Dem programs seem good at discouraging people from working to have a decent marriage and raise kids with BOTH parents.
Not having a dad in the house has been cited as one of the biggest problems of society's problems.
Will there be even more fatherless kids once Dems give free heatlhcare to everyone?
Will this further hurt poor black children in America?
2007-10-30 04:32:19 · 15 answers · asked by junglejoe 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
More than now, that the average Rep lets down
4.82 kids from 2.83 women and pays for none?
2007-10-30 04:42:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
i'm somewhat astonished by using varied the responses right here. and that i'm with you in this. the two Hillary and Obama elect to sell us scientific wellness coverage. i think of the readers could be puzzled once you assert you elect to refuse healthcare. What you recommend is which you particularly elect to refuse being compelled to purchase healthcare coverage. Hillary and Obama intend to make it a call for for each guy or woman interior the U. S. to purchase scientific wellness coverage. this could be a patch for the gadget, and not even a stable one. I, such as you, make a stable residing (100k income). And nevertheless, i do no longer elect to be compelled to purchase coverage for the comparable reasons you state. And if I made much less, say 30k, I particularly would not be for required scientific wellness coverage. to boot... and that's the 2d maximum severe factor, there'll be a extensive descrepency between the type of healthcare coverage the prosperous could have the money for, and the type the unfavourable would be waiting to have the money for. surely, this ability that there'll be a extensive distinction interior the traditional of shield the unfavourable vs the prosperous. I nevertheless do no longer understand why the U. S. would not undertake a no longer-for-income healthcare gadget (wherein case, high quality is the comparable for all, and it truly is a unfastened provider). i've got self assurance that effects would be analogous to what occurs in case you do not have automobile coverage. it truly is an excellent question, nonetheless. we would in all possibility be penalized with expenditures. would not it is insane to bypass to penal complex for no longer identifying to purchase scientific wellness coverage?!
2016-11-09 20:34:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look. Universal Health Care simply means affordable health care. People unemployed will get health care, but it will not be the same quality as health care for people who can afford it. Also health care for the unemployed will be the most basic and will also be very limited.
It simply means that if you are without a job, and you get hit by a car, you would have to wake up to thousand dollars worth of bills. You will probably only have to pay a couple hundred.
2007-10-30 04:55:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Rewarding poor behavior has been a major problem in the US. Have babies out of wedlock to get more welfare and free health care. The problem with the whole thing is that the federal government is a very poor manager of money and Hillary's health care plan is just one more example of government taking over. Those of us who work hard for a living and try to have a family end up paying for illegitimate children being born and then have to pay to raise it with more and more of our income being taxed. It is time the average middle class hard working tax paying person stop paying for sorry lazy freeloaders and make them start working to earn money and benefits. I will vote for the Republican candidate because they believe in free market and don't think us hard working people should pay tax for the sorry and lazy in this country like all the Democrats do. The Democratic party is the enemy of the middle class because they want to tax us to death.
2007-10-30 04:43:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Dems don't discourage people from working or having decent marriages. What a generalization.
I know of as many "Republican" marriages that have failed as "Democrat" marriages.
My EX husband is a very conservative Republican and he was a terrible father. He smoked a lot of dope and didn't have the inclination to be a good dad.
2007-10-30 04:36:04 · answer #5 · answered by katydid 7 · 7⤊ 3⤋
Growing up without a father was hard, there is no substitute for him.
I also think the Woman's I can go it alone attitude is stupid or greedy. It's like why have one man when you can have 2 or 6. It speaks largely to how women use men in this country.
We have morally broken marriage when 1 in to 2 fails we are at a draw right now at best.
When you throw in gay marriage that undermines the present ideas of society and also is something that will take food from babies mouth-es because money will be spent on non-breeder pares that was meant to go to reward people for getting married and having kids, thus producing mentally healthy kids for the work world.
2007-10-30 04:38:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋
This question is proof positive of the dumbing down of Americans.
Thanks for the laugh
Didn't Newty leave a couple kids behind, ooopps
2007-10-30 04:38:25 · answer #7 · answered by Steve G 2 · 5⤊ 3⤋
My daughter's father is a Conservative who has just now (a few years later) decided he was "ready" to be a dad. Does that mean that all Conservatives are bad dad's? Nope, just like your argument is invalid because of generalizations.
2007-10-30 04:38:15 · answer #8 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
...Compared to how many children are living without Dads NOW?? Let's think a sec...with health care, wouldn't the Dads hang around, as that burden would be lifted?? hhmmmmmmm
2007-10-30 04:36:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
I don't follow the co-relation between socialized health care and divorces?
2007-10-30 04:41:33 · answer #10 · answered by booman17 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋