To what degree do you think this is true?

A better life does not have to be a worry-free, pain-free existence. In fact, it probably should not be. Dealing with things we don't want to deal with is what keeps us strong as a race, and promotes our future survival.

Sure, it would have been easier for me if I had a free college education, but it wouldn't have improved my lot in life. Instead of learning to budget and pay back my loans, I'd likely have gone out and bought more car than I needed. I'm aghast at the number of college graduates driving high end cars while complaining of their college debt.

I have chronic pain in some joints, and might benefit from some special treatment or procedure. Instead, I resort to a Motrin on the worst of days, and simply ignoring it on the others. There are plenty of ways I could waste money on such treatments, but I don't because my need doesn't approach that of others. Many out there take advantage of treatments that might better serve others in greater need, all while saying, "That's what it's there for". It's no wonder health insurance is so expensive. Funding for necessary treatment is being drained by frivolous treatment.

I'm still wearing the same eyeglass frames I got 6 or 7 years ago, even though my insurance allows me a new pair every couple of years. Someone out there needs the eye exam or glasses, or some procedure more than I need to replace my frames.

I can't get over the ignorance of the masses clamoring for a $15 minimum wage. Do they really not understand that their standard of living benefits nothing from an increase which drives increases in wages of others in more skilled positions? Do they not realize the cost of goods and services they purchase will soak up the increase in their paychecks because it now costs more to employ the people who make those goods and render those services? The saddest part about the minimum wage target is that it is so ridiculously high that automation will put many . . . not all minimum wage workers, but many out of work. The upshot of that is a net decline in their standard of living because the costs of the goods and services they used to buy will be driven up by the increases in pay for all that remain employed.

You asked, "If these people shouldn't ask their government to find a way to make their lives better, who should they ask?"

It's simple, really. They should ask themselves.

I lost my prior job in a RIF two years ago, and was unemployed for 4 - 5 months. Facing age discrimination, I took the job hunt as a challenge, compromised my expectations, and took a job in a field in which I had no experience. I committed to the company and, more importantly, I committed to myself and to my family that I would learn and perform the job with hunger and passion. I received my first performance review the other day, and am happy to say that, scored numerically, I left no room for improvement. In my bosses words, it was a "glowing review". Bow taken, thank you very much.

Naturally, there is always plenty more to learn and more to do, so I'm mapping out my next 2 years. I'm old enough to "slide" into the "countdown", but I'm not going there . . . no able-bodied American should. If one is sliding, sloughing off, counting down . . . whatever you want to call it . . . that person is cheating the employer.

Yes, this is the Land of Milk and Honey. But we draw the milk from the cow and harvest honey from the hive. We don't just sit down and get it served to us.

 

I say when a man's down...KICK HIM...gives him incentive to rise above himself.

Without the freedom to die in the gutter, we're all just slaves.

Dickensian hard scrabble life was the best life.

 

The expected reply.

Don't debate the message . . . just attack it.

 

the message was naïve and mockable.

 

You're a fine one to speak of naivete.

 

Oh, and I nearly forgot . . .

Disputing my claim is narrow-minded, especially in the context of universal high quality health care for all.

You see, liberals believe that great healthcare is a right, and should be guaranteed to all. Unfortunately, it is not. Simply put, there is not enough great healthcare to go around. It is not a commodity . . . it is a specialty service. If it was guaranteed for all, then doctors, nurses would probably have to work about 500 hours per week to meet the demand (guessing, of course . . . I truly don't have a feel for the real number, except that it is quite high). Far from universal at this point, doctors and nurses are already overworked.

Now, if you can get all of the uneducated on board with studying really hard and becoming doctors and nurses in high enough numbers to make healthcare available enough to support your goal, then my perspective would change. But you cannot.

It is that reality which defies the goals of willfully ignorant liberals.

 

it's only for people 65 and older...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

quick someone phone Denmark and tell them UHC doesn't work.

 

Healthcare is not a ”right” in Denmark

Excerpted from the article linked below . . .

"What Americans consider health care is not exactly offered in Denmark. Too many Americans see the health care system as a backstop for lifestyles driven by chronic disease rather than taking primary responsibility for one’s health through proper diet, exercise, and balanced living. Obesity is less pronounced in Denmark because people eat better, take bicycles, and so on. The Danish health care model is weighted toward preventative and catastrophic care, not the daily maintenance of preventable diseases. There is no blank check for prescriptions; Danes pay for them out of pocket, along with dentistry and physical therapy.

The Danish model enjoys scale economies from centralization, low overhead, and lack of malpractice insurance and litigation, but the universe of health care products and services is limited. Moreover, where physicians are not essential, other health care professionals perform procedures. Childbirth in Denmark, overseen by midwives , costs about one-fifth that of the US. Having no complications, I left the hospital a few hours after my son’s birth, and a midwife came to my home the next day."​

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roslyn...an-should-know-about-denmark/?sh=7610ed57d2e1

 

What Americans consider health care is not exactly offered in Denmark. Too many Americans see the health care system as a backstop for lifestyles driven by chronic disease rather than taking primary responsibility for one’s health through proper diet, exercise, and balanced living


Now this I agree with

 

I do too, but it goes beyond that. The American People have been misguided into believing that they can have unfettered access to all manner of healthcare at little cost to them, if only we'd jump on the Universal Healthcare bandwagon.

What they don't realize is that their expectations for the American standard of care far exceeds that of nations which cover their people universally.

 

Not sure that the statistics bear out any such assertion. There are plenty of industrialized nations that spend far less on health care but receive much, much better health care and health care outcomes. It's at best a mixed bag. For example:

• The U.S. spends more on health care as a share of the economy — nearly twice as much as the average OECD country — yet has the lowest life expectancy and highest suicide rates among the 11 nations.
• The U.S. has the highest chronic disease burden and an obesity rate that is two times higher than the OECD average.
• Americans had fewer physician visits than peers in most countries, which may be related to a low supply of physicians in the U.S.
• Americans use some expensive technologies, such as MRIs, and specialized procedures, such as hip replacements, more often than our peers.
• The U.S. outperforms its peers in terms of preventive measures — it has the one of the highest rates of breast cancer screening among women ages 50 to 69 and the second-highest rate (after the U.K.) of flu vaccinations among people age 65 and older.
• Compared to peer nations, the U.S. has among the highest number of hospitalizations from preventable causes and the highest rate of avoidable deaths.

 

Thank you for answering honestly and directly with how you feel about your fellow Americans. I appreciate that you took as much time as you did to respond and here is my response.

I think you see yourself as the "yardstick" or standard by which you measure others needs. You exaggerate the needs people are actually interested in somewhat but I get your perspective. You don't really draw a distinction between people wanting opportunity and access to education, health care, and a living wage and any other wants they might have. It's all the same to you. Lack of access to any of these things sends entire families into poverty and debt even if they are hardworking and able-bodied. However, when you use yourself as the yardstick you are missing the point entirely and I have to say, maybe intentionally.

You honestly tell yourself that the opportunities you have enjoyed your entire life are available to anyone that wants them. When, in our entire nation's history, has that ever been true? The answer is never. You occupy the single most privileged class in the country and it has been the most privileged class a record setting 245 years and counting. Your class was never enslaved, never lynched, never experienced institutional racism, never was considered 3/5 of a human being, never denied access to neighborhoods, never used for medical experimentation, never knew genocide. I know because I am also in that class.

But for some reason, you use yourself as the measuring stick that all others must be judged by. You did it, so why shouldn't others be able to do it as well? In your eyes, there is no such thing as inequity that needs to be addressed. It is all just greedy, lazy people wanting free things. The very same things you have taken for granted all of your life. Maybe empathy is just beyond your capability to see others for who they are. Maybe it helps you sleep at night secure in the knowledge that you are superior to these other people because you have struggled throughout your life and come out on top. I don't know what goes on in your head as you fall asleep every night but if your words are any indication of your true feelings, you prefer to judge others rather than understand their plight.

Here is a piece of advice. Take it or leave it. Replace judgment with curiosity and empathy as you mature. It lifts a heavy burden from your shoulders and increases your understanding of the world in general. Come on. What else do you have to do anyway? Give it a try.

 

It is exactly this sort of post that keeps me interested in this forum. While fundamentally I don’t necessarily agree with all of it. The message certainly gives me an alternative and well spoken viewpoint that I have learned something from. However I see problems when you shift reward away from talent and ability. Imagine for example what will happen to higher learning institutions if they were made free as Bernie Sanders suggested. Imagine the untold millions of 40-60 year olds flooding universities because they couldn’t afford them when they were twenty. The result would be a lower level of education for all...... I fear the result of lowering standards across the board to create a perceived level playing field will be a lower standard of quality and service. I just don’t see a way around that. In our effort to implement short term solutions, we create long term problems that will be felt long past our generation. Somebody needs to be thinking about the long range impact of slash and burn policy.

 

Aint Bee is getting a case of the vapors again.

 

Thanks Randy. I always enjoy your thoughtful responses. Even when I see flaws in your logic, you always maintain a level of reasonableness and a curiosity that few people have these days.

Back when you and I were young'uns, college was essentially free. It was subsidized by the states through land grants that originated in the 1800's. There was some cost to attend but people didn't go into massive amounts of debt to attend college. Today, that loan debt is topping a trillion dollars. How were we once able to afford to subsidize college but today it is too expensive? State university systems are nearly broke these days through lack of state funding. They have modernized and cut their costs to the bone but the cutting has gone on far too long to maintain the quality of the educational experience. It is difficult to even hire qualified university presidents these days. There is just no one interest in guiding one of these institutions into the ground.

On the idea that people would flood the halls of higher education if it were free, I would point out that going back to school, few adults could afford the lifestyle. Paying tuition is just one expense. Adults are rarely in the position to drop everything they have and start living a student's life. Heck, most adults don't even want to attend college free or not. It would never be a huge factor. For that matter, many high school graduates wouldn't attend free college either. It isn't always the cost of tuition that keeps people out of college, it is often the commitment to do the work involved that holds many people back. Besides, adults trend towards nigh classes while traditional students are day-campus rats.

 

but 60 year olds flooding the colleges getting philosophy and womyns studies degrees.

 

derp

 

Sorry if this response rambles at times . . .

I'm far from rich by today's standards but, because I am conservative, and because enjoy some modicum of success, you assume that I do not relate to the needy.

I'll disclose some personal details about myself for the first time here, only to demonstrate a greater level of objectivity than you give me credit for possessing

• I spent a few of my formative years growing up in a neighborhood where theft was a way of life. I was surrounded by people who chose to do wrong.
• During those years, my younger brother and I each spent lots of time in the closets of an abusive babysitter. Her services all we could afford at the time, and my Mom knew nothing of the abuse until the day she removed us from that woman's "care".
• We didn't have adequate heat in our apartment during those years, and I can recall Mom running the kitchen oven overnight on cold winter evenings to keep us warm enough.
• The ability to buy a school lunch to enjoy with my schoolmates was always out of reach, from kindergarten straight through high school graduation.
• Even the Yodel and Ring Ding laden lunches other kids brought to school in those nice colorful metal lunchboxes had me sheepishly wondering if I was worthy of eating with them.
• I regularly passed on milk and drank water at lunchtime to save my milk money to buy gifts at Christmastime.
• For the great majority of my childhood I was extremely underweight for my age, and was endlessly picked on by some for being so. This is no different than being picked on for being overweight, having different skin color or having a bad limp.
• I was also regularly ridiculed for my highwater pants and outdated clothing, largely thrift shop or clearance items.
• There was no shortage of opportunities for me to go down the wrong path. I chose not to, while several I knew went the other way . . . very far the other way.

The above were not enjoyable conditions, but they shaped me. They instilled in me a determination to make more of myself than destiny would deliver with less than my fullest effort.

In your post you stated, "In your eyes, there is no such thing as inequity that needs to be addressed" and "It is all just greedy, lazy people wanting free things". Those statements do not accurately describe how I feel.

I've been on the other side of inequity, and have great sympathy for those who are singled out by others for being different, and for those who are needy beyond their control. That has nothing to do with laziness.

However, I oppose those whose position is that inconvenience, discomfort, or disagreeable instructions / responsibilities justify not carrying their weight. There are those, quite capable of carrying their load and of paying their fair share of the taxes who, at the first sign of difficulty, opportunistically go on the government dole instead. I have personally witnessed that behavior. It is more common than you are aware, or that you let on, and it boils my blood.

This is not a black vs. white issue, by the way. I know many more white folks than blacks who "shirk the work", but that may be due to under-representation of blacks in my locale. I don't know for sure but, for the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't really matter.

I think you get now that I can relate. I get that the have-nots want things. I've lived it, but I learned early on that it was not right to ask others to provide what I desired, and certainly not to just take it. I had a roof over my head though it wasn't always warm, food in my belly though it wasn't tasty, clothes on my body though not stylish, and I was going to school albeit not the best. None were as good as I might have had, but all were adequate. They gave me a start, and I've made of it what I did.

I've not climbed as far from adversity as a Ben Carson, a Thomas Sowell or a Ronald Reagan, all of whom I admire greatly, but I've climbed out, and can look back and declare that it is not only possible to escape poverty without government assistance, but that to do so is well within reach for all. How can I state that so emphatically?

It's because looking back at all of the very wrong decisions I could have made, I could easily have neglected my education, or amassed a lengthy criminal record, or fathered children prematurely, or become substance dependent, or buried myself in debt, or some combination thereof. It was not for lack of opportunity, believe me.

So, how is it that I was able to avoid those pitfalls? . . .

Was it dumb luck? . . . No, I was in those same situations with others who chose differently. The difference was that I decided not to tempt fate while others rolled the dice. For them the decision was not based on what was right, but whether or not they would get caught or their luck would run out.

Was it "white privilege"? . . . No, in those situations there were some blacks who chose far better than some whites did, and the results bear that out.

Some making the wrong choices managed not to get the short end of the stick, but not all, and that's the point. None of us should be tempting fate if the potential consequence can be attributed to being "dealt a bad hand", as the dealer is usually the owner of the decision made.

From my perspective, people getting free things without working for them is the inequity that needs addressing. It is unfair to all who do work for what they have. This statement addresses only the able-bodied, and not those who cannot help themselves.

In a utopian existence, we'd all just relax, stress-free and in maximum comfort, sipping our favorite drinks and listening to the surf while basking in the warmth of the sun. Hakuna matata, baby.

Of course, if everyone was equally able to enjoy that utopian existence, and no one had to work, the human race would perish in a heartbeat. No one gathering / preparing food, no one sheltering us from the rain, no one heating our shelters, no one refilling our drinks. That is precisely why Utopia is an impossibility . . . reality gets in the way every time . . . no matter which direction you approach Utopia from, you can never get there.

As for measuring others against me, I don't honestly think I'm doing that. Rather, I sometimes contrast where I am against where I came from, if only to illustrate to others that it is all too realistic to take charge of one's own life, one step at a time. Success comes in small bites, as does upward mobility. It doesn't and shouldn't just get handed over . . . not to me, not to you, not to anyone. If it did, the recipient wouldn't be there long, as maintaining one's changed standard of living is dependent on lifestyle choices, or the new standard of living would soon burn out the ability to maintain it. Many former professional athletes and winners of the lottery are examples of this. Being given an abrupt lift up the ladder is but temporary relief because the ascent was not an organic outcome of sustainable effort and valued productivity.

You wrote, " . . . The very same things you have taken for granted all of your life". If I take so much for granted, why do I push myself so hard to excel? Am I just plumb stupid, or do I realize that carrying my own load is central to dignified living, and an important example to set for others?

You also wrote, " . . . you prefer to judge others rather than understand their plight". Sorry, but I dispute that assertion. I understand the plight of those who cannot support themselves, and I understand and despise the manipulation by those who can, but will not. They are stealing the resources intended for the helpless.

Finally, you wrote, "I think you see yourself as the "yardstick" or standard by which you measure others needs. " My answer to that is, no, I don't measure the needs of others by my own. Rather I see myself as one example of many where, in the absence of government intervention, a bad start doesn't have to stand in the way of a good finish,

Perhaps, because you've not been in my shoes, that's harder for you to relate to.

 

Very well said, @toughcoins.... I have a much similar backstory. My earliest memory was my very young mom sobbing in our living room when "the men" came to take our car away. That was shortly after my father ran off to chase a lady country music singer.... I too grew up without the nice things that the popular kids enjoyed. I was working at thirteen so that I could have a bike and bell bottom bluejeans. I remember my mother weeping when she signed me up for the low cost school lunch program. It was reviling to her to have to accept help for her son..... I may be a white male but I was not handed some magical group pass that afforded me a higher standard living befitting of a Caucasian male. In fact I very clearly remember my first NCO review board. I worked hard to make something of myself in the Army and deserved that promotion. Unfortunately, I did not receive the promotion my first review due to an equality standard. The promotion was given instead to a black fellow who happened to be a friend of mine. He and I shared an apartment off base. I didn't begrudge him at the time, but I was hurt inside. I didn't understand what equality had to do with the hard work and effort I had put forth. But I was a mere lad of nineteen at the time and had no idea what forces were at work that were shaping our nation.

All that to say, that I believe you have clearly defined what needs to be considered as we rush along at lightning speed to adjust the levels of equality in our nation today. Do we replace talent and effort with a free pass up the ladder? I fear that may portend danger for us all if that is the plan.