Alliedassault - View Single Post

Snuff · 07-03-2004, 03:00 PM

Madmartagen
I know we can't just pick and choose who recieves benefits, but there should be a way of holding these people accountable for their actions, not just providing a path to less reponsibility. Medicaide is govt. subsidized. Someone is eating the cost of their healthcare. The hospital, healthcare provider, and the govt. all take a hit which results in an increased cost for all. I live in an area of the country where many just don't deem it necessary to have health coverage even if they can afford it.

Investigators and clerks do not solve the problem. It is an overall attitude of apathy with some people. Employing enough investigators to catch these people would cost too much money. These people should not have such an easy path to take. Point is: they should have to take some responsibility and make a contribution.

The "lock box" even untouched is still not a long term solution. SS will eventually not work. With advances in medicine, people are living longer and are more dependant on the system in their golden years. I don't agree
with SS as a long trm solution. Some resposibilty must fall on the working generation of today to plan for their retirement.

I wasn't speaking of a young mother with a child. I was talking about ones that do it over and over and over when there is no way she can support these children. Does she need help? Of course, but should we keep suppoting a system that does not hold these people accountable?

The lower class was not taxed heavily in the first place. Giving a tax cut to wealthier people who pay most of the taxes anyway does not mean that you are taxing the lower class more heavily.

Yes i wish we were not in a defict. I do not agree totally with either parties economics 100% On economics alone, a business man could run the economy much better, but at what cost?

I'll let you get the last word biggrin: This debate is wearing out my hunt and peck typing method spank: I'm signing off....

	(#11)
Snuff is Offline Corporal Posts: 899 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Land of opportunity	07-03-2004, 03:00 PM Madmartagen I know we can't just pick and choose who recieves benefits, but there should be a way of holding these people accountable for their actions, not just providing a path to less reponsibility. Medicaide is govt. subsidized. Someone is eating the cost of their healthcare. The hospital, healthcare provider, and the govt. all take a hit which results in an increased cost for all. I live in an area of the country where many just don't deem it necessary to have health coverage even if they can afford it. Investigators and clerks do not solve the problem. It is an overall attitude of apathy with some people. Employing enough investigators to catch these people would cost too much money. These people should not have such an easy path to take. Point is: they should have to take some responsibility and make a contribution. The "lock box" even untouched is still not a long term solution. SS will eventually not work. With advances in medicine, people are living longer and are more dependant on the system in their golden years. I don't agree with SS as a long trm solution. Some resposibilty must fall on the working generation of today to plan for their retirement. I wasn't speaking of a young mother with a child. I was talking about ones that do it over and over and over when there is no way she can support these children. Does she need help? Of course, but should we keep suppoting a system that does not hold these people accountable? The lower class was not taxed heavily in the first place. Giving a tax cut to wealthier people who pay most of the taxes anyway does not mean that you are taxing the lower class more heavily. Yes i wish we were not in a defict. I do not agree totally with either parties economics 100% On economics alone, a business man could run the economy much better, but at what cost? I'll let you get the last word biggrin: This debate is wearing out my hunt and peck typing method spank: I'm signing off....