[kenafein]

Maybe, unlike liberals, they recognize that there are more important things in life than money. Or maybe they realize that being paid by the government to be poor just means that you will always have to be poor for the democratic agenda to be in your self-interests.

You don't have to be poor to enjoy social programs. Look at civilized nations like Canada, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. People need to worry about what is best for society and the planet. I don't care about money, I care about the social contract and common decency. Quality healthcare and education are worth paying (taxes) for; and, I believe, a fundamental right. We don't need a legion of clods supporting the autocrats in the vain hope that they'll, one day, join the elite.

[jogiba]

When the Duggars visited TODAY last June, it was the longest Michelle had gone without a pregnancy in more than 20 years. Backstage, she told TODAY Moms that her baby days might be over – and she was fine with that. But the Duggars have always said they leave their family planning up to God, eschewing birth control.

TODAY Moms . Parenting Advice, Stories and Mom News | TODAY.com Blogs - 20 kids and counting! Michelle Duggar announces she's pregnant again

[seacapt]

Which argues hard on another issue on which the GOP has a problem.

Would you be a little more specific please?

[GeneV]

Would you be a little more specific please?

Birth control.

[jeffkrol]

You don't have to be poor to enjoy social programs. Look at civilized nations like Canada, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. People need to worry about what is best for society and the planet. I don't care about money, I care about the social contract and common decency. Quality healthcare and education are worth paying (taxes) for; and, I believe, a fundamental right. We don't need a legion of clods supporting the autocrats in the vain hope that they'll, one day, join the elite.

double plus one.....

[Nesster]

Matter of fact, it is shown that the wealthy don't work for their money, they make their money work for them. Despite that, they work harder than the hammock bound poor. But their satisfcation levels when it comes to employment are higher.

So, in order to maximize the enjoyment of social programs, I say we re-orient them towards the very wealthy, as this overlooked and discriminated against minority, of them all, will enjoy these benefits the most. This way, also, the government stops confiscating our money to fail at its stated goal of eradicating poverty and addiction etc. and uses its funds where it does the most good. For a happy employer is a good employer, and happiness trickles down faster than money.

[mikemike]

You don't have to be poor to enjoy social programs. Look at civilized nations like Canada, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden. People need to worry about what is best for society and the planet. I don't care about money, I care about the social contract and common decency. Quality healthcare and education are worth paying (taxes) for; and, I believe, a fundamental right. We don't need a legion of clods supporting the autocrats in the vain hope that they'll, one day, join the elite.

The problem, and it may be a uniquely american problem, but taking the public education system we have here it seems that the more money we pump into it, the more the teachers and their unions suck out of it without improving results for the children. No doubt if more taxes and more spending via the public sector proved effective at improving these social programs, the resistance from people such as me and other conservatives to spending more on them would be less. As far as it being "a fundamental right" it seems a bit of a stretch to say that someone (doctors, nurses, teachers, etc.) must provide there services to all. Some of the greatest challenges in healthcare and education are reaching those who live in places that are undesirable (such as dangerous neighborhoods or rural locales) to the high performing professionals with high quality service. We have seen that they can't be bribed into going there should the be forced in order to make good on fulfilling that "fundamental right?" If they are enslaved, will they continue to perform at the same level?

If the answers to these questions mean that we can't solve these problems with more money than there is no need to raise spending on these areas to improve results. We need to try different things within the same spending envelope.

[Nesster]

someone (doctors

I for one at times have difficulty squaring the Hippocratic oath with some of the cosmetic surgery being done...

[kenafein]

The problem, and it may be a uniquely american problem, but taking the public education system we have here it seems that the more money we pump into it, the more the teachers and their unions suck out of it without improving results for the children. No doubt if more taxes and more spending via the public sector proved effective at improving these social programs, the resistance from people such as me and other conservatives to spending more on them would be less. As far as it being "a fundamental right" it seems a bit of a stretch to say that someone (doctors, nurses, teachers, etc.) must provide there services to all. Some of the greatest challenges in healthcare and education are reaching those who live in places that are undesirable (such as dangerous neighborhoods or rural locales) to the high performing professionals with high quality service. We have seen that they can't be bribed into going there should the be forced in order to make good on fulfilling that "fundamental right?" If they are enslaved, will they continue to perform at the same level?

If the answers to these questions mean that we can't solve these problems with more money than there is no need to raise spending on these areas to improve results. We need to try different things within the same spending envelope.

If you consider Canada's socialized medicine system enslavement of medical professionals then I don't know what to tell you, but Canada has some of the most remote and desolate territories on the planet; and they still seem to be able to provide for their citizens. Doctors volunteer to go to the worst corners of the globe to help those in need. I think you'll have enough that can handle downtown Chicago. The problems with US education maybe unique, but attack your issues with the system, don't abandon those that need an education. If the problem is the bureaucracy, then reform that. A good education benefits everyone, except those that would keep us repressed.

[jolepp]

The problem, and it may be a uniquely american problem, but taking the public education system we have here it seems that the more money we pump into it, the more the teachers and their unions suck out of it without improving results for the children. ...

It would seem that the US teachers are not especially highly paid in international comparison though:



(Teacher Pay Around the World - NYTimes.com)

[kenafein]

It would seem that the US teachers are not especially highly paid in international comparison though:



(Teacher Pay Around the World - NYTimes.com)

Very true. My wife worked 60 hour plus weeks for peanuts, and she could barely afford a 600sqft apartment near her school, then the budget crisis hit and her services were no longer required. They decided to double class sizes instead. It must have been the greedy union's fault.

[GeneV]

If the answers to these questions mean that we can't solve these problems with more money than there is no need to raise spending on these areas to improve results. We need to try different things within the same spending envelope.

Really? I missed where our government put comparatively more money into these problems. As the previous graph shows, teachers are poorly paid compared to most of the industrialized world, and we aren't putting much money into paying doctors in rural areas. A primary care doctor outside of a large city is likely to make less than the average in a country with socialized medicine.

[dadipentak]

And teaching is, btw, one of a society's most important responsibilities--especially in today's world.

[seacapt]

Birth control.

Gene , just because a high percentage of us believe abortion is in most cases fundamentally wrong does not mean that most of us are against birth control.
Lack of moral turpitude and sense of responsiblilty in most cases are the cause for rampant demand for abortions. Personal responsibility and use of birth control could drastically reduce the incidence of abortions.
BTW I'd gladly see a few tax dollars go to get "Baby Daddy O' Thirty " and his eleven recepticles fixed.

[Wheatfield]

If you consider Canada's socialized medicine system enslavement of medical professionals then I don't know what to tell you, but Canada has some of the most remote and desolate territories on the planet; and they still seem to be able to provide for their citizens. Doctors volunteer to go to the worst corners of the globe to help those in need. I think you'll have enough that can handle downtown Chicago. The problems with US education maybe unique, but attack your issues with the system, don't abandon those that need an education. If the problem is the bureaucracy, then reform that. A good education benefits everyone, except those that would keep us repressed.

Our doctors also aren't enslaved, any more than my paper boy is enslaved. I don't really think the average right zingo American has a clue about how Canada's health care system works, but our doctors tend to be in private practice (they own their own clinics) and work out of their own offices.
They bill the government for their work rather than the American method of billing the patient's insurance company (presuming the doctor is on the proscribed list for the insurance company).