Would you pay a dollar to save someone’s life?

[Cyrano]

How about a hundred dollars?

What I'm talking about here is health care. How much are you willing to pay to keep strangers healthy or alive? Is a hundred bucks a year too much to pay? Or is it easier to just say, “Screw it. I don’t know him/her. Let ‘em die.

We already know how Republicans and blue-dog Democrats would respond. “Screw ‘em. Let ‘em die.”

Just how much of a soulless person do you have to be to take this position? How much decency do you lack? Is there a shred of humanity in you?

This is what everyone needs to ask themselves every time they see some political hack standing up there telling us that it’s cheaper to let people die.

$100 stinking bucks a year. Hell, most people spend more than that on stuff and things over a year than they could even name.

[napi21]

1. Perhaps if it wre phrased as .27 ¢ a day would be more understandable?

I wouldn't have any problem but the Pubs are against ANY tax increase at all for anything!

[WVRICK13]

25. The Pubs Are Against

any tax to the wealthy. They are perfectly happy with giving a tax cut to the rich and a tax hike to the poor to pay for it. So. they aren't really against tax increases, only increases for those who can most afford them. Like in feudal europe we serfs have to support the wealthy classes through labor and taxes.

[MNDemNY]

2. Who's life? Glen Becks? NO.

[HopeHoops]

3. Good ol' "Christian Values" keep getting in the way.

That's MY money!

The Vatican shut down two churches in Chicago ten years or more ago because they couldn't "pull their own weight." That's real fucking Christian now, isn't it. I'm sure Jesus would just be THRILLED to know about that.

[Lucy Goosey]

19. Yes, well Jesus was a total free-market capitalist, you know.

Downright Randian.

:sarcasm:, obviously

[TxRider]

26. Of course religious types in the U.S. give more to charity than anyone

All studies I've seen show religious people both give more and volunteer more for charitable causes than secular people.

And that they give more and volunteer more for secular causes not just religious ones than secular people.

And that Americans as a whole give way far more in charity than our government, and far more per capita than any other nation.

We are a nation of givers.

[Cyrano]

28. Ummm, You forgot to tell us where all that charity is going, who's getting it and

who is benefiting from it.

For the most part charities spend more on their own "costs" than they do on the purposes for which they supposedly exist.

Offhand, I can think of two charities to whom I would contribute and funnel the
money to where it's needed. The Salvation Army and Doctors Without Borders.

If you know of another one, let's hear about it.

[LWolf]

4. Of course. nt

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

5. Does the person being helped care?

Would you pay a dollar to save someone’s life? ...
It's a question that needs more background info to answer honestly.

If I am trying to help someone in some way, not just with healthcare but in any way, then that person better at least be interested and care enough to help themselves out in whatever capacity they can. I would pay quite a bit more to someone willing to care and help themselves than somone expecting a handout. I know my efforts, donation, and assistance will go 10X further if they fall upon someone who cares.

EDIT:
But to answer your question, at face value with no qualifier, I would feel helping everyone a little is certainly reasonable and would do so. But again, the ultimate amount of assistance I'd offer would be determined largely by those recieving the help.

[rog]

7. And who determines how much they 'care'? ... You?

Really, my jaw is on the floor after reading this post.

.r.

[Cyrano]

9. Well, it seems as though we've found our next candidate for God

You, dear onetenthofonepercent have got to be the first person to throw your hat in the ring if our present omnipotent being retires, quits, or is disappeared.

We either have a system that covers everyone, or not.

The last thing we need is some "judge" determining the worthiness of anyone who needs help.

Suppose you passed some homeless person lying in the street who never gave a shit about himself or did anything to help himself. Does that make it okay to step over him, ignore him and forget he ever existed?

How could you possibly know anything about him, or if he were "deserving" or not?

The strongest reply I can give your despicable post is this. I'm glad I'm not you.


P.S. I'll send you a copy of Ayn Rand's next book if she manages to get resurrected.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

18. I'd have to respectfully deny that job title.

Suppose you passed some homeless person lying in the street who never gave a shit about himself or did anything to help himself. Does that make it okay to step over him, ignore him and forget he ever existed?

How could you possibly know anything about him, or if he were "deserving" or not?

No one could just "know", and because of that people in need should get the benefit of doubt. It's not like one goes around asking the needy to prove themselves. If there was some way for certain to know that that person never in way cared for, or did anything to help themselves, then I would not feel bad for giving my assistance to someone else.

Here's a situation that will happen once we have healthcare. Should public healthcare cover people who destroy their bodies?
Say for example, a liver becomes available for transplant. With organs in very short supply, do you offer that organ to someone who drinks/smokes too much and shows general disregard for both his own health and the gift that such a an organ (& public healthcare) can be? Or do you give it someone who demonstrates responsibility and care for their health and follows the rules?
Well, I know that I would give the resources to the responsible people that need it and utilize it most.

I don't think any sort of public need-based funding or services should be given to people who aren't going to value the assistance. Personally, i want the money I can spare to give to the needy (which is in short supply compared to the amount of people who need it) to be most utilized. Do not mistake what I am saying for, "I wouldn't help unmotivated people"... because I certainly would. But I can say, with 100% confidence, I would give more to people who show genuine motivation toward their own cause than people indifferent toward helping themselves. Honestly, how can someone expect donors to care more about them than they care for themselves?

[Control-Z]

21. Funny, the people who have

stopped caring, or helping themselves, are usually people who have seen the more difficult side of life. Not all. But many. Childhood abuses, mental illness, bad luck... I feel it is those people, the ones who who have suffered the most, who are especially deserving of a break, even though they may appear worthless to some.

[unpossibles]

6. have you checked out governmentisgood.com yet?

http://www.governmentisgood.com - it has some good articles on this idea, how we each pay $27 annually for the EPA, and the benefits far outweigh the costs.

[YoungAndOutraged]

8. Right now, I'd like to make $100 a year

n/t

[Cyrano]

10. Your post indicates that you're on a computer at the public library, or

have somehow found a way to not pay for an ISP, a modem, a computer and all the software that goes with it.

Either that, or you're on a friends computer wasting your time when you could be out doing "day work."

Many moons ago, I was unemployed, but could always pick up day jobs loading trucks on the docks of New York. I ended up with about $25 a day which was just about enough back then.

I don't know where you live, but in every city I've ever been in, there has always been "day work" opportunities. Check out the poorer area of your city. The work is there.

Conversely, if you're a vet, the VA will help you.

And if you have nothing, nowhere to go, no one to help you and are in a state of complete hopelessness and helplessness, ask for some help online. There are millions of generous, caring people who will help.

Oops, I left one out. You're 10 year old and using mommy or daddy's computer.

[YoungAndOutraged]

12. Nice try

I wish I was privileged.

[T Wolf]

11. Depends on who (or what) it is. One of my pets - absolutely. Any repuke - absolutely NOT. I would

not want to contaminate them with my socialism - I respect them and their beliefs that much.

[Cyrano]

13. As I said in a previous post, we are either all covered or not.

Is there going to be an interview every time someone goes to see a doctor or checks into a hospital?

Right now, you're paying Republican bills whether you like it or not. This includes every Republican congressman, senator, or local political hack.

We are either going to have universal health care (at some point) or not. None of us can or should be given the opportunity to pick between Republicans and Democrats.

Or perhaps you want Republicans making your health care choices when they are in power?

[T Wolf]

15. No. I just want them gone. By any means necessary. They contribute NOTHING to this

country except greed as policy and bigotry as belief.

[tblue]

14. With no reservations. That's what money is for, IMHO.

But a lot of people would answer 'no.'. Like the teabaggers I saw here in the Bay Area saying, "People have a right to healthcare? That's like saying people have a right to food!" The horrors. Some people were born with hearts three sizes too small.

[Cyrano]

16. I always find it amazing that the greatest hatred comes from those who

scream Jesus the loudest.

[MNDemNY]

17. Alou?

[newtothegame]

20. I don't have a problem paying for it. I have a problem with one sector of society paying for it.

If we're all gonna use it, we should all pay for it. Not just those who have been successful. Your analogy doesn't really work if only 1% of the population has to answer that question.

[TxRider]

22. I'd pay more than that... easily.

If politicians phrased it like you do we would be a lot better off.

[Barack_America]

23. To the government? Yes. To a for-profit corporation? Not sure.

I don't want $99 going into some CEO's pocket.

[pitohui]

24. well no one paid a dollar to save my life...or my friend's life

i had to be tested and treated for a cancer some years ago, and no one helped me, and if i had turned out to need more serious treatment, i would have just died

more recently my friend (who can't get insurance because of his age -- late 40s -- even tho he's a nonsmoker) had to get tested for a possible cancer, fortunately it was benign, but no one gave him a penny either

i'm at the point where society has decided that i, and my friend, are without value, and i never rec'd any help or handout, so i'm not willing to give to the most aggressive or the most "cute" of the beggars -- i give ZERO handouts, not even a dollar, because that's what i received

we don't need to pit poor person aga. poor person and talk about "would you give even a dollar?" i already know if you looked me in the eye and heard i had to get a growth removed, you would tell me NO because i've already been there (obv. i mean "you" in the general sense as in the second person plural of english, but NO ONE helped me, NO ONE helped my friend, the truth is people don't give a damn or a dollar unless you scare them -- large scary drunk has his hand thrust in your car at the intersection sure you'd throw HIM a dollar to make him go away -- or you're a cute kid because i guess kids and puppies are cute)

so everybody can sit here and pretend they'd give a dollar to save a life but i already know it's a damn lie

we CANNOT rely on "gifts," we CANNOT rely on charity, we must have a gov't based program that is fair to ALL

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

27. Do you have any figures to back up your claim?