So you *don't* believe that people that are poor are so because they are either stupid, lazy or more likely both?

If so then you're a pretty rare conservative around these parts. This premise has been stated as *fact* to me by very well respected and visible members of the JU community literally dozens of times. This premise is so endemic to the site that it's just an assumed *fact* and is implicit in literally thousands of replies.

So if you're one of the few that doesn't subscribe to this theory please let me know because I would be happy to be wrong in your case, or in anyone else's case for that matter.

In reality I had never heard this kind of reasoning in my life before coming to these sites. Of course everyone knows that there's probably an occassional person that does fit this description. But to claim that essentially *everyone* that's poor is so either as a matter of choice or due to some character flaw basically allows the demonization of the poor. It also denies the fact that people can end up poor even though they have worked hard their entire lives through no fault of their own.

Being poor is not a choice.

So please tell me that you deny this premise. Nothing would make me happier for you to prove me wrong in any number of cases possible. But even you can't deny that this attitude does not exist and is not very prevalent among conservatives on these sites.

This topic is also a matter of our responsibilities.

Where as I, as an individual am not going to be forced to provide medical care to others who are rich or poor.  Because we all know that it's not the goverments money.. it's our (the citizen's) money, collected by taxes.

Granted that does make me sound "cold" or "unsympathetic", maybe be even like a real "a**hole".  But in this county, freedom should not mandate me to do so.

On the other hand, there are organizations out there called "charities".  These are places that accept money and skills that individuals give to freely.  Even I, have been known to "give"... WHAT I CAN AFFORD... to charities that I deem worthy.  That IS MY RIGHT to give MY money or skills where I choose, but I will not stand idly by and let someone or a goverment steal MY money or skills to give to whomever they choose.

No, I am not rich.  I barely seem to "get by" most of the time... due to my hard work and determination, I seem to at least keep my head above water.  I also, do not expect or feel it is my right to force others to provide for me.

Could'nt have said it any better.

Bonus karma for you.

So how are France, England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Finland and on and on and on doing? Because they are all socialist by your definition. That's not to say that any one of these countries are utopia but they all have what you consider to be "socialist" medicine and many other "socialist" programs. I suppose unions are socialist by your definition as well. But all of these countries are in a far better position with their healthcare than we are in the US.

Good luck getting by.

And there are many places my tax money goes that I don't approve of either. The wars for example. The defense industry for another. Tax cuts for people like Wesley Snipes for a third. But I don't have a choice as to which portion of my taxes I approve of and which I don't. I have to pay them all or face potential jail if I'm really that stupid to force the issue that far.

So if someone is stupid enough to want to go to jail because they insist on not having health insurance *and* they insist on not paying the $675 tax penalty or whatever it is, then I suppose it's technically possible for them to be sent to jail and if so then I think they "earned" it and perhaps it will teach them something. But in all likelihood for an amount like that the IRS would just garnish your wages for a week or two and be done with it. For me that's less than an average days pay. For someone with a minimum wage job it's like two weeks pay. Talk about penny wise and pound foolish.

Not usually, but it will become a viable one soon in your socialist utopia.

Yes, well, thank God for socialist precision.

Freedom means the right to be just so.  Spending money on beer & cigarettes is foolish, too, but I'm not about to tell people they can't (especially in Germany).  The degree of disgust in which you hold the values of individual autonomy & self-determination is itself disgusting.

Well I know that I'm probably opening a can of worms here but I can't help myself.

What do you all think about The Health Care Bill?

I believe that we were cheated by the Big Interests (yet again). Someone, please tell me how leaving insurances co's their monopolistic protection, no real competition and Medicare not being able to bargain down the price of medicines is somehow in my interest?

Personally I think it doesn't go far enough. I wanted Universal Health Care. I think keeping the insurance companies in control is bad. The insurance companies should be placed under direct control of the government/people so that this thing is NOT profit motivated. Make no mistake that this system is still profit driven.

What about the death threats to the Dem Congressmen and Women? Put those wacko "Tea Party" people in jail I say. Those Glenn Beck/Fox/Sarah Palin zombies need to be dealt with harshly. I am saying the ones making death threats and throwing bricks through windows and such.

Anyone engaging in terroristic threatening and/or acts should be vigorously prosecuted and then put to work improving the nation's infrastructure. No ass sitting in prison.

How about all those men making judgments about abortions? Hey I got a good idea: Let's let the women decide. I can't remember the last time I got pregnant. The bill removed the government funding for abortion anyway so why do those Glenn Beck/Fox/Sarah Palin people keep talking/bitching about it?

To firm up support (and get money from (directly/indirectly) among the all too pervasive and prevalent angry people who can't figure out that there are no death panels, yet scream to the high heavens about supporting those children.

Here's another idea: Let's get the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Those money pits sure don't help the so called debt now do they? Far as I can see Bin Laden is holed up in Pakistan so why the hell are we still in the wrong countries? Perhaps the cost of the health care bill could be covered by the money we are now spending killing people in the wrong places.

I'll buy that. The basis for intervention is shaky at best. We all know about the lies which got us into that mess. Enough is enough. Why does someone's child have to be maimed, emotionally sickened or killed for oil and that idiocy. Do what's right. Convert to sustainable, non polluting (or minimally polluting) energy sources and to hell with the big money oil and Mid-East despotic regimes.

One final plea: Put Bush, Cheney and Rove in jail for the crimes they committed in the 8 years they were in office.

Had any one of us done anything similar we'd be so far up the river only the salmon would see us and then, only during breeding season. All done for greed...and no shame whatsoever. Quite the opposite: and how much are those without health care paying to keep "Tricky Dick II" alive?

This is kind of funny and sad.  The haves will not convince the have nots of anything.  The left will not convince the right of anything.  The dwindling middle class are doing what they can to stay middle class. 

Where I was born, I've seen 3rd and 4th generations on welefare.  Born into it and go for a piece of it when they get older.  easier than working.

Am I left or right.  I believe a woman should choose if she wants an abortion, why force someone to have another mouth to feed.  Also we should have prayer in school and the pledge of allegiance should have under God back in it. 

I believe people should have medicial care but don't need this piece of crap.  We have 3 different health plans now.  1 that covers the pres. and congress.  1 that covers the military/dependants/retirees and medicare/medicaid.  Why not just cover them under one of those plans instead of making another Government mess?  Paying tons of new people to run it. 

Oh well.

The necessary implication that folks who disagree with you about how to go about helping others in need means they only think of themselves is insulting and wrong.

Thing is, some tar themselves with that brush, by their own words and simply by refusing to participate in life outside their own egos, wants, needs and desires.  What's more, I am not suggesting how anyone should help/contribute, just that they should when the means are at their disposal.

Ya know, I have bugger all money, as in nothing you'd call spare... it's ALL spoken for, every fortnight.  I was getting $290 p/w around 20 years ago... I'm now getting about $360, a rise of $70, which is hardly keeping pace with inflation/the cost of living, yet I'll still dig into my pockets when the Salvos come knocking on Red Shield day and give what I can... not so with the wealthier residents around here.  Like the Salvo Captain said, they prefer coming to the working class type of home, because when they go to the plush homes with a couple of flash cars in the driveway, 9.9 times out 10 the occupants will refuse to even answer the door, much less donate anything.  In one case, he said, the wealthy owner of a property just around the corner from here set his dogs onto them... 2 dobermans and a wolfhound.

So yeah, if there are some who think I'm calling them selfish, then so be it.  As my dear old grandmother used to say: "If the cap fits, wear it!!!"

All he is saying is that it's not the role of government but the role of private charity. In other words he's fine with giving of his own choice to help other people but simply objects to being forced to do so. There is certainly some validity to his point.

On the other hand one should be able to express their opinion which is what I'm certain all Starker’s intent was without it being taken as some kind of implicit insult.

I would like to address both the argument that this should be the role of charity *and* the idea of being *forced* to do something by the government. First off charity is all fine and good. But there are two major problems with depending on charity alone. The first one is that charity alone isn't always enough and then what? The second part is that generally to receive charity one must essentially beg. I personally find this somewhat objectionable although there is something to be said for the idea that the rich can afford pride but it's just too expensive for the poor.

Basically I take certain things to be an intrinsic *right*. In a country where CEO's get 100 million dollar (yearly!) bonuses I do believe that certain things should simply be not allowed to exist. In this category I put things that I consider to be a want for the basic necessities of life. I certainly include health care as part of this bundle of basic necessities as a right.

I don't believe that someone should be forced to beg for a *right*. So while charity is fine as far as it goes. It doesn't go far enough in its ability to supply the basic necessities to all that need it and it does require people to get on their knees and beg.

The second idea is the idea of being *forced* to do something by the government and I am no different than anyone else in this regard. I don't like being told what to do any more than anyone else however to me the scale makes a big difference. Some people seem to be taking the principle to the extreme.

Like I mentioned before, who in their right mind would choose to go to jail rather than pay a tax penalty of $675. I mean get real here. If it was $675,000 then that's a different matter. Dependent on your means perhaps even $6,750 might be a different matter. But I guarantee you there is no person in this country to whom going to jail is preferable to paying $675. It really is a matter of degree. Stuff this principle crap, there is a difference between penny wise and pound foolish and that's what I think people are being.

I view taxes in the same manner. The way I see it is that taxes are the price of living in a civilized society. Without a civilized society anyone or any group that was stronger than you could take everything you own including your life at any moment.

Therefore *everything* you have or will ever have in the future is dependent on living in a civilized society. If that civilized society decides by whatever means it makes such decisions that they need to take some portion of what you have for it's own maintenance then you have no complaint whatsoever as long as you're left with at least the basic necessities of life, since remember without civilized society you would in fact have nothing.

Like I said someone that makes anywhere near what I make or more has no legitimate complaint about how much they pay in taxes. Those with the legitimate compliant are far closer to being without the basic necessities of life than anyone in my tax bracket. And that is *fact*, not just my opinion. Everyone complains about taxes, there's nothing more American than that. But taxes have never come close to making a rich person poor. At the very most all taxes at the high end do is to make a rich person slightly less rich. Boo Hoo Hoo! Actually not even that. The most taxes at the high end do is to slow the rate at which the rich get even richer. Boo Hoo Hoo squared!!

Finally, while I will rail against what I call the "politics of greed and selfishness". I really am simply expressing my own opinion and I feel that I have a right to express that opinion without someone automatically assuming that by doing so I am somehow implying that someone else that disagrees with me is *personally* selfish and greedy. I'd like to think I can rail against what I see as *collective* selfishness and greed without someone always *assuming* that I'm applying this to them *personally*.