As noted elsewhere, I object to regularly sharing a health care system with folks in the underclass. Just as I prefer not to live near such people or send my children to school with them. I realize that sounds a bit elitist, but let me ask you this: Do you think most educated people – even liberals – would be willing to save money by living in a “bad neighborhood” and sending their children to the school there? (“bad neighborhood,” of course, is a code phrase for a neighborhood with a lot of underclass folks living there.)
I wouldn’t care too much one way or another. If the country can afford it, I don’t mind spending money on poor people (which includes most of the underclass).
ETA: I doubt that such spending will raise up the underclass as liberals fantasize, but if it’s done intelligently, it may improve some lives.
You stupid idiot England has lots of those too, so does Canada. I’m glad your username says brazil cause you’re showing stereotypical American level ignorance of the world and I for one American hate the stereotype.
tl;dr you’re nothing but a right bloody stupid Chav that happens to reside in America.
It’s called NIMBYism, and it’s in large part responsible for the creation and oppression of the “underclass” that disgusts you so much. Please just admit that you don’t like blacks and latinos and don’t want to be around them, and then go fuck yourself.
Only as long as China and others continue to buy our bonds. And with the baby boomers retiring in ever-increasing numbers, we’re reaching the point where we will no longer be able to finance our debt.
Here’s a news flash for you: in 20 years we’re not even going to be able to keep the Medicare promises we’ve already made, much less making new ones.
I wouldn’t define NIMBYism that way, but you are free to define it any way you like.
Do you have any proof of that?
Oh, and by the way, I invite you to fight against this “NIMBYism” you find so digusting by moving to the nearest “bad neighborhood” (i.e. a neighborhood with many underclass folks) and sending your children to public school there.
That’s assuming you live in the United States, of course.
I attended a large public high school, about 60% hispanic. Many of my fellow students were the children of illegal immigrants and many of them in gangs. Despite being exposed to poverty, criminal behavior, and violence (once or twice), I’m extremely thankful that I did. It taught me that the “underclass” are people, many of them good people, who were doing their damnedest to get by in a system that wanted them to fail, a system perpetuated in large part through de-facto segregation and warehousing by those “above” them. It turned out that some of those scary gangsters could be good friends. Being raised in a white, professional-class, suburban household, I would never have had this perspective otherwise. I might even have become like you.
Which would be me how, exactly? I’m responding to a specific poster’s use of the term - a poster whose history leads to the fairly obvious conclusion that he’s using “underclass types” to mean “minorities”. You’d probably do well to think for 2 seconds before you open your idiot yap, but then I guess you’d never have anything to post.
Nice to know it’s the poor who are oppressing the middle class, though.
It was the closest public high school to where I lived. What’s your point? At the time, I lived in a rented house in a working- to middle-class neighborhood. What’s your point? Now, I live in near the University District in Seattle, because I found cheap rent there and it’s close to my work. *What’s your fucking point? *
I expect that you’ll respond by saying “well if you love poor colored folks so much, why aren’t you living in the ghetto.” Disregarding for a moment that the question is completely retarded, I don’t live there because I don’t at the moment have any reason to; this might be different if I were living in another city or working another job (apart from not really wanting to be a part of the gentrification process). Enjoy your elite gated compound, secure in the knowledge that you and those like you help to maintain a crushingly brutal existence for those born in less fortunate circumstances.
Actually I think it’s getting harder and harder to live on a middle class income more because the middle class is being destroyed. Look at the alarmingly growing income disparity in this country before you blame the poor for taking your money away. Oh wait, I forgot: you’re an idiot.
What I don’t understand is why brazil84 is worried that single-payer/UHC would force him to share healthcare facilities with the “underclass” any more than he already does.
As other posters have pointed out, the “underclass” already use healthcare services (such as emergency-room treatment) that are de facto subsidized by wealthier consumers. How would the situation under UHC be any different from this, except perhaps that some of the overhead and cumbersome administrative paperwork currently required to separate out the insured and uninsured and “charity” patients would be eliminated?
And why should we imagine that under UHC, many healthcare facilities wouldn’t still be effectively segregated by socioeconomic class, due to their location? Even if everybody has healthcare coverage, I’m sure that going to a hospital or doctor out in the affluent section of town where there’s no public transit will still enable you to avoid sitting next to any of those pesky underclasspeople in the waiting room.
That’s not how I would have responded. But the fact remains that you – like most (apparent) educated liberals – choose to live in places which just happen to not be underclass neighborhoods. So much for fighting the NIMBYism you hate so much.
Enjoy your elite gated compound as well as your sanctimonious cloud of self-deception.
Yeah, maybe I should move to Detroit and fight “NIMBYism” just like you did.
Welfare, Aid to Dependent Families, food stamps, etc.
No guarantee that the healthcare would be worth the price we would pay (not that I believe it would be just “a bit more” cost).
If it’s true that we pay less tax than most others, that doesn’t make it any less ridiculous. We have only my husbands income, we are only middle class and between all of the payroll taxes we pay out almost 30%. Which doesn’t include sales tax, property tax, user fees on the cars, gas tax…
Probably, but would there be enough of them? We already don’t have enough nurses. You say that the current nurse shortage is caused by an increase in opportunities for women - men already have those opportunities, so if becoming a doctor is no longer worth the expense and time of the needed education, they too may turn to other fields.
Uh, well, we aren’t buying any luxuries here. Isn’t VAT essentially the same thing as sales tax?
Those things are welfare. The dole refers specifically to unemployment benefits- and in any case, those things are also much easier to obtain in the UK and Canada.
It certainly isn’t worth the price you pay now.
Of course that makes it less ridiculous. If virtually no other national government can provide a basic level of service for less than ours, the only rational conclusion is that ours does a pretty good job.
Or we might just stop capping med school enrolment.
It’s exactly the same thing as sales tax. 6.5% doesn’t look so bad now, does it?