggling it's a big deal to them. To be honest I do see a lot of people getting these things while on Government assistance not before simply because they know how to work the system...and why would they even bother to get used brand name sneakers when they can buy new. The thing that bothers me is women getting pregnant to be able to get Gov't assistance even if only for a little while until they can get some kind of trade/college to get a job. It's insane to set that guideline to be eligible for help after unemployment.

The poor people I truly feel for are those living in shelters and on the streets not the people most consider poor who live in a furnished apt.

Oh btw we just got a new shelter built in a town close to me... I haven't seen the inside yet but have been told it's nice and is like a hotel LOL. Well of course it is it's new and it accommodates a lot of people who need it to live in. What did she expect old and run down when it's newly built.
 
Bob of QF
catman wrote:
When a distinction can be made between those 'few deadbeats' who abuse the system, and the other people who are actually down on their luck through no fault of their own, I say let's make the distinction.


Considering the cost to run a bureaucracy? Is it worth the extra cost of the extra paperwork? Doubtful.

Besides-- these folk are punishing themselves, by wasting their once-around-the-track life as a bum.

To me? That more than offsets anything they think they get away with.

The point is-- depending on how you set your "grid of detection", you'll screw up in some way that will harm people who really deserve the help, just trying to get at a few deadbeats.

Just as we often let a few guilty go free, so that we [hopefully] rarely punish the innocent, we can let a few deadbeats slide, in order to continue to help those who truly need it.

It just ain't worth the cost to police it to a finer degree-- the cost would be in failed human lives, far worse than mere money.

But that's my opinion, obviously.
Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
 
catman
I think we could at least screen out most of the deadbeats. No system would be perfect or impossible to fool, but as I said, when a distinction can be made...

Since some people want to be bums (I had one in my family), they don't regard it as 'punishment'.

EDIT: I made the change from "have" to "had" above because I had an answering machine message from the Denton, TX Forensic Examiner when I got home from my gig tonight, stating that my 57-year-old brother has died. I'm still in shock. I may not be on here much for a while.
Edited by catman on 03/14/2010 03:59
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
 
Theory_Execution
I think the only people who can truely object to government handouts, are those hard working people who struggle to survive on minimum wage.

And to being unemployed and needing government assistance, I was there for nine months, and it nearly killed me. It strips your confidence, kills your self worth and drives you into debt.

Living on government handouts in most cases (theres the odd one where a family have landed a million pound home in the UK) is no way to live, its bleak survival.
 
Doubting Thomas
I'm really wondering if this is an urban legend. I've seen it before, but just can't remember where. Probably in an email forwarded by one of my conservative family members.

And dare I say that there is a hint of racism in that story? Gold tooth, R&B ringtone, and being on Medicare? As if Obama is only going to pay for the medical expenses of African-Americans.
Edited by Doubting Thomas on 03/10/2010 13:07
You're just jealous because the voices are talking to me and not you.
 
Hypatia
Doubting Thomas wrote:
I'm really wondering if this is an urban legend. I've seen it before, but just can't remember where. Probably in an email forwarded by one of my conservative family members.

And dare I say that there is a hint of racism in that story? Gold tooth, R&B ringtone, and being on Medicare? As if Obama is only going to pay for the medical expenses of African-Americans.


Sinny added a link to Snopes in her op.
 
Doubting Thomas
Sorry, I missed that.
You're just jealous because the voices are talking to me and not you.
 
Sinny
How I see it is it's more than just a few deadbeats today. Years ago it may have been just a few but not anymore and it's not limited to only black people or aliens. It's people from all races who try to cheat the system. They never consider it a punishment and usually get away with it up to the day they die. The only time it's a bitch for them is when they choose disability and stick with that because most people don't know once they reach retirement age the buck stops there. That happened to some people I know and it totally threw them for a loop. The reason they were on disability was because they couldn't work and when they reach retirement age the checks stop and they go on Social Security. I'm not sure about anything else they could apply for but one woman I know ended up losing her house because she couldn't pay the taxes when her husband died and she no long had both his and her Social Security to live on. She had to choose between the two SS checks to take and of course she chose the higher of the two which was standard procedure from what I was told. This woman didn't cheat the system but it sure looks like the system cheated her. Those deadbeats out there who get away with cheating the system are also cheating every person who goes to work everyday even when they don't want to and pay the tax dollars that pay their way and they also cheat the people who really do need the help. If there weren't so many deadbeats out there there would be more money for more people who desperately need the help....even if only until hey get on their feet again or at least to help them have a chance in life.
Edited by Sinny on 03/13/2010 22:35
 
derF
All right. I have followed this thread for a while and there are good arguments for both views on the topic.

To me this doctors' article has a fishy odor about it. He bases his opinion on one patient he had the night before he wrote it. There is no mention of any other patients he has had that would add more weight to his argument. Is this the only customer he has had that he feels is milking the system? If so then I would think that he my be falling prey to his own prejudices. If not, then this highly trained and educated person has failed to mount a convincing argument to support his position.

Either way, he has written an article that is transparent and hollow, lacking any documentation or proof (rather that his one observation) that his claim is factual. Therefore I suspect ulterior motives.


Edited with a vengeance.
Edited by derF on 03/14/2010 00:27
I'll drink to that. Or anything else for that matter.
 
Jump to Forum: