Knowledge Bytes

My cousin told me that honestly she didn’t have enough information to form an educated opinion about healthcare and wanted to know my thoughts. She felt that she was mostly against the idea but growing up in a Mennonite community in one of the poorest counties in Mississippi can cause that. So I told her I would take my time to post some detailed information. I am copying that information here.

It is rather long, but I like to think it is worth reading since i did spend a lot of time on it!

So here it is:

Since you ask, I’ll be glad to tell. But let be give you some background.

For many years I worked for the GOP as a deputy registrar. I was a republican through and through. I just could not stand those ignorant liberals and all their ideas. I couldn’t understand them at all. They made no sense to me! Everything they stood for was counter to everything I believed. And one thing I really loved was winning debates against such people. I lived for it. I became a master of debate. One thing I found critical to my debate skills was making sure that I had all the facts behind me. I would dig in and learn these topics from every point of view. Philosophical, emotional, economical, and every other way.

There was just one problem. As I gathered information, I learned that things weren’t really as they had seemed. I learned all sorts of facts that would astonish you. Many, just like the fact that traffic circles are safer than intersections with stop signs, were counter-intuitive. Most importantly, I learned a lot about myself and what I believe in.

One of the things that I learned was that neither party was consistent with my beliefs. I also learned that the party to which I belonged that I had invested so much time, energy, and money into had basically fooled me. This really hurt because I had to come to terms with the idea that not only had I been misled, but I had been part of misleading many other people as well!
So I am not partial to either party. I am not a Democrat and I have a lovely Springfield XD-40 handgun and personal protection permit to prove it. I’m still an NRA member.

I also learned that although both parties were guilty of misleading people, the right was far far more guilty of it. This is because the right is a very organized movement while the “left” is basically all the people who disagree with the right. There really is no one common thread that ties the democratic party together, but part of the lies on the right is convincing people that there is this massive “liberal agenda” with a bunch of communist liberals hiding in every corner ready to corrupt the youth of America. This just isn’t the case. Most people on the left have some very basic beliefs about right and wrong that are well though out. People on the right often accuse those on the left of being “intellectual elitists”. Well, if that means that I feel that my opinion is better because I have more facts, then that’s what I am as well. Why the right seems to think that the search for knowledge is a bad thing I will never understand and this is just another thing that let me away from them.

I take each specific topic and learn it until I know it then I make a decision. When I’m not sure, I simply state so. For example, the jury is still out on unions. I have not yet decided how I feel about them. That’s why my only response to the news about the teacher’s unions is that the GOP had no business running through this legislation so fast given that they didn’t even campaign on it and that the legislation needs to be tabled until it can be debated well in the public and an election can be had where it was part of the campaign.

OK. So absorb that for a moment, but don’t comment. I’m going to break this into four emails. This one just to give you some background. The next will be about some of the more interesting things I learned that changed my core view of our country and how it operates. It won’t be until the third email that I will tackle healthcare. Then finally I will wrap up with a fourth email. This may take a couple days but it is worth it.

I know this will probably be a lot of overwhelming information, but you did ask and I think it’s important that you take the time to learn it all because it is so important. It shouldn’t be taken lightly. I am willing to go through all of this because I feel that it is my duty to undo some of the harm I did while working for the GOP. If at the end, you still feel the same, that’s fine. Part of what I learned was that there is no “right” or “wrong” opinion. People as they are when viewing a crime first-hand will all have slightly different opinions of exactly what happened. It’s only safe to reason that people armed with the same facts can come to different conclusions. The only bad opinion then is one where we aren’t armed with all of the facts and that is what I work very hard to set straight on a daily basis.

Does that sound alright to you?

NEXT EMAIL

OK. So where to begin…..I never really thought about it! lol

I guess you could say it was while I was working in the mortgage industry. Going into the mortgage industry I was as republican as the come and more so than most. Coming out I had pretty much changed hats.
My job in the mortgage industry started as an originator. I would find people who needed home loans for one reason or another, pre-qualify them, find them the best deal I could on a rate and terms and get them to close the loan. For this I made some very good money. A typical $100,000 loan would be about $800 per month. If a person had a home worth $100,000 and only owed $80,000 on it but had $20,000 in credit card debt, they could consolidate. Rather than a $750 mortgage and $300 in credit cards they could have a single $800 payment. Meanwhile I would make about $3000 on just that one loan. This would seem to be a good thing, right?
Well, sort of. If a person is well-disciplined they could do this and use the extra monthly income to pay off other debt and eventually work themselves to be debt free. However, that’s not human behavior. Instead, people with credit cards with zero balances who had been at the limit of their budgets will see all this freed up money and credit and go shopping. They buy new cars, new TVs, and everything else you can imagine! Then they are back where they started except now they owe even more!
As I learned more about the business, I learned that not only did every bank in the industry know this, but they counted on it. They wanted it that way. This guaranteed a never-ending supply of new customers. After just two years a customer would find they were at their limits again and refinance again. Now a bigger loan, higher rate, and of course I make my $3000 again.
These banks didn’t just keep these loans and collect payments. If they did, they would run out of money to lend. So what they would do is package hundreds or even thousands of them together. They would determine that roughly 5% would fail, but the rest would buy out or complete and pay all that interest. If you aren’t aware of it, a 30 yr loan at 8% for $100k paid back over 30 yrs is about $300,000. That’s 200% PROFIT.
So the banks sold packaged loans to bigger banks until they got to the biggest banks who then turn them into a “security” and sell stocks on them.
I hope you follow me so far. It may not seem important, but it is. So keep reading. lol

So a bank like Lehman Brothers would make a “fund” out of these loans – call it the “Lehman Mortgage Fund”. Since they were doing these loans so fast, these “stocks” seemed very attractive. And what could be safer than homes?

Many IRA companies – you know – companies where people put their retirement money – well, they invested people’s IRA money heavily into these stocks. So the short of it is this – Hard working American people were supplying the bash from their retirement income to fund the home loans at the other end. That’s where the money comes from to make home loans. Got it? I think you do.

So why is this important?

Well, as time progressed, people started to get to the point where they could no longer refinance again. You can only take so much money out of a property. At some point you have either borrowed all that you can out of it, or you have borrowed beyond your ability to pay for the loan. So the market began to dry up.

As a result, people were taking out less loans, paying off less credit cards, and were as such, unable to buy as much stuff. The economy started to slow. Bush did not want to be part of a lagging economy, so he did something. He pressured the Fed to lower interest rates despite the slower economy. He also began to dismantle some of the regulations in place that kept at least some of this in check and from getting out of hand. When he did, the big banks found that now they could get more lax about their underwriting guidelines. They could make loans to people who couldn’t document their income. They could loan money to people who previously simply didn’t qualify before. This opened a whole new market and a product referred inside the industry as “liars loans”.
Now this alone is fine really. You can assume that the failure rate of such loans is going to be higher and charge a higher interest rate so that the ones who do pay them off cover those who don’t.
But the competition between banks was fierce driving the rates down. Meanwhile the deregulation from Bush didn’t require them to go as far to disclose the actual risk of these loans as they were packaged into funds on the stock market. So all of American’s IRA money was going to pay for loans that were riskier than the fund managers were disclosing!

Now I saw this happening from the inside. I knew exactly what was up. In fact, I knew what was coming 2 full years before the economic collapse. So I got out of the business before it all came crashing down. What happened next is well known. The foreclosure rate skyrocketed. When it did, investors realized that these funds were worth far less than they thought. Almost overnight everyone pulled what money was left out of those funds which caused the single largest stock decline since the Great Depression. At the same time, the big banks were left with no money so they began to fail. Smaller banks, without big banks to sell loans to or any path to get money to lend stopped lending. People even with good credit found it hard to buy anything on credit and since most of the nation was already in debt beyond their means, it’s not like they could just start paying cash for things. So no one could buy anything. So the manufacturers quit making things. They laid people off. So now Americans had less money. They tried to love off their savings but they found t hat their “savings” was really in their IRA and their IRAs were now worth much less than they had put in!!!!!
The whole economy came to a screeching halt. It had effects all across the globe!
And the people who were running these large banks? Well, they knew it was coming in advance! The head of Countrywide sold off all of his own stock for $144 million at roughly the same time I chose to leave the business. Many retired with bonuses worth not just millions, but hundreds of millions! One CEO was fired and was paid $350 million on the way out!
These people knowingly and willingly took advantage of everybody and sent the entire economy into a tailspin and we have yet to recover.

Now, what did I learn? I learned something about power. You see. We are brought up to believe in rugged individualism. The power of the individual. The government is the enemy. Keep the power for the people and don’t give it to the government.

But here’s the thing. Real power doesn’t lie in the hands of the government. It lies in the hands of those with the most money. The power of Obama is pale in comparison to the power of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, or even Mark Zuckerburg – the guy who made facebook. (He is a $25billionaire and his power is evident in the fact that I am using his software to communicate with you right now).

The government is powerless at the hands of such people. They can buy votes. They can buy people. Bush himself had much of his campaign paid for by the very people who he deregulated. There is almost no accountability for such people. You can’t vote these CEOs out of office unless they aren’t making a profit. And the more they make, the more they scheme and plot and steal to make more profit, the higher they get paid and the harder it is to get rid of them.

So you fear government control? That’s just silly. We are being taught by the GOP through repetition of this lie that we should fear the only means we have to control these tycoons at the top who are so powerful that only six of them were able to ruin the global economy in a matter of days!

Now, does that mean that all government is good? No. But if you pay attention to the GOP, you will hear nothing but hatred of the government with almost no indication that private industry can be just as corrupt and evil as any government.

This is of course because that’s where most of their money comes from to get elected.

This is what set me on my course of discovery. From there I started paying closer attention and I saw other things that I didn’t like. For example, if you listen you will hear utter disdain for all government. You will hear how inefficient government is. You will hear them cite failure after failure of government programs. But they are all lies.

Look at government workers. I know lots of people who work in government and every day they show up for work just like I do. They get paid less than me and work their butts off to do their jobs. Try working as a case worker, or a IRS auditor or police officer and see what I mean. Do you want that job? I don’t!

You hear how government is inefficient. You get examples such as $600 hammers cited to prove this. But what you don’t hear is that these cases are the exception. They rarely happen and the reason you heard about it in the first place was because someone got caught trying to cheat the system. That’s because financial recors for public sector jobs are open for audit and are made public. You can get your hands on the budget of any public entity if you know where to look. That’s not the case though with private companies. Their records can be made private. They can spend $10 million to find out the best way to “market” a product to you – ie figure out the best lie you will fall for – and no one questions it. And I assure you that in the private sector such exchanges as $600 hammers happen all the time. No one ever hears about it though because their financials are private.

Here is a terrific example. I had a serious debate with someone recently about public education. He was trying to tell me how public education was a failure and how private education was the answer. But here are some things he never considered:

1.) Before public education, private education was failing miserably. That’s why public education happened in the first place. It was so successful that every industrialized country in the world followed suit.
2.) Other countries beat us on test scores not because of our educational system, but because our kids care more about sports and entertainment. This is because these things are elevated by adults! How many parents show up for spelling bees compared to football games? Who donates their life savings to the academic teams? Our problem is cultural, not the system.
3.) Yes, we throw more money at the public school system and it does not good but that’s not because the system is bad. It’s because there is nothing wrong with the system and no matter how you change it or how much money you spend, you can’t fix it. Reason – see number 2.
4.) Private schools do show better test scores overall. But then again, there are no ghetto trash kids with druggie parents and foster moms in private school either. If you send these kids to private schools you will simply cause more problems at the schools. This problem is much deeper than public vs private schools. Private schools are full of kids with parents who care. Studies have shown clearly that when you control for economic background, public school kids actually perform above private schools in science, math, and history.

5.) Our test scores are really lousy on the world stage, but all of the other countries ahead of us have a private school system. They are all public schools that are ahead of us, so public school cannot be the problem.

6.) Our college system is screwed up beyond belief. It is extremely expensive and there are tons of homeless and jobless people with degrees. The college system is privatized. I don’t think it’s the model we want for primary education.
So the problem with public schools has nothing to do with bad teachers, teachers unions, or government. That much is obvious. Even worse, some of those in the GOP leadership are aware of this! They just don’t care because they have an agenda to push. Their other big contributor if from the churches who have a lot of vested interest in making sure that more people go to private schools. The churches want that tax money and are pushing this voucher program which will only make things worse! What happens when the only kids left in a particular school are the ones who’s parents won’t drive them across town to the private schools and the kids who don’t WANT a “better” education? You will end up with slum schools!

The GOP has had several memos leaked over the years where leadership has actually stated these things and how to “overcome” when people point it out. They send them out as “talking points”. I have already went way long on this so I won’t fill you with sources but if you want them I’ll get them.

The bottom line? I have discovered over the years that in nearly every way, they are a very well organized and close-knit party who’s sole objective is to maintain power and to do so they will say and do anything to convince people that they are against the “evil government” all the while using this as a way to get political contributions from the churches and the large corporations. They refuse to acknowledge this one important point. Our “government” is made of of our people. It is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. while there are some bad people in government, the checks and balances laid by the founding fathers keep things in line. This is in complete contrast to the checks and balances on power that do not exist in the private sector and that allows “private companies” to have power once reserved to Kings.

Before I go on to healthcare, I wanted to take a bit and talk about the role of government and address some myths. I know it
is a bit of a digression from the topic at hand but I feel it’s important because I see many different arguments against
government healthcare. Only one of those is about “government power”. Many others are about government inefficiency, the
constitution, “cycles of dependency”, “welfare states”, and other such nonsense. One of my favorites is “the government
spends so much money but doesn’t make anything!”. Before we can even begin to address healthcare itself, we need to address
these myths.

So I’ll start with myth number 1 – government inefficiency.
Often I hear people talk about how government wastes so much money. I hear how we spend too much on “government programs” and how that money is wasted on “layers of bureaucracy”. While it is true that money gets spent on administration, it is often far more efficient than private industry. You hear stories of “$600″ toilet seats and such but they unfairly place the blame on government when the real culprit is private industry.

My favorite example is the military. I choose it not because I have something against the military. Quite the contrary – I believe our military deserves the very best. But they don’t get it.

Why? Well, consider the “Manhattan Project”. Back towards the end of WWII, Einstein wrote a letter to Roosevelt that said the Russians might build a nucelar bomb and that we had better get on it. The military put together a program employing roughly
130,000 people and went from nothing to the first nuclear weapon in just four years in total secret. The cost was roughly $2
billion. Adjusted for inflation that’s about $23 billion.

More recently we developed the F-22 raptor. This plane will perhaps be the greatest fighter aircraft to ever fly. Even
against our own fighters in excercises it has a kill ratio of 108:1. Nothing in the world compares. But that came at a
tremendous cost. The cost to develop and deliver less than 200 of these planes was over $40 billion. (that doesn’t include
the $30,000 per flight hour maintenance cost).

But that plane used no new fantastic technology. The stealth technology was a bit more refined but the principles of stealth were already well known and studied. We improved the radar, the agility, the speed, and the electronics. But each of those things were simply modifications of existing technology. To make matters worse, no other military in the world was capable of taking on the aircraft we already have. Our existing planes were aging, but we could have simply built more new planes of existing designs – maybe making some improvements in radar and electronics with relatively little cost. There still would not be a nation in the world who could take us on in the air. Finally, the most ansurd part about it was that the program has now been killed because we developed the f-35 and because we are relying more on drones!

So what is the difference? What is the lesson here? Well, this all happened because at some point between WWII and now, we decided that the “government” having all that money to themselves was too much of a socialist thing. The free market needed to be propped up and supported. We felt it was only right that the military buy all of their stuff from the private sector. This caused two problems. The first was that congressmen who lived in districts with aerospace companies realized that to win votes they needed to get contracts awarded to the businesses in their states. Also, they realized that every time they could manufacture a war, a fear, or anything that required military hardware, they were almost guaranteed to be able to win more jobs in their districts and keep their elected position. On top of that, something else happened.

But that wasn’t the worst part. No, the worst part was that the concept of “profit” was introduced into government expenses.In the manhattan project, the US Army corp of engineers was in control of the whole thing. No one expected a profit. They just wanted to get the job done. Had the same project been done today, it would have had to been split among multiple congressional districts – some of which just by distance create additional costs. (Ever wonder why the space shuttle costs so much? The external tank is made in New Orleans, the solid boosters in Utah, it takes off in Florida and lands in California!) Then of course, they not only have to charge the government (you and I) for the wages of the people (which are always lower in government jobs), but they have to ensure profit for their company as a whole.This means they will charge whatever they can get away with and cut corners where they can. They also have to pay salaries to entire divisions of people in departments called “margin assurance” who’s entire job is to make they charge more than their costs, and they have to support board members and outlandish CEO salaries. FOr example, the CEO of Boeing’s salary last year was $19 million, lockheed’s CEO was paid about $19 million as well, and every one of the hundreds of companies hired to make parts of course has it’s own CEO,board, and shareholders to pay!

Imagine the difference had the US Corp of engineers over the last few decades been wholly responsible for designing and manufacturing our military machinery. Imagine the hundreds of billions that would have been saved had we not decided that the private sector needed to make these things.

The point? Government by nature is not less efficient than private enterprise, it is just different. Those $600 toilet seats happen not because a government employee was pad $600 to make it, but because some private sector sales person for a toilet seat company charged the government $600 to make a killer profit and some underpaid accounts payable clerk overlooked it while processing hundreds of invoices on the same day.

I could go on with examples, but I think you get the point.

So on to myth number 2: “The constitution doesn’t allow for welfare”

This one is perhaps the easiest to refute, but most commonly spread myth. People say it, repeat it, and eventually just like Hitler said, “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth”.
There are two places in the constitution where it is addressed. The first is the preamble. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Note the wording “to PROMOTE the general welfare”. Granted this is a very broad term and whatit means can vary. But that was the whole point of setting up a government with checks and balances that entirely revolves around writing new laws.

The second is Article w Section 8: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”.

Granted, there was a lot we didn’t know or understand then. Germs weren’t even discovered until 1860. Also, most of the US was a wilderness and a person could just go out, claim a piece of land and work it. Not the case now since all land in the US is owned by someone and can only be aquired by purchase.

But that’s a bit off point. The point is that the Constitution does not prohibit welfare programs. It allows for the general welfare. It is up to us as a people and the Supreme Court to decide what that means and the Supreme Court has decided that the programs are legal. That is the way the government was setup and that’s the law of the land.

Here is some interesting information on wealth distribution:

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsociology.ucsc.edu%2Fwhorulesamerica%2Fpower%2Fwealth.html&h=dc0f6

Now Myth number 3: “Cycles of dependency and welfare states”

This one is fun. I’m going to copy some text from another site and edit as needed which will save some time but only the first couple paragraphs……

Perhaps the only topic that entertains more myths than the federal deficit is welfare. Reagan once described a Chicago Welfare Queen driving a Welfare Cadillac. Allegedly, she had used 80 different names to collect $150,000 in benefits. When the press tried to track her down, they discovered she did not even exist. Nonetheless, this apocryphal anecdote has enjoyed lasting fame – among both conservatives and liberals, for different reasons.

One of the most popular myths is that welfare is a serious drag on the economy. Actually, it barely registers on the radar screen. The most vilified form of welfare is Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which allegedly gives poor mothers a financial incentive to avoid work and have babies. Together, AFDC and Food Stamps are by far the largest items of the welfare budget. Yet in 2008, AFDC formed less than 2 percent of the combined state and federal budgets. Food stamps also took up 2 percent. If you expand the definition of “welfare” to include all one-way transfers of benefits (such as student grants, school lunches and pensions for needy veterans), then welfare takes up only 19 percent of the combined budgets.

Another myth is who gets welfare. Mention the word “welfare” and most people automatically think of the poor. But the fact is that corporations and the rich receive far more welfare than the poor. Welfare for the poor (AFDC and Food Stamps) totaled $50 billion in 1992, but welfare for corporations (pork-barrel projects, business subsidies and tax breaks) are estimated to run from $85 billion to $800 billion, depending on which think tank you listen to. (More) Brian Kelly, a Washington journalist who has written a book on corporate pork, discloses that pork alone costs taxpayers between $20 to $100 billion a year.3 By itself, the $250 billion dollar Savings & Loan bailout would have funded 5 years of AFDC and Food Stamps for everyone on the programs! There is simply no question who receives the most welfare from government.

During the 80s, government spending on individuals increased for everyone except the poor. The reason is because the poor cannot afford lobbyists to defend their interests in Washington; consequently, politicians find the poor easy targets for budget cuts. Between 1970 and 1991, the purchasing power of benefits for the typical AFDC family fell 42 percent, primarily as a result of state and federal cuts.4 During the 50s, poverty hovered around 20 percent. Michael Harrington then wrote a bestseller entitled “The Other America” to remind the middle class that not all Americans were living like Ward and June Cleaver. The conditions that 20% of the nation lived in were absolutely horrible. If you get a chance, read that book. It will surprise you.

In 1964, Johnson declared war on poverty with his “Great Society” program. The increased welfare payments reduced poverty to 12 percent by the end of the 60s.One offset here was that by the 1970s, more people who would have been in that 20% homeless and starving were able to move OUT of poverty and into jobs. Unemployment was lower, education was better, more went to college and people were moving up out of poverty and into the workforce so much that it spawned a famous show called “the Jeffersons” from 1975 to 1985 and was the longest running predominantly black cast television series ever.The premise “We’re movin on up, to the top, to a deluxe apartment in the sky”….I finally got a piece of the pie…..:-)

In 1980, the average family received $350 in AFDS and $42 per person in food stamps each month. By 2009 that number was just $297 and $47 despite inflation. Welfare benefits that are paid combined with state and local programs still place a family at only 70% of the poverty level.

And this is where the “cycle of dependency” comes in. Most Americans are now convinced that welfare people live well, don’t work, have no incentive to get off of welfare, and will have more children to get more welfare. They think they are mostly single mom’s who got “knocked up” out of wedlock and are having our taxes pay for them to buy drugs, steak, and otherwise sit around and watch TV. Nothing could be further from the truth. Many studies have been done on this. They all come up with similar numbers that I will share with you:

84% of welfare recipients are divorced. Of those, 82% are not receiving support payments from dead-beat dads.
42% of all AFDC payments are eventually recovered by garnishments from dead-beat dads.
The average age of welfare recipients is 24.
Mothers on AFDC on average have fewer children than mothers who are not on government assistance.
85% of welfare recipients are on welfare for less than two years.
When stretched to 5 years, that number becomes 94.
Only 22% of recipients once off of welfare return and then 96% are off again within 12 months.
The average recipient receives a total of roughly $24,000 in total benefits in a lifetime.
In the 45+ other years that they work, the average recipient pays roughly 165,000 in taxes.
11% of first time recipients are over 40 years old.
43% of recipients have only one child.
14% of recipients are disabled.
39% are white, 37% black, 17% hispanic and the remainder “other”
Benefits are not paid to illegal immigrants
Abuse accounts for roughly 1.3% of all cases.

And here’s a neat one. In a pair of recent studies it was found that roughly 6% of people have received welfare benefits at some time, yet only .5% personally knew someone they were sure of or suspected was on welfare. This indicates that 11 out of 12 recipients is never even suspected by friends and famiily of even being on welfare. In other words, the bulk of recipients are not that trampy woman down the road that abuses her kids, but people who look just like you and I.

These numbers are all plus or minus one or two percent either way depending on the source but that doesn’t change the overall point. Welfare recipients just aren’t what we suspect. Most receive benefits for a limited time and then go on to become productive members of socity paying in much more in taxes in a lifetime than they ever receive. Obviously this is direct contrast to the myths spread by the GOP. But just think about it…. The amount a woman receives in welfare and food stamps when she has an additional kid is not enough to offset the cost of having another kid. Instead, even with the additional benefits, the kid costs even more than she already was spending. Why in the world would she want another baby? She’s going to do anything she can to keep from having that expense. I mean, really, if I told you that I would give you $75 per month to have another baby would it be worth it? I bet not, and you are one of those people who loves kids!

Needless to say, the “cycle of dependency” doesn’t exist. People grow older and move past welfare. We’re not talking about disabled people who by their very nature can’t take care of themselves. Welfare is a good program. It is successful. It does what it is supposed to do. A small amount do remain dependent on it and a small amount abuse it. But those people represent a very small portion of the overall program. As such it doesn’t deserve all the bitter resentment that has been created by the GOP since the Reagan days. Meanwhile, the same party that demonizes welfare and has created this myth just this year crammed a tax bill down Obama’s throat which included the extension of $65 billion dollars to the wealthiest 2% of Americans. And what do they do with that money? They don’t spend it on food which supports american farmers, or anything like that. They stick it in off-shore accounts, tax-shelters, spend it traveling overseas and buying exotic cars and other stuff from outside the country. Oh, and they use it to buy more power in Washington. (Now I’ve heard people argue that when rich people make more money they donate more to charities, but those numbers don’t add up either. I’ll be glad to dig them up for you if you like.)

And this explains some interesting facts. Today, the wealthy pay less taxes as a percentage of their income than any point in US History. There is a huge disconnect between how most people think the money in the country is distributed and how it actually is. For example, CEO pay over the last 20 years has grown over 300% while most other wages have remained flat. In 1960, the average CEO earned 50 times the average laborer. Today the average CEO earns about 350 times the average wage!

Think of that….take what your family earns in a year, multiply it by 350. That’s what the average CEO earns. The US ranks 93rd in the world in income equality…..just behind IRAN. Sure, you and I are better off than the average Iranian, but our CEOs are just that much better paid than the Iranian elite!

I could go on and on about this as well, but I’ll leave you a link if you want to learn more about this.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

And that’s all for today. Next we’ll tackle the role of government and hopefully, finally get to healthcare. Again, if youhave any questions, feel free to ask. Sorry if I’m dumping a lot of information on you but so much of this is core to the issue at hand you need to know where I’m coming from.

She responded back with this:

Glad for all the information. It is very interesting. I would like to hear some facts on Mississippi. It may be a little different that the rest of the country. This county alone(Noxubee) has healthy men sitting around playing cards and drinking in many neighborhoods. Many blacks here have no desire to better their life. They only want that government check. Often they will ask a farmer for work but want to be paid in cash so they don’t have to report it. I still haven’t figured out how so many black men here don’t work since AFDC is for women, isnt it?. Another area you may want to research for both our curiosity is the HUDD program. When Jennifer was here before she went to jail we signed her up for HUDD. She was renting an old trailer where the rent was only $250 per month. When she was approved the representative told me to put $400 as the rent since that was common to be paid for rent. It didn’t matter weather the trailer was worth it or not. Now repeat that over and over all over the country. I have always wondered how many people overcharge the government rent simply because they can get by with it.I can definately see that welfare is a drop in the bucket compared to other spending!

And of course, I answered with this:

I know exactly what you are referring to. I ran a rent-to-own store for two years and saw a lot of this. I even see it in the habitat home they built next door to me. Granted, the woman is a registered nurse now but she wasn’t always. Read on and I’ll explain.

First of all, you are right about welfare being only available to women. Personally I have problems with that. It leaves lots of men homeless and on the street ready to steal and rob who would otherwise sit around harmlessly and get high. lol

But you are mentioning men sitting around doing nothing and waiting for a check. What’s going on here? I’ve actually already done that research as well. This was all done on my way to changing my position. (Did you see the pic of me I posted in my GOP shirt with Republican Congressman Hostetler?)

What did I find out? Well, it is a cultural issue, not a welfare issue.

Within the greater culture of the US are many sub-cultures. You have geek culture, sports culture, business culture, Jewish culture and Christian culture. Even within Christian culture there are sub-divisions. Catholic culture is completely different from Amish and Walmart even carries certain “Kosher” foods for Jewish people. There are even disturbing cultures where some follow sharia law and others allow for multiple wives, then you have skin-heads, and the KKK. Each culture and sub-culture has its own distinct rules and etiquette. The roles of various people are different in each sub-culture as well.

Just like anyone else,there are many sub-cultures in the black population. One thing that people such as you seem to be disturbed by is that in several of the black subcultures it is perfectly normal for the woman to be the wage-earner and support the man. It exists within certain sub-cultures of both whites and blacks, but it is more common within black culture. Women who are part of this sub-culture actually pride themselves in their ability to “keep” their man. (Note that I’m not referring to all black culture, just the specific sub-culture that you are concerned with). They parade their “man” around in the nicest shoes and clothes they can afford and their “man” does little more than sit on their ass all day and watch TV. The women cut the grass, do the laundry, bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan. They derive as much of a sense of pride for keeping their man up as some wealthy white people do their expensive pure-bred dogs. In fact, some treat them no better than dogs.  They put absolutely no faith in the ability of their man to be able to do anything right and thus never ask them to do anything. At the same time, they will jump through whatever hoops these men expect of them in order to “keep” their man.

Now from our point of view, this isn’t just odd. It seems absurd. We assume that these men must be abusing these women, taking advantage of them, or that they are somehow brainwashed into thinking this way. But it’s not the case. Instead, it is usually the women driving the relationship and pushing the man to the back seat. The men are left without much to contribute except to be jewelry for their woman, so they sit around and do nothing. And many white women join this culture willingly just as with any other strange subculture we know of. This doesn’t make them any worse than us, just different. It is our white culture that sees that and makes the sudden assumption that any man who doesn’t work while his “woman” does is doing so out of laziness. But our general interpretation is wrong.

You and I can’t make any more sense of it than we can make sense of Sharia law or Scientology. It just is. And they are intermixed with us in such a way that you encounter them regularly. Given the high number of blacks in Mississippi I’m not surprised that you see more black jobless men than there are on in the country on average, but rest assured they aren’t collecting welfare. They may be living with a woman who is, but as I showed before, most of those women will eventually get off of welfare. And sure, they don’t want to show their income because their woman could lose her benefits even if she sees none of the money. But that’s fine with me. If the employer doesn’t report it, the employer is paying taxes on the money instead of the employee. Either way, the money is taxed. So if the employer is fine with that, I am too. Funny thing is that often, the income wouldn’t change the benefits since they are below the poverty line, but they are probably not skilled enough in math and the system to figure that out so they err on the side of caution. Surely we as Americans aren’t going to suffer because they have a little extra money to spend.

Now that doesn’t mean that there aren’t lazy people out there and that there aren’t people abusing the system. It just means that there are far less people sitting on their asses because of laziness than you think.

Here’s a couple of interesting things about Mississippi….your population is 60% white and 40% black. Blacks own 13% of all private businesses. Women own 25%! 20% are below the poverty level and that is split almost 50/50 between whites and blacks. Out of over 3 million people, over 600,000 are disabled. (Indicating there may be a lot of SSI disability abuse) Average people per household is 2.63.
But in your county, you are a minority. 70% are black and 28% white. 33% are below the poverty level and only 52% even get a high school diploma. But here’s something…Out of a population of 11,631, 33% were below poverty = or 3877 people. Federal spending was $1, 145,000. That works out to $2940 per person for the whole year. Not exactly a large amount.

3100 of your 11,000 people in Noxubee county are “disabled”. That’s more than 1 in 4. Half the population is under 18 or over 65. The “disabled” number includes people from age 5+ so there may be a lot of disabled children and elderly skewing these statistics. If 25% are under 18 and 25% over 65, then the 25% disabled could mostly be the same people who are over 65.

Looking at the stats for your county and state, I’d say that you live in one of the poorest communities in the nation. There doesn’t seem to be many jobs at all. I wouldn’t doubt that kids grow up thinking that an education is a total waste because it’s not like they will be able to get a job anyways. That’s just plain sad.

So the story for your county isn’t one of “dependency”. It is more like – “imagine what people would do there if there was no welfare.” Would it become a “shanty town” like we see in third world nations? Probably. Because there were many such places right here in the US. That was the “other america” I was talking about earlier. It was all but ignored.

Now about your HUD issue. They may be able to get away with that there, but not here. What that sounds like to me is that they had a budget to stay in and they had a shortage of eligible applicants. If they don’t spend the funds, the funds would be reduced the following year. So they were telling people to fudge numbers to keep their surplus up. Most places for HUD don’t end up with surpluses but shortages. The larger the community, the more likely they are to have a shortage instead of a surplus since the numbers are more predictable.

Still, this doesn’t make it right and you should have reported them. No matter how much money we’re talking about, it’s still our tax money and our responsibility to reduce abuse when we can. This abuse doesn’t mean there is a problem with the program. It means there is a problem with us.

And yes, people overcharge the government all the time because they can get away with it. That was my exact point earlier when I was talking about the military and the $600 toilet seats. Private companies and individual business owners are always trying to improve their profits by overcharging the government. So why do we do this, then blame the government?

My comment

So to put it into perspective: The average full-time employee earns $34,000 per year – or about $16 per hour. The average Dr visit is $120 plus a $40 prescription. So unless you have health insurance, it costs 10 hours of work to get 5 minutes with a doctor and some pills to help you get over an infection that made you miss 3 days of work. And some people actually believe this doesn’t need fixing?

and the responses: (simple fun stuff and general agreement omitted)

Michelle Burns That’s because those people have great health insurance and are making lots of money in kick-backs to convince the “easily led” people that it’s a bad idea. If people would think for themselves and RESEARCH for themselves then those types of lobbyists wouldn’t stand a chance.

Jake Hicks Do you really want health care from 16 dollar an hour doctors?… it sounds great to say “they make too much”… but when you take the money out of the profession… then the best and the brightest go do something else that pays according to thier abilities. I would rather be in debt than dead…

Kevin Freels No. Not $16 an hour doctors. Hell,$75 an hour would be a hell of an improvement over the $120 for 5 minutes. That’s $1440 an hour. You actually think that’s reasonable? That’s why there is such a huge disconnect. Costs have gone from “high” which is to be expected of a professional, to “absurd”. It is capitalism run wild. It really irritates me that people see the solutions to extreme problems from the opposite extreme. As if we have only two choices – $16 an hour doctors or pricing run amok. Arguments from the right invoke images of communist style health care as being the only possible result of government managed healthcare despite the 16 other countries that have better overall healthcare systems than ours. Only the worst examples are held up as the outcome while the positive examples are ignored. Your argument is a classic example – as if I think $16 an hour doctors are the solution.
I love freedom and free markets, but you can have too much of a good thing. Even the right knows this or they would support the legalization of all drugs and let market forces work it out. Just like when the rail companies figured that a 1 in 10 death rate of workers was acceptable loss, sometimes capitalism gets out of control and it has to be reigned back in. That’s the case now.

Jake Hicks Why is it kevin when the leaders of those countries with supposedly better health care than ours get sick.. they come to america?… because we have the best doctors…. because we pay them… not saying the system couldnt be better… but we have plenty examples of government run health care… like… the VA… as a vet I wouldnt let those guys touch me if that was my only option. Not to mention the fact the lion share of the costs you pay when you go to the doctor is for the malpractice insurance because of the lack of tort reform raining in the sue happy lawyers… not anything to do with capitalism, which by the way has made this the greatest country in the world for the last century plus… defeating communism, socialism, imperialism and allowing people to make their own decisions in life… not having the government do it for them. There are plenty of ways to make insurance available and affordable for everyone without the government stepping in and mandating it.

Michelle Burns Yes, those exaggeration tactics are highly used when it comes to giving reasons why fixing health care isn’t a good idea. My husband has the same thoughts as Jake, he believes all good doctors will quit practicing and move on to different fields that they can make more money in. I tell him that, that is an extreme argument and only based on speculation. If that were true everyone would already be a plastic surgeon..but they’re not. There are a lot of fixes in between where we are now and his doomsday picture of cut-rate doctors leaving you dead in back alleys for $20. Typical scare tactics. I certainly would’nt rather be in debt than dead and a lot of americans feel the same, that is why they put off treatment that they can’t afford and they do most certainly die as a result. You aren’t allowed to go “into debt” for hospital bills if you don’t have insurance because you are required to pay costs up front….no money up front means no treatment…means death.

Jake Hicks Then lets allow people to buy insurance across state lines… community co-ops… tort reform… and you would be amazed at how much health care costs drop… and if you think its speculation that a brilliant kid at the start of college… will do 8 years more of college to get even 100k a year… thats crazy… they will be programming software or hell in this administration… go to work for the government and make much more than that with out the investment in time and money it takes to be a doctor.

Michelle Burns Maybe, maybe not. Not everyone picks their profession based on money, some do still pick it based on a love for it and a genuine desire to help others. Why do you think we have firemen and police officers and teachers? They don’t make squat when it comes to money…they do it for other reasons. Not everyone chooses to be a professor and make more money, they want to be a high school teacher. Not everyone will choose to be a specialized heart surgeon, they will want to be a family doctor.
I completely agree that there are lots of ways to make health care affordable but it isn’t being done so I think the government stepping in is a way to get that ball rolling. We don’t necessarily have to go all the way and have them running things, I think that would be a mistake as well, there are things about other countries health systems that are broken but there are also some small things that work and I think we should take that info and learn from it, tweak it, and run with it. We agree on the outcome.

Kevin Freels Well, I’m glad you asked. Because you are basing your information on a myth. I’m sure your example of this is the cases where people from Canada come to the US, or another of the many countries that are behind the US. But Canada is ranked behind the US. So are many other countries used by the right as examples. Ignored are the places where it works well such as France, Italy, Andorra, Spain, Singapore, Austria, Japan, Norway, Netherlands, Norway, UK, Switzerland, Ireland, etc.
How often do you hear of people from the Netherlands coming here for healthcare? You don’t. Because it CAN be done properly. Sure, you may have a case or two that are outside the box, but nowhere near the number of people in this country right now suffering due to lack of BASIC healthcare.
Sure, it can also be done wrong as your VA example exemplifies. But that is different from saying that just because something is socialized, it will turn out bad.
And while I’m at it, let me correct you. Socialism was never defeated. We were never even at war with it. France – the birthplace of modern beliefs of basic human rights and freedom – is a socialist country. The only real problem they suffer from is a lack of people…they are actually asking for people to move INTO the country.
Socialism and Communism are two different things. Sure, the Russians called themselves the “United Soviet Socialist Republic”, but that wasn’t socialism. It was communism. As Rush likes to say – “words mean things”. and socialism is a totally different thing which most people on the right that I know seem to think are one in the same. It’s like equating capitalism and democracy with anarchy and mob-rule.
And sure, malpractice insurance is high, but the premiums are of course set by the INSURANCE COMPANIES. And of course the dollar amount of the insurance still isn’t enough to justify healthcare costs. When a cylindrical sponge soaked in a blood clotter to stop a nose-bleed costs over $1000 dollars, the reason is not malpractice insurance it is a combination of greed combined with the fact that in emergency situations you take what you are given and can’t shop the free market.

And this is why I chose this side of the issue. Free market forces do not apply in medicine. An industry where the more sickness there is, the more money you make is entirely counter to a productive society. When you can’t directly shop for the materials chosen by the doctors to you but the cost of them is passed on to you, the free market is hobbled. The free market does not exist in healthcare and the idea that taking it over will ruin some wonderful free market system is a complete lie.

Ah. I disagree. Software design doesn’t pay $100k per year. And I have yet to meet a “brilliant” doctor. Most can barely speak English and plenty are ignorant enough to really irritate me. These people coming out of med school aren’t geniuses and they aren’t the best and the brightest. They are those who could afford the most school.

Jake Hicks Kevin… NAZI… is a german accroynm for National socialist party… we did defeat socialism… in 1945… and eveyone else has beaten france at least once…lol… still reading needed to correct you…

Linda Penland Good job Kevin! Got people thinking! I am a nurse….and can PROMISE you….IF you do NOT have PRIVATE health care insurance in this country YOU WILL NOT recieve the same care as those who do! So bottom line….if you want the best care don’t loose your job or ability to pay. Anyone coming to “America” for health care is RICH RICH RICH.

Jake Hicks ok Kevin…what is the difference between stalins communism… and hitlers socialism?… government running your life is government running your life… kinda like the difference between liberal and progressive… (marketing…lol)… and what do you think will happen when the government is in control of your healthcare… hmmm… those cheeseburgers arent healthy… and that drives up healthcare costs… so… we are putting a tax on anything we dont approve of… or worse… banning it all together. Take the regulations off… let people choose their healthcare… regardless of where in the country they are based… incentivize business to develop insurance co-ops… and kill the trial lawyers… just kidding on the kill the trial lawyers… I know you libs…oh I mean progressives take things so literally sometimes…lol

Kevin Freels Nazis gave themselves that name.They were a fascist government, but “National Fascist Party” probably wouldn’t have earned them any power.
Just because someone calls themselves socialist doesn’t mean it is socialism. Socialism is a term that has to do with how money moves. The type of government that moves it has just as much to do with it. A fascist or communist government implementing socialism is different for a democratic republic implementing it. Socialism is not a form of government and we were never at war with it. All democratic societies on the planet today implement a balance of socialism and capitalism. We are no different. A person cannot just walk out into the wild and plant a stake and call it his and farm and hunt it anymore. As a people we have decided that we have some sort of responsibility for those who cannot care for themselves. Within this framework we are debating just where we draw that line. Yet the right continues to throw about these terms as if the skies would be safer without the FAA or that food would be safer without the FDA, and our jobs would be safer without OSHA and that the country would be just so much better if the government just quit governing. As if there should be no laws to prevent Ohio from dumping toxic waste into the Ohio river so that it remains safe for those downstream or that power plants can’t put plants on the border so that their air quality in their state is fine while people across the line suffer.
We are a NATION now. Have been ever since the Civil War. Sure we have states, but the whole states rights argument was lost first with the Civil War and last when they still wouldn’t let blacks vote or drink from the same water fountains.
Capitalism alone didn’t make this country great. It was a combination of capitalism along with socialism that helps to stabilize things that did it.

Jake Hicks now who is going to extremes to make a point?… Capitalism isnt the absence of laws… it is the philosophy that I have the right to out work you… and that I shouldnt be punished for having a better work ethic… feeding myself or your lack of motivation. I do disagree with you about not being at war with socialism… I believe we are… especially in the last two years… and Hilter was a socialist… not a facist… that was mussilini… Hitler tried to rewrite the laws through the courts… which is done now by socialist forces in america… government siezed the auto and airline industries… ala… GM…
Did you know that before LBJ’s “war on poverty” (socialism run amok) that something like 80% of african american homes had a mother and a father… its less than 50% now… not unlike the ghettos that germany ran in the 30s and 40s… pay people not to work and they wont… keep them poor and they will need you forever… that is what scares me about socialism…

You can say its just a form of financial infastruture but inevidably it draws the same type of people to power… people who think they know whats better for you than you do… and are prepared to force you to do what they think is best. Give me liberty or give me death…

Kevin Freels Surely not I going to extremes. I didn’t define capitalism as an absence of laws. My point was that a large group on the right thinks this way.
And the government didn’t “sieze” anything. They gave them loans. Most of which have been paid back.
And we’re not talking about paying people not to work. Who ever mentioned that? We’re talking about people for the most part who pay for their own insurance and keeping people healthy. We’re not buying them TVs.

Jake Hicks I thought we were defining socialism… that was my point… and yet even though those “loans” were paid back… speaking for someone who works in the industry… they are still calling the shots at GM… color it any way you want to…

we will just have to agree to disagree about government run health care…

Take care my friend.

Kevin Freels yeah. I don’t have time to keep this up either. But one thing….why are we talking about Stalin and Hitler at all? It’s an argument I shouldn’t have to defend. The comparison is more accurate to the Netherlands, Japan, Ireland, UK, France, Andorra, Singapore, and Switzerland. To draw the comparison to those too is indeed extreme…..

Jake Hicks Do you like to read? I recommend “The wealth of Nations” by Adam Smith… (one of our founding fathers)… you can call it the “capitalist manifesto”… lol and you will never win me over to an arguement saying we need to be more like france… has to be one of my least favorite countries… but that is for another day…lol

Kevin Freels Read it..

October 20 at 5:33pm · Like

Jake Hicks And yet you’re still a Marxist.

Kevin Freels Marxist? Lol that’s exactly what i’m talking about! But i know you’re kidding. Good ddbate, brother.

I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t believe that all things need to be provided to all people. That is the marxist way of thinking. People who really know me know that I am no Marxist. I love guns and freedom. I’m definitely into personal responsibility. I don’t believe in draconian measures to fight “global warming” and I think a lot of work needs to be done to fight the abuse of the programs we have now. So I’m no “liberal” which is just a catch-all term for anyone who doesn’t buy into the conservative agenda 100%.
I just don’t think that the ability to have glasses, a tooth extraction, chemotherapy, or diabetes treatment should be considered a luxury item granted to those of us who are fortunate enough to be able to pay for it up front. We’re not talking about botox and boob jobs. It’s not a Ferarri or flat screen TV. We’re talking about the basic stuff needed to keep people healthy. Why is this such an alarming concept? We’re talking about our people in our great country of wealth and if we can’t at least provide a roof, some food and water, and some basic health for our people, what are we really worth?
The benefits for society at large go much farther than the individual who receives the treatment.

On foreign policy:
CAMERA…A shot of the World Trade Center towers falling.

VOICEOVER: “9/11. The nation suffers the worst attack on its soil in history. But Jesus says that we ought to love the people who did this. He says: “do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who misuse and persecute you.” (Matthew 5:44) Love al Qaeda? Do good to the people who attacked us? This is no plan to keep us safe. Jesus. Soft on defense. Wrong for America.”

I can’t help but share. I spent a lot of time on some of these replies and I hate to lose all of the material!

Here is a response to someone asking me what I meant when I posted “Stole this from a friend…something to think about: “Because violent revolution is JUST what Jesus would do when faced with the disgrace of actually paying LOWER taxes”"

Steve: What exactly are you trying to say?

Me:Steve, there is a large group of people out there who claim to be christians and defenders of liberty and they are nothing of the sort. While talking about their christian values they also talk of supporting the concept of violent revolution against the Obama administration – despite the fact that many of them are actually paying lower taxes. These people are hypocrites, liars, and are doing considerable damage to the causes of both conservatism and christianity. They are definitely not doing as Jesus would do and make a mockery of his teachings. There are forces at work in this country that are attempting to make people into the christian equivalent of sharia law and they are using the poor, muslims, gays, and other such things to do it. They support qur’an burning and the suspension of basic freedoms like where someone will build a mosque, flag-burning, peaceful anti-christian protesting and wire-tapping without warrants based on skin color or religious affiliation but then talk like they are the party defending freedom and liberty. They don’t want liberty. They want just their form of liberty. The GOP is surreptitiously supporting many of these groups while occasionally making a short public statement against them to keep their hands appearing clean. It was enough to get me to abandon the GOP and you may want to dig into what’s going on a bit as well. It’s truly ugly.
Freedom is freedom and if ever the left gets back to attacking my freedoms such as trying to take my handgun, I’ll be back out tearing them down as well, but for the moment, militant conservatism and evangelism are my target.

Steve:hose people are really few and do not reflect the views of the majority of the TEA party. The TEA party is made up of people that are fed up with all of the politicians. They have had enough. They are not stupid people. They know that taxes will go up after the tax cuts expire. And they know that all this debt will have to be paid for by someone. As christians, we must take the high road, but that does not mean that we have to sit down and take it. This country was founder on Christian values, but now has become the puchline of political jokes. The qur’an burning pastor, I believe was just trying to make a point. If that was a muslim burning the Holy Bible, it would have been freedom of speech. Do you believe we should adopt sharia law? A judge in New Jersey ruled in favor of a muslim who beat his wife and raped her against her will. I saw a women in congress leading the Pledge and leaving out “under God”. Before a debate, an audience menber asked if they were going to say the pledge and orator said no, but the crowd said it anyway. The money you make is yours and not the governments. Healthcare is not a right. Laws must be upheld even if you piss a few countries off. Nobody is against the poor, they/we are against people abusing the sytem. I don’t care if a person is gay, but i do not want to here about it, nor should it be taught in school like a story about two princes. I have nothing to hide but are against big brother peering into my personal life. for the most part one political party is just as corrupt as the other. And there are quite a few looneys out there. I’m from TN, but that does not make me a redneck. I do not agree with the gay way of life, but I am not going to hurt one. The left wants to ban guns, raise taxes, remove Christianity from our history, open our borders to a free for all. We have to many people who are apathetic. There is a lot going on on both sides. The dems just happen to have been in power the last four years. I do not trust any of them, but what I and everyone else can do is pay attention, speak up, and vote. By the way, I would like to talk to you and get you other opinions on things. Later.

Me:I never said they reflected the views of the majority. However, to say that they are few is wrong as well. I am specifically referring to these people: http://www.triplepundit.com/2010/04/fair-trade-tea-party-stages-violent-protest-in-washington/

Nor have I called any of them stupid. But anyone, no matter how smart, can be misled. The question I have is this: Is there any measure or proof that I could submit that would change your mind? I’m a scientist at heart and political science is no different than physics. I am always seeking new and contradictory information constantly refining my opinion. For example, I’m a gun nut, but I haven’t seen anyone mess with guns since the so-called “assault weapon’s ban” and that was the Clinton era. Obama got an “F” rating from the Brady bunch meaning he’s not an anti-gun person. Yet I can’t tell you how many people claim that Obama is out to get their guns. Heck, when he was elected I couldn’t even find 40 cal ammunition because there was a run on it. It took 6 months before I could regularly find ammo. lol
What I have found is that despite my very detailed description of the particular people I was knocking, many read into that some kind of generalization – just as you did – that I meant the GOP as a whole was engaging in this behavior. (Although I do accuse the GOP leadership of secretly funding these whackos). As is usually the case, you came back with a generalization of your own pointing to the “left”. I hate to break it to you, but there really is no big “left” movement in this country that you think you are fighting against. The “right” has done a terrific marketing job convincing you that there is some evil left communist anti-god conspiracy out there that you need to fight against and it just doesn’t exist except to say that the “left” is pretty much anyone who isn’t part of the “right” – or in other words – if I’m not with you, I’m against you.
The fact is that most people pointed out as being “left” are only “left” on a topic or two and right on a topic or two. Most have at least two things in common -that 1.) Gun ownership is a right as long as you are not a felon and aren’t packing automatic weapons. and that 2.) We have an obligation to our citizens to spend tax dollars to take care of those who CANNOT take care of themselves.
Now on with some other topics you mentioned.
First of all, it is debatable whether being a christian means you have to sit down and take it. To vote your pocketbook is one thing, but to affiliate with a group that resorts to all sorts of lies to get their point across is another thing. That’s a rant for another day.
Next is this whole “Christian Country” thing. Sorry. It is nothing of the sort. We are founded on Masonic principles, not Christian Principles. I admit, God does play a part in what the founders thought about human rights, but Christianity does not have a monopoly on God. Those same principles are embedded in nearly every major religion. By reading the Constitution – or even the Declaration of Independence, one could just as easily make the case that this is a muslim or jewish country. If you want to be truly accurate you would recognize that the country was founded on principles that the founders recognized as being common among all major religions.
One argument I always hear from libertarians is the line “if you would read the constitution”…. Well, I have. I have read it through and through many times. Let me just quote the very beginning for kicks: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Note that the purpose of the government is to achieve a simple set of goals.
1.) To Achieve a more perfect Union
2.) Establish Justice
3.) Insure domestic tranquility
4.) promote the general welfare
5.) Provide for thew common defense
6.) Secure the blessings of liberty

Note the order. The promotion of the general welfare of the people is listed even before the common defense. Before that even is to “insure domestic tranquility”.

So part of the role of the federal government is to make sure that each of us has a calm home-life. How’s that for over-reaching authority?

Going back to the Dec of Indep, note that we are “endowed by our creator” not “endowed by God, the father of Jesus” with certain unalienable rights. That AMONG these rights (not ONLY these rights) are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and that in order to secure these rights, we institute government.

So it is inferred that there are other rights as well, but that these are just a few that are mentioned. It was left to us as a people to define what those other rights may be.

Now I can assure you that a person bed-ridden and dying because they cannot pay for a surgery is completely incapable of pursuing happiness. A child who’s parents cannot buy them clothes is incapable of pursuing happiness. And I assure you there is no justice in a health insurance provider who owns significant stock in tobacco companies and in companies that make and sell the over-priced products in a market where doctors, not the end-buyer make the buying decision and there is no opportunity to “shop around”. Health care in this country is so screwed up it’s not even funny and I find it amazing that anyone compares health care to luxury items. I voted for Bush but he spent 8 years sitting on his ass while healthcare got worse and Goldman Sachs et al drove the market into collapse while we hung out in Iraq where we attacked after misleading the public despite knowing there were no WMDs in advance and paid billions for a bunch of privatized security companies who didn’t fall under government scrutiny. I would rather have health care provided and shoot my own bad guys than have police to protect me.

I have seen plenty of people who need to be cut off the welfare rolls. There is abuse out there. But the abusers are an incredibly small portion of the total and economically, that money is still better out there being spent than it is sitting in some stock portfolio.

Which brings me to another topic. “Trickle down economics”. Guess what….it’s BS. Money trickles UP. How else can you explain the facts that the multi-millionaires have more income and wealth than ever before at the same time the middle class is shrinking and the lower classes are growing? Why did the middle class need a tax cut at all during 8 years of GOP rule? Shouldn’t their INCOME have been increasing instead? With more income, taxes would be higher but there would still be a net gain. Sure, when the money gets to the top, some of it is invested, but only a small portion of the whole. The rest sits still in an account somewhere to provide for a “rainy day”. Economies grow when money moves, not sits still. Money moves from the bottom up, not the top down.

And that’ s just about all the time I have today. Sure, the dems and repubs have both been guilty of bad things, but to say they are equal is just plain wrong. Historically, the right (in both parties) has done far more than the left when it comes to breaches of liberty. The one shining star was Reagan but his legacy has been lost to sycophants. Maybe if the democratic party stays in power too long, they will get arrogant and start going after things like guns or strongly supporting labor unions. If that happens I’ll quickly turn on them. But at the moment, the overwhelming majority of badness is coming from the right and the bad taste in my mouth gets worse every day I read something about Obama being a muslim or not being a legal citizen, or being a socialist or communist or how socialized medicine equals crappy medicine. You may not believe me, but check back with me in 20 years and you’ll see that I was right.

Oh and the country should be open to all who want to come here – through the front door. And those who come in the back should be shot.

Steve:Whatever happened to just following the Constitution. Oh, I bet that it is too much for them to read. Too many big words.

Kevin:I already addressed that. We have been following the Constitution. Even a national healthcare program is not outside the bounds of the constitution. It all lies in the interpretation of what it means to insure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare of the people. This was part of the constitution for 4 years before the Bill of Rights became part of it.

Section 8 provides for the collection of taxes for among other things, to provide for the general welfare, to regulate commerce among the states and to borrow money on the credit of the U. The constitution – even before the bill of rights says point blank that they can collect taxes ” to promote science and the arts and to build post offices and post roads.” So the framers saw investment in Science and Art as being more important than the right to free speech.
It even spells out the power to organize, arm and discipline the militia which leads some argument to the left on what the “militia” means although I am honest enough to say I like the definition of individuals better.

So it’s not about it having too many big words. I know for a fact that my vocabulary exceeds 99.2 of the population just by various test I’ve been privy to. There are many on the right however who claim to know the constitution better than they actually do. I sincerely hop you aren’t one of them. I actually have much of it memorized although not word for word…..but I’m working on it.

I posted this link on facebook which started a long debate. Did my best to copy the whole debate here. I’ll start with the link, then the comments:

Robo-op marks new world first for heart procedure

The world’s first remote heart procedure, using a robotic arm alongside 3-D mapping, is due to take place at Glenfield Hospital in Leicester.

MY COMMENT: “Wow. Another terrific example of innovation and advancement of medical science…..from a country with “socialized medicine” as well.”

NOW THE DEBATE BEGINS!

Jake Hicks The question with Solialized medicine is not technology Kevin… its access and the loss of control by the patient. Its waiting for months on end for a bueracrat on the other side of the country to decree whether or not you are worthy of such a procedure. Its taxing fast food because the government doesnt approve of your diet… and feel they can make better decisions for you than you can.

Kevin Freels Sorry. It wasn’t meant to be a standalone argument. It just addressed one of the many debate points I often hear. I could have the “access” debate by talking about the access that 65 million (give or take a few) don’t get at all under the current system. I could argue that bueracrats on the other side of the country already decide which procedures and medications I can have because otherwise I would have been on Nexium long ago. The behavior tax idea is just a “slipper slope” logical fallacy.Sure it’s possible but it would be so unpopular I don’t expect it would ever happen. And of course, the insurance companies already make the decisions for the doctors. Unfortunately you can’t shop around for your own provider of q-tips that the hospitals buy for you and pass the cost to you so they make your decisions there as well.

Jake Hicks Well I agree with you that freeing up the federal regulation not letting you cross state lines to shop insurance would dramatically reduce the cost of health care… I dont know what nexium is, so not sure about that. OH… and if the people not wanting a tax would be grounds for the Dems not passing it… how did obamacare pass?…:-)...

Heather Alvis And here all this time I was lead to believe that no TECH is ever created in a “socialized” environment due to lack of “market forces.” HMMM>>>>I guess that’s one more load of BS I need to dump.

Jake, you’ve really got the talking points down on this one. Congratulations! Right now some bureaucrat in an office is deciding whether or not my family and I can have ACCESS or CONTROL of our range of healthcare and whether or not my family and I are worthy of this or that treatment. I do believe that we should be able to pick and choose between different private health insurance coverer and levels of coverage, but since our insurance comes from my husband’s employer, I have no say in THAT either.

Ain’t it great to have imaginary “choice?” Yeehaw

Jake Hicks lol… so many points to make and so little time… ok… first of all… I dont think england’s socialized health care system can lay claim on being the inventor of the robotic arm… in fact, if you read the article… it is actually just a modification on an existing device…that was probably made by an american capitalist…:-).

Heather… The reality is that no one knows how this new socialist utopian health care system is going to effect us… because there was no national debate… there was no congressional debate… just Comrade Nancy cramming it down our throat.

I have said it to you many times Kevin… if the point was to make health care affordable… pass tort reform… allow competition across state lines… allow community co-ops… then hell… the people that are still not covered… let the government pay their deductable and thier premiums ( but let them choose their provider)… it would still cost us a ton less then the catastrophe that is Obamacare.

Kevin Freels Erggh. Point is, the picture of “socialized medicine” painted on the right is one of inferior EVERYTHING. Obviously that’s not the case per the article. And that robot arm was probably made in Japan since American education has been falling behind on such things.

And Jeff, that would have been a wonderful solution 10 years ago. There was plenty of debate, lots of lies “death squads?”, and in the end, no one ever knows what the end result of anything will be. But sitting around with our thumbs up our arses hasn’t accomplished anything at all. It’s like standing in the middle of the road. You had time to figure out if you should jump into the river on the left or try to climb the cliff on the right. Either could have been the right answer. But if you stand in the middle long enough you are sure to die.

I don’t have some magical 8 ball that tells me I’m right and you’re wrong, and neither do you. In the end all we have is our best guess how each will turn out. But until I see someone one the right really out there championing health care reform instead of throwing out half-ass alternate solutions with no real organized effort to pass them, we’ll have to go with the only reform available.

And the demonization of social programs and “socialism” are polarizing me against the right. Every time I hear that ignorant rant about goals of socialist utopia, I cringe and lean even further away from the right. No one (or so few that they don’t matter) wants a “socialist utopia”. They just have different views on how far government should be involved in things. They aren’t commies hiding behind the bushes and that kind of stereotyping just pisses me off.

Not to say I’m pissed at you Jake. Just that to make points with me you’ll have to do better than using those lovely cacophemisms often used on the right.

Jake Hicks hmm… Kevin… didnt mean to upset you, we just look at the world a little differently. I think you made my point about Obamacare for me when you brought up how our educational system is failing… because we socialized education decades ago!! We have dumbed down the profession with low pay and layers of buearocracy have stifled creativity. Which is exactly what will happen with health care… it may take 20 or 30 years before we feel the extint of it, but make no mistake… our quality of life will suffer because of it.

I know you dont like being lumped in with the idea of “Socialism”… and I dont believe that you fit any of the stereotypes… well for the most part…lol unfortunitely some of the leaders on the left are far more idealogical, whether you can accept that or not… its the facts. They have no respect for you or your abilities and believe that you have to be taken care of by the state…. your decisions have to made by the state… and your freedoms have to be surrendered for the “greater good” of…yes… the state. Kevin… color it any way you want to… that is socialism. Thats “1984″…

Look at the health care bill… are you telling me they couldnt have lowered health care costs and increase availability without the monstrosity that they created. They created it to lay a foundation of control. And no there was no real debate about what was in the bill… if you remember… most of the people who voted on it… later said that they werent even allowed to read it before the vote… it was “too important” to waste time with the debate… because they knew that once the american people started to see what was inside they would react they way they did a couple weeks ago on election day. Look at who wanted the bill… the extreme progressives in the party (pelosi, reid, frank, boxer)… and look who they sacrificed to get it… all the sane democrats in congress… oh I mean blue dogs… moderates… yet the idealogs in safe districts get thier way and the country be damned.

Kevin Freels

Alas, as you said, so many points to debate, so little time. But I will say this. State sponsored education was a massive improvement over what was before. Do you have any idea of what the literacy rate was before compulsory state controlled education? You think state education is a mess? Look at the enormous joke that secondary education has become! Kids are “sold” that a degree is a ticket to high income and then encouraged to go into debt as much as possible to but the “best education” possible and come out with less education, or earning potential than I have. That’s “private” sector education for you. They never even want to flunk someone because if they do, they lose that revenue, so they pass nearly EVERYONE!
Even worse, you can choose your version of facts that you want to learn rather than just learning what is really there. Add to that the crap that the catholic schools have going on with their priests and the little boys and I would argue that state sponsored education is superior in every way to the private education available.

And I know plenty of people on the right and left. One day if I can find it I’m going to post my autographed photo of me with Newt Gingrich. But I can tell you that the right has far less respect for me and my abilities and thoughts than do the left. The “left” isn’t some organized front as the right is. Sure, there are utopians among them, but they occupy far less of a percentage than the spiteful evangelical christian sect and the tea-party members do on the right.

Most people I know on the “left” as you say are hard-working people who save money and donate shitloads to causes they support. Most are higher-earners and most of which know damn well that a tax increase means a tax increase on their very own income. The right has successfully painted a false picture that the left is made up of the “have-nots” who are wanting to take from the “haves” on the right. That’s just not true. In fact, Obama bashing is quite common in the backwoods of middle-america where incomes and education are lower. Nothing kills me more than to see a beat-up pickup spewing smoke out the back barely running with no turn-signals and expired plates with a bumper-sticker that says “Taxed Enough Already!” sitting in the parking lot at my wife’s work where they are using the free computer services to apply for their third unemployment extension.

Jake Hicks

‎:-)… the key word I read in that was better then the private education now available… but imagine a world were instead of the beheamath that is the dept of education was instead a regulatory agency that gave vouchers worth a specific amount of money that every american child would have at their disposal… so you could take your kid’s vouchers and put them into a school of YOUR choosing… then allow private industry to come in and make it profitable to educate our kids… you would see a transformation… teachers salaries would go up by 20k or more, bad teachers would be fired, and kids would have access to state of the art technology….ie, Microsoft high school and learning center… GE innovation academy… so you take your voucher and add your own money (if you choose to) to put your kids in more and more challenging enviroments. The universities are not in any way what I would call a private sector educator, I realize techically your are correct, but they are not the people that I want to get involved in teaching our kids at the primary levels. If you make it profitable to educate… the best and the brightest will become teachers instead of lawyers and software techs… because that will be where the money is.

You are wrong about how the right looks at the left… not as the “have nots” trying to take from the haves… but instead a minority group of people who generally are among the “haves”…elitists usually… who believe that you can control the masses through government hand outs designed to keep people poor and needing those programs. It is modern slavery in my mind… when I see the anti obama sticker on the old pick up, I am heartened that this guy wants more from his life than a hand out… he may not be where he wants to be… but he isnt looking to the governement to fix his problems or blame someone else for his life decisions.

Kevin Freels

That’s a heck of an assumption to think that high pay always attracts better workers and that low pay only brings those who are of lower quality. Money, money, money. There is more to life than money. There are a good many people who choose their occupation, not based on money, but on what they actually want to do. You’ll have a hard time trying to convince me that a teacher that is there for the better paycheck is going to be a better teacher than one who actually wants to teach. The reason teacher salaries are low isn’t because they have to be. It’s because so many people are willing to teach at the salaries that they have now. If there were fewer people willing to teach at that salary, the boards would have no choice but to set salaries higher.
One o ther thing. It doesn’t take vouchers to fix the problem. Nearly every other developed nation is kicking our ass without vouchers. Obviously there is something far more sinister at work. It is the degredation of education. In America, it is not fashionable to be an “educated elitest”. Education is not the top priority. Instead it is how many episodes of American Idol you watch and what church you attend.

Jake Hicks

lol… Kevin its not an assumption… do you think doctors and lawyers are smarter (generally) then social workers or for that matter salesmen… I would say yes they are. Because the top kids in the class who have the most options gravitate to the most lucrative positions. Yes there are some crusaders out there but the large majority of brilliant students arent aspiring to be a lawyer because of their love of the law or a doctor because they aspire to check the sniffles of 5 year olds… they do it because it is the best financial option in a field that they are interested in. Profit is not a cuss word… and ambition is not a vice.

So many people are willing to teach because the standards are not high enough. We have put such a value on class size and Union dues… that we have flooded the schools with teachers with basic “teaching” degrees… no specialty in a specific field… just general degrees. The education standard has suffered because of it. See what would happen if you raised the standard to 6 year specific degree, ie…. english teachers be a english major, math teachers be a math major, instead of 4 with a general teaching degree and raised their pay. You would have kids gravatating towards teaching away from law… or software… or financial.

I dont want to be like the french… I believe we can solve the problems in an american capitalistic way that would soar past any country in the world. I am not a wanna be european… I think they should aspire to be more like us… the most innovative country in the world…. we have proven that time and time again… usually when some european country needs our help getting them out of a mess their snooty ass has gotten themselves into.

Kevin Freels

Unless you are expecting regular run of the mill teachers to earn 6 figures in your voucher program those “top kids” will still choose to be lawyers and doctors. I suspect that the numbers just don’t work out for that. Education would become so damned expensive only the wealthy could afford it.More likely I would expect at most a 15% increase in salaries through efficiency and I’ve quit jobs paying more for bigger pay cuts because I didn’t like the job and I’m sure you have too. So the impact on teacher quality would be minimal.
I’ll admit – I haven’t studied the voucher program as much as you have so I’ll reserve judgment on it until I do. I was just poking holes in your logic.
My overall point however still stands. The educational system as it is, is not the problem with kids and their lack of education. The “system” itself isn’t the horrendous failure that you think it is, so it is a lousy example in your healthcare argument. Sure, it has problems, but most of those problems are due to the “solutions” to perceived problems. We aren’t averaging as high on standardized testing, but we make even ignorant kids who don’t want to be there go to school. This skews the numbers some because those kids will obviously do worse than those who want to be there, but it does mean that our derelicts are smarter than everyone else’s!
If there is a problem with education in the US, it is cultural. Our culture puts more emphasis on sports and entertainment than it does on education. We set those values as a people and the kids learn that. Great minds like Hawking and Darwin are ridiculed . Millions of kids ignore biology entirely because some of it conflicts with what they learn in church. (yet there is not real conflict). Kids emulate and when their parents can name nearly every pro NFL player along with their stats, but can’t tell you which planet is third from the sun, they prioritize the same way.
Simply switching how the money moves around or throwing more at it won’t fix it. But we’re way off topic.
So back to healthcare. What I want to see is the bottom raised. No one has advocated a wholesale government ownership of the healthcare industry. The Obama bill does very little in the way of government control. Frankly I’m surprised at all the angst. Part of it includes insurance exchanges whichwere a GOP idea negotiated into the deal that does exactly as you say – sets various companies up to compete against each other. The bill stops kids from being denied because of pre-existing conditions which would be costly to insurers except for the fact that it requires everyone to have insurance which should offset that. It requires preventative measures be covered which of course reduces long-term costs. Sure, it steps on the toes of the few uninsured who are so by choice, but isn’t that better than the alternative which is to tax more and give away the insurance? It’s a well thought out compromise and instead you hear “it’s the first time the government ever required someone to buy something”. Sure, it was fast-tracked which still allowed for debate. It just limited that debate because the GOP would have done what they always do – endlessly debate the same points that had been debated continuously over the years. All this reminds me of the small business bill that the GOP helped write then opposed. I am curious – since you are so darned adamant that the Obama plan is terrible, which specific parts bother you the most and why?

Jake Hicks

The idea of setting up an infastructure of control… you are fined unless you get the “approved” insurance… already companies are opting out of the existing insurance that they offer to their employees… because why shouldnt they… the government is going to pick it up… look at hawaii… they tried this and almost bankrupted the state. Because companies quit offering insurance and the state was expected to cover more and more people… now, I believe that Obama / Pelosi want this…They want to be the nanny state… I oppose this not because of the individual programs within… but because I am against an all consuming government. Take off the raines… allow us as INDIVIDUALS allow us as individuals to excel or fail on our own. Have your safety net, but stay out of my way.

I also disagree with you that the “system” is not the problem with education. There again the government does nothing well… well not nearly as well as the private sector anyway.

I have noticed Kevin that your central “boogy man” seems to be religon… I dont think the “religous right” has anywhere near the influence or power you seem to. The Tea Party, which is about taxes and not religon seems to me to be the power on the right at the moment. They are just as mad at Bush as they are Obama… I think religon is playing less and less of an important role in politics. Look at the power brokers on the right of the future… Chris Christie (I like this guy alot!!), Mitch Daniels, Bobby Jendal, and even Rand Paul… none of which are touting god as the justification for their positions… and more often than not are avoiding the subject completely.

I love religon but am not religous. I find it facinating they way people react to it… both for and against. Who really cares.. or who should care who I pray to when I am all alone… or if I pray at all… what does that have to do with anything…

Kevin Freels

I really wish I had more time for this but I don’t. I don’t expect employers to stop offering insurance…the government is not taking up the tab. The plan doesn’t call for the government to directly pay for anyone except the poorest of the poor. The bill also addresses this with penalties.
This isn’t a goal to achieve the “nanny state” you fear. I seriously doubt the healthcare plan as written will have much affect on you at all so the government is indeed out of your way.
I just don’t agree with the sink or swim mentality you have. We can do better as a people than simply letting those who don’t succeed simply rot and die. We’re not talking about luxuries here, Jake. We’re talking about basic health. You are basically saying that if you don’t succeed and you get a disease, you deserve to die, but if you succeed, you deserve to live and that we as a people have no responsibility to intervene in this. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
The statement “the government does nothing well” is a clear sign that you are walking around with your blinders on. Most of the government programs in place are due to a failure of the private sector. Public education came about because the private sector was failing to educate the country. This is the case with OSHA, FDA, FAA, FCC, FEMA, and every other part of the government.Snake-oil salesmen and child labor were the end result of capitalism run amok. There were 96 deaths just building the Hoover Dam and that was perfectly acceptable to the companies building it. The unions were a reaction to abuses like this. I despise what the unions have become and I am certainly anti-union, but they exist because of capitalism gone wild. Sure, any organization has it’s problems. Even where I work there are people working who should be fired and decisions made that are stupid. Organizations, public or private are manned by people and people screw up. Making something private over public doesn’t magically change that and just because it is government it doesn’t mean it is bad.
Any real working system is going to be a blend of private sector and government control. To debate the role of government is one thing, but to assume that government = bad is just wrong.
Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree as I can’t keep spending this kind of time on this because I have to make a living.
As for religion, you are right. I do see it as the boogeyman. The tea party is far more saturated with evangelical religious views than you know, or care to believe. If I had time I would dig up a list I saw with Tea Party candidates and their very own quotes about where they stand on such things as creation, stem cell research, and the role of religion in government. I fear theocracy more than I fear government healthcare. Easy decision – Saudi Arabia or Switzerland?? Iraq or Ireland? Seriously. Every time I hear “Christian Country” I cringe because I know we’re founded on Masonic principles. A belief in God is not a believe in Jesus. Christianity implies Christ and Christ is not one of the truths we found to be self-evident. That’s why I really do’t have a problem with the pledge of allegience or In God We Trust despite the fact that these things came only after more than a hundred years of the USA being formed.
Do you remember the proposed flag-burning amendment? That’s the kind of crap I fear. Banning free speech is much more dangerous than redistributing some wealth – especially since all money eventually works it’s way back to the top.
Well, that’s enough for me. Feel free to respond if you wish. I’m pretty much done as I don’t have more time for this although I wish I did and I do enjoy the debate. I won’t respond to whatever you post, but for the record that doesn’t mean that I concede or that I have no points to make in response. I just have to draw the line somewhere. Thanks for the debate.

Jake Hicks

hehe… Kinda got tickled that you started off the last reply with “I really wish I had more time for this…” and then wrote a small novel…lol

I will only reply to correct your misrepresentation… I am not for sink or swim… (though I will say that for someone who idolizes Darwin… survival of the fittest should be right up your alley…lol) I have said earlier in this thread that I am for the safety net… for the disabled and elderly… obviously kids without parents type of thing. I am just not for the government establishing jurisdiction over my health… or any one in my family. Oh and I am sure I will feel the effects of this monster even if I never get sick a day in my life… my paychecks will be smaller… there is no arguing that fact.

Good debate Kevin… catch ya next time around.

Kevin Freels

Damn. You had to do it, didn’t you?! How can I pass this up?
For the record, I don’t idolize Darwin. There is a long list of people who have made great discoveries. He’s just the one that many people understand so poorly that they want to keep his ideas out of the classroom. If someone promoted “intelligent falling” and heliocentrism in schools, I would be defending Newton and Copernicus. Fortunately in 1992 the Vatican finally cleared Copernicus of any wrongdoing and accepted his ideas – just 350 years after he died so I don’t have to.
Evolution by means of natural selection is as real as gravity. But just that doesn’t mean I like it or that we just accept our fates. Instead we use technology to overcome the obstacles created by it. We use antibiotics and vaccines, we cook our food, we treat our water and we heat and cool our homes. In society we use charities and government as our tools to overcome so-called “social darwinism”.
OK. That’s it. I really am done now. I suspect that you already know all of this and just wanted to draw me out since I said I wouldn’t comment again. You just know me too well, Jake. lol

Jake Hicks

lol… Kevin I was just teasing you about the darwin thing… Man what is your obsession with the vatican?… who cares?… They have no athority. This country is no where near a country like saudi arabia or Iran’s theocracy… I would be the first in line with a rifle if I thought there was a remote chance of that. Why are the only two options in your way of thinking, to be controlled by the government (socialism)… or controlled by a theocratic state… how about not controlled at all (conservatism)… I have never (and I have been to several republican and conservative rallys and partys… including tea party) heard someone on the right want a theocratic state. They may want prayer in school… or believe that abortion is a religous issue (it isnt… any more than a person killed on the street is a religous issue)… but I have never heard one suggest punishing other people for not believing what they thought. That is crazy…

Now I whole heartedly disagree with the republican platform on gay rights and immigratioon… and seem to agree with no one on abortion… I have voiced these opinions many times to my conservative friends and have never had more than a debate like you and I have. They know I am not religous and still welcome me into the room. I dont see the boogy man you do and I am alot closer to them than you are.

Just read an article that says that people on the right give a lot more to charity than people on the left. The research appears to be sound. What this means is that those who consider themselves on the left need to quit being such tightwads and pony up some cash.