![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 8 to 32 of 32. Go back in thread:
Posted by AdaGrace on August 26, 2005, at 21:54:33
In reply to Please be sensitive » AdaGrace, posted by gardenergirl on August 26, 2005, at 18:24:23
I said "able bodied". Meaning I understand the necessity for these programs for individuals who need these services. I do not understand someone who is on dissability because they have a drug addiction and are able to get government subsidies and really never attempt to seek treatment for their addiction. I am talking about people who have more children because they can get more government welfare money and are not trying to get a job. I am talking about people who CAN work who are physically and psychologically ABLE to work, but chose to use government subsidies instead. I completely understand the need for these programs, I've been there. I am talking about the people who abuse the system for years because they know they can. They're out there GG, hundreds of people abusing the system that was meant to help people, and as a result are using up the resources that might not be there in the future for others who really need them.
Posted by Tamar on August 27, 2005, at 6:41:58
In reply to Re: Please be sensitive » gardenergirl, posted by AdaGrace on August 26, 2005, at 21:54:33
Uh-oh, I feel a rant coming on…
I just don’t think drug addicts are psychologically able to work. And possibly not physically either. I’d want to look at individual cases… and I’d want to ask: why is this person a drug addict? It’s too easy to say that people are just bad and take drugs out of badness. However, I think there are reasons why people use drugs… reasons like poverty, abuse, illness… and the reason many people don’t seek treatment is that treatments costs a lot of money and not everyone has it. Free programs are difficult to get into. Treatment isn’t a wonder cure; if the reasons for drug use are still there, people often go back to it. And ultimately treatment probably doesn’t seem like a viable option to people who just don’t believe their lives could be any better. I would like to see more compassion in society for drug users. They are human beings like the rest of us.
As for other categories of people who live on welfare… I think the percentage of people who abuse the system is probably tiny. Getting welfare isn’t easy; there are a lot of hoops to jump through. And I think there are probably more people who need it but don’t get it than people who get it undeservedly.
Sorry for the rant…
Tamar
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 16:09:49
In reply to slight rant, posted by Tamar on August 27, 2005, at 6:41:58
It's the deal between US bases overseas and trade concessions for them, isn't it, that guts US industry. Actually I'm out of date, that applies to East Asia but not to China. Still if the US want to put troops in 129 countries, or whatever it is, there are going to be consequences. For which it is convenient to blame the weak and unfortunate.
Declan
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 16:19:46
In reply to slight rant, posted by Tamar on August 27, 2005, at 6:41:58
It's the combination of dogeatdog with high minded religiosity that gets me about the US.
Declan
Posted by ClearSkies on August 27, 2005, at 16:44:31
In reply to Rant continued, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 16:19:46
> It's the combination of dogeatdog with high minded religiosity that gets me about the US.
> DeclanWoah! Please don't paint an entire country with the same brush! I mean, I'm not American, but that's quite the blanket statement you've made, isn't it?
Can I be offended on behalf of a country?
your Canadian babbler comrade, living in the US,
ClearSkies
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 17:47:04
In reply to Re: Rant continued » Declan, posted by ClearSkies on August 27, 2005, at 16:44:31
Of course it's a vast generalisation. But is there any truth in it? If not.....
And anyway it's not person specific, I'm talking about countries. Maybe you can talk about countries without huge generalisations, but only at book length. I wouldn't be offended if someone said some such thing about Australia, or wherever I was, well maybe *some* things could be said that would offend me but nothing like that. But anyway that's the view here from outside the US for some of us, for better or worse.
Declan
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 17:57:17
In reply to Re: Rant continued, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 17:47:04
That was meant to be dogeatdog, not dogatdog.
Declan
Posted by ClearSkies on August 27, 2005, at 18:24:43
In reply to Slight Clarification, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 17:57:17
Well, that's ok then.
:-)
Posted by sleepygirl on August 27, 2005, at 19:07:57
In reply to Rant continued, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 16:19:46
You know I hear a lot of anti-american sentiment from people outside the US. Can anyone speak to whether this is quite common?
You think it bothers you? try living in the US!
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 20:24:14
In reply to Re: Rant continued » Declan, posted by sleepygirl on August 27, 2005, at 19:07:57
Hi Sleepygirl
It's quite common in some parts but not in others. This is Australia. Where I live it's greenies, old lefties and hippies and rich people and here it's not odd for people to write to the paper about US war crimes etc. Not all Australia is like that.
As to why there is this perception. I think it is US unilateralism, US foreign policy, the US entertainment industry, and US religion. I think maybe all of them at once is too much, and like Tamar said, the media projection of this highlights it.
At the Sydney Writers Festival I saw Harvey Pekar and Joyce Brabner, they do comics, good ones about politics, depression and cancer, and someone asked Joyce Brabner about why the US was so loopy and she said something like it's not just us, we are all in this hole together, and anyway who thought up Rupert Murdoch. Everyone there agreed that the overall prospects were depressing.
I think at least once a day, what would it be like for me and the people I know in the US. It must be something else.
And for heavens sake, I live in what many people say is the easiest country on earth to live in. And what's more in the nicest part of it.
I dunno
Declan
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 27, 2005, at 20:54:21
In reply to slight rant, posted by Tamar on August 27, 2005, at 6:41:58
Thank you Tamar,
For ranting for me.
The percentage of "able bodied" people who are on disability is less than 1%
That was established during a "shake up" when all people on disability were being reassessed for their eligibility.Considering that disability does not provide enough money for a lifestyle even close to comfortable, and the consistant degradation of being on it, I think it's highly unlikely that anyone who is psychologically able to work would choose it as a sole income.
They may not fit into a psychiatric category, but there is definitely a psychiatric issue there. And for the amount you have to beg, and plead and and worry and wait in lines, in many ways it's more "work" and far more soul-killing than a job itself. I've done both, I know what of I speak.
I keep hearing about these able-bodied people on social assistance benefits, but I haven't met one yet. I've also asked people who they know of, when they speak of these folks undeserving, and I honestly haven't recieved an answer, they just "know"
Posted by sleepygirl on August 27, 2005, at 21:07:03
In reply to Re: Rant continued, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 20:24:14
I'd like to fake an australian accent and move there, try to blend in, it looks beautiful. As far as politics go I am woefully ignorant - I just look at George Bush and shake my head, mercy, mercy me.
Posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 23:18:47
In reply to Re: Rant continued, posted by sleepygirl on August 27, 2005, at 21:07:03
Yeah, gee, well that's fair enough, about GWB I mean.
Declan
Posted by AdaGrace on August 28, 2005, at 8:38:29
In reply to Re: slight rant, posted by Gabbix2 on August 27, 2005, at 20:54:21
I by no means intend to offend anyone, and I realize I am probably stepping on toes. But if you will read in my posts above, you will see where I said I live in a very rural area, I am sure the statistics are somewhat skewed from the norm, but certainly more than 1%. Where I work, the unemployment rate is extreemly high in comparison to the state. The county is one of the poorest counties, and having said all of that, I do know from being directly involved with Human Resources at my job, there is an extreemly high percentage of people in this town, and this county who are "able" to work, and chose not to, opting for government assistance instead. I "know" this, because I "know" these people. They used to work for my company, and as former employees, my job is to fill out the paperwork that the SRS office or unemployment office, or SS administration sends me in regards to these employees. I have on many occassions, had employees, single employees without children, who would put that they had 12 household exemptions on their W-4, so they would not have any taxes taken out. I have filled out paperwork for people who have directly told me that they were going to try to get unemployment, even though we had a job available for them. I have been directly involved in a law suit in which an employee sued our company and lost, but not before it cost the company over $150,000 in legal fee, to prove it's innocence. And the reason? We knew that if we simply offered a small minute settlement, to avoid the legal fees, he would accept, but yet, others, many others would come to the surface to try to do the same thing. During this lawsuit, it was apparent that this individual was lying and working the system, and had done it many times before. In many different avenues. The mentality in a poverish area like this seems to be "I want to get something for nothing" And it seems that contrary to what you are saying, it IS pretty easy to do, here in the middle of nowhere, from my point of view. This individual had lived his life "working the system" and once the system caught on, and the assistance was taken away, he moved on to another system. This went on for 20 years. I realize this is one case. Once case of abuse of government assistance. But is it not a little like insurance? It's there to help and protect, but once it is used, the cost goes up? Doesn't fraud and abuse cause government programs to become more costly for tax payers? Just like turning in a minor fender bender causes your insurance rates to go up? Sure, there are government regulations, and yes, there have been lots of reform, but has it been enough? Has it trickled down here to nowhere land? I am not about to sit here and suggest that everybody on government assistance is a fraud. And I am not about to pretend to know everything, because I have never been in a situation to require government assistance. I have only been on the employer side in processing the paperwork. I realize my view is tainted from experience. And this subject is really not the main point I have stated in my original post, it's merely a factor of a much bigger problem.
Posted by AdaGrace on August 28, 2005, at 8:54:43
In reply to slight rant, posted by Tamar on August 27, 2005, at 6:41:58
Seriously Tamar, it is a huge temptation for me to not work, get unemployment, and welfare when that runs out. But I work, because I feel I have to. Maybe that is in part to the luxuries I have gotten myself into maintaining that I probably could give up. I have health insurance that I am losing because of losing my job that I am scared not to have, so I am going to have to cough up an additional $700 to $1000 to have insurance that really isn't all that good anyway. $1500 deductable, pre-existing condition clauses, etc. Now I have become to realize that there is something to be said for having nothing. Medicaid and welfare is very tempting when you think about it. They don't get the same care, yes I have heard that arguement. But maybe that isn't the case in everyday care needs like colds, flu, minor injuries.
I don't think drug addicts are phycially able to work either, but they would be if the sought treatment. And again, I have personal knowledge that the government can and will provide free or inexpensive treatment for individuals who are willing to kick the habbit.
I was a recipient of reduced cost psycological care, I didn't continue with it, for reasons that have no bearing on my point here....I didn't even ask for it. I just stupidly called the first number in the book. I wasn't aware that it was a county government run organization, but I can tell you this. The cost of the sessions were cheaper than what I pay in cigarettes and booze in a week, and that seems pretty minute to me. Could it not be possible that if I was poverty stricken and couldn't get or keep a job due to my alcohol adicition that I could of benefited from that situation?
Posted by Tamar on August 28, 2005, at 13:12:02
In reply to Re: Temptation » Tamar, posted by AdaGrace on August 28, 2005, at 8:54:43
> Seriously Tamar, it is a huge temptation for me to not work, get unemployment, and welfare when that runs out. But I work, because I feel I have to. Maybe that is in part to the luxuries I have gotten myself into maintaining that I probably could give up. I have health insurance that I am losing because of losing my job that I am scared not to have, so I am going to have to cough up an additional $700 to $1000 to have insurance that really isn't all that good anyway. $1500 deductable, pre-existing condition clauses, etc. Now I have become to realize that there is something to be said for having nothing.
Really? You really think there’s an advantage to having nothing? I just can’t imagine a world in which that’s actually true.
> Medicaid and welfare is very tempting when you think about it. They don't get the same care, yes I have heard that arguement. But maybe that isn't the case in everyday care needs like colds, flu, minor injuries.
And what if (God forbid) you might one day need treatment for something that’s not minor? Medicaid doesn’t tempt me at all. I’m became diabetic a couple of years ago. There was no apparent reason for it; it just happened. My pancreas slowly stopped making insulin. Diabetes can cause problems in almost any part of the body: eyes, toes, heart, lungs, fingers, genitals, kidneys… That’s a lot of potential healthcare. I can’t imagine welfare and medicaid as a life choice.
> I don't think drug addicts are phycially able to work either, but they would be if the sought treatment. And again, I have personal knowledge that the government can and will provide free or inexpensive treatment for individuals who are willing to kick the habbit.
But I don’t think it’s as simple as being willing to kick the habit. Treatment for drug addiction isn’t easy and it requires the individual to believe that they can actually do it. When everything seems hopeless it’s hard to believe life can improve, and hard to find the energy to make the momentous effort necessary to tackle an addiction. Whenever I tackle my own addiction I do well for a little while but so far I’ve always gone back to the drug. And half the time I don’t really want to give it up. I’ve been trying to quit for five years, but my physical craving for nicotine always seems to win out in the end. So I can’t in all honesty point an accusing finger at people who can’t find the motivation to give up street drugs.
> I was a recipient of reduced cost psycological care, I didn't continue with it, for reasons that have no bearing on my point here....I didn't even ask for it. I just stupidly called the first number in the book. I wasn't aware that it was a county government run organization, but I can tell you this. The cost of the sessions were cheaper than what I pay in cigarettes and booze in a week, and that seems pretty minute to me. Could it not be possible that if I was poverty stricken and couldn't get or keep a job due to my alcohol adicition that I could of benefited from that situation?
I’m astonished at the idea that anyone might benefit from poverty or addiction. I guess I just don’t see that the so-called benefits are worth living in poverty for. If you have an alcohol addiction then I think it is entirely appropriate for you to receive reduced cost psychological care… in fact, if I ruled the world all healthcare would be free (well, paid for by taxes). If you are addicted to alcohol, I don’t think you have become addicted because you are bad or weak or foolish. It’s a terrible thing to happen to anyone, and you don’t deserve it. It seems less than ideal that people have to pay a lot of money for psychological care. I think there needs to be more compassion in society for people who become ill, whatever the illness.
Posted by Tamar on August 28, 2005, at 13:12:49
In reply to Re: slight rant, posted by Gabbix2 on August 27, 2005, at 20:54:21
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 14:55:58
In reply to Re: I Do Know » Gabbix2, posted by AdaGrace on August 28, 2005, at 8:38:29
I realize that it wasn't the major point you were making, but no, I don't believe that the small amount of abuse of the system makes it harder on those who need it, it's a common rationalization though.
There is more than enough money for people who need it desperately, it's the priorities of the government that make it unavailable to the needy and basically legislate poverty.
I detest hearing the weak, and the impoverished being blamed for something that is a result of money mis spent by the government. One that doesn't seem to find poverty and homelessness, and *proper* health care not token health care, as an issue significant enough to warrant more than lip service.
Posted by alexandra_k on August 28, 2005, at 15:03:47
In reply to Re: I Do Know » AdaGrace, posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 14:55:58
Howz the coffee this morning???
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 16:12:47
In reply to Re: morning :-) » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 28, 2005, at 15:03:47
> Howz the coffee this morning???
Gopo..(That was supposed to be "good" but I liked it so much I left it.
Funny you should ask about the coffee. I was out this morning, and so desperate I re-used my filter from yesterday. What a gross thing to do.
I bet your coffee was better than mine. : )
Thanks for asking.
Posted by alexandra_k on August 28, 2005, at 17:01:22
In reply to Re: morning :-) » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 16:12:47
Aaaaaaaaaaaaah I have been hearing about Canadians and their filtered coffee... That isn't so big over here.
When I went on holiday there was a fire(place) in the house. I was telling my friend about smores so we went on a pressed wheat biscuit hunt because you can't get graham crackers over here. The closest we could manage was vitawheat which are pressed wheat and sunflower oil. My friend was dubious - until we tried one (or two...). Yum.
Have a good day :-)
Posted by Gabbix2 on August 28, 2005, at 17:56:43
In reply to Re: morning :-) » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on August 28, 2005, at 17:01:22
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 28, 2005, at 23:55:14
In reply to Re: I Do Know » Gabbix2, posted by AdaGrace on August 28, 2005, at 8:38:29
> The mentality in a poverish area like this seems to be "I want to get something for nothing"
Please don't post anything that could lead to others feeling accused or put down. The last time you were blocked it was for 1 week, so this time it's for 2.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Other follow-ups should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Politics.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 28, 2005, at 23:58:57
In reply to Rant continued, posted by Declan on August 27, 2005, at 16:19:46
> It's the combination of dogeatdog with high minded religiosity that gets me about the US.
Please don't post anything that could lead to others feeling accused or put down.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Other follow-ups should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Politics.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 29, 2005, at 17:14:39
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » AdaGrace, posted by Dr. Bob on August 28, 2005, at 23:55:14
> Other follow-ups should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Politics.
Here's a link:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050728/msgs/548278.html
Thanks,
Bob
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.