sliderider must be well off and never been sick. I have seen many people act like him until they have a problem they cannot deal with on their own and then they beg for a handout.

Unknown_K wrote:

sliderider must be well off and never been sick. I have seen many people act like him until they have a problem they cannot deal with on their own and then they beg for a handout.

Far from it. I am what they call "working poor" in this country and have gone without healthcare many times because I didn't have insurance and couldn't afford to pay out of pocket.

But regardless of my own situation, I fail to see how anyone can consider it to be moral to use the government to steal from others in order that they can have something that they can't afford to pay for through their own efforts.

sliderider wrote:

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:

I agree. I read the first sentence and immediately thought "what a bunch of bullcrap, neocon rhetoric". :P People who speak ill […]
Show full quote

badmofo wrote:

Lol, that's the most retarded thing I've read on these forums!

I agree. I read the first sentence and immediately thought "what a bunch of bullcrap, neocon rhetoric". 😜 People who speak ill of publicly subsidized healthcare often don't realize what a good thing it is to have, even if you're not a fan of "government interference".

One thing I should probably point out, there actually ARE privately subsidized hospitals and treatment centers in Canada, they're just not very common. They pretty much exist for extreme cases where a person is actually willing to pay money for immediate treatment. It's good that we have this option, but I think it's unacceptable to base an entire healthcare system around this strategy, as it benefits only a few while leaving many others to suffer.

EDIT: Mods, do you think we can split this debate off to another thread? I mean, healthcare is an interesting topic and all, but this thread is supposed to be about the cost of shipping things to the 'States. 😜

Wait until you get older and the government has decided that you have outlived your usefulness as a tax payer and then you'll see the dark side of government healthcare first hand.

Or maybe you won't have to wait that long. Maybe your girlfriend will die of cervical cancer in her 20's because the government wouldn't pay for her to have a Papp smear test or maybe you will have a baby born prematurely die because the government wouldn't incubate it because it costs too much or you'll have a loved one die lying on a table in the hallway of a hospital because there weren't enough beds or maybe they'll die of starvation because there weren't enough nurses to keep tabs on everyone. All these things and more have happened under the NHS in England and even the government itself admits that the system does not work.

My grandfather has prostate cancer, and the government-subsidized healthcare he receives is actually doing an excellent job of managing it. While it is true that no one can wave a magic wand and make it go away completely, at this point it barely affects him. Now, I will also note that he does have some other health problems, but again, whenever he does need to seek treatment for them (which is infrequently, I may add), he receives quality care from people who know what they are doing.

Also, Canada's healthcare system =/= the NHS. Doctors here aren't government employees, and hospitals and clinics are still considered private entities. The difference between our system and yours is that ours is publicly subsidized. This allows for greater access for the people who need it, while keeping gov't bureaucratic stuff to a minimum.

sliderider wrote:

Unknown_K wrote:

sliderider must be well off and never been sick. I have seen many people act like him until they have a problem they cannot deal with on their own and then they beg for a handout.

Far from it. I am what they call "working poor" in this country and have gone without healthcare many times because I didn't have insurance and couldn't afford to pay out of pocket.

But regardless of my own situation, I fail to see how anyone can consider it to be moral to use the government to steal from others in order that they can have something that they can't afford to pay for through their own efforts.

It's not "stealing", it's redistributing wealth for the greater good. We may pay slightly higher taxes than you, but they actually go towards things that matter for us. Is it socialistic? Yes. Does it interfere with our everyday lives the way non-believers think it does? Hell no. We're still a free country with great individual and human rights, and frankly, I think people are going to flock here once the US finally admits that it's becoming a police state.

sliderider wrote:

Social safety nets fall exclusively in the realm of private charities.

🤣.

Saying that the unfortunate poor people should depend on wealthy people voluntarily giving away their money, while at the same time whining about paying tax.

Then saying you've gone without medical care because you couldn't afford it.

Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face. American dream indeed.

SquallStrife wrote:

LOL. […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

Social safety nets fall exclusively in the realm of private charities.

🤣.

Saying that the unfortunate poor people should depend on wealthy people voluntarily giving away their money, while at the same time whining about paying tax.

Then saying you've gone without medical care because you couldn't afford it.

Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face. American dream indeed.

I agree. Charities really can't replace government-subsidized social programs. I mean, it's a logical fallacy to think that something funded purely by voluntary donations could replace something funded by taxes. Go ahead and whine about taxes, but ultimately they work out as being one of the best ways to pay for things, as everybody only has to give a little bit, rather than relying on a few individuals to give a lot, if they even donate in the first place.

SquallStrife wrote:

LOL. […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

Social safety nets fall exclusively in the realm of private charities.

🤣.

Saying that the unfortunate poor people should depend on wealthy people voluntarily giving away their money, while at the same time whining about paying tax.

Then saying you've gone without medical care because you couldn't afford it.

Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face. American dream indeed.

Social safety nets create more poverty. Ever since the Johnson administration declared war on poverty back in the 60's, the number of people living in poverty has increased both as a raw number and as a percentage of the population. You always get more of what you subsidize and less of what you don't so all social safety nets do is get people to stop working and thinking for themselves and getting on the government teat rather than getting out of bed at a reasonable hour in the morning and working for a living. Why work when nanny government will support you?

sliderider wrote:

SquallStrife wrote:

LOL. […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

Social safety nets fall exclusively in the realm of private charities.

🤣.

Saying that the unfortunate poor people should depend on wealthy people voluntarily giving away their money, while at the same time whining about paying tax.

Then saying you've gone without medical care because you couldn't afford it.

Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face. American dream indeed.

Social safety nets create more poverty. Ever since the Johnson administration declared war on poverty back in the 60's, the number of people living in poverty has increased both as a raw number and as a percentage of the population. You always get more of what you subsidize and less of what you don't so all social safety nets do is get people to stop working and thinking for themselves and getting on the government teat rather than getting out of bed at a reasonable hour in the morning and working for a living. Why work when nanny government will support you?

So what? We have a longer average life expectancy than you guys, as well as a lower infant mortality rate. 😜 Also, you can't really compare poverty stats, because we have no official way of measuring "poverty".

And really, what's so bad about getting some help from the government? If you're so hell bent against it, why not move to Somalia? You'll be begging for government intervention after spending five minutes there.

On a side note, I will admit that I am terrible at debating, mainly because I don't know shit about persuading people.

sliderider wrote:

You always get more of what you subsidize and less of what you don't so all social safety nets do is get people to stop working and thinking for themselves and getting on the government teat rather than getting out of bed at a reasonable hour in the morning and working for a living. Why work when nanny government will support you?

Everything you've said here is pure fantasy and conjecture. The exact kind of conjecture that comes from narcissistic privileged wealthy men, who probably don't even know that store-brand cereal is a real thing.

As someone who has been there, let me tell you this: For a sane person, living on welfare is not a choice, it's a last resort.

Unless you're lucky enough to have family or friends that will give you a room, you live in a tiny townhouse/apartment/unit/flat in a shitty area outside town. You have barely enough money to rent that shitbox or pay board. You get to use a minimal amount of electricity, and buy store-brand basic foods to feed yourself. You can't afford to eat out or buy things to entertain yourself. No way you can own and operate a car. You don't live, you simply exist.

If you genuinely believe anybody would choose welfare over having a job and decent quality of life, you need your head examined.

This isn't an argument for welfare to pay out more, by the way. I'm simply saying that the "living it up on welfare" fantasy is just that. An image conjured by the privileged to justify their callous attitudes.

A prisoner is entitled to four meals, a roof, and a bed. A free person should have at least that and his dignity, when he loses his job for reasons beyond his control.

SquallStrife wrote:

Everything you've said here is pure fantasy and conjecture. The exact kind of conjecture that comes from narcissistic privileged […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

You always get more of what you subsidize and less of what you don't so all social safety nets do is get people to stop working and thinking for themselves and getting on the government teat rather than getting out of bed at a reasonable hour in the morning and working for a living. Why work when nanny government will support you?

Everything you've said here is pure fantasy and conjecture. The exact kind of conjecture that comes from narcissistic privileged wealthy men, who probably don't even know that store-brand cereal is a real thing.

As someone who has been there, let me tell you this: For a sane person, living on welfare is not a choice, it's a last resort.

Unless you're lucky enough to have family or friends that will give you a room, you live in a tiny townhouse/apartment/unit/flat in a shitty area outside town. You have barely enough money to rent that shitbox or pay board. You get to use a minimal amount of electricity, and buy store-brand basic foods to feed yourself. You can't afford to eat out or buy things to entertain yourself. No way you can own and operate a car. You don't live, you simply exist.

If you genuinely believe anybody would choose welfare over having a job and decent quality of life, you need your head examined.

This isn't an argument for welfare to pay out more, by the way. I'm simply saying that the "living it up on welfare" fantasy is just that. An image conjured by the privileged to justify their callous attitudes.

A prisoner is entitled to four meals, a roof, and a bed. A free person should have at least that and his dignity, when he loses his job for reasons beyond his control.

You obviously have never been to any major city in the United States where welfare recipients outnumber working people by a wide margin. It's not that these people can't get jobs, though some might, it's that the majority don't want jobs. Their families have been living on welfare for generations and have no plan to get off of it any time soon.

And as I said earlier, I am working poor. I have a van that I hire out for delivery jobs to whoever needs someone. I never work in the same place two days in a row. I go for long periods sometimes where I don't even earn minimum wage because I am considered an independent contractor and have to accept whatever pay the employers offer. I have no job security and because I am an independent contractor, I don't qualify for unemployment benefits when work is slow. I worked off and on as a cab driver to fill in but still didn't have anything in the way of security or benefits. I could qualify for several assistance programs if I wanted them but I don't because then I would be guilty of stealing something that I haven't earned. If I can see that, why can't you?

sliderider wrote:

You obviously have never been to any major city in the United States where welfare recipients outnumber working people by a wide margin. It's not that these people can't get jobs, though some might, it's that the majority don't want jobs. Their families have been living on welfare for generations and have no plan to get off of it any time soon.

I would love to see some statistics to back this up, because it really just sounds like hyperbole. Welfare recipients outnumbering the employed? Give me a break.

I could qualify for several assistance programs if I wanted them but I don't because then I would be guilty of stealing something that I haven't earned. If I can see that, why can't you?

Again, cutting off the nose to spite the face. The only person you're hurting here is yourself.

When I lost my job 8 years ago, it was 6 months before I got a new job. The minuscule amount of welfare I could get meant I could keep my self sheltered and launder my clothes. Without that basic level of facilities, I wouldn't have been able to land the job I have now, where I earn 6 figures and contribute to the economy. If paying a little tax means someone else has that safety net available to them, thats fine. I had to rely on it, and now I'm repaying my debt to society.

"Stealing". Pfft. Please.

If you're too self absorbed to participate in this arrangement then that's cool, enjoy poverty.

sliderider wrote:

You obviously have never been to any major city in the United States where welfare recipients outnumber working people by a wide margin. It's not that these people can't get jobs, though some might, it's that the majority don't want jobs. Their families have been living on welfare for generations and have no plan to get off of it any time soon.

There are poor rural areas (ex: Appalachia) as well. Welfare recipients certainly do not outnumber the working class in cities like NYC or Philadelphia. Poverty is a complex socioeconomic problem, there is no quick or easy fix for it. It also knows no bounds.

And as I said earlier, I am working poor. I have a van that I hire out for delivery jobs to whoever needs someone. I never work in the same place two days in a row. I go for long periods sometimes where I don't even earn minimum wage because I am considered an independent contractor and have to accept whatever pay the employers offer. I have no job security and because I am an independent contractor, I don't qualify for unemployment benefits when work is slow. I worked off and on as a cab driver to fill in but still didn't have anything in the way of security or benefits. I could qualify for several assistance programs if I wanted them but I don't because then I would be guilty of stealing something that I haven't earned. If I can see that, why can't you?

You open up a lot of questions about your "income" here. Those independent contracting jobs should be paying at least minimum wage if they are 1099ing you.... or are you getting paid cash under the table? If its the latter, are you reporting that income to the IRS? Is that cab company sending you a W2 at the end of the year and with holding taxes from your salary? How about that van rental? Is the vehicle registered and licensed for that use? Are you reporting that income?

If not, whom is the one stealing from whom?

SquallStrife wrote:

When I lost my job 8 years ago, it was 6 months before I got a new job. The minuscule amount of welfare I could get meant I could keep my self sheltered and launder my clothes. Without that basic level of facilities, I wouldn't have been able to land the job I have now, where I earn 6 figures and contribute to the economy. If paying a little tax means someone else has that safety net available to them, thats fine. I had to rely on it, and now I'm repaying my debt to society.

You shouldn't feel guilty about taking unemployment benefits. You paid a portion of your salary into the system to have the benefit available to you!

I know plenty of folks who have been unemployed or underemployed. Its not because they are lazy or don't want to work either. If you are unemployed, finding a job IS your full time job.

Solving the problem of dependency would be grand indeed; I'd love to see the day when we could all be self-sufficient (again), but unbridled capitalism hardly seems to be the solution. Achieving independence from your government doesn't mean much if, in effect, you have to trade it in for increased dependency on your direct employer and on fleeting circumstance ("work is slow").

Sad as it may be, the world's fundamental problems are way past the point of being solved by blind adherence to one economical ideology or the other.

I wanted to post here, but I better keep my mouth shut. Let's say I work, I am qualified for my job, I have a high level education; but I earn enough to survive.
It comes from living in an ex-communist Eastern European country, I guess....
While people from other, more Western countries pay for food under 10% of their income, I pay something around 30-40.
When I hear USA citizens complaining about gasoline prices, I can remind them that we pay double and we earn much less.

fillosaurus wrote:

I wanted to post here, but I better keep my mouth shut. Let's say I work, I am qualified for my job, I have a high level educati […]
Show full quote

I wanted to post here, but I better keep my mouth shut. Let's say I work, I am qualified for my job, I have a high level education; but I earn enough to survive.
It comes from living in an ex-communist Eastern European country, I guess....
While people from other, more Western countries pay for food under 10% of their income, I pay something around 30-40.
When I hear USA citizens complaining about gasoline prices, I can remind them that we pay double and we earn much less.

That makes sense. As a Canadian, I may sometimes complain about the higher prices we pay for things compared to people in other countries, but ultimately we have a system that works, and it works rather well I may add. I can't really think of too many ways in which our system could realistically be improved. There are a bunch of unrealistic things that I would like to see happen, but they are just that; unrealistic pipe dreams.

NJRoadfan wrote:

There are poor rural areas (ex: Appalachia) as well. Welfare recipients certainly do not outnumber the working class in cities l […]
Show full quote

sliderider wrote:

You obviously have never been to any major city in the United States where welfare recipients outnumber working people by a wide margin. It's not that these people can't get jobs, though some might, it's that the majority don't want jobs. Their families have been living on welfare for generations and have no plan to get off of it any time soon.

There are poor rural areas (ex: Appalachia) as well. Welfare recipients certainly do not outnumber the working class in cities like NYC or Philadelphia. Poverty is a complex socioeconomic problem, there is no quick or easy fix for it. It also knows no bounds.

And as I said earlier, I am working poor. I have a van that I hire out for delivery jobs to whoever needs someone. I never work in the same place two days in a row. I go for long periods sometimes where I don't even earn minimum wage because I am considered an independent contractor and have to accept whatever pay the employers offer. I have no job security and because I am an independent contractor, I don't qualify for unemployment benefits when work is slow. I worked off and on as a cab driver to fill in but still didn't have anything in the way of security or benefits. I could qualify for several assistance programs if I wanted them but I don't because then I would be guilty of stealing something that I haven't earned. If I can see that, why can't you?

You open up a lot of questions about your "income" here. Those independent contracting jobs should be paying at least minimum wage if they are 1099ing you.... or are you getting paid cash under the table? If its the latter, are you reporting that income to the IRS? Is that cab company sending you a W2 at the end of the year and with holding taxes from your salary? How about that van rental? Is the vehicle registered and licensed for that use? Are you reporting that income?

If not, whom is the one stealing from whom?
.

Nope, they are not required to pay minimum wage because I am considered a contractor and not an employee. They pay a flat fee for each job and my hourly rate depends on how long it takes it to me to get the job done. For larger jobs, I may have to hire helpers so their pay comes out of that money, too. Some jobs reimburse for gas, but not all of them. I also don't get all my jobs from the same place and some jobs are only one time deals. I might take jobs from 3 places one week and 3 completely different places the next.

As for driving the cab, I get a flat percentage of fares plus tips but we also do a lot of work for the county ferrying people to and from medical appointments and the county underpays for those jobs and those people don't tip because they are poor. I might spend 2-3 hours of a 8 hour shift making $2-$3/hour if I'm lucky. And yes, I do file quarterly estimated tax forms with the IRS like all self employed people do.