War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

[photon555]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

As was said before earlier in the thread by someone else, "My right to swing my fist ends at the tip of your nose. Your right to suppress the use of birth control ends at my wife's estrogen prescription."

Now why do you believe that the employer's "matters of conscience" should matter more here than the employees? If the government doesn't get enforce public opinion on such issues who should?

Public opinion doesn't get enforced by anybody. Go read the Constitution.

[jiimbergin]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

But using Ellenz's example, how would an unemployed person with cancer be able to afford individual coverage after COBRA expires? I'm on COBRA since my husband was killed last year and I can barely afford it. Individual coverage costs even more.

I did not mean to imply that it was cheap, but coverage is available with no underwriting. Each state is different. The coverage must be broad and one or two of the insurance companies top plans. Since they can not deny anyone coverage in Florida, for example, they can charge up to 2 times the regular individual rate. Obviously someone who is unemployed will not be able to afford virtually any coverage unless they have other resources. I don't know if your example of being unemployed with cancer is your situation. I pray that is not your situation. I have had personal experience with friends and family who are or have been on medicaid. It has proven a good alternative for them. But in each case they were already on medicare, so I do not know how well it works for those who are younger.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

...All Catholic institutions together are a very small part of the universe of all employers...

Bigger than you'd guess.
In Ohio, Catholic Healthcare Partners is the 4th largest employer in our state. We're a big state.
Add in the Catholic universities (University of Dayton, Xavier, Ohio Dominican...) and it is really big.
Now throw in small and medium size businesses owned by Catholic people, and it becomes huge.

Catholic businesses are NOT a small part of the universe of employers.
Invoking the slippery slope argument, this could also ripple out to first tier suppliers like giant pharmaceutical companies, paper companies....

[mesyn191]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I am opposed to anything free to anybody except those who are absolutely unable to provide for themselves due to real disabilities.

OK that is nice but what does that have to do with the question I asked before of, "Now why do you believe that the employer's "matters of conscience" should matter more here than the employees?" and, "If the government doesn't get enforce public opinion on such issues who should"?

If someone "needs" food stamps, or medical treatment, or anything else that is supposedly essential to life, then they should be required to work for them...Nobody is entitled to a free ride

I know the thread has kind've drifted around to include general health care coverage too but what does this have to do with a UHS or Medicare for All?

There is nothing wrong with having to work 80 hours or more a week to make ends meet. Many people work this much and more to provide for their families, or to establish a business.

Its one thing to work those long hours because you want to and another to HAVE to work those hours just to make ends meet. When a political/economic system results in large numbers of people, much less a majority of them, having to work greatly increased hours just to make ends meet while a special few get richer then this is a systemic issue and not a personal one.

Going without eating for a day or two might motivate some people to find their own job

Starvation as a social/economic cure all eh? Historically that hasn't gone very well to say the least. Its funny though, prior to 2008 or so the number of people working was much higher than now, did you ever wonder why that is so? I mean do you believe that millions of people suddenly became perma-sloths or what? Is it something in the water or what? Or could it possibly have something to do with that whole recession thing and the nearly non-existent "recovery" that has followed it?

[mesyn191]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

Public opinion doesn't get enforced by anybody. Go read the Constitution.

Public opinion a) effects who gets voted in to what and b) shapes the laws that are made. The laws of a society reflect that society's beliefs/tradition/etc. That is why once upon a time slavery was legal and now it isn't.

[shiny!]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I am opposed to anything free to anybody except those who are absolutely unable to provide for themselves due to real disabilities. If someone "needs" food stamps, or medical treatment, or anything else that is supposedly essential to life, then they should be required to work for them. If they are unable to find their own job, then the local communtiy should arrange suitable work. Something like community service, but doing real work that makes a difference. There is nothing wrong with having to work 80 hours or more a week to make ends meet. Many people work this much and more to provide for their families, or to establish a business. Nobody is entitled to a free ride, or even a 40 hour per week work limit. Going without eating for a day or two might motivate some people to find their own job, and is usually good for health. Historically, fasting one day a week has been seen as good for the soul and the body. Perhaps we all should try it at least once so we can speak from experience. My own slight experience with fasting has been entirely accidental or due to illness, I must admit. Now if someone is so unfortunate or unwilling to work that they reach the age of retirement without paying off their debt to society, then their hours can be reduced, but they should still be required to work at least some amount until they are actually no longer able. If you think that is harsh, then realize that it is not as harsh as the economic collapse of society to which our entitlement crazed social welfare paradigm is leading. For those who are unable to order their own lives society could offer the freely chosen option of being under supervision in a commune like arrangement. Just remember there is nothing free except God's love, and that actually cost Him His only Son. It's only free to humanity, to those of us who accept His offer of redemption.

Let the reprisals begin!

No reprisal from me, because I agree with you to an extent.

Used to be, back before FIRE took over the economy, that people worked, and they were able to save and live debt-free and be self-reliant for the most part. That world is gone. Now, the cheerleaders for FIRE tell us that it's virtuous to work two and three jobs to keep a roof over our heads and feed our families. What happened to the American Dream? FIRE happened.

We've had to accept lower paying jobs with fewer benefits, no pensions, no job security. Most people are unprepared and ill-equipped to survive this "new normal". The FIRE politicians talk about the undeserving lazy poor getting welfare and food stamps, but they steal our money and give it to Wall Street banksters.

So, while I'm a big fan of self-reliance, it concerns me that people are starting to repeat FIRE spokesmen's assertions that suffering is good for the soul, when FIRE is what brought about our suffering in the first place. These crooks robbed our country blind! Now they want to turn us against each other while we fight for scraps and crumbs.

[photon555]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

Public opinion a) effects who gets voted in to what and b) shapes the laws that are made. The laws of a society reflect that society's beliefs/tradition/etc. That is why once upon a time slavery was legal and now it isn't.

The government doesn't directly enforce public opinion, at least not in a republic. And until public opinion influences elections and laws, nobody enforces it. After the influence is incorporated into law it will be enforced, but hopefully it will be subject to strict scrutiny and made subject to the Constitiution. Sometimes public opinion rides victoriously and unchecked into power and some people's rights are abridged as a result. You speak of public opinion as if it is a cut and dried thing that everyone agrees on. I'm pretty sure this is not the case. Also, it is wise to be skeptical of opinion polls; look at the huge disparity in the ones you posted earlier.

[jiimbergin]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

No reprisal from me, because I agree with you to an extent.

Used to be, back before FIRE took over the economy, that people worked, and they were able to save and live debt-free and be self-reliant for the most part. That world is gone. Now, the cheerleaders for FIRE tell us that it's virtuous to work two and three jobs to keep a roof over our heads and feed our families. What happened to the American Dream? FIRE happened.

We've had to accept lower paying jobs with fewer benefits, no pensions, no job security. Most people are unprepared and ill-equipped to survive this "new normal". The FIRE politicians talk about the undeserving lazy poor getting welfare and food stamps, but they steal our money and give it to Wall Street banksters.

So, while I'm a big fan of self-reliance, it concerns me that people are starting to repeat FIRE spokesmen's assertions that suffering is good for the soul, when FIRE is what brought about our suffering in the first place. These crooks robbed our country blind! Now they want to turn us against each other while we fight for scraps and crumbs.

and I am sorry that it does not appear that it will get any better soon. Maybe after the KA-Boom we will have one chance to fix our situation.

[don]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

suffering is good for the soul

Check out Jamie Dimon's digs: http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/...iew/?service=1

[LazyBoy]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I am opposed to anything free to anybody except those who are absolutely unable to provide for themselves due to real disabilities.
...
If they are unable to find their own job, then the local communtiy should arrange suitable work. Something like community service, but doing real work that makes a difference.
...
Going without eating for a day or two might motivate some people to find their own job, and is usually good for health.

Hunger is also a motivation for criminal activity. And should the unemployed person's children go hungry while they get their motivation?

I like self reliance too, but I don't think starvation is a good solution. "Get a job you bum!" Unemployed != lazy anymore. Where are the jobs for high school grads? That can support a family? How many millions are unemployed? What can possibly supply all those jobs?

How many millions can pick up trash around the courthouse (community service) and not put other people out of work? At some point doesn't it mean the society or economic system has failed, not that everyone is lazy?

[photon555]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

No reprisal from me, because I agree with you to an extent.

Used to be, back before FIRE took over the economy, that people worked, and they were able to save and live debt-free and be self-reliant for the most part. That world is gone. Now, the cheerleaders for FIRE tell us that it's virtuous to work two and three jobs to keep a roof over our heads and feed our families. What happened to the American Dream? FIRE happened.

We've had to accept lower paying jobs with fewer benefits, no pensions, no job security. Most people are unprepared and ill-equipped to survive this "new normal". The FIRE politicians talk about the undeserving lazy poor getting welfare and food stamps, but they steal our money and give it to Wall Street banksters.

So, while I'm a big fan of self-reliance, it concerns me that people are starting to repeat FIRE spokesmen's assertions that suffering is good for the soul, when FIRE is what brought about our suffering in the first place. These crooks robbed our country blind! Now they want to turn us against each other while we fight for scraps and crumbs.

I totally agree with you about FIRE, but the same crooks who facilitate the banksta's piracy, are at the same time busily creating a dependent class who will be their willing pawns, and keep them in office. They will be used as cannon fodder most likely if the need arises. We are being attacked in a pincer movement, from above and below. We must recognize both attacks if we are to respond accordingly. The best thing for all of us is to be prepared to exert ourselves on the behalf of our families. We must be prepared to "suck it up" and keep on fighting. If you can't break even then just getting behind as little as possible is still a partial victory. An attitude of despair is really our greatest enemy. There will be a future at some point, even if only for our children. But we must keep on resisting both attacks, and work as much as possible. The most important thing we can do is guard against falling into that dependent class ourselves if at all possible. Dependency leads to despair, cynicism, and surrender. Our's is not a new situation. Oppression by elites is nothing new. It's been going on for thousands of years. The past two hundred years in the US have really been quite extraordinary when viewed against the historical norm.

My post is really my description of the closest thing to an achievable utopia that I believe is humanly possible, given human nature. The greatest threat to most people is their own nature, that they will succumb to despair and fall into dependency, that they will give up on themselves. Only a few are afforded the opportunity of being corrupted by wealth. You may have heard it said that most people are waiting either for Santa Claus or the Grim Reaper. They are waiting for something to happen to them instead of making something happen. I have heard that life is what happens to you while you are waiting for something important to happen. Well, we must make something important happen for us before life is over. Still, there will always be many people who give up on themselves or just don't have the ability to compete economically. Hence my post. Work is necessary for emotional and mental health. Therefore it should be embraced. But intentionally luring people into dependency for power and profit must be exposed for the crime and tragedy that it is.

Well, I hope I have made it clear that I don't condone the FIRE pirates in any way.

[mesyn191]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

The government doesn't directly enforce public opinion, at least not in a republic.

Usually not directly no, though there things like CA's proposition system which are a form of direct democracy that allows the people there to bypass the state government or even amend the state constitution. Historically on a national level in our republic there have been things like the Civil Rights Movement and the Labor Movements that have heavily influenced the government as well, both in terms of who got elected and how the then current politicians shaped policy to meet the people's demands.

You speak of public opinion as if it is a cut and dried thing that everyone agrees on. I'm pretty sure this is not the case.

It isn't the case and I didn't aim to suggest that it was. If you look at the charts of polls I posted a ways up the page its obvious not every one agrees on the issue of a UHS, Medicare for All, or anything else really. There does however to be a majority consensus on what people want though.

Also, it is wise to be skeptical of opinion polls; look at the huge disparity in the ones you posted earlier.

The way the question is asked and the context the question is given in matter a lot and play a huge role in the results. Push Polls, like the infamous one Bush used* can be used by intellectually dishonest people looking to sway public opinion. That is why I gave a chart of several different polls from different sources all asking similar but not exactly the same questions at different times. Note that in 8 of the 9 cases more than 50% of people were pro single payer or Medicare for All as a form of public health care. On the issue of employers beliefs and compensation I included 2 charts of polls, both done by different people, again asking the similar but not same question, and done at different times. The results were broken down by sex, religion, political affiliation, etc.

A certain amount of skepticism is good concerning polls but when you start seeing similar results for similar questions that are well sourced across different groups over time...well its probably not a flash in the pan result.


*Voters in South Carolina reportedly were asked "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" The poll's allegation had no substance, but was heard by thousands of primary voters.^[5] McCain and his wife had in fact adopted a Bengali girl. Bush had previously used push polls in his 1994 bid for Texas Governor against incumbent Ann Richards. Callers asked voters "whether they would be more or less likely to vote for Governor Richards if they knew that lesbians dominated on her staff."^[6]

[mesyn191]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I totally agree with you about FIRE, but the same crooks who facilitate the banksta's piracy, are at the same time busily creating a dependent class who will be their willing pawns, and keep them in office.

This argument would make sense if they were really trying to expand social welfare programs and services but doesn't really pan out since they're doing the opposite.

Simpson-Bowles (aka. Cat Food Commission), PPACA (aka. Obamacare), etc. are all anti social welfare/service policies and pro corporate/FIRE. They're all about taking your and my money and giving it to the rich and nothing at all to do with social improvement, much less creating a class of willing pawns.

[photon555]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I see that the idea of missing a few meals is being equated with starvation. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am not advocating forced starvation, but a little hunger can be a great motivator. Please try fasting a day or two. Perhaps you could start by eating just one meal a day once or twice. Fasting really is good for you if you are in reasonable health. People who die of starvation have generally been starved for months on end, sometimes years of privation. I have seen hunger in my own extended family. When I was a boy I had three cousins whose parents were alcoholics. You could not give them money if you wanted to help. You had to bring groceries to their house so the boys could eat. Do you think addicts and alcoholics use food stamps to feed their children? Not from my experience. Once again government makes the problem worse, not better.

The most effective charity begins at home; family helping family. Then the church and community are the next line of defense for those who need help. Government should be the last resort, not the first. And we must be honest and call welfare what it really is, charity. If you ever need help, it is good to be reminded that you are in fact receiving charity. Someone else has decided to help you from their earnings. This will be a humbling experience, one that is good for all of us. And you will be highly motivated to become self supporting again as soon as possible. You will learn that "self reliance" is good, but that we are not really "masters of our own destiny." There is a golden mean, a balance to be sought here that will grow your soul.

[mesyn191]

Re: War on Women: A Bridge Too Far?

I see that the idea of missing a few meals is being equated with starvation.

That was hyperbole actually. Its great and all if you like fasting but I'd think you'd find most people would rather prefer a healthy steady diet and exercise instead.

Do you think addicts and alcoholics use food stamps to feed their children?

Nope, but if a relative few abuse a given system do you think that system should be abolished even if it is a net benefit for society as a whole both from an economic perspective and moral one too?