Scotties Toy Box

December 5, 2019

Thousands of minor children ripped from their parent by order of POTUS

Filed under: Bigotry, Cartoons, Children, Criminal, Family, Fascism, Hate, Memes, News, Political, Questions, Race — Scottie @ 10:19

29 Comments »

  1. Hey Scottie, sorry to bother. I was over at Nans page and I continued to ask her this particular question repetitiously, she seemed to avoid answering it (I don’t know exactly why and I’m not going to jump to conclusions), but I was wondering If you could provide me an answer?

    The question is : “Elizabeth Warren has stated multiple times that she wants to make QUOTE – (Make an America that works for everyone)”, What do you think she means by this, and If she gets elected, how would she go about doing such a thing?

    Thanks Scottie,

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Dylan Shetler — December 5, 2019 @ 16:09

    • Hello Dylan. I would be glad to talk with on this. However I am a bit behind the last couple of days so it may take me a day or two before I can really give you my full attention. Keep asking question it is the best way to learn. I need to go over to Nan’s blog later as I have been too busy to follow the conversations. Hugs

      Like

      Comment by Scottie — December 6, 2019 @ 13:03

    • Dylan Shetler – she has a campaign site, you know.
      https://elizabethwarren.com/plans
      She probably “avoided answering” because there is a lot there.
      Here’s my take, without actually reading up on any of these. (A mistake, I know, but I have to prepare for me scheduled work and I can’t go down a rabbit hole)

      1 – “Medicare For All” In other words, a national health care insurance system, starting from the Medicare system that we already have in place. (Dems over complicate this, I believe, when they could just point out that everyone knows someone on Medicare and getting everyone on it and improving the system from there would help everyone.)

      after this point there is a sort of showcase section followed by a linkto all of her plans.. The items displayed there today (I don’t know if they change, leaving MFA on top, always, but that’s probably how I’d do it)

      2 – “A Fair Workweek for America’s Part-Time Workers” – some sort of legislative support to limit employers’ capricious control of schedules. This would allow part-timers to plan for a second job, or even plan child-care around their schedule, something you can’t do when your schedule can be posted at the last minute or changed daily.This one is a casse where employers have all the power and workers can get charged for child endangerment because the boss won’t plan ahead.

      3 – “Fighting Back Against White Nationalist Violence” – probably calling out terrorism even if it’s domestic. How hard can that be. The FBI has defined it, even.

      4 – “Protecting and Empowering Renters” – this probably has a component of “trump and his son-in-law are slum lords” but housing is a big problem for the U.S.

      Any of these four items that are on the top today are problems for just some of us.
      Health care, housing, work schedules are all things that the richest among us just don’t have worries about. The economically bottom 20% or so, however live and die by these.
      White Nationalist Violence has been allowed to grow under trump since “some of them are great pee-pul”, allowing some groups to be above the law.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by MDavis — December 6, 2019 @ 13:05

      • I also “avoided answering” because the question is not related to my blog post topic. I do allow some meandering but I’ve found that various individuals seem to have a need to discuss (argue) some vaguely related topic … and they want to use my blog to do so.

        Liked by 2 people

        Comment by Nan — December 6, 2019 @ 13:58

        • Hello Nan. It seems to be a problem on popular blogs that people want to talk about a lot of different things other than the post. I have seen it on other blogs where the author has to keep asking people to return to the topic. Maybe it is because people just have no where to really express themselves in person so they jump at the chance to do so in a comment section. I guess it must be the difference between a blog and a forum or redit. It is totally understandable you want your post topic discussed. You put the effort into writing about it. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Scottie — December 6, 2019 @ 14:39

          • Oh yes … there are undoubtedly many and varied reasons why this happens. Some blog-owners don’t mind. And actually, so long as the topic doesn’t get too far off in left field, I’ll let things continue. However, as you suggested, there are several other avenues to use where moderation of topics is minimal and people can discuss/complain/argue to their heart’s content. About anything.

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by Nan — December 6, 2019 @ 14:50

            • Hello Nan. I am one of the worst persons of this offense. When talking with someone, going back and forth I just keep following the flow until I am way beyond the original post. I hardly realize I am doing it, I am just having a discussion / argument until the blog owner reminds me I am far off topic. Yes you are correct, I know of several more commercial blogs where every evening they open up the comment section to any topic. However these are blogs that have security and other moderators to prevent illegal activity and that simply is not possible for my level of blogging. Hugs

              Like

              Comment by Scottie — December 6, 2019 @ 15:36

              • Scottie, let me say this … I don’t mind your comments on my blog even if they stray a bit from the post topic. Why? Because almost always you are presenting FACTS.

                Yes, you’re may be “voicing” your opinion — and you may be disagreeing with someone else’s comment — but you’re doing it from a perspective that demonstrates your knowledge — and research — of the subject. You aren’t just “baiting” people. There is a difference. A big one.

                And that’s all I’m going to say on this subject.

                Liked by 1 person

                Comment by Nan — December 6, 2019 @ 15:47

        • Ah. I didn’t realize. Still, if you want to know about a candidate’s position, why not look up her campaign site?

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by MDavis — December 7, 2019 @ 01:43

          • Hello MDavis. I agree. Thank you for trying. I will get to Dylan today. A quick read of part of his answer to you showed a lot of assumptions and right wing talking points like freezing the economy but no substance and fact. He wants to push the idea it is bad but has only right wing shows to go on. Hugs

            Like

            Comment by Scottie — December 7, 2019 @ 05:48

      • Hello MDavis. Thank you. I am so behind I have not even done my own posting today. I appreciate all the help I can get. Trying to get other chores done around the house. Thanks again. Hugs

        Liked by 1 person

        Comment by Scottie — December 6, 2019 @ 14:31

      • MDavis, I thank you for your response,

        I agree MDavis, without a doubt some of these problems exist in large quantities today within the US, but the textual material presented on Warren’s site (elizabethwarren.com) doesn’t at all answer my question. Elizabeth Warren is running on the notion that she wants to make an America that quote : “works for everyone.” When you look at her plans, including “Medicare for all”, and “universal free tuition”, you get the idea, but if you examine them with more depth, it can concerning.

        So how do you get “Medicare for All?” Simple. Take a given country, implement a “Universal Healthcare Bill”, freeze all of the capital (money) within it’s economy, and the identify who/whom possesses the most of that capital. Then take the required amount of money (through high taxes) from those who possess the most of it (the affluent/wealthy), and utilize that money to purchase the healthcare of everyone else. Do you know what that is called? It’s called theft. I understand left leaning voters are siding with the Democrats on these issues, but the Democrats aren’t telling the entire story. They proclaim that healthcare is a “universal human right”, which currently is not true based on the facts. Unless money falls from the sky, in order to achieve “universality” within the healthcare system, the government would need to forcibly invade the rights of American citizens to pay it’s tab! When I say rights, I am specifically addressing the right to “liberty” found in the Declaration of Independence. The liberty each of us have as Americans, includes the liberty to spend “our” money how we please, and not when others want us to. Yes, we all pay taxes to have roads, police, and fireman, because those are things we all use from time to time, but anything more than that becomes “theft.”

        Social Security, theft. Welfare programs, theft. Food assistance, theft. Housing subsidies, damn theft. All of these things are socialist programs, most of which should be removed because they violate the rights of other individuals in the process of them functioning. The lefts answer to fixing every social problem is, “we’ll simply just make another governmentally subsidized program to fix that!” If you take a look at a majority of Liz Warren’s plans, you’ll find most of them all revolve around imaginary governmentally subsidized programs, in which she advocates for taking from someone else (theft), and then handing it over to other people.

        I hope you get the idea ; “Government subsidized programs require capital in order to function, therefore they must get that capital from somewhere”, and in most cases, it’s obtained from that governments citizens.

        You’re welcome to respond If you disagree.

        Like

        Comment by Dylan Shetler — December 6, 2019 @ 15:49

        • Curious, Dylan … if you feel the money for social security, welfare programs, food assistance, housing subsidies are all “socialist” programs because they “violate the right of other individuals,” then I can only assume you feel the people who are taking advantage of these programs should just “take it on the chin.” IOW, make it on their own. Doesn’t matter if they’re old, physically incapacitated, unable to find work, don’t have the education or training for a decent-paying job, can’t find housing they can afford, etc., etc. Too bad. How sad. Tough luck.

          For sure we wouldn’t want to violate anyone’s “individual rights” by offering assistance.

          Liked by 2 people

          Comment by Nan — December 6, 2019 @ 17:18

          • Hi Nan, my apologies for not getting back to you at a sooner time, I was quite busy over the weekend with various things and I’m struggling to get caught up.

            “Too bad. How sad. Tough luck.”

            I will admit, this is actually how a good proportion of conservatives and “right wingers” think (and even some independents) about the immobility of the under class in America, and it’s not hard to see why. If your a conservative in California (my state), and you make a decent income (150k-200k), you will being paying a hefty amount of that to the state income tax. In California today, If you make over 150k annually, your looking at a 32% income tax right off the bat, and let us not forget If you own private property, you have a “property tax” as well, and property taxes depending on location can vary significantly. Now, after having more than 50% of your income confiscated by the state (via income tax & property tax), wouldn’t you enjoy knowing where exactly that money is going?

            (63.7%) of [just] the “health and human services” section of the budget, or 100 billion dollars is directly going to fund “Medi-Cal”, which is a social Medicaid program designed to financially assist individuals who need healthcare.

            Click to access HealthandHumanServices.pdf

            It sound like a great reason to place egregious tax burdens on higher income people, because it’s better for everyone right? Well, some (like myself) argue contrary. Throughout history Nan, society always functions better without government intervention. We have seen the benefits of a system similar to this throughout the last two and a half centuries in America, where people have more money in their pockets to invest in a growing economy. In the USSR, millions of people were killed because of extreme government intervention. In Mao’s cultural revolution, millions of people were also killed due to severe government intervention. As you can see, I tend to use quite a bit of history to judge what the future may possibly be like.

            So, your probably wondering what any of this has to do with the cutting of social programs from state budgets? It has a lot to do with it Nan.

            Why do we have “welfare programs?” The simple answer is because some people don’t make enough money to live. But reverse the question! Why do we have people that don’t make enough money to live? Now that’s a good question for politicians to address. Could it be a corrupt social fabric that isn’t building competent and responsible human beings with good values, or a ridiculously loaded elite that is taking everyone’s money? Nan, I’m not saying we should just “abolish” all the current social programs like the particular ones I named earlier (Medicare, food stamps, housing affordability and subsidization etc.), but that we look at the societal problems that currently inhabit America and address them at their roots, instead of slapping bandaid like “assistance” programs over everything.

            You’re last line, “For sure we wouldn’t want to violate anyone’s “individual rights” by offering assistance”, is rather sarcastic but worthy of a proper rebuttal.

            Nan, I am open to the government offering assistance (financial, dietary, intellect) to all good people, providing It does not force unwilling taxpayers to subsidize it through their taxes. I think your missing the point Nan. In order for a government to give “free things” to it’s citizens (especially expensive things like healthcare), money must either grow on trees, or they will pay for those “free things” using taxpayer dollars, that’s how it works.
            So, generally in order for under class (disabled, incapacitated) to receive assistance from the state, other individuals rights must be invaded.

            Lot of material here Nan, hope you get a chance to read “some” of it, obviously I wouldn’t devote so much time for nothing (I’m not that type of person). Hope you are having a good day 🙂

            Like

            Comment by Dylan Shetler — December 9, 2019 @ 21:55

            • I’m just responding to a few points.

              You said: “If you make over 150k annually, your looking at a 32% income tax right off the bat,”

              California’s top income tax brackt is 13.3%
              https://www.tax-brackets.org/californiataxtable
              The U.S. top bracket is higher, 37% for income over a half million
              https://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx

              But we’re talking about a marginal tax rate system. There are explainers out there and there is no excuse for not learning how marginal tax rates work.
              Here’s an easy explainer. Just watch the video to see how it works.
              https://www.vox.com/2019/1/18/18187056/tax-bracket-marginal-video

              You said: “Throughout history Nan, society always functions better without government intervention.”
              Yeah, not so much. There are numerous ways for governments to intervene. They can go Stalin’s route or Hitler’s route and applyu fascism. Or they can go the Noridic way, Socialist-Democracy, and have the government intervene in a different way.
              Ironically, it seems that if the U.S. would simply enforce the laws already on the books supporting labor and unions rather than just ignoring wrongdoing by executives except for the occasional ritual sacrifice to appease the masses.

              I do appreciate that you are putting some effort into your replies. Too many people espousing these values just go straight to name-calling.
              You would do well to actually follow the links (and read those posts) that Scottie provided. We’ll still be here when you get done.

              Liked by 1 person

              Comment by MDavis — December 10, 2019 @ 00:33

            • Hello Dylan. I hope you had a good weekend. I know you were addressing Nan, and that MDavis replied with some really valid points, I would like to add a couple more. Your history is faulty and spotty. History has shown even in our own country that growth has only happened in a steady manner when there has been government rules and restrictions known as laws. From the earliest day of the country places that grew and became prosperous were ones that had strong governments to enforce laws that allowed for stability and peace. Looking again at the entire history of nations and civilizations those that prospered like ancient Babylonia had laws and rules. Same with ancient Egypt, ancient Rome, Maya, and Persian to name a few. However weak government leads to collapse, lawlessness, gang violence, and economic failure. We do not need to look back in time to see how this works, recent history has shown it in Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua to name a few locally. In Africa you have a number of countries that have fallen such as Somalia, Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Mali. Now contrast that with countries that are doing well and have the highest ratings in happiness and longest life expectancy are countries with strong governments and regulated capitalism. Remember that unrestrained capitalism is harmful and eventually self destructs and the US is in decline because of it. I showed you our most prosperous years were years where the tax burden fell heavily on the wealthy up to 91% at one point. That is what created the middle class which gave the economy a huge boost because when more people can spend their money to buy things, more jobs and demand for products are created.

              The idea the wealthy create jobs is a trope, a myth, and a Republican talking point. Jobs are created by demand for a product. There can only be demand when people are able to buy. The recent tax cut that increased the debt over a trillion dollars and went almost entirely to the wealthy and big business did not stimulate the economy nor create more jobs. Instead companies used the extra money to buy back their own stock which helped no one but the company and in some cases the large investors with preferred stock.

              Annual reports from four companies—Apple, Walt Disney, Visa International, and Starbucks—that completed their fiscal years on Sept. 30 show that free cash flow increased an average 33.7 percent from fiscal years 2017 to 2018. Overall, these four companies used their windfall to boost share buybacks an average 75.5 percent (including 119 percent growth in buybacks for Apple and a 64 percent decline for Disney), while paying out just 9 percent more in dividends (although Starbucks and Visa increased dividend payouts by at least 20 percent). Capital investments—which from now until 2022 are fully deductible in the year a purchase is made—rose 8.6 percent from a year earlier for these companies.

              https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-16/here-s-how-u-s-businesses-actually-used-their-tax-cuts

              I wish to address is the myth that poor people are lazy and being poor is there fault. This is simply wrong. Wages have stayed stagnate in the US for over 40 years while at the same time costs of everything have gone up. Here is something to think about. In the 1980’s I was making a bit over 40 K a year. I had a new home, new truck, new motorcycle, and all the luxuries of the time.

              According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index, prices in 2017 are 197.48% higher than average prices throughout 1980. The dollar experienced an average inflation rate of 2.99% per year during this period, meaning the real value of a dollar decreased.

              In other words, $40,000 in 1980 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $118,990.29 in 2017, a difference of $78,990.29 over 37 years.

              https://www.in2013dollars.com/1980-dollars-in-2017?amount=40000 This is a great tool, try it. Today a person making $40,000 would need to have roommates just to rent an apartment, not to mention food, car costs, utilities, medical care, all with no luxuries. The minimum wage today nationally is $7.25 per hour. At that rate your hourly wage of $7.25 would end up being about $15,080 per year in salary. That is barely above the federal poverty level for a single person and about $10,000 below for a family of four. So if you are looking for the reason more people need government assistance and are in such debt look at the wealthy employers who try to rake in ever increasing profit while shorting their employees. Not to mention the gig economy where people have to have more than one job, have no set schedule, no healthcare, no home life, no vacation, basically no “American Dream”.

              Dylan every right granted to a person in any country has limits. Every single one. That is not taking your right away, it is part of the social contract to allow everyone to have rights. The old saying is your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose. You have freedom of speech but can not incite a riot or immediate harm. That is just one example but you get the point. This is again necessary to have a functioning society. The thing is this goes back to the concept of the greater public good. Hugs

              Like

              Comment by Scottie — December 10, 2019 @ 03:49

        • Dylan,
          Apparently you were able to find Warren’s site. Also, you seem to have a strong opinion on how she’ll make and America that works for everyone. So it seems we are done here.

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by MDavis — December 7, 2019 @ 01:54

    • Hello Dylan. I read this comment, MDavis reply to you, and your reply to him. I can see your issue and confusion and it is something we have already talked about. Either you forgot our long discussion on economics and when the nation worked the best for everyone including letting the wealthy make money, or you did not read it. That was history and proven facts, not opinions.

      Dylan you make assumptions that simply don’t pan out, I suspect you are hearing these on TV or right wing sites / radio and they sound right to you. But those places do not normally site facts and they mostly use opinion. There is a place for opinion but these issues are not the place. So let’s go through your reply to MDavis and see what we can get for facts, then we can discuss specifics if you like.

      This sentence alone is incorrect.

      So how do you get “Medicare for All?” Simple. Take a given country, implement a “Universal Healthcare Bill”, freeze all of the capital (money) within it’s economy, and the identify who/whom possesses the most of that capital. Then take the required amount of money (through high taxes) from those who possess the most of it (the affluent/wealthy), and utilize that money to purchase the healthcare of everyone else. Do you know what that is called? It’s called theft.

      We will skip how bills become laws and all the debate from peoples elected representatives, and go right to your idea of freezing the capital. Not sure what you mean because that is not term to be used in that context, but if your idea is to stop or take the money that is wrong. It also makes no sense if there were any way to do so. It is not in any proposal I have read, and not something anyone would do especially someone who wants to make the economy work for everyone. It simply is not in any plan so if you have heard that is the idea they told you wrong.

      Taxes are not theft. Sorry they are part of a social contract that allows people to live in ever increasing communal groups. The social contract is rules for the basic good that let societies function. No rules, no function, chaos. We humans understood this and lived by it before we even wore clothing. The SCOTUS has ruled taxes are legal. In early 20th century the income tax enjoyed renewed support, and in February of 1913 the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified to the Constitution, thus granting Congress the power to collect taxes on personal income. Kind of goes back to our conversation on a living breathing changing constitution. BTW did you look up the two amendments I mention during our discussion, if not they were about prohibition and its repeal which are great points about how the constitution is malleable and changeable to the desires of the people. Here is a great web site that goes over the history of taxes. https://www.efile.com/tax-history-and-the-tax-code/ .

      Dylan you state that healthcare is not a basic human right. How do you figure that? First while rights are granted by governments and not any other entity, different countries and governing bodies at all levels do grant and modify “rights”. However if you are looking for a declaration of healthcare as a human right maybe this will do.

      Article 25 of the United Nations’ 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services.”

      The US is a member and signed on to this article.

      I found this image very informative. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Universal_Health_Care_july_2018.png/978px-Universal_Health_Care_july_2018.png . It seems more countries in the world consider healthcare to be a right than those like us that do not.

      Your argument about liberty to spend our money if false. You do not have a right to spend your money anyway you please. There is a huge list of banned products from foods and candies to animal parts to electronics and on. Again these bans are legally instituted for the greater public good. You do know we have added to the list of tax payer funded programs for as long as we have been a country, these are not somethings in the distant past. So again it is not theft. If you do not like the spending on these things there are legal way to get them eliminated and decreased and that is through the legislatures. Something right wing groups are trying to do, but you have to ask why they want to end programs that work for so many and harm none. Then you look who funds these groups and it comes back to a few ultra billionaires and wealthy corporation normally. Then when you look at why they are pushing these things it comes down to either more profit for themselves or a bigotry and hatred for certain groups of society.

      You admit that we have programs we pay taxes to because we all use those things from time time. That is not why we have taxes that pay for those programs even though it is a good reason too. I am surprised you are bringing this up again. We went over this in depth, how every program has people it is vital too and that one person’s waste is another vital need. Do you remember who I proved were the largest recipients of taxpayer funded assistance in the US was? I gave citations and easy to verify links. Yes it is large corporations, oil and gas companies, and wealthy individuals. So lets leave the little that is keeping the lower incomes in life and health alone. Remember the history I showed you? The country as a whole including the wealthy did better and fine when the tax rates on the wealthy were higher and we had a high marginal tax rate. Dylan these are not platitudes or wishes, this is simply historical fact. But again I wrote this all out to you before. I even mentioned other developed countries with those implemented taxes have higher standards of living, live longer, the people are healthier, they have all these social programs to benefit the people as a whole. They also have huge corporations and very wealthy people. We in the US have been given a con job of increasingly strident stringent talking points by corporations that want it all and will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs in their short sighted greed.

      The programs proposed by Warren are programs that work in other countries and have made them better than the US for everyone in those countries. Again, these are verifiable facts, but if you do not believe me google them. This is an attempt by progressives to make the US work again for everyone, not the top few. The fact is the economy has become so dangerous for lower incomes that it also like the healthcare industry will soon become unworkable. We are fast becoming a third world banana republic. Talk about a socialist program, the US government is paying farmers out of the US treasury over 12 billion dollars because the trade war is hurting them so baddy, at the same time kicking over 700 thousand poor people off food assistance. Most of the farmers are large wealthy agro companies ( some owned by foreign nationals ) that are large donors to Republicans and poor people do not have the money to give to a politician. How is that workable? Shall we look at where the majority of assistance programs are used, the two poorest states. Missouri and Kentucky. The fact is most red states take in more tax dollars then they give in taxes, while most blue states are the opposite in that they give the federal government more in taxes than they get back in federal programs. You know one of my favorite sayings is facts matter. These are facts. Media opinions are stated as if they are truth in stone and parroted by their followers. But look at both sides of an issue and you will see there is a big difference in a saying, a platitude, and the reality reality.

      OK be well I have to go get some other stuff done, have a great weekend. Hugs

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Scottie — December 7, 2019 @ 09:52

      • First off Scottie, I would like to point out that you didn’t paste the entirety of Article 25 of the UN, in which it states

        “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

        So Scottie, who and what determines the line “beyond his control”, my personal belief is that healthcare is a “commodity”, not a “right.” If healthcare is a “right” (which appears to be what you claiming), and if a universal healthcare bill is passed that labels it as a “right”, then the government obtains the authority to now force doctors to perform services that they may or may not want to perform. It also will force unwilling citizens to possibly pay for healthcare that do not need or necessarily “want.” And Scottie, what about the incentives here? Who the hell is going to want to attend school to become a surgeon knowing that he isn’t going to make anything because of socialized healthcare! Scottie, if we take away the market for healthcare, the incentives go away, the willingness of people to become doctors goes away. Do you know that I have met many doctors who are of foreign ethnicity, that have explained to me how they studied to became doctors in foreign countries, and then after finishing their education (in these countries) immigrated to America to practice. You know why? Because these countries they came from have socialized healthcare systems, where if your a doctor, you can only make what the government says you can make, which is generally based on that governments annual budget. People come from all over the world Scottie to visit our physician’s and surgeons, because we lead every other country regarding innovation and ingenuity within medicine.

        Yes Scottie, you are right, SCOTUS did rule taxes to be legal in 1913, but taxing individuals 70% to finance universal healthcare is “morally” wrong. Do you understand that? I say “morally” wrong in hopes you will recognize how evil it is. Take a look at Sweden for example, they almost killed their country in the 90’s over to much government intervention, and look at them now.

        https://sweden.se/business/how-sweden-created-a-more-stable-economy/

        Scottie, while universal healthcare appears to be a highly effective way to give everyone the care they need, there seem to be a lot of possibilities the Democrats are overlooking in discussing it’s implementation. In healthcare, there are three things to remember. Universality, quality, or affordability, and you can only have two at a time.

        Have a nice weekend Scottie!

        Like

        Comment by Dylan Shetler — December 7, 2019 @ 14:42

        • Hello Dylan. Thank you for pointing out I did not include the entire UN Article 25. However neither did you.
          Article 25.

          (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
          (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

          You spent a lot of your last comment trying to say that how you spend your money is a right based on the liberty portion of the Declaration of Independence. Well it is hard to have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without health and healthcare. Hard to have those three when you are ill, sick , injured and do not have the right to medical treatment. So yes I think healthcare is a right not a commodity. Simple human dignity demands it.

          The idea of doctors being forced to perform surgeries they do not want to is a trope. It simply doesn’t happen. Heck that is part of the problem in the the Midwest with Catholic run hospitals being the only source of medical care in entire regions. People are being denied legal medical treatment due to Catholic dogma. Want a vasectomy for what ever reason like say you already have 6 kids, nope no chance. Have an ectopic pregnancy that will kill you and the zygote will die anyway, sorry we wont remove it. So no, doctors are not forced to do surgeries. Doctors do not even have to treat people they do not want to if HHS rolls back the anti-discrimination policies. Any time you think it is OK to discriminate against someone insert the words “black” or “Christian” and see if it still sounds OK. What doctors are supposed to do is refer the patient to another medical provider who will treat them.

          When I worked in the Surgical ICU of a major hospital system we had religious doctors. Most of them never mixed their patient care with their faith. We did have one ICU doctor who was a fanatical Catholic. He wore his religion on his sleeve and tried to push his faith on to the patients at every turn. Yes dying and sick patients and families who had to depend on him he preached at and tried to convert them. He said his true mission was to convert as many people as possible. We had a very ill patient in a same sex marriage, totally legal, with legal documentation for giving rights to make medical decisions for each other. This doctor refused to accept that, he refused to follow the spouses wishes, refused to allow the spouse to participate in rounds as required. He even went so far as to call family members of the patient trying to get them to over rule the spouse and try to take legal custody of the patient. Why, his religion did not honor same sex marriage nor homosexuals. When told by the legal department he could not do that and was forced to stop he got revenge. The next morning at rounds when it was time for that patient he waited as the support staff gathered and the spouse was there. Then stood up announced he was refusing the case and taking himself off as the doctor and walked out. We were all stunned, this was a dying patient that needed the best in care. We scrambled to get another doctor but the new doctor was not familiar with the case. After all this do you know what the first doctor’s punishment was? Nothing! Yes you see because a doctor can take themselves off a case and they can refuse a case even if they are an asshole while doing it. This wont change with Medicare For All or if we grant healthcare as a right. Other countries practice the same ethics standards and all I have checked allow doctors the same right as long as they refer the patient to another provider who will treat them.

          Dylan do you read my replies? I spend a lot of time and work on these so I hope so. In my last reply I sent you a link to an image that showed the countries world wide that had some version of free or universal healthcare. It was most of the world. Do you think they have no doctors? Do you think people are saying heck no I wont become a doctor because I can not rake in unlimited cash. That line of there will be no doctors is a right wing talking point that if you thought about it for a minute you would see right through. It is caused by thinking only of the US. Making the US the entire world, and it simply is not. There is an entire world filled with countries that have faced the same problems that we do. Some of their solutions are better than ours. We are not the best at everything and do not have the best ideas, we just like to think so. Look at the other countries, see what they got right and learn from it. For example Canada has healthcare as a right and they have universal healthcare. They have lots of doctors and those doctors are making lots of money. I see you mentioned in your comment that people come from all over to get their healthcare in the US. Normally that is from countries that do not offer our specialized treatments, but that works both ways. Many people go to other countries from the US to get treatments not offered in the US. Recently Senator Rand Paul went to Canada to have his hernia surgery. Many people get their medications from Canada because it is so much cheaper. Please do not go to the idea that Canadians hate their healthcare, the majority in fact love it. No they do not wait long times for care than the US. Here in Florida where I lived I had to wait 6 months to see a new doctor and I have told the story of how I had to wait three years for a total hip replacement. Again we do not have the best healthcare in the world, not even close. This is not an opinion, it is a fact you can easily look up. Google the healthcare ratings / ranking by country. We are way down that list. That is something we should be ashamed of.

          Dylan you do bring up a good point, the cost of higher education. Other countries have free or low cost higher education and we should also. It helps the country and doesn’t saddle a new professional with a mountain of debt. When I was getting ready to leave Germany I could have stayed and gotten my RN free. Paid for by the government. It also included my living expenses. All I had to promise in return was to work 6 years in the country. I wish I had done it.

          I also have met foreign born doctors who came to the US to practice just to rake in money. Not many but yes some. I have often wondered at their patient care if all they really cared about was money, greed over concern for the patient. Remember the countries that they come from doctors do make good money, they are not poor. They just do not make millions and millions of dollars quickly. Contrast that with medical people who are part of Doctors Without Borders. If you are not aware of them please look them up, they and organizations like them are inspiring for the work they do. They care about the patient, not the money. Oh and many of those foreign born doctors finished their schooling in the US and decided to stay, many in part to the debt they incurred. So it is not an endorsement of the system but a sign of the problem.

          I was interested in your link to Sweden. I did some research and the article is missleading. Yes Sweden did get rid of the wealth tax, but because it was already watered down so much it was not raising money. Here is the really interesting thing, Sweden is increasing the number of millionaires in the country at the same time they tax the shit out of them. Yes! https://www.thelocal.se/20180111/does-swedens-tax-system-really-screw-the-rich . I can not pull the quote from the article but they tax them up to 50% on any income. They do not complain because of all the services they get. The country has healthcare as a right also.

          Swedish policy states that every county council must provide residents with good-quality health and medical care, and work to promote good health for the entire population. As of 2019, county councils also cover dental care costs for local residents up to the age of 23. Dental care from the age of 24 is subsidized by the state.

          Sweden’s municipalities are respons­ible for care for the elderly in the home or in special accommodation. Their duties also include care for people with physical dis­abilities or psychological disorders and providing support and services for people released from hospital care as well as for school healthcare.

          Costs for health and medical care as a percentage of Sweden’s gross domestic product (GDP) is fairly stable and on par with most other European countries. In 2016, health and medical care represented 11 per cent of GDP. The bulk of health and medical costs in Sweden are paid for by county council and municipal taxes. Contributions from the national government are another source of funding, while patient fees cover only a small percentage of costs.

          Government spending on health and medical care, including dental, amounted to SEK 67.4 billion in 2017, one of the larger expenses for the government.

          https://sweden.se/society/health-care-in-sweden/ . The US pays much more in percentage of GDP for healthcare and it is not as good.

          Dylan it is sad that you think we can not have ” universality, quality, or affordability” at the same time when other countries do it right now. They have it. Maybe we are not the greatest country we think we are? The point is those making millions off the suffering of others want you to think we can not do it, we can not have all three. But that is their greed talking and their desperation to keep raking in more money as people are suffering and dying. Don’t be fooled Dylan, look up the information they do not want you to know. Remember I told you the study paid for by the hyper conservative Koch brothers showed Medicare For All / universal single payer would save the US money. The government would save money.

          I wanted to end with your 70 percent and morality questions. First I have already explained to you that when the country had much higher tax rates on the wealthy we have a better economy and were able to do things benefiting the entire country such as the national highway system. That also was a boon to business as they could move goods so much faster and cheaper. Please check out this simple chart on the tax rates from 1950 to 1980. You will notice the highest rates were during our most robust economies, and that was when the middle class was created. https://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci120a/immigration/Federal%20Tax%20Brackets.pdf Here is another one for just a few years. https://www.tax-brackets.org/federaltaxtable/1955

          So I ask you Dylan is it moral to deny a person healthcare, to allow a person to suffer, to let poor people die just for profit and money? Medicare For All is not only moral in that people have the medical treatments needed for a happy quality of life, but it is good for the country as a whole. Healthier populations are better for business, healthier people are more productive. I do not look at the pursuit of money as more moral than taking care of people in need. That is my opinion. Human suffering needs to be taken care of.

          Best wishes, BTW this is the second draft of this. Yesterday evening I spent three hours researching and typing out an informative reply. When I hit send I lost the entire thing. Hope it goes this time. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Scottie — December 8, 2019 @ 03:57

          • The high cost of health care in the U.S. has also been cited as a factor in the loss of manufacturing capability, creating the “Rust Belt” in the U.S. Midwest. Why keep a plant open and pay exorbitant prices for employees’ health care insurance, the logic goes, when we can just move north a couple hundred miles or south to Mexico and have the employees pay their own way into the system in place there through simply paying their taxes? It really helps their bottom line, and once that idea has been floated it’s all over except for debating whether other countries, such as China, would be even better for the bottom line.
            It kind of reads as increases in pressure in this one area contributing to an exodus when the dam of resisting the rising costs finally breaks.

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by MDavis — December 8, 2019 @ 13:42

            • Hello Mdavis. Great point and one argued in the World Trade Organization, basically the international court for trade disputes, has taken many suits of unfair practices because other companies in other countries business do not have to provide healthcare like US businesses do.

              That is why corporations and business should love Medicare For All, they no longer have the burden of providing the majority of funding for employee healthcare coverage. I read some where that almost $2000 dollars of cost on each new vehicle is due to the manufacturer having to provide healthcare to workers and former workers. Think of the reductions in cost of goods and how much more competitive they could be world wide if the companies did not have to provide healthcare insurance. Hugs

              Liked by 1 person

              Comment by Scottie — December 8, 2019 @ 14:16

              • There are corporations that focus on medical care and health care insurance, though, and a lot of them don’t want this.
                Talk about killing the goose that laid the golden egg – their attitude makes it pretty literal.
                ps – I recently learned that those huge pharmacy prices that are excused because of the cost of inventing and testing new drugs – the pharmaceutical companies get government grants for that, so they are double dipping.

                Liked by 1 person

                Comment by MDavis — December 8, 2019 @ 23:49

                • Hello MDavis. Yes, very true. Also some of the most lucrative drug patents are publicly owned by the government. The person who discovered insulin gave the patent away free in hopes the drug would be made and sold at the lowest cost possible. It is a scam of greed as shown by Martin Shkreli, who bought the rights to a pill being sold for $1 because it only cost pennies to make and then raised the price to over $700 a pill. It was a life saving medication and needed. Who paid for all his new income? We all did with higher insurance and other costs. Hugs

                  Liked by 1 person

                  Comment by Scottie — December 9, 2019 @ 06:13

          • By the way, Scottie, I’m bookmarking this conversation for reference. Your research is impressive and of great interest.

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by MDavis — December 8, 2019 @ 13:43

            • Hello Davis. I look forward to your critique and input. I enjoy honest conversation and I love to learn. Hugs

              Liked by 1 person

              Comment by Scottie — December 8, 2019 @ 14:18

      • Love your linky logic, Scottie. I’m tempted to go look for the previous comment you referred to.

        Liked by 1 person

        Comment by MDavis — December 8, 2019 @ 13:21

        • Hello MDavis. I love to have honest conversations. I enjoy talking with someone I think is honest about the give and take. I spend hours looking up information and getting facts correct. I cite my sources and use quotes when I can. However I do not feel it is my job to convince anyone of my view, but rather I just need to plant the seed and let the person follow it up if they really are interested in the answers to the questions they ask. Then if they come back we can get more in depth on a subject. Hugs

          Liked by 2 people

          Comment by Scottie — December 8, 2019 @ 14:05


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: