General welfare not individual welfare. This means we should provide an environment where success is available to all rather than guaranteeing success to all. A safety net could be intended but likely wasn't because it is juxtaposed to the liberty clauses. Liberty means freedom to succeed and freedom to fail.
Question for the day?
- Thread starter WCS Coach
- Start date
General welfare not individual welfare. This means we should provide an environment where success is available to all rather than guaranteeing success to all. A safety net could be intended but likely wasn't because it is juxtaposed to the liberty clauses. Liberty means freedom to succeed and freedom to fail.
I'm all in with personal responsibility, yet I pity the irresponsible enough to find a way to help them.
I look at my path, I have worked hard, but I've had help. I have no answers. Big picture, general welfare helps individuals. Individual welfare helps the general welfare of a society. Nothing is perfect.
No one is saying the "truly needy" should be left under the bus.
Am saying those who "crawl under the bus" for a "free handout" don't get my sympathy when the bus runs over them...
1) YOU'VE worked hard. A big key.
2) Government help? Did you have help or take advantage of the opportunities available to all?
3) General welfare does help individuals but is designed to benefit the masses that contains individuals.
4) No general welfare attempt should be aimed at an individual or even group of individuals or it isn't "general".
I'm not opposed to the government helping people that can't help themselves. What I am opposed to his people that have money to walk into any convenient store buy a 12 pack of beer, lottery tickets, and cigarettes, and then depend on me to pay for their insurance.
Oh, did I forget to mention cable or satellite TV in a big screen TV?
If you're going to be poor at least be poor all the time if you're counting government help.
You are correct, healthcare should not be a want. However when you decide that you were going to spend your money on 50 other things before you purchase your healthcare and then you expect me to pay for it I have a problem with that.
If that makes me a bad Christian, then I guess I'm just a bad Christian.
Hate to break it to you, but you already pay for their care through your premiums.
Again, private insurance is really terrible by any metric.
I can't disagree, better to let social services handle the details. Who are we to judge? We have our own bills to pay.
Gosh, those terrible people paying for food and housing before medical premiums.
There are millions of people in America who do not make enough to pay for their health care and their basic necessities. Full stop.
ONE MORE TIME for the slow to catch on....... WHO said food and shelter were reasons to deny healthcare freebies?
The average American going into bankruptcy for health care was not going there because they spent the money on weed and a 1972 Camaro. it's a total red herring of an argument for him to raise. They were going there because they ran up a huge bill that they had no hope of every paying off on a working class wage.
And the same is true of health care for millions of people who can't afford it now. We are talking about a risk that runs into the five figures on an annual basis for many people. That is not affordable for many, many people.
You didn't say that though. You said food and shelter when no one else cited any necessity (unless you are Cowherd and think cell phones are).
Another red herring from you.....he never mentioned bankruptcy from healthcare either!
He said we shouldn't be buying health insurance for those who have not chosen health insurance as a high priority placing it behind wasteful things.
Do you mean cellphones or smartphones? Smartphones are a luxury. Cell phones are a basic form of communication in today's world.
They may be a basic form of communication for you, but the are not an absolute necessity in order to live. I never mention things like food in the housing and all you were trying to do is create a strawman argument by going there.
I am referencing people who absolutely put every convenience and want a head of the things that they need. You and I know that they are both out there and we waste billions and billions of dollars on these freeloaders. The government doesn't care because it isn't their money, but it is partly my money and I do care.
You are correct that I do pay part of it in high insurance premiums, we also pay when we go to hospitals him right off bad debts from people who do not have insurance, but I don't need the government mismanaging more money on top of that.
We have created a culture who does not want to work, because they know that somebody will be there to take care of them when they don't. I would love to have seen the look on all of our educators faces in high school if everyone would've gotten a B whether they did any work or not. It wouldn't take very long before you would figure out that you don't need to work in order to get a good grade.
I am referencing people who absolutely put every convenience and want a head of the things that they need. You and I know that they are both out there and we waste billions and billions of dollars on these freeloaders. The government doesn't care because it isn't their money, but it is partly my money and I do care.
You are correct that I do pay part of it in high insurance premiums, we also pay when we go to hospitals him right off bad debts from people who do not have insurance, but I don't need the government mismanaging more money on top of that.
We have created a culture who does not want to work, because they know that somebody will be there to take care of them when they don't. I would love to have seen the look on all of our educators faces in high school if everyone would've gotten a B whether they did any work or not. It wouldn't take very long before you would figure out that you don't need to work in order to get a good grade.
Thats what these clowns don't get. The ignorant need to wake up and realize its just a monetary shakedown
Amazing how you have all the answers but you've never actually created a meaningful job market yourself.
When you can say you've paid the majority of the bill for your 25,000+ employee's Health Insurance, come back and see US...
Until then...just speculation .
Basic access to communication is a necessity for basic life tasks like scheduling medical care, applying for jobs, etc.
Not a bleeding heart.
Wasting money is important to you though. Responsibility is a dirty word.
How did we all not die without our smartphones then? Wait, maybe BASIC communication isn't what you want.
If you persist.....you keep saying your family needs Obamacare to keep you solvent. How many smartphones in your family? How many "regular" cellphones?
Are you stupid enough to believe saving, at most, $1,500 is enough to cover the cost of healthcare that routinely runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars?
No, I'm saying the average person doesn't have annual medical expenditures in that range but they do have things that if they sacrificed would pay for health insurance. What you want is for the taxpayer to subsidize lifestyle rather than health insurance.
What each individuals hardships are differ. The timing of those hardships differ. What stage of life they happen differ. Everyone has hardships and it usually affects living standards. Such is life. There shouldn't be a government program that pays for one persons hardship but not anothers.
What a great example to "prove" your point. A point that I'm not even debating.
You're right to the extent the private market provides for adequate ability to insure those hardships, which it doesn't for medical care.
And there's a difference in the consequences of individual hardships.
Whether I have a heart or not doesn't really matter here. You simply will go under doing what our government is currently trying to do. We have millions of people that are only taking and not contributing anything in return because our government allows that. Your comments only illustrate what I have been saying. We have a society that has been conditioned to expect government to be the answer for anything they think they deserve. This country didn't get to where it is with that mentality. People worked and took care of themselves. If a neighbor needed a hand then they helped their neighbor, but they didn't expect a freebie from the government.
My father was a life long Democrat and he would have died before taking a dime from the government. He worked two jobs most of his life to take care of us, but you see that was the way he was conditioned. The problem in most cases is people simply don't want to work one job, much less two.
The only reason the government is running a 4% of GDP deficit is because one party pretends it doesn't have to fund its spending.
There is no serious case that the US cannot fund its current level of federal programs if it wants to. Had the Bush tax cuts never happened, the US would have a budget deficit that is under its GDP growth rate.
I am all for federal programs incentivizing work. I have no problem updating programs and the tax code to make them more efficient. This is not what the Rs are trying to do. They just want to give money to rich people.
The level of incentives to not work in the US are very low for people under the age of 65.
I will give you that the Republicans spend money that they should not be spending and that is exactly my point. The answer isn't to continually tax the hell out of the American people, the answer is to quit wasting money and spending it on people who refuse to contribute to society.
The role of the United States government is to protect it's citizens. If we're going to spend money that should be the first thing we spend it on.
That isn't possible! They are a BASIC form of communication. Do you not talk to anyone?
