It's the (Tanking) Economy, Stupid

[cmartyn 0]

There are 2 types of Jobs. Ones that have been eliminated and those they want to eliminate. If you are working for more than minimum wage then there is probably someone at your firm is searching for a way to eliminate your position. On the face it looks like a bad thing but conservative dogma would have us believe that this is a good thing. It raises the profits of the corporation, making it expand, and hire more people. More middle management anyways. I dunno. So far, things have worked out rather well financially for me but I'm not going around saying that poor people are poor by choice. I have worked with many smarter and harder working people that have been let go over the years. I just have more perceived value at this point in time. In the near future, I may not be perceived in the same light. I would appreciate at that point in time - that some sniveling little neo-con arsewipe - not call me freaking stupid and lazy because he is still working.

[LuzyC 0]

It's not the government's job to INSURE people, but don't you think there's some merit (or at least moral value) to keeping people alive and healthy?

It comes down to personal responsibility and your own priorities. This government is turning into a nanny state. You get out of life what you put into it. If someone does not want to work hard to better themselves then it isn't my job to take care of them. Now I exclude someone that is disabled or for some reason beyond their control can't work but the idea that I should take care of them just because they are not motivated to work is abhorrent to me!

So you're saying that the 45 million people in this country without health insurance don't have it because they are not motivated to work hard enough for it?

In a word, yes

That's utter BS. What a cynical assumption. Personal responsability only goes so far, there are so many factors that effect someone's economic mobility. A person living in a small rural town has less job opportunities than someone who works in a metropolitan area. Instead of blaming people for being poor, we should be looking at solutions beyond telling them to simply go and get a better job. What a farse.

Excuse me, I came from a very small rural town. When I didn't like the oportunities that the area offered I moved to somewhere that did offer better chances. It still comes down to personal choices. If your poor it's because you choose to be.

It's a complex problem, Gary. You just need to look at Luzy's country and her own family as an example that it isn't entirely about one's personal responsability. I'm all for the American Dream and making people responsible for themselves, but when you're dishing out the responsability, you can't ignore the other players - government and corporations. I just don't think it's productive to simply blame the poor for being poor - they don't need a hand out or blame - they need real solutions. For one, the ones effected by poverty the most are young children. Blame won't put food in their bellies or help them to break out of poverty.

Steven,Shake it off my friend

What this America's Economy got to do with me,my family and my country?You cannot compare my situation and my country with all this bruhaha?were in 3rd world poor country..sad to say..Im working my ### off all my life and I dont beg for food to put to my table.

Just my opinion..

[GaryC 7]

There are 2 types of Jobs. Ones that have been eliminated and those they want to eliminate. If you are working for more than minimum wage then there is probably someone at your firm is searching for a way to eliminate your position. On the face it looks like a bad thing but conservative dogma would have us believe that this is a good thing. It raises the profits of the corporation, making it expand, and hire more people. More middle management anyways. I dunno. So far, things have worked out rather well financially for me but I'm not going around saying that poor people are poor by choice. I have worked with many smarter and harder working people that have been let go over the years. I just have more perceived value at this point in time. In the near future, I may not be perceived in the same light. I would appreciate at that point in time - that some sniveling little neo-con arsewipe - not call me freaking stupid and lazy because he is still working.

When someone is of value to the company then that company wants to keep them, when they are not of value to the company then they look for ways to get rid of you. Thats life. The secret to success is to make yourself a valuable asset. Don't rest on your laurals. Always strive to improve yourself. That is what I have done and it has served me well. The company I work for now sees me as an asset and they are investing in me. In the last 16 months I have worked here they have sent me to 4 factory schools and at the moment I am taking 6 SIGMA classes. I strive to continue to develop my value to this company and I am rewarded with job security, higher wages and upward mobility. It only makes sense that the company keeps the ones that are assets and weeds out the ones that just skate. Your future is in your own hands.

[cmartyn 0]

When someone is of value to the company then that company wants to keep them, when they are not of value to the company then they look for ways to get rid of you. Thats life. The secret to success is to make yourself a valuable asset. Don't rest on your laurals. Always strive to improve yourself. That is what I have done and it has served me well. The company I work for now sees me as an asset and they are investing in me. In the last 16 months I have worked here they have sent me to 4 factory schools and at the moment I am taking 6 SIGMA classes. I strive to continue to develop my value to this company and I am rewarded with job security, higher wages and upward mobility. It only makes sense that the company keeps the ones that are assets and weeds out the ones that just skate. Your future is in your own hands.

Yes, and if and when India gets up to speed on doing whatever it is you do, you can join the ranks of the stupid and lazy as you retrain for something else. Thats all I am saying :-) I was an electrical engineer, then a software developer, at 50, I dont think Ill be able to switch careers to something else that pays well.

[GaryC 7]

I am 48. I have changed careers 4 times in the last 20 years. It can be done if you want it. Never say die.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's a complex problem, Gary. You just need to look at Luzy's country and her own family as an example that it isn't entirely about one's personal responsability. I'm all for the American Dream and making people responsible for themselves, but when you're dishing out the responsability, you can't ignore the other players - government and corporations. I just don't think it's productive to simply blame the poor for being poor - they don't need a hand out or blame - they need real solutions. For one, the ones effected by poverty the most are young children. Blame won't put food in their bellies or help them to break out of poverty.

Luz's country is the Philippines and not America. Totaly different. In America you get out what you put in. That is what makes us great. You are blaming government and corporations for the poor. That is not where the blame or the solution lies. The solution lies with the people themselves. In 1980 when I got out of the Navy I was unemployed and homeless. I was living in a broken down car. It wasn't the fault of anyone but myself. I realized that if I wanted more out of life I had to put more into it. No one helped me. I got down to it and did it myself. If I could do it anyone can do it. It all comes down to what you want out of life. I will say it again. If you are poor it's because you choose to be. And it isn't my job to give hand outs to someone that doesn't want to put the effort into life to get what they want.

Hypothetically, if I have a good job with an annual salary of $65-$85K, why is it a person earning that kind of money can still be denied health insurance either through pre-existing condition clauses or by unrealistically high premiums.

Healthcare should not ever be about profit at the expense of patient care. That really is an indicator of the widening gap between rich and poor - but its really all meaningless because the system works in such a way that unless you are seriously (or independently wealthy), you still can't necessarily get or afford treatment even on a decent annual wage.

Not to mention the system is intrinsically corrupt - that barring the threat of a lawsuit most insurance companies will cut corners to reduce their costs and maximise profits - even if it conflicts with standards of patient care. That's simply B/S - I just can't buy the idea that "if I'm ok - ####### everyone else"

While this is not true of the individuals that live here, in terms of its systems - this country is a dark and brutal place.

[GaryC 7]

Hypothetically, if I have a good job with an annual salary of $65-$85K, why is it a person earning that kind of money can still be denied health insurance either through pre-existing condition clauses or by unrealistically high premiums.

Healthcare should not ever be about profit at the expense of patient care. That really is an indicator of the widening gap between rich and poor - but its really all meaningless because the system works in such a way that unless you are seriously (or independently wealthy), you still can't necessarily get or afford treatment even on a decent annual wage.

Not to mention the system is intrinsically corrupt - that barring the threat of a lawsuit most insurance companies will cut corners to reduce their costs and maximise profits - even if it conflicts with standards of patient care. That's simply B/S - I just can't buy the idea that "if I'm ok - ####### everyone else"

While this is not true of the individuals that live here, in terms of its systems - this country is a dark and brutal place.

I am living proof that that isn't the case. If you don't like the job you have or don't like the coverage that you are getting then change it. Why think it is the job of the government to force an employer to change the way it does business. My insurance covers pre-existing conditions. My premium is something I can afford. If a company wants to attract workers that have the skills they want then they will offer the incentives that will satisfy their needs. Look at yourself as a commodity and market yourself accordingly. It all comes down to personal responsibility and personal goals. It is not the job of the government or corporations to do that.

I don't want to see America go the way of Canada and Europe with cradle to grave benefits. It removes incentives for personal achievement and growth and makes an entitlement mentality.

[GaryC 7]

This country is not a dark and brutal place, it is a bright and shining example of how a country should be. I am very proud of America and it is the envy of the whole world. I would hate to have your pessimism. It would be so depressing to live like that.

[mawilson 2,133]

...the share of the GDP that goes to wages and salaries has reached a 59-year low, while the share going to corporate profits is at a 40-year high.

Shares are relative numbers. If you look at absolute numbers, you'll see that things are getting better.

Luz's country is the Philippines and not America. Totaly different. In America you get out what you put in. That is what makes us great. You are blaming government and corporations for the poor. That is not where the blame or the solution lies. The solution lies with the people themselves. In 1980 when I got out of the Navy I was unemployed and homeless. I was living in a broken down car. It wasn't the fault of anyone but myself. I realized that if I wanted more out of life I had to put more into it. No one helped me. I got down to it and did it myself. If I could do it anyone can do it. It all comes down to what you want out of life. I will say it again. If you are poor it's because you choose to be. And it isn't my job to give hand outs to someone that doesn't want to put the effort into life to get what they want.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hypothetically, if I have a good job with an annual salary of $65-$85K, why is it a person earning that kind of money can still be denied health insurance either through pre-existing condition clauses or by unrealistically high premiums.

Healthcare should not ever be about profit at the expense of patient care. That really is an indicator of the widening gap between rich and poor - but its really all meaningless because the system works in such a way that unless you are seriously (or independently wealthy), you still can't necessarily get or afford treatment even on a decent annual wage.

Not to mention the system is intrinsically corrupt - that barring the threat of a lawsuit most insurance companies will cut corners to reduce their costs and maximise profits - even if it conflicts with standards of patient care. That's simply B/S - I just can't buy the idea that "if I'm ok - ####### everyone else"

While this is not true of the individuals that live here, in terms of its systems - this country is a dark and brutal place.

I am living proof that that isn't the case. If you don't like the job you have or don't like the coverage that you are getting then change it. Why think it is the job of the government to force an employer to change the way it does business. My insurance covers pre-existing conditions. My premium is something I can afford. If a company wants to attract workers that have the skills they want then they will offer the incentives that will satisfy their needs. Look at yourself as a commodity and market yourself accordingly. It all comes down to personal responsibility and personal goals. It is not the job of the government or corporations to do that.

I don't want to see America go the way of Canada and Europe with cradle to grave benefits. It removes incentives for personal achievement and growth and makes an entitlement mentality.

That's unrealistically optimistic - often you have no insurance choices apart from what your company offers you - unless you do it individually at a drastically higher rate.

Career change is all well and good - but it doesn't happen in 5 minutes, 6 months - even a year is optimistic, considering that you often have to start at the bottom of a new industry, and you often find that its that period of time when you need the healthcare - as opposed to the other 95% of the time when you pay for it and don't use it.

There is no way you can argue that corporatisation of healthcare is beneficial when the sole pursuit of the industry is profit at the expense of patient care. I know several people, including my father in law (who makes around $100K with an architectural firm) who has had his health directly impacted by insurance workers making medical decisions on their behalf to save them money. He was landed in hospital a couple years ago because his insurer decided he no longer needed to see his cardiologist. He almost ended up having a cardiac arrest as a result!

While I was waiting for my EAD (and my wife was working full time and finishing college) I had to have a Lymphoma biopsy. Bearing in mind I couldn't legally work and was covered under my wife's plan, she was earning $32k and studying, we were looking at being "pre-existing conditioned" for $20,000 for an exploratory surgery on something that hadn't even been diagnosed. Are you suggesting my wife and I should incur a massive additional debt for the luxury of finding out whether or not I had a potentially deadly disease, or perhaps I should have simply "taken my chances" - as apparently 45 million Americans do on a daily basis?

Then there's a fairly famous author I know who's wife needed an MRI scan - but while the doctor recommended a 64 slice scan (highest resolution), and they themselves insisted on it to the insurer - they were still given (and billed for) the low-res one, which actually made the exercise completely pointless.

Do you think these people are personally irresponsible or is, as I suspect, this situation rather more typical and rather more widespread than you are prepared to admit?

This country is not a dark and brutal place, it is a bright and shining example of how a country should be. I am very proud of America and it is the envy of the whole world. I would hate to have your pessimism. It would be so depressing to live like that.

I knew that would cause uproar.

I don't live like anything. I simply said "in terms of its systems" this country is a dark and brutal place. Certainly with regards to healthcare I don't see how that is an inaccurate assessment.

I can give you a whole range of examples demonstrating why corporatised healthcare is geared towards profit to the detriment of the health of individuals.

Ask yourself why it is that two people buying the same medication at the same pharmacy can pay vastly differing amounts of money for the exact same thing. Or why it is that drugs researched and manufactured overseas are subject to apparently arbitrary price mark-ups in the US?

No wonder the govt cracked down on US residents buying drugs through the Canadian public health system. All for your protection of course.

Edited September 14, 2006 by erekose

[Cassie 8]

I don't want to see America go the way of Canada and Europe with cradle to grave benefits. It removes incentives for personal achievement and growth and makes an entitlement mentality.

Oh give me a break! I never felt entitled for anything while growing up, other than getting my EI benefits when I needed them in times of unemployment -- you know, the benefits I paid for out of my paycheque every freakin' week.

I'd say more, but for the sake of my blood pressure, I'm keeping my mouth shut.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't want to see America go the way of Canada and Europe with cradle to grave benefits. It removes incentives for personal achievement and growth and makes an entitlement mentality.

Oh give me a break! I never felt entitled for anything while growing up, other than getting my EI benefits when I needed them in times of unemployment -- you know, the benefits I paid for out of my paycheque every freakin' week.

I'd say more, but for the sake of my blood pressure, I'm keeping my mouth shut.

Neither did I - for the brief time when I collected unemployment in the UK, I felt like a scumbag picking up my check each fortnight, not to mention the Employment Agency staff look at you like something they scraped off their shoe.

[mawilson 2,133]

While I was waiting for my EAD (and my wife was working full time and finishing college) I had to have a Lymphoma biopsy. Bearing in mind I couldn't legally work and was covered under my wife's plan, she was earning $32k and studying, we were looking at being "pre-existing conditioned" for $20,000 for an exploratory surgery on something that hadn't even been diagnosed. Are you suggesting my wife and I should incur a massive additional debt for the luxury of finding out whether or not I had a potentially deadly disease, or perhaps I should have simply "taken my chances" - as apparently 45 million Americans do on a daily basis?

I'm sorry to hear that, erekose -- but if the UK system is so much better (which is what I think

you're saying), why didn't you have it done on the NHS?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sorry to hear that, erekose -- but if the UK system is so much better (which is what I think

you're saying), why didn't you have it done on the NHS?

I would have - except:

1) The wait time would likely have invalidated my K1, as the symptoms only manifested after I had received the visa. Not to mention a lymphoma is not something that they conduct an exploratory surgery on without first developing an observational case history over a period of time.

2) I was in the US at the time anyway, in that no-mans land between K1 and AOS. If I had flown out, there was a possibility of not being let back in for being out of status - or alternatively waiting god knows how long for advance parole.

Edited September 14, 2006 by erekose

[mawilson 2,133]

2) I was in the US at the time anyway, in that no-mans land between K1 and AOS. If I had flown out, there was a possibility of not being let back in for being out of status - or alternatively waiting god knows how long for advance parole.

Ah -didn't know you were out of status.