Population Control
Posted on 08/09/2009 3:22:15 PM PDT by Richard Poe
Okay...fine... Ask me your DIRECT questions and I will answer them the best that I can...
Richard Poe responds:
With all due respect, sir, all of my questions have been direct. You are simply asking me to repeat myself. But never mind. I'll repeat my questions, if you like.
QUESTION 1
You are saying that we spend too much money on health care for the elderly and that the young and fit should get that money instead. The problem is that the young and fit don't need that money.
A 2006 study by the Department of Health and Human Services shows that half the U.S. population “spends little or nothing on health care… with annual medical spending below $664 per person.” The study is talking here about healthy young people.
Obviously, if you are a healthy young person spending less than $664 per year on health care, you do not need to raid Grandma and Grandpa's piggybank in order to pay your doctor's bills. Grandma and Grandpa don't need to die, so you can live.
The statistics are clear. Money is not the real issue here. So what is the real issue? Why is it so important to you to convince us that Grandma and Grandpa need to die?
QUESTION 2
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?
Alright, direct questions: I like it...
Question 1: You are saying that we spend too much money on health care for the elderly and that the young and fit should get that money instead. The problem is that the young and fit don’t need that money.
Well, I did not actually say that.. you inferred it..
I said that the elderly should take some responsibility and reduce their effect on health care to protect the younger generation.
Question 2: 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?
during the 50’s and even the 60’s, the elderly thought much like they do today (I hope) that they should not be taking money from the next generation to provide for themselves. It is a selfish problem that continues to this day - do the elders continue to take from the young taxpayers to pay for their extended care for maybe reduce that to same money. It is not a question of anything other than financial responsibility.
Next question...
Children worth anything would do all they could to keep their parents around and with them as long as possible. So these kids who you are describing can't be worth diddly squat.
I would like to hear your response to Uncle Chip on this point.
Wow... Uncle... you take my arguments all wrong - not the first time believe me... heh.
I would give up several years to prolong the life of my children - that is the key. If you believe otherwise, ie, extend your own life than you just simply don’t think like I do - what can I say...
It is a valid point from the Children’s view...from the parents view it would be the opposite! If you think different, then you are putting yourself ahead of your children...
Do you realize that you just stated that Social Security and Medicare is a program only for those over 65? Shame on you for stating the obvious...
Wow... Let me say right off that the kids today are NOT worth SQUAT! That said, they are the future of the country, much to our dismay, and do deserve the same or similar benefits as the rest of us enjoy (not really much these day though).
That said, we should at least give preference to the future rather than sustaining the past...
Waiting for a reasonable response from you regarding my responses to your questions...heh...
I am not unreasonable, just a bit of an old fashioned elderly gentleman...
You claim to oppose Obamacare. Yet you support the key point of Obamacare, which is used to justify all the rest. You support the idea that Grandma and Grandpa must die so Junior can have a good life.
As you are well aware, sir, this argument leads directly to Obamacare. It cannot possibly lead anywhere else. It is absurd to pretend that people today are going to be left alone to make their own choices about how they will die. The government will decide for them. You know this as well as I do.
Here is my final question for the night. You have expressed concern for your son. Yet, your support of Obamacare presents a deadly threat to your son.
Your son will have to live with the consequences of Obamacare long after you are dead. He will live in fear. The government will have the right to end his life whenever it pleases, for whatever reason it chooses.
Is that what you want for your son?
Well, right off, what makes you think that I support ObamaCare? I could not oppose it less...
It is a monstrosity that will impose socialist healthcare on all. I would not support that under any circumstances...
Please... I don’t support the old dying to support the young..geez... I was only saying that in the older days (and my days) that the elder should have more respect for the young. Mercy, I’m not saying that we should die or give up on health care...but if you look at the last few years, you can agree that elderly health care has mushroomed and is causing a problem. No, it is not due to anything except expectations (advance drugs) and other advances in medicine. Yes, that is grand, but it it causing a problem with overall health care costs.
My son might have a chance at health care IF the current costs are contained (not likely) and the current advances continue (not likely at all with no profit motive, a by-product of this administration). So, the only chance he has is to contain costs today and hope that he can prosper in the future... fat chance with today’s health costs rising as they are and will - especially if the government get control of it)...
Oh...and I actually like your questions. Nice for a stimulating conversation for a change...
Waiting for a reasonable response from you regarding my responses to your questions...
Richard Poe responds:
Sir, you have made no responses to my questions at all, other than crude denials and evasions.
Deagle wrote:
I am not unreasonable, just a bit of an old fashioned elderly gentleman...
Richard Poe responds:
With all due respect, sir, we have only your word that you are "old-fashioned" and "elderly." It is very easy, on the Internet, for people to pretend to be something other than what they are. For all I know, you may be a college student, pretending to be an "old-fashioned, elderly gentleman."
Very few 64-year-old men, in my experience, would refer to themselves as "elderly." College students, on the other hand, probably think of 64 as quite an advanced age.
If you are "old-fashioned," I certainly see no sign of it in your comments. Medical rationing is not an "old-fashioned" concept.
You know, I have begun to think that people today absolutely do NOT think like the elderly (those of yesterday). It use to be an honor to go to war to fight for the country..today’s generation thinks of it as a chore (or worse). The difference in thinking is both a product of our education system and the environment (pool morality if any).
I actually feel sorry for the people that have grown up in this environment... they will never understand what patriotism is or means in today. It really is a shame, but worse, it may prevent Democracy in the future. Hell, they don’t even teach it anymore...
Mercy...well, what can I say... You can go your own way and I will go mine... Seems like you are very hard to please and I haven’t the time... You have your beliefs and I have mine... I think that is enough stupid sayings for now... Have a good rest of the weekend...
Richard Poe responds:
With all due respect, sir, we have only your word that you are “old-fashioned” and “elderly.” It is very easy, on the Internet, for people to pretend to be something other than what they are. For all I know, you may be a college student, pretending to be an “old-fashioned, elderly gentleman.”
Very few 64-year-old men, in my experience, would refer to themselves as “elderly.” College students, on the other hand, probably think of 64 as quite an advanced age.
If you are “old-fashioned,” I certainly see no sign of it in your comments. Medical rationing is not an “old-fashioned” concept.
I would not normally respond to such gibberish, but...geez you infurate me with this... I guess your older folk think of themselves as the younger generation (ha - anyone under 75 I’d guess). Well, you are hanging out with an unusual crowd... Gentleman maybe not, but elderly yes, unfortunately my golf game gives me away... and yes, us old-fashioned folk do tend to refer to ourselves as that...
You may realize that as you get older...
Actually, we probably agree on most of what we are agruing about..but sticks get in the way. I am just a 64 year old father that would like the best results for his son...
He is going for his Phd by the way at Montana University - you can look it up on the web - Becraft will find him...
So, no, I don’t disagree with you just your attitude is causing a problem. I do think that the elderly (me included) should make way for the young - but of course it is a voluntary action, not government mandated.
Anyway, have a good one... This as?**** is going to bed...
“With all due respect, sir, we have only your word that you are “old-fashioned” and “elderly.” It is very easy, on the Internet, for people to pretend to be something other than what they are. For all I know, you may be a college student, pretending to be an “old-fashioned, elderly gentleman.”
Very few 64-year-old men, in my experience, would refer to themselves as “elderly.” College students, on the other hand, probably think of 64 as quite an advanced age.
If you are “old-fashioned,” I certainly see no sign of it in your comments. Medical rationing is not an “old-fashioned” concept. “
After re-reading this again and again...I’m pissed!
One : I am very old-fashioned and proud of it!
Two: As to elderly, I look at myself that way and hope that others do NOT. You on the other hand tend to look suspiciously at anything anybody says. Good for you, but you do live in a perilous world. There are those here who not only tell the truth, but actually live it...a shock I know.
So, you may believe what you may, but remember, it is a belief and not the truth. The truth is sometimes hidden openly... Geez, just look at the media for guidance - ha.
Sorry, had to add a bit of hilarity to this...
Despite your previous admonition for me to chill out, you just don't know when to give it a rest, do you? Now, you come back making two blatantly false assertions.
1) I did not mention Social Security at all.
2) In both of my previous responses, I asserted that Medicare was designed primarily -- not "only" -- for those over 65. There are limited exceptions that allow benefits for those under that age.
As for 'stating the obvious', you keep lamenting that too much Medicare $ is spent on 'the elderly'. It didn't appear obvious to you -- it seemed that you needed to be reminded that this is the group for which the program is intended. While not everyone in the 65+ may not consider himself or herself "elderly", a qualifying age had to be established, and that's the number that was settled upon.
Now why don't you practice what you preach and skip a few of your meds to give the younger folks a chance. You're certainly not making a lot of sense with your spurious arguments and are reading things into my comments that I did not write or suggest.
For my part of it, I'm not wasting any more time. I might as well be trying to have a reasonable discussion with a liberal.
Go ahead -- get the last word in. You "win".
What do we do with elected officials who vote to murder people in the name of health care?
This is a first. They have done it to the unborn...but they were not able to do anything about it. Now they are after the centralized killing the living...
What do Americans do with elected officials who vote for the power to kill them through health care denial?
Yes, you’re right... Had a bit too much wine to speak coherently. Was really flaming the AARP who I dispise with their attempts to gouge the public for every dollar they can.
Sorry for my over reaction...
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.