Jeremy

Profile

Username:
jerms
Name:
Jeremy
Location:
Midwest City, OK
Birthday:
06/21
Status:
Married
Job / Career:
Insurance

Stats

Post Reads:
131,686
Posts:
409
Photos:
10
Last Online:
> 30 days ago

My Friends

10 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago
> 30 days ago

Subscribe

My Little Place On The Web

Sports & Recreation > Tennis > Social Programs
 

Social Programs

My opinion concerning social programs is rather insignificant on the grand scale of important things in life. It probably won't even matter to the ten or so people who read this. However, I'd still like to take this opportunity to clarify my position.
I'm not against them. I've been accused of being sanctimonious and lacking in experience (not compassion). This post isn't even about that.
It's is only logical that the government responsibly build roads and highways, provide basic services and even help those who, for whatever reason, cannot help themselves. Helping the needy and helpless used to be the Church's job, but she has effectively abdicated that privilege to other entities, primarily the government. The government provides a myriad of services and programs that are essentially good for our country and help define us as a kind and compassionate people, regardless of what the America haters would have us believe. Living in a foreign country has pointed that fact up on innumerable occasions.
However, privatization and capitalism are not evil concepts. Competition still spurs higher quality and lower prices. It's a fact. Another well-known fact is that the government is notoriously inefficient and wasteful. My frustration is with those who make the following totally illogical leap: Something is broken. The government must take over.
Let's take Social Security, for example. I will concede the fact that many people are living comfortably on Social Security. I will also concede that fact that removing Social Security entirely, would probably be a bad thing for the country. However, since I was a child, I've heard that social security is going bankrupt. I've also been advised by people who are knowledgeable in economics, that by the time I'm able to draw Social Security, it won't be enough to live comfortably. I've done the responsible thing and opened a Roth IRA and am making great personal sacrifices to maintain semi-regular deposits. Sometimes, our financial situation doesn't make that possible. Sometimes it does. I'm hoping for the best. I will not opt out, because I've already paid into it (before I became aware that I was being forced into a program for which I didn't ask). I'll take what's coming to me.
Health Care. A government take over was not the only available option. Period. I've seen up close what government-run health care is like and I shudder think that we're even taking steps in that direction. Speaking of experience, that's one experience I DO have and let me tell you, it's a long way from compassionate.
That's a short list, but they are two examples that illustrate my point rather well.
Much has been said about greed in our American system and the part it plays in our current economic woes. I'll concede that point. The real discussion isn't about capitalism versus socialism. The issue is how much socialism is acceptable. Evidently, some are quite comfortable letting the wasteful and inefficient government handle some of the must crucial and important areas of their lives. I, however, am not.
If you have something to say, you're welcome to comment. If you make it personal, I'll try to ignore you. That kind of behavior works just great over at Blogster, but we're not like that here.

posted on Oct 5, 2010 3:08 PM ()

Comments:

My church still takes care of our needy members. That is how it should be - and no one else knows but them. One of the ones who needs help told me the other day or I wouldn't have known. He is embarrassed and hopes to soon get to the point where he can take over for himself and his wife. He is willing to work and has started a job this last week.

I could not live on my ss check. My medicine is more than it is. Also my sisters.
comment by nenah on Oct 26, 2010 7:57 AM ()
No, we are not like the people on blogster. We enjoy our retirement but would enjoy it less if there was no social security.
comment by elderjane on Oct 10, 2010 7:36 AM ()
You make some valid points. Too bad main line Republicans don't or won't listen to you. What this country needs is more civil debates (debating civilly). I won't argue (but I like Trout's response).
comment by solitaire on Oct 9, 2010 6:30 AM ()
Hear! hear! on the civil debate. Too often it degenerates into a personal attack or emotional knee-jerk reaction. It gets old after a while.
reply by jerms on Oct 9, 2010 7:10 AM ()
I am 80 years old. I worked all my life. I started public working when I was 12. So for 53 years (with the exception of the time spent in the military) I paid in to S.S. So did a lot of other people. I believe that if it had been handled like it was planned, it would have been a good supplement for a very long time. M O
comment by larryb on Oct 7, 2010 6:50 PM ()
The estimates could be wrong, but I've been told over and over that by the time I can draw it, it will either a) not be worth anything or b) not even exist as a viable program. Makes paying it in all these years a very bitter experience.
reply by jerms on Oct 9, 2010 7:09 AM ()
I agree with you that we must all assume social security is not going to be there for us (and I'm much closer to it than you are) and assume that we are responsible for making our money last as long as we live.

I guess some conservative republicans (and I'm not saying you are one of them) endorse the right of health care insurance companies to make huge profits, raise premiums by at least 40% every year, and deny coverage to their customers on the principle that capitalism is good, and those of us who disagree just want a free ride.

What I hope from the government getting involved in health care is some chance that our health insurance premiums will not equal 80% of our annual income and we won't be turned down for coverage when we need it, after faithfully paying those exorbitant premiums for decades. All I ask is value for my hard-earned middle-class money.
comment by troutbend on Oct 5, 2010 8:13 PM ()
I agree with you. The system is broken. However, I don't think a government take over was the only viable option on the table. Sadly, the Republicans didn't offer anything more appealing, when they could have.
reply by jerms on Oct 9, 2010 7:08 AM ()
One cannot live "comfortably" on Social Security. It was not intended to be a retirement fund. It was designed as a last resort for indigency.
comment by jondude on Oct 5, 2010 7:06 PM ()

Comment on this article   


409 articles found   [ Previous Article ]  [ Next Article ]  [ First ]  [ Last ]