Posted on 08/09/2009 3:22:15 PM PDT by Richard Poe
It’s interesting that half of boomers are participating in getting their own demise, but other half realize the SCAM and are protesting...just like in old days of Vietnam War.
R&Z are terrible human beings.
There was a book going around in early 1980s called “The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow”...by Constance Cumby.
Think of Jackson’s non profit, and what is going on today, it was about the same thing DR.J.M. and the return of that horrible holocaust.
At least now I understand why she used the word “Rainbow” in her title of the book..that had always escaped me.
"Probably just a way to reduce the Social Security payments... Let the elderly go a bit early and save money. Actually, I don’t think that the elderly should be hogging all the Medicare money anyway - What is another 2-3 years anyway... living in pain or with limited movement, limited eyesight, limited hearing, etc... Wow, am I a pessimist or what... and I am one of those that need those benefits."
Life is either valuable or its not. So then what is it? Make up your mind.
Sorry...life is a choice and when you are drawing upon your kids and grand kids futures to prolong and ease yours, you are selfish. That is my philosophy - like it or not.
I can understand yours but I do think it is a selfish attitude that continues to prevail today. If we were to think like the 50’s, your ideas would cause revolts in the younger generation for sure...
I still think that the elderly should make way for the young in both body and soul (and monetarily), yep, I’m sure that I do not agree with you and visa versa...
No. He does not. I don't want my father's generation to suffer, mine, yours, my grandkids...nor future generations to suffer due to this.
And the fact that so many people have, here on FR of all places....expressed their wishes OTHERwise....is disgusting to me.
So. With that I leave you for now....
Well, I differ with you a bit... I would rather me and my older generation suffer a bit more to grant a better chance for the future generation. Talking mostly about health care, but it is true for most everything...
If that is not your goal, you are backward looking. I understand your feelings regarding Uncle Chip (sounds like a close relative) but you are just letting feelings get in the way of logic.
That’s alright though... I feel the same way about my Mother - who wouldn’t. He is an old cuss anyway though - heh... (Just like me).
It's an exercise in stupidity arguing with people on the internet, but in your case, I'm willing to make an exception.
You have now stated TWICE that a program that is designed primarily for people who are over 65 -- a group considered by most to be 'elderly' -- should not allocate the majority of the money spent to that group.
And then you impugn a large number of them by calling them hypochondriacs.
So just support Obamacare and let political hacks & bureaucrats sitting in a room, waiting for their next Gov't holiday, decide whether they need the treatment, or not. Tell you what -- we'll decide whether or not YOU are faking it.
I'd rather that decision be made by my physician and myself.
Heh...Okay... Lots of rhetoric there... Enjoy.
bookmark
I was looking at the financial side of health care (not Obama care). ObamaCare is a joke! I am not in any way supporting socialist medicine but am pointing to a fact - elderly require more care. If they gave up a bit of this money to support others, it would help enormously since they consume about 40% of the costs.
Sir, let's get our terminology straight. You are talking about medical rationing. It doesn't matter whether you call it Obamacare, Hillarycare or Rockefellercare. Medical rationing is medical rationing.
You are saying that we spend too much money on health care for the elderly (and, by implication, on health care for the disabled and the gravely ill at any age).
You are saying that it would be more fair to give that money to the young and fit.
One problem with your argument is that the young and fit don't need the money -- at least not for health care. They hardly need any medical care at all.
According to a 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services, five percent of the U.S. population accounts for nearly 50 percent of health care spending in America. Who are those five percent? Most are people over 65 years of age with serious, chronic illnesses.
By contrast, the study notes, half of the U.S. population “spends little or nothing on health care… with annual medical spending below $664 per person.” These, of course, are mostly healthy young people – people without serious, chronic illnesses.
Obviously, those healthy young people who spend less than $664 per person per year on health care do not need to kill off Grandma and Grandpa in order to insure that they get enough health care dollars for themselves. They already have enough.
So what exactly are you selling? Why are you so eager to convince us that Grandma and Grandpa need to die?
And when the younger generation starts to put a price tag on the lives of the elderly, they begin to shorten theirs, just as the 5th Commandment tells us: "Honor your mother and father, and you will live long on the land that your God gives you."
Your low view of human life will shorten not only the duration of your life but also that of your children.
I;m sorry that you are so offended!
I just am trying to pass along the idea the we (elderly) should have some respect for the spending that we are responsible for. I’m not sure that you either understand or care even after several posts saying the same...
If you still don’t get it... well, contact your local Veterans Hospital and see if they can help you...
Good Luck...
Life is a choice and when you are drawing upon your kids' and grand kids' futures to prolong and ease yours, you are selfish. That is my philosophy - like it or not.
I can understand yours but I do think it is a selfish attitude that continues to prevail today. If we were to think like the 50’s, your ideas would cause revolts in the younger generation for sure...
Richard Poe responds:
You say the younger generation would revolt if "we were to think like the '50s." I'm not sure what you mean by that.
How did people think about these questions during the '50s? And why do you say that such thinking would cause revolts among the young?
Actually, giving money is the main problem - our money! Just when do you think that it is appropriate to give the “peoples” money to anybody! Just what does it matter if young or old - the money given is not theirs to give!
NO... I am talking about voluntary rationing of the elderly! Big difference! You sir are continuing to try to sway my arguments into your own attitudes about health care.
I am looking for voluntary reduction of health benefits by the elderly (by choice) which should be acceptable by those that care about their grand kids...etc. You on the other hand are bastardizing what I am saying to support your position of Health Care...
I’m not sure that you either understand or care even after several posts saying the same...
Richard Poe responds
Sir, it is true that you have posted several comments saying exactly the same thing, over and over again. However, that is not particularly helpful.
I am trying to get you to clarify and elaborate your position, rather than simply repeating it. That is why I am asking you questions.
Rather than running away, I wish that you would stay and answer my questions.
Okay...fine... Ask me you DIRECT questions and I will answer them the best that I can...
Still waiting for that FIRST question?
Questions Richard Poe?
Surely you’re not gone for the night - such an early retirement... Still awaiting that first awful health question...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.