English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How about sign them up for the war effort?

2007-10-19 04:22:32 · 18 answers · asked by St. Tom Cruise 3 in Politics & Government Politics

18 answers

Obviously you people have no idea what it costs to insure a family. How many of you can afford over $1000 to $1500 per month for insurance. After that, co-pays from 15 to 100 dollars, and then med pays ontop of that. I can't wait until some of you either lose your cushy health benefits because your employer decided it isn't worth the cost anymore, or you grow up and try to afford you won insurance. Grow up.

2007-10-19 04:38:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

Informed people know that the bill doesn't go up to 80 thousand dollars. While I disagree that it should cover 25 year olds except in extreme cases like they have a debilitating condition that makes them unable to care for themselves. The people helped by SChip are not the poorest of the poor. We have Medicaid for them. Instead it is for kids whose working parents don't make enough to buy insurance, their employers don't provide it at all or it's still too high, and they make too much to qualify for Medicaid. These kids are caught in the middle. Imagine a child requiring insulin 4 times a day at $400 a week. How about the child with cancer who was turned down by an insurance company even thought he parents could afford insurance. That child would possibly die without Schip. Even after the parents sell their home, cars, and nearly everything else they own to pay for the chemo therapy to try and save the child's life the Republicans would just rather they die than to spend a little to help the family and the child. What we spend in four days in the Iraq war would pay for SChip easilly. So money can't really be the motivation for Republicans in Congress obstructing the will of the people or the President vetoing the bill. Like Ebeneezer Scrooge before the ghosts they would have these children die and reduce the surplus population.

2007-10-19 04:45:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Way to keep spreading the rhetoric. That is exactly why politicians feel the pressure to add more programs and government and never cut under performing programs.

Why not wait until a compromised plan is passed? Bush has significantly expanded that program already, but is that ever good enough for Liberals? It will never be!

Look at the answer above. I own an insurance agency. Those numbers are not even close. Where did you get that info? It costs less than $400 a month. I have clients making 60K who have 3 cars and a house in the suburbs (housing is much lower here). They cannot give up something? I pay for my health insurance. It's called a priority. I'm beginning to think all the liberals on here are about 18-21 years old. Get some experience in life, and pretty soon you'll understand that government takes much more from us than it returns. It's not rocket science.

2007-10-19 04:38:54 · answer #3 · answered by Stereotypemebecauseyouknow 7 · 4 3

First you can blame women's lib, for taking potentially great mother away from their babies , with the trade off of women's career for we will teach your children. Day cares, Television, public school in the 70's to the same + movies CD, computer games, video games & cell phones. Now what a convenient way to mold the little children and especially poor children not welfare children but people making above the poverty line. Cheap so called entertainment is killing our society, yes at 13 boys should be walking around with lawn mowers cutting grass, girls baby sitting, to in fact break free from the cycle of destruction.

You know we need these kids to carry on, so should we not be concerned or just stand by and do nothing, I believe the latter will be taken because the government has most of the peoples mind and they can no longer think for them selfs or they are unwilling to believe the government would do such a thing.

2007-10-19 04:50:55 · answer #4 · answered by man of ape 6 · 2 3

for the reason which you often blame the sufferer in case you are the offender.. and in case you may get adequate human beings on your side, you're possibly to stroll based on the doubt that exists in peoples recommendations..ie, rape sufferer/ "she exchange into asking for it",.. that's a large common Humanism and with the aide of the 4th property (the media) company interests, alongside with the foyer effect they create, and a gadget that has been in accordance with suppression, theft and butchery from day one. (think of of the Land grab that ensued as quickly as we've been firmly footed right here, The Genocide of the Natives, the Barbery of the Rail highway and Oil adult adult males etcetcetc) Our entire gadget is in accordance with exploitation.. and the gadget tells us early early on which you "are a winner" or a loser.. those words might by no skill be uttered yet relax certain those imprints are made back very early, and no you may deny with a shred of certainty that our contemporary varieties of Dogma do not create this classification hollow, or particularly institue it added, by making use of consistent references and pictures of an "top" and "decrease" classification.. usually situations human beings settle for all of this for a existence time with out ever as quickly as scuffling with and pondering their root impulse.. purely examine the varied solutions to the question, the suitable in this room experience they might earn it no be counted what.. this is why even if in the event that they're Piss undesirable, they're nonetheless harboring hostility approximately those "Goddamn" lazy welfare mothers... with out any clue of what quite spending, or what the quite "workfare" gadget grants.. purely what their Media Demigods tell them.. on the tip of a Monopoly pastime, a million man or woman owns each and everything, maybe one man or woman will run the jails, one man or woman will run the railroad, and maybe yet another the financial company.. who's ever left is scuffling with for those spots, some finally end up in detention center... get the image? not something unintentional right here.. what it rather shows is that we've been Devolved via programming, and our own common good has been replaced with "Christian" sin... thank you Paul and Co.... this is Rome, yet this time the finished international is going to Burn...

2016-11-08 22:24:28 · answer #5 · answered by clapper 4 · 0 0

To bad the folks complaining about this don't get together and fund a charity to provide this service. They can even use their own money.

Funny how a democratic controlled congress voted to continue funding the war then complain about the fact that funding the war for forty days would pay for this. Why the hell did the do it in the first place.

As for you question the kids are covered.

2007-10-19 04:34:49 · answer #6 · answered by ken 6 · 2 4

They wouldn't have defeated it if the Dems hadn't set it up so poorly. They increased the income limit to over $80,000. They increased the age defined as children to 25. They plan to pay for it on the backs of smokers, a steadily diminishing tax base. Had they been more rational, they might have come up with a bill that did not allow Bush to cut 100,000 from the program, but instead funded a moderate increase with real funds. As it is, they just gave him a better excuse to veto it.

2007-10-19 04:33:20 · answer #7 · answered by mommanuke 7 · 2 5

Im sorry you cant understand that we already have a CHIPS program for the Poor Children, this Bill was to increase the coverage to $82,000 household and increase a childs age to 25.

2007-10-19 04:29:35 · answer #8 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 6 6

Let's hope so!

Those poor 25 year old kids could actually get a job, put an illegal out of work and maybe entice them to go home.

2007-10-19 04:29:44 · answer #9 · answered by LadySable 6 · 6 6

My wife is pregnant, and I put the radio right up to her belly everynight so my unborn son can listen to Rush and Hannity. If these parents would have been real Americans, they would have done the same, and these children wouldn't be such liberal ninnies.

2007-10-19 04:30:30 · answer #10 · answered by Earl Grey 5 · 2 6

fedest.com, questions and answers