[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by Ea

What I also don't get, is the impression that one who is recieveing government financial help, such as health care or housing, is reciveing this complacantly, without any feeling of need to reprocicate and pay back. I am personally quite aware of why I pay my taxes. I have gotten a free education, including a stipend to live on, I can get the health care I need - but I am also quite aware I am paying for it.

I couldn't tell you, I've never gotten anything for free. I don't understand welfare mentality, welfare families or anything remotely resembling that status.
And I'm paying for it because it allows me a freedom of life that I would not have had, have I had to save up to pay for all the things that is provided. I fell safe that whatever happens it is extremely unlikely I should end up on the street. I have a relatively short work week and can afford to pursue my hobbies and spend time with my family, as well as take a one to two week vacation every year. I'm not 'rich' but I have never been in 'need'. Compared to much of the world I feel quite pampered - but I am also paying for it, and I am engaged in politics because I want influence of this process.

I lived in Germany for 8 years and had many close German friends. I understand the system and pretty much envy it (except maybe the radio and tv taxes)

*An example: While the 'wounds' are pretty much quite healed, 1864 is still a significant year in Danish history - a year that most Danes are still aware of in some capacity.

Originally Posted by rhadin

That's essentially the same rationale Henry Ford and other anti-unionists used in attempt to prevent unionization.

It is the same rationale that was used to oppose child labor laws and the laws mandating the 8-hour workday. In fact, it was used in the defense of the owners of the clothing factory whose employees had been locked in the factory to insure they worked and who died when it caught fire.

And it was part of the rationale for the labor camps used by Stalin and Hitler.

And many slave holders were repeating that rationale as they fired on Fort Sumter and voted to seced from the union.

Just because others believed it to be true, one would think that a man of Jefferson's intelligence would have been able to see through the facade and would have freed his slaves (and opposed slavery) as many other plantation owners did. what part of "I'm not making excuses for Jefferson" did you totally not get? he struggled with it. a lot. he wrote about it. he wasn't happy about it. when I was in california (the salad bowl) I HATED seeing the migrant workers in the fields and knowing that most of my produce was coming from there. outside of growing my own (which I do when I am at home) what are my choices? go without... pretty much that's it. I believe he had a similarly unrealistic option
Jefferson and crew deserve a lot of respect for what they did, but it needs to be tempered with their view that women and nonwhites were chattel. When he wrote "All men are created equal," he literally meant white males.

Originally Posted by rhadin

If our reason for going to war is to free the oppressed, then let's be upfront about it and let's be consistent. Personally, I opposed invading Iraq and Afghanistan but supported going to Darfur and Rwanda. What we Americans do not accept readily is that we cannot be the morals arbiter for the world. We need to insist that others step up to the plate.

oh but there is hell to pay when we don't step up to the plate! where are the Americans? why aren't they doing something about it!?

Originally Posted by Spartacus2112

Bottom line....they are overhauling a system that works for 85% of American citizens to adress a problem that exists for probably 7% or 8%.

wow! are those really the numbers? I didn't realize! I REALLY resent that the system that works for me may be completely screwed up because of a few

Originally Posted by Ea

It's not quite the same situation. In Europe you have a number of soverign countries, many who have a hundreds of years long history of wars between them - and alliances with other countries as well. And some countries are younger federations, while other are thousand years old. It's really mixed. It's not like a number of states as in USA - and I know some states are older than others etc. a lot of these different states have a lot of different traditions, customs and needs. I can guaranfriggingtee you that what works in New Mexico damn sure won't work in New York
(edit: ) I would be very surprised if Europe could unite to be like USA in the next, say 50 years. We are too unlike, we share wars as well as brothership. EU is mostly about trade and production and how to make this work between countries.

On the other hand, you are right, a federal Europe are relatively widely distrusted - it is by some seen as detriment to rule on country level - personally I'm not completely in disagreement in all cases. But for USA couldn't health care be taken care of at state level? Why isn't it? To me, it seems such a bonus to everyone, individual and state/country level alike.

make no mistake! I think most of us believe that health care reform is needed! we just don't want it shoved down our throats!

Originally Posted by kennyc

Sure why not. The more the merrier, right?

You may very well have touched on an aspect of the health care crises that needs fixing. I don't know that more doctors necessarily are the answer, but perhaps we need a way for people to get the services that are required (not just because they want them or think they deserve them) in a different manner, walk-in clinics, medical technicians, etc. etc. Not everyone needs the most prestigious doctor in town, nor should they be seeing a doctor for every sniffle they get.

And don't get me going on anti-biotics

I WANT THE FRENCH SYSTEM!!!!