2007-02-25 10:53:03 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
No, but they all need fixing. Social Security as it is now is doomed. It's built on a pyramid system, the number of people working and paying will soon be less than those taking out and needs to be restructured ASAP, not to mention it's continously raided for funding of other programs. Medicare and VA need more funding and need to go to the people who need and deserve it. Student loans are the only channel for many to go to college, and since it has to be paid back I don't think they can really be considered an entitlement program. FEMA needs to be replaced by something better and more efficient.
2007-02-25 11:01:58 · answer #1 · answered by Χαλαρά 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So you want to eliminate the poor, the elderly, and the disabled too?
What happens if you get sick and can't afford private health insurance?
Oops! No Medicare or Medicaid to bail you out!
Can't afford college tuition? Too bad! No student loans available period!
All because you wanted it eliminated!
What I don't understand is why some people think that eliminating programs DESIGNED to help those who are unable to function in society (the disabled for example), or hit those parts of the population who have lived long and happy lives (the elderly), is a good thing?
Has anyone noticed the widening gap between the rich and the poor lately? Notice how the rich are getting richer--off the backs of the poor--and the poor are just getting worse?
There was an article posted about this yesterday on Yahoo! And now they have something about the welfare state getting bigger, not smaller.
And you want to sit here and ASK people if we should eliminate such programs which are designed to help those who can't afford basic essentials or services?
Why?
If it wasn't for some of the programs you listed, I wouldn't be alive today. I would be dead long before I had a chance to know life.
And if it wasn't for Medicare, I wouldn't have the medication that's keeping me alive right now.
But you know, since you obviously have a problem with these entitlement programs, then I guess you see the poor, the disabled, and the elderly as a severe burden on society itself--and should be eliminated--huh?
2007-02-25 11:13:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, we should eliminate entitlement programs like Congress
voting themselves a raise every 4 months, or entitlements
like paying the presidents plane fare, so long as gets off &
speaks for 5 whole minutes, or entitlements like hiding pet
projects in bills - like a billion dollar bridge for 50 people in
Alaska. Eliminating these could save tax payers billions.
2007-02-25 11:10:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is just the terminology used referring to a specific Title number of the particular legislation. The word "entitlement" has a negative connotation, and is used incorrectly by politicians and TV reporters to imply that people who get benefits from these programs don't deserve them.
2016-03-29 00:49:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We do need to end entitlements for the rich like no bid contracts for war making. Under Bush we have had socialism for the rich while everyone else must fend for themselves. If we are to end entitlement programs, let us start with that one. If we did that, there would be plenty of money left for the others.
2007-02-25 11:01:07 · answer #5 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Sure, why not we will just set anybody that might need help or he elderly out on the side of a hill to die from starvation.That seems like a reasonable solution to you not wanting to pay your fair share to support those in need.
2007-02-25 11:01:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
no, they pick up the slack where the market economy doesn't. There is no money to be made from assisting society's weakest so the government has to, it is the right of every person to have dignity, education, and quality of life.
2007-02-25 10:57:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
Now why would anyone want to do that? Get Real!
2007-02-25 11:07:58 · answer #8 · answered by chole_24 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think we should eliminate the Republican party. That would be much better.
2007-02-25 10:56:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
not unless you are looking for a revolt.
2007-02-25 10:57:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋