Ultimate College Softball
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #1 

1)  A young woman works her entire life and sets aside a large sum of money to cover her retirement years and the medical bills that will come.  At 86, she runs out of money with the likelihood she still has a dozen years more years to live and no surviving family.  She never imagined she'd live to 95.  What should we do with this woman?
 
2)  A young married man finishes medical school, begins a practice, and starts saving money for his elderly years.  Unfortunately, he is killed by a drunk driver the next year and his physically challenged wife is left with two kids to care for.  The young man's savings years were cut short and his family will soon run out of money.  What should be done for this family?
 
3)  An elderly couple has retired and their life savings are invested in Corporate and State bonds.  A tragic economic cycle hits and these Corporations and States go bankrupt leading to their savings being wiped out.  What do we do with this couple with no children?
 
4)  A young man finds himself alone at age 26 due to the accidental death of his entire family and he works his entire life.  He assumes he won't live past 66, decides not to set aside any money whatsoever, and becomes unable to work due to physical ailments at 67.  He's penniless and in need of dialysis.  What do we do with this young man?
 
5)  Ten million folks work their entire life and save every chance they get.  Unfortunately, when they are no longer able to work, their life savings amount to just enough to cover them for three years of retirement.  What do we do with these ten million citizens when these funds run out?
 
6)  A retired couple has enough savings to last many years into retirement tucked away in their home.  In no way will they let another institution lose their life savings.  Unfortunately, a fire in their home destroys their entire life savings.  What do we do with this old couple with no family?
 
7)  A single man works his entire life while setting aside funds for his retirement years.  Unfortunately,  years before he retires, he becomes seriously ill and wipes out the entire maximum coverage of his health insurance as well as all his life savings.  What should we do for this man?
 
I could go on and on with similar scenarios but I'll stop here.  In my world, I'd set up a retirement and medical insurance fund that required contributions from all working citizens to cover each and every one of these possible scenarios.  I'd name it Social Security and Medicare.  I'd do this because I know this great nation would never turn their backs on these folks, whether they deserved it or not, and it's surely better that they contribute during their productive years rather than being bailed out because of tragic circumstances later.  I'd also do it in order to make sure none of these folks are left to survive on the streets, be it my cul de sac or yours.  I'd like to think the social insurance programs I'd implement, which are identical to the ones we have implemented now, are every bit as important as hazard insurance programs like fire, life, etc.  Please tell me why I'm wrong and, more importantly, tell me what you would do in each example named above.  If you decide Government is going to bail these folks out, what Government fund are we going to use?
 
Some of you will suggest insurance be purchased to cover some of these tragedies.  OK but, in those instances, tell me what we do if the insurance companies are not viable and are unable to meet their responsibility?  Are we going to require folks to take out insurance?   
 
I've wanted to ask these questions for some time.  I hope some of those who have disdain for these programs will make a legitimate effort at providing their answers.  Thanks. 
bhblue

Registered:
Posts: 2,254
Reply with quote  #2 
Dewey - I don't think many will disagree that the people in your examples need a safety net of some sort, be it help from non-taxed entities like charities and churches, or some level of government.  These examples are not the ones that have some people upset and I think you know it.  Here, IMO, is where your programs that are "identical to the ones we have implemented now" are flawed.  How should society deal with the other segment of "social insurance" recipients?  I assume you know what segment I mean.
DaddyO

Registered:
Posts: 1,016
Reply with quote  #3 
Ah, the emotion-filled rant designed to pull at your heartstrings, with little thought attached.  No suggestions on how to fix it; just the subtle implication that anyone who disagrees MUST be a heartless bastard.

Should we have expected anything less?

Liberalism is easy.  All you have to do is 'feel'.  There's no thinking involved; just emoting and casting aspersions on anyone who may disagree.  Plus, it's quick.  I can spend five minutes typing a post showing that I 'care', and by implication, I am better than you.  Now, I can go on to whatever else I wanted to do with no further thought to the types of people I just talked about.  I gave at the office.

Now, the hard part.  The thinking part.  The conservative part.

Let the states run their own brands of Medicare (wait - they already do) and Social Security.  That way, the greedy Feds keep their paws out of the money.  Also - for the states who choose to have these programs, create accounts for individuals and deposit the money into those accounts directly, with the understanding that the individuals cannot get to the accounts until retirement age, or some other aspect of their lives such as permanent disability.

Anyone can point out a problem.  The real work is in solving it.  



__________________
Scratch a reactionary leftist, find the fascist writhing underneath.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #4 
bhblue - I thought number five represented the vast majority of Americans.  Please give me some scenarios and I'll give you my response.  I suspect under any scenario you can come up with, I'd offset it with the requirement to be a contributing member to the security and medical funds like we have now.  In my world, that's problem solved for most scenarios.

DaddyO - Nobody called anybody any names.  When a particular political philosophy campaigns for a particular type world, one has to give serious thought to that world and have some answers regarding any consequences.  Add this scenario.  A young man works his life but sets aside nothing for retirement.  He doesn't care.  In the end, what will we do with this old and penniless man?  If we want a Country requiring personal responsibility or else, what will these rules mean to the lives of our society as a whole?  Don't just get mad, give me the alternative picture and help me understand.  If you are for a mandatory and Government run program by the "State", then you are not my target audience in this thread.  I'd have many different questions for you in that regards.  My assumptions in this thread are toward those who believe these two mandatory programs, run by any Government, are unnecessary, or towards those who feel these programs should be optional.  They will experience a world including the examples I've laid out above and I'm interested in how we would deal with them. 
DaddyO

Registered:
Posts: 1,016
Reply with quote  #5 
So, to paraphrase...

Since someone disagrees with you, they have to 'answer' for it.

I have given a solution.  Tell me, what is YOUR solution?

Bankrupting a country in the name of compassion is not a virtue.

Looking for ways to prevent national bankruptcy while still caring for those who truly need it is not a vice.

Do you disagree?  

__________________
Scratch a reactionary leftist, find the fascist writhing underneath.
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #6 
Daddy O - "Bankrupting a country in the name of compassion is not a virtue" - Are those the only two alternatives available in national problem solving?  I remember well a "conservative" Presidential candidate running on a mantra of "Compassionate Conservatism" which is what I voted for. That lasted about as long as "Hope" and "Change" which I also voted for.  So it goes.  Once in "The Washington Way", such ideals are ground up and spit out in favor of the next Party power move or representative's economic gain.    

Also, to me "reactionary" and "liberal" do not belong together in a political spectrum statement.  "Reactionary" would be far right wing conservative, and "Radical" would be far left wing liberal.  I distrust both equally.  Is this not  proper use of political jargon?

Then again, perhaps a reactionary liberal would really be a moderate, and a radical conservative would also be a moderate. I think not, but I obviously could be wrong.         

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #7 
Dewey - your senarios are rare and obscure other than the ten million scenario which is now happening thanks to people knowing there is a govt safety net so why do I have to work so hard.  When you give people something for nothing there is no motivation to better themselves.  How many generations of welfare have we had now, especially in DC right where all the govt gives out!  when people now there is a back up they dont tend to put out as much, when they have to live or die on their own they tend to work a little harder as there are consequences.  It seems people who have your philosophy forget this (and it has been proven time and again through history this occurs, look at the entitlement mentally that Europe has right now) and more and more people end up living on the dole. 

why do you think big central govt is so much better than doing this at the local level?

__________________
Susan
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #8 
DaddyO - I was trying to debate the philosophy of these two programs, not the financial survival.  Maybe we have to increase the payroll rates, adjust payments to doctors, adjust benefits, change the retirement age, or any number of possibilities.  Making these programs work financially is not that difficult.  Where the income or the cuts are arrived at is the hurdle.

If it's decided we all want to be required to contribute to these two social programs while keeping them as an integral part of our society, and our only disagreement is which Government should stand behind them, then our differences are not that great.  I'm arguing for a system that requires each of us to be party to thus making certain one doesn't become a burden on society in their twilight years.  Breaking it up among fifty states has many hurdles to overcome, (States that fail financially, moving several times in a lifetime, which State pays better, are the rules standard, etc.).   
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #9 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbmom1812
Dewey - ...when people know there is a back up they dont tend to put out as much, when they have to live or die on their own they tend to work a little harder as there are consequences. 

Our Country will never simply allow, nor should it allow, those who fail, for whatever reason, to die due to their decisions.  I know this and I think many others know this as well.  For that reason, I want them to be required to contribute now so we don't have to deal with the financial repercussions of their failed decisions later. 
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #10 

Dewey I think we understand what type of system you are arguing for but you dont want to admit or see that your system creates cradle to grave dependency for some and others demotivates and ultimately drags the whole system down.  Europe is a prime example.  And the thinking we can do it better etc... does not cut it either.  History has shown that this is not a good thing over time and it just slowly kills the country.  Look, Europe is about to go bust. What are we supposed to bail them out too!


__________________
Susan
swifty

Registered:
Posts: 941
Reply with quote  #11 
Dewey,

I don't remember hearing about or seeing pictures of hordes of people dying in the streets of America prior to the enactment of SS and Medicare.  How were all of those that fit into your scenarios taken care of at that time?
GoYard

Registered:
Posts: 1,289
Reply with quote  #12 
Not wanting to appear as a "bible thumper" because I certainly am not, I offer the following site:

The Bible on the Poor

I just find it amazing that many, if not most of those on the right claim to believe in Christian values, but when it comes to social programs to help those less fortunate, they do not exhibit those Christian values, saying only that we need less government in our lives.  They will turn their back on those in need & tell them to "get a job" or "get a better job" & that government has no business helping them out.  Private charity is not enough (especially if the contribution deduction is eliminated with a flat-tax system).  I have had this discussion numerous times with some of my own family members, who profess their religion strongly & claim to be devout Catholics & Christians.  I simply don't get it.....

Just a few quotes to ponder:

"Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" Matthew 19:21 

"Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."  Mark 10:21

"If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18

"If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land."  Deuteronomy 15:7, 11

"He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God."  Proverbs 14:31

"He who gives to the poor will lack nothing, but he who closes his eyes to them receives many curses."  Proverbs 28:27

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy."  Proverbs 31:8-9
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #13 

GoYard -  your bible verses are an interesting way to justify big centralized govt.  If I may simplify some, I think God did not want us to be materialistic/greedy and to help thy neighbor.  Who said we dont want to do that.  Our thoughts of doing that are just not by mandating big govt programs where really nobody but politicians and their cronies benefit. 


__________________
Susan
Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #14 

Didn't read anything in there that said I should sell my possessions and give the proceeds to the government so they can take care of the poor! Didn't read anything at all about giving to the government so they can take care of the poor. I, of course have contributed to SS and Medicare since my working days began and fear, despite Dewey's promises, that there will be nothing left when I am entitled to receive the benefit of my contributions! On top of that I do give very regularly and very handsomely to charities to benefit the poor, ill and homeless. I am more than comfortable comfortable with my giving, without the SS and medicare contributions that I have made for others benefit! I believe that there are many in the boat with me!


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by swifty
Dewey,

I don't remember hearing about or seeing pictures of hordes of people dying in the streets of America prior to the enactment of SS and Medicare.  How were all of those that fit into your scenarios taken care of at that time?


swifty - I suppose we paid a lot in welfare and medical programs, backed by the Government, to cover all those who failed to save enough to pay their own way.  Notice how much better our standard of living is now compared to those early days?  I think we've made a very wise decision making workers contribute towards their future.

That said, my examples are being ignored.  We all know we'll care for these folks anyway and without their required lifetime contributions, it gets real expensive.  That is unless you show me the alternative that says otherwise.
DaddyO

Registered:
Posts: 1,016
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
I just find it amazing that many, if not most of those on the right claim to believe in Christian values, but when it comes to social programs to help those less fortunate, they do not exhibit those Christian values, saying only that we need less government in our lives. They will turn their back on those in need & tell them to "get a job" or "get a better job" & that government has no business helping them out. Private charity is not enough (especially if the contribution deduction is eliminated with a flat-tax system). I have had this discussion numerous times with some of my own family members, who profess their religion strongly & claim to be devout Catholics & Christians. I simply don't get it.....

Just a few quotes to ponder:

"Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" Matthew 19:21

"Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." Mark 10:21

"If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18

"If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." Deuteronomy 15:7, 11

"He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God." Proverbs 14:31

"He who gives to the poor will lack nothing, but he who closes his eyes to them receives many curses." Proverbs 28:27

"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy." Proverbs 31:8-9


For the sake of argument, I'll stipulate all of the above.

Now, for the thinking part.

If I over time become conditioned to big government taking over caring of the poor, why do I have to get involved?  Good Lord, they have much more money than I do, they know who the poor are - what can I do in comparison?  What good would it do for me to go out and do something?  I pay my taxes, unlike Tax Cheat Geithner.  Can't I assume that Uncle Sugar will take care of the poor?

__________________
Scratch a reactionary leftist, find the fascist writhing underneath.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #17 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaddyO


Now, for the thinking part.

If I over time become conditioned to big government taking over caring of the poor, why do I have to get involved?  Good Lord, they have much more money than I do, they know who the poor are - what can I do in comparison?  What good would it do for me to go out and do something?  I pay my taxes, unlike Tax Cheat Geithner.  Can't I assume that Uncle Sugar will take care of the poor?


I suppose you could if that's the credit you give yourself and the rest of the American people.  I doubt anyone is suggesting the safety net system we have here is perfect but it works pretty good, imo.  (You know how thoughtful that post came across until you said "Tax Cheat" and "Uncle Sugar"?) 
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #18 

dewey - I would say you are the one doing the ignoring.  Long before big govt social programs existed people did fine taking care of themselves and their neighbor.  And, it would be alot less expensive for us with Big Govt out of the situation!  If you cant admit govt wastes a ton of money you're not being honest at all.


__________________
Susan
sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #19 

dewey - I would say you are the one doing the ignoring.  Long before big govt social programs existed people did fine taking care of themselves and their neighbor.  And, it would be alot less expensive for us with Big Govt out of the situation!  If you cant admit govt wastes a ton of money you're not being honest at all.


__________________
Susan
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #20 

Families, organizations, Corporations, and Government all waste money.  We should work to reduce the waste but I doubt we'll ever end it entirely.  Other than that, not sure how this plays into the debate over what we do with folks who fail to meet their personal needs.

Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,151
Reply with quote  #21 

If families waste their money, that is their right, it is their money! If a corporation wastes money that is a matter for the owners or shareholders to address and for the public to determine if they want to do business with or not. If a charity wastes money, the public has a choice of whether or not to support it or one who does not waste money. If we are forced to contribute to a govt. program and they waste money, we don't have a choice!


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #22 

No justification from me.  Just pointing out a fact of life.  Of course, one man's waste is another man's pork.

Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #23 

I now recall one particular difference from our past that I recently heard explained.  One of the primary reasons Medicare was developed was due to the fact the elderly were finding health insurance impossible to purchase.  I imagine many families saw their life savings wiped out due to illness and ended up on welfare.

sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #24 

Dewey you still are choosing to ignore the fact that we did just fine taking care of people before the era of Big Govt programs. 


__________________
Susan
DaddyO

Registered:
Posts: 1,016
Reply with quote  #25 
Dewey - I wasn't giving myself any credit.  I was pointing out the natural byproduct of a big government solution to these problems - man turns cold towards his fellow man because government has taken the role of caregiver.

We truly used to care for one another.  I fear that will fall along the wayside. 

__________________
Scratch a reactionary leftist, find the fascist writhing underneath.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #26 

DaddyO - I didn't think you were taking credit but, instead, unfairly selling yourself short and taking away some valuable personal credit from what you would likely continue to do, and that is help whenever and wherever you can.  I was hoping you wouldn't assume the rest of the American people would do any differently. 

sbmom1812

Registered:
Posts: 3,002
Reply with quote  #27 

you are absolutely correct DaddyO.  There are also alot of people that eat alot better on food stamps than alot of people paying for those food stamps.  I think there is something wrong with that picture.


__________________
Susan
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #28 
Susan - Did we really?  Think back historically to an era from the late 19th century through about 1934 and see how the poor lived.  Yes, most survived, but is that all you want for our government and our national society?  If it is, then there is where you and I part company.
That' my SOCIALIST side coming out !!!    I did learn a lot "hands on" in my stint as a social worker - senior visitor.       Frank

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #29 
Daddy O - I guess the message that "Greed is good" hasn't gotten to you yet.   How about "He who dies with the most toys wins?".   I do agree that in small town situations people did and do tend to take care of each other more than in larger communities. I grew up in a small railroad town and still have a romanticized love affair with the Town Fair and the casseroles that appeared at the door when someone in the house was ill or when someone was "laid off".  I grew up during the Great Depression.  
 

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
swifty

Registered:
Posts: 941
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey

DaddyO - I didn't think you were taking credit but, instead, unfairly selling yourself short and taking away some valuable personal credit from what you would likely continue to do, and that is help whenever and wherever you can.  I was hoping you wouldn't assume the rest of the American people would do any differently. 


HUH?
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.