# Working full time should guarantee...



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Assuming a person in America is working full time, what benifits do you think should be guarnteed? Housing? Food? Health Insurance? Should a full time worker be able to support a family of four, or do there need to be two workers in a four (or more) person family? Should one adult be able to support an adult and one child?

What do you think?

(Political, but I wasn't sure if it should be in War/Politics. Moderator: feel free to move it. TIA)


----------



## MamaSoleil (Apr 24, 2002)

I think one person working full time should be able to support a family of four.


----------



## Lucky Charm (Nov 8, 2002)

What are they doing for that full time? are they a doctor, nurse, fireman? Policeman/woman?

That said, a while back someone mentioned living wage.....meaning even if you aren't a nurse or brain surgeon, you should at least be able to live....housing food. clothes. This i agree with. in this country, with all its might and prosperity, surely we can afford to feed our own. If we can send food to the Kurds, and all over the world, then we can surely feed our own.

Education. I think this is vital. But we have to inspire people to want this! So many don't!

Health care. I am not sure how to do this, because i am not a big supporter of socialized medicine. As it is, it sucks. But there has to be a better way. our ER's are overflowing with sore throats and aching backs because people cant afford to go to a regular doctor. If you are employed full time, the benefits should be affordable and accessible.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

I'm asking: What is the MINIMUM package of wages and benifits that it should be legal to provide for someone working full time?

Of course, there will still be wage differences (bus driver vs CEO...) but what should the minimum be?

It seems like most people agree that working full time means you should not be on welfare. So...?


----------



## Marlena (Jul 19, 2002)

T

Quote:

_Originally posted by sweetbaby3_
*Health care. I am not sure how to do this, because i am not a big supporter of socialized medicine. As it is, it sucks. But there has to be a better way. our ER's are overflowing with sore throats and aching backs because people cant afford to go to a regular doctor. If you are employed full time, the benefits should be affordable and accessible.*
What are your complaints about socialized medicine? I suspect (but don't know) that many of them are applicable to the experience of many people in the U.S. who are insured under a more bargain-basement HMO (though I think you or someone else mentioned you knew a Canadian who had a 4 month wait for gallbladder surgery - I don't think even Aetna would make you go through enough hoops to keep you waiting that long!).

I'm also wondering if you're taking into account the substantial public health benefits that could be achieved through universal coverage (however one mandated such coverage).

I'm again going to link the latest IOM report re uninsurance:

http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091055/html/

edited to add an OT marker.


----------



## Lucky Charm (Nov 8, 2002)

Health Care
401K or some sort of retirement fund
Tuition contribution/reimbursement.
Profit sharing. so everyone gets a piece of the pie, even if its teeny.


----------



## Lucky Charm (Nov 8, 2002)

Marlena, i was the one who wrote about the 4 month gallbladder wait. And the hip replacement wait. This is a sore spot with me. I hate the idea of someone needing surgery to wait, or wait forever to see a specialist.

I wish there was someway to blend the best of private health care with the best of socialized medicine.


----------



## stayinghome (Jul 4, 2002)

I agree that you should be able to work full time and support your family and have health care. Isn't that what minimum wage was supposed to ensure? What happened?

This reminds me of a book I recently read, I think it was called "Getting By in America?" where a successful jounalist worked minimum wage jobs and tried to support just herself. It was an eye opener.


----------



## MamaSoleil (Apr 24, 2002)

As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather wait 2mts for a nonlife threatening surgery, than go to the ER with my kid and find out they won't take em cause I don't have the proper insurance!!!

There is talk of privatizing health care in Canada, I hope that never happens!!!


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

This reminds me of a book I recently read, I think it was called "Getting By in America?" where a successful jounalist worked minimum wage jobs and tried to support just herself. It was an eye opener.
Nickel & Dimed: On (NOT) Getting By in America.

Loved it. Recommend it constantly.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

I don't think nothing should be guaranteed. Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4? This all sounds good on paper , but in reality it doesn't work in the business world. How many people want $10 hamburgers.


----------



## DreamsInDigital (Sep 18, 2003)

I have been on and off welfare and other government programs since I was 17. I was raised in a middle-income family with a working mom and a SAHD who was polio disabled, but not enough to qualify for any government help. I was a foster kid and things were fine for my family until they adopted me and the foster care payments stopped. They own a very old house and it seemed every time they started to get ahead of bills the roof would leak or the electricity would go out in half the house, or once, half our porch just kind of fell off.
My mother is an RN who makes over 50k a year and they are SCRAPING by and have been since I was 8 because of their house but they were never able to afford to move. They could sell the house but they would not make any profit and would not be able to afford a down payment on a new house.
Not entirely on-topic but close. Even when one makes well over the FPL sometimes things happen and even they have financial trouble.
Totally on topic, I definitely think working any full time job should entitle you to be able to afford to feed, clothe and house your family, as well as health insurance for everyone. I've lived poverty for almost 6 years and even while working full time and not paying for child care and sharing a 3 bedroom apartment with 2 other people, I had about $30 a month to buy my son new clothes or a toy.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*I don't think nothing should be guaranteed. Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4? This all sounds good on paper , but in reality it doesn't work in the business world. How many people want $10 hamburgers.*
Well, then it sounds like what you're saying is that some people SHOULD be poor? Be uninsured?


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

I think one person working full time should:

Get basic healthcare for them and their family
Make enough to support a family of four
Get retirement
Make enough to pay 1/3 or LESS of their income towards housing (be that a house payment or just rent)


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

I don't think nothing should be guaranteed. Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4? This all sounds good on paper , but in reality it doesn't work in the business world. How many people want $10 hamburgers.
A better question, IMO, is who needs to make $3 million yearly? There is definatley enough money. The enequities between the lowest paid and the highest paid people continue to grow at an astonishing rate within American corporations. For each $1million in compensation that is throw to the upper levels/dividends that is 100 people at the lower levels getting $10K less a year that they truly need.


----------



## DreamsInDigital (Sep 18, 2003)




----------



## daylily (Dec 1, 2001)

I think SQ meant that places like McDonalds are dependent on cheap labor.

So what's more important--that businesses like McDonald's stay afloat and the American public isn't deprived of value meals, or that everyone who is working to support him/herself or a family is able to do so? Ideally, the only people working at McD's would be teens who don't need to support a family, but sometimes a McD's job is the only option for someone. What then?

Anyway, basic minimum package for full time work should be:
Healthcare
Built-in sick time or Paid time off
Living wage in step with the rents in the area


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

I am going to be an apparent voice of dissent here. I do not think that a minimum wage job should support a family of four including everything I consider necesities (food, clothing, health & legal insurance, education, housing). I do think that all minimum wage jobs should support at least one person though. Minimum. They should include health insurance and pay a wage to live.
That means that two people working full time jobs should be able to comfortably support a family of four with no problems (since living costs generally don't double and insurance would already be taken care of).

Kay


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

Are you all familiar with SweatX? It's a garment company founded by one of the Ben & Jerry's guys. It makes quality garments and all of it's employees get benefits and holidays and a living wage. This is unheard of in the garment industry. And the price difference? Approximately 25 cents more per tee shirt for the consumer.

The McDonalds example is bullshit. A medium soft drink is app. $1.09, right? It costs McD's about 4 cents for that drink. All that profit does NOT have to go to the CEO, it COULD be distributed more equitably and provide a living wage for all the workers, and they would still make money. Not to mention the fact that happy employees don't put feces in our food, or ove cleaner, or spit, or piss. They also show up for work with a good attitude. Hell, they show up!

If you aren't willing to pay a little more for something that was produced using fair labor, there's something wrong with you. (notice I said WILLING, and didn't mention the ABILITY to pay more.)

So yes, I believe a person working 40 hours a week should be able to provide insurance benefits for their family, have life insurance and disability insurance, the opportunity to contribute to a pension plan, holidays and vacation time, tuition assistance, and a wage high enough that they are able to purchase the goods they help to create. If you are MAKING Fords, you ought to be able to BUY A FORD. If your employees can't buy what they make, who the hell is going to buy all the crap you are unleashing on the marketplace?

I can't understand why Europeans are able to get free healthcare, free education, 3 weeks of vacation, and work fewer hours in a week than we do. I guess we are just on a BIG economic learning curve.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

I think SQ meant that places like McDonalds are dependent on cheap labor.
But that is a choice they make, IMO. They could pay a living wage to their lowest workers if they did not spend billions on advertising and paying their top people. If you add it up, it just wouldn't add that much to the cost. Some businesses do it (Whats the good burger place according to Fast Food Nation) without an astronomical increase in prices.

Places that pay slave wages pass the burden of paying THEIR employees on to everyone--- whether they use their services or not (why do I have to subsidize sleeping queens happy meal?)


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Elpheba---

Exactly!!!

And I contend that by not paying those wages they just pass the buck to the taxpayers.

Can I say it again? Corporate welfare


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by TiredX2_
*I am going to be an apparent voice of dissent here. I do not think that a minimum wage job should support a family of four including everything I consider necesities (food, clothing, health & legal insurance, education, housing). I do think that all minimum wage jobs should support at least one person though. Minimum. They should include health insurance and pay a wage to live.
That means that two people working full time jobs should be able to comfortably support a family of four with no problems (since living costs generally don't double and insurance would already be taken care of).

Kay*
I think my logic in supporting a family of four is that it benefits society more when one parent can stay at home. So I'd like to see even the poorest parents be able to stay home with their children until their children are school aged. So...whatever kind of parental leave that would give would be fine too.


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

crap! I forgot parental leave! One year paid leave for parents, so each parent could take a year off to stay home with the child and the kid could avoid daycare until after they turn 2. I think you should have been in the job for a certain time period before taking advantage of that, though. Would be very bad business-wise to pay someone for a year of leave when they started working for you in their second trimester! :LOL


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

What will happen is more business will take their jobs to other countries. Most of you have absolutely know idea what it takes to run a small business. If what you wanted was enforced it would put a lot of small businesses out of business.


----------



## Elphaba (Nov 19, 2001)

so, there are no small business owners in Europe? or Canada?


----------



## daylily (Dec 1, 2001)

Ack! You guys are right, of course, that McDonald's doesn't *need* cheap labor.

I wonder about a two-tier wage system: if you can be claimed as a dependent on someone else's income tax, then you get the lower minimum wage. If you can't, then you get a living wage. Of course, that could lead to discrimination.

In my city, 30% of our homeless population are also employed. Rents are beyond the reach of many working people.

I found this:

Quote:

A minimum wage worker in the City of Charlottesville must work 104 hours per week to afford a 2 bedroom apartment at the area's Fair Market Rent (FMR).
I think it's fair to ask that if you are employed full-time, you earn enough to pay your rent and work just 40 hours a week.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

I think one problem hasn't been addressed and that is there probably is more of a need for assistance in large cities where the cost of living is astronomical.


----------



## TingTing (Jan 12, 2004)

Quote:

A better question, IMO, is who needs to make $3 million yearly?
A-friggin-MEN!


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*What will happen is more business will take their jobs to other countries. Most of you have absolutely know idea what it takes to run a small business. If what you wanted was enforced it would put a lot of small businesses out of business.*
That makes NO SENSE.

If you dont give tax breaks to big companies (the ones who benefit from the VAST MAJORITY of them)....small business will FLOURISH without major corporations to squash them.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

If you dont give tax breaks to big companies (the ones who benefit from the VAST MAJORITY of them)....small business will FLOURISH without major corporations to squash them.
Yup, yup, yup & ITA.

It is not small business that generally screw their empoyees. From my experience, small businesses are more likely to pay a living wage and just have the proprieter make comparitively less (verses huge corporation powers).

While I agree with the value of a parent at home, I don't think it is a necessity. It should be within reach--- but not a given. If you could live basically on one persons wages, though, it should be easier to save up enough to take substantial time off for the birth of a child.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

My dh worked for a small company and they kept their employees under a certain number otherwise there was regulations imposed upon them that they could not afford. So these regulations inhibited their growth.

I hear a lot of jealousy in this self-righteous contempt of people who makes a lot of money.


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

Quote:

I hear a lot of jealousy in this self-righteous contempt of people who makes a lot of money.
:LOL Uhh, what do you consider "lots of money." Honestly, I feel disgust at someone who would happily take home millions a year and not feel *anything* about the fact that people working for him full time are homeless. That makes me really sad.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

Can I just make a plea for socialised medicine? I've lived in 3 different countries, two with soc. med. & in the US, & I love our socialised medicine here in Australia. I have had to wait for certain medical treatment. That's okay by me, it wasn't life threatening, just inconvenient. Better that than some people not having access to medical care at all, or only having access to 2nd rate health care. I hate the idea that only some people can have decent health care, whilst others suffer for lack of money. But we do pay for it, to be sure. Our taxes are much higher than in the US, & when you earn over AUS$70,000, I think, you pay an additional 1.5% tax that goes straight into Medicare. What our family pays in taxes is about the equivalent of what we would pay per year for private health insurance (this is also an option in Aus, in fact the gov't is trying to force all but low income earners into private health care thru tax incentives-GRRRR). I personally would far prefer paying my taxes & waiting a bit; I sleep better at night for it.

Absolute minimum requirements IMO for min wage earners:
1) no more than 1/3 income out for rent/mortgage
2) one income should support a family of 4, which means being able to buy decent quality food, pay electric, water, gas, rates(land tax?), insurance & 1 car + petrol
3) well-funded public schools so people don't have to buy an education they can't afford for their kids (taxes again here, I'm afraid)
4) the option for both parents to work part-time and be at home part-time, or for the second parent to work pt outside the home (let's face it, we're not all great full-time SAHMs)
5) school uniforms, so families don't have to worry that their kid doesn't have the latest gear (love this about Aus too- 3 uniforms, that's my dd's school wardrobe-SUCH a relief from the way I grew up)
6)integrated public transport so the 1 car family has options. Or how about a public bike scheme!!! Rural families need more options, of course, as we all don't live in cities.
7) maternity/paternity leave & subsidised childcare fees based on a sliding scale depending on your income

That's about all I can think of for now. Have i taxed us into oblivion yet? Probably not, & think what it would mean to have a society where everyone is assured shelter & food of a reasonable standard, good schooling for children, & time off for new babies. Those who felt the need for a new plasma screen TV and dishwasher would have to work longer, of course. Or you could save money slowly, the old-fashioned way.


----------



## grisandole (Jan 11, 2002)

TiredX2, it's In N Out burgers that is a "good" fast food joint. They are in CA. And, they are good! My aunt and cousins all work for them. I don't know exactly how much they make now, but about 3 years ago, starting wages for entry level employes was $8.50/hr. That was more than I was making working as a counselor in a group home for teen boys. My aunt manages one, and I know that they have great health beneftis, get raisies, and are treated very well. Oh, and their food is great!

Anyway, I think that if you work full time, you and your family should have health insurance. All paid by the employer. At an entry level job, I think you should make enough to support youself; and anything above entry you should be able to support a family. I define entry level as fast food and retail. Any job that requires a college degree, or training (mechanic, welding, etc) should pay a living wage for the employee and their family.

Kristi


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

I often wonder what the world would look like if everything cost what it should. No subsidies, no over-inflation of price, everyone making a living wage.

And In&Out ROCKS!! Great burgers, great fries, great company. My first stop every time I fly to the mainland!


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*I don't think nothing should be guaranteed. Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4? This all sounds good on paper , but in reality it doesn't work in the business world. How many people want $10 hamburgers.*
I really don't understand how it's OK to not pay a living wage to someone, while at the same time believing the person should not be entitled to any form of government assistance when they can't afford to feed, house and clothe themselves or their families. If the person is not getting enough money working fulltime, and not getting any money from the government, just where are they supposed to come up with enough to live on??


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Elphaba_
*I can't understand why Europeans are able to get free healthcare, free education, 3 weeks of vacation, and work fewer hours in a week than we do. I guess we are just on a BIG economic learning curve.*
Make that five weeks of vacation, plus another two weeks of comp time in France!







And don't forget maternity leave, and an amazing number of other odd little benefits.


----------



## TingTing (Jan 12, 2004)

Quote:

Can I just make a plea for socialised medicine? I've lived in 3 different countries, two with soc. med. & in the US, & I love our socialised medicine here in Australia.
I have to concur. I live in Canada and, as compared to the experiences of family and friends in the US and other countries where health care is for profit, I wouldn't trade our system for theirs.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

If you want to know what socialized medicine will be in the United States of America, go and take a good look at any Veteran's Hospital.

That is our experience with a Federalized Health Care System.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

As far as a "living wage" is concerned, I recall Barry Goldwater in 1964 had come up with a proposal in which a person could work full time and the government would compensate the person to fill in a gap between his wage and the "living wage" with little in the way of government administration. For instance, if a living wage was $15,000.00 in those days for a family of four, and the breadwinner made $12,000.00, the discrepancy $3,000.00 would be covered.

He was defeated resoundingly by promises of the "Great Society".


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Regarding the supermarket strike that is four months old in SoCal:

The companies that have refused to continue to pay full family health benefits to cashiers also gave their CEOs big bonuses before the contract ran out and the strike started.

These are jobs that are paying a living wage to people with good benefits and they are going bye-bye.


----------



## the sunshine (Jul 31, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*

I hear a lot of jealousy in this self-righteous contempt of people who makes a lot of money.*
I hear a lot of contempt for people who for whatever reason can't support themselves or their families.


----------



## Marlena (Jul 19, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by aussiemum_
*Can I just make a plea for socialised medicine? I've lived in 3 different countries, two with soc. med. & in the US, & I love our socialised medicine here in Australia. I have had to wait for certain medical treatment. That's okay by me, it wasn't life threatening, just inconvenient. Better that than some people not having access to medical care at all, or only having access to 2nd rate health care. I hate the idea that only some people can have decent health care, whilst others suffer for lack of money.*
I completely agree. We rank among the lowest, if not THE lowest, with respect to a number of key indicators of health among all developed nations (eg, neonatal mortality, birth weight, life span, etc.). And, likely not coincidentally, we're just about the only developed nation that doesn't have universal health care. Only Mexico and Turkey have higher rates of uninsured people than we do.

I lived in England for a year and Canada for a year, and experienced both their health care systems directly and, through friends, indirectly. Both were superior to the experience I had in the US at that time, as someone who was low income and usually uninsured.



*Quote:*

But we do pay for it, to be sure. Our taxes are much higher than in the US, & when you earn over AUS$70,000, I think, you pay an additional 1.5% tax that goes straight into Medicare.
Unsurprisingly, this is exactly the opposite of what happens in the U.S. - I think the cutoff rate for payment into Social Security and Medicare is $80,000 - one does not pay FICA on earnings above that amount (or something close to it - it might be $85,000 this year).



*Quote:*

Absolute minimum requirements IMO for min wage earners:
1) no more than 1/3 income out for rent/mortgage
2) one income should support a family of 4, which means being able to buy decent quality food, pay electric, water, gas, rates(land tax?), insurance & 1 car + petrol
3) well-funded public schools so people don't have to buy an education they can't afford for their kids (taxes again here, I'm afraid)
4) the option for both parents to work part-time and be at home part-time, or for the second parent to work pt outside the home (let's face it, we're not all great full-time SAHMs)
5) school uniforms, so families don't have to worry that their kid doesn't have the latest gear (love this about Aus too- 3 uniforms, that's my dd's school wardrobe-SUCH a relief from the way I grew up)
6)integrated public transport so the 1 car family has options. Or how about a public bike scheme!!! Rural families need more options, of course, as we all don't live in cities.
7) maternity/paternity leave & subsidised childcare fees based on a sliding scale depending on your income.
All excellent suggestions, IMO!


----------



## mimim (Nov 2, 2003)

Lovely thing to think about!

I think:

full health care benefits - including dental and vision
at least 3 times the going rate for housing
retirement benefits
profit sharing
at least two weeks vacation time
at least 7 days sick and personal buisness time
one year paternity leave at 100% pay
second year paternity leave at 50% pay
flex time for parents/guardians of children
tuition reimbursment


----------



## ~Jenna~ (Dec 7, 2003)

I'm gonna hi-jack this thread for a sec...

Quote:

_Originally posted by applejuice_
*If you want to know what socialized medicine will be in the United States of America, go and take a good look at any Veteran's Hospital.*
The VA I worked at was awesome. Yeah, there were long waits because there were so many veterans that needed to be seen, but most of that was just because the concentration of vets in our area was so high. There are VA hospitals and clinic that are almost empty most of the time. We had much better equipment than the private hospitals in our area (I worked at both) and the employees were much happier than the ones at the private hospitals. The dept I worked in is one of those that is understaffed at most hospitals and we weren't. The hospital across the street had 8 openings and we had zero. I don't know if all Veteran's hospitals are like the one at worked at, but if that is socialized medicine then I am all for it. Oh btw, you know that the VA started to charge right before I quit work...I think it was $15 a visit and $50 for tests. I think that sucks.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4? This all sounds good on paper , but in reality it doesn't work in the business world. How many people want $10 hamburgers.
Have you heard of In-N-Out Burger Express? Maybe not, since they don't advertise! They pay their employees above minimum wage and give health benefits, yet the most expensive menu item is under $2.50, and they use high-quality ingredients. McDonald's could do the same thing; they just don't want to.

No one's children should be punished just because the parent has a minimum wage job.

In Nickel & Dimed, they say a living wage for one adult and one child is $11.77 per hour. We've got a long way to go! Of course, every time they raise the minimum wage, food and rent prices also go up, so we're really getting nowhere.

And yes, dental and vision benefits must be included! Since when are seeing and chewing "optional"?


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by ~Jenna~_
*I'm gonna hi-jack this thread for a sec...

The VA I worked at was awesome.*
The key word here is "worked"

past tense.

I mean visit them as a patient. I did. My DH went there for the last seven years of his life. Very poor. And this was supposed to be an improvement over what Ron Kovics wrote about in Born on the Fourth Of July .

They buried him. His life in the military also caused the condition he died from, so they had lots of teaching material. So it was a losing battle.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

Oh dear applejuice, I am very sorry that you lost your husband. And I'm sorry that the VA & military couldn't do more for him. Regardless of my left-leaning, peacenik ideals, I've got a thing about making sure military & ex-military people are looked after (friends & fam in the military, you know how it is). It's just that we have what I consider to be a workable socialised health care system here in Aus, & I'd like to see that system extended to the country where I grew up, so that people that I care about and have left behind can have health care too.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

My DH took his R&R on a farm in the Outback of Australia in the 1960's after he was doused with Agent Orange and Agent Purple in Vietnam.

If Nationalized Health Care in America means anything resembling the "treatment" he received at the VA, which by the way, was NOT "free", we paid a good chunk of it, then forget it.

There are three hospitals that have closed in my area because few people pay their bills any longer. Only huge medical, trauma centers are left.

People who had the $ will opt out of such a program and go find a doctor who will treat them since they can and will afford it.

The Federal Government already has all Americans roped into the "Social Security System", which is by no means "secure" and no one can opt out of it; a more horrible system there is not. The people who work there are nasty, mean, and have a job for life; therefore feel very justified in getting away with it. I was outright lied to and my Congressman refuses to do anything about it.


----------



## Curandera (May 17, 2003)

You people just don't get it! It is THE "American Way" to strive for lots of money and not look back or around at others. What is left of the unique culture created by a bunch of people who left their homelands and thier emotional attachments behind to focus on a possibility of having more (for many it was a lifesaving necessity) if you start talking about "sharing" and "fairness". The "American Way" is to get what you can, and hope that ONE DAY you will be wealthy enough to have your family insured and your home paid off, a few cars, go on vacation somewhere and whatever else - the good life. If the other poor suckers don't earn enough, well, that's just a necessary part of the motivational structure to keep this country what it is - THE ONLY PLACE IN THE WORLD WHERE YOU CAN GO FROM RAGS TO RICHES! Wheeeee! Halleluja!!




















































































:







:


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

People from countries with socialized medicine do move to America, so their country can't be all that great. Some of them tell me that although affordable, it's not very high quality. It's not like you walk in and get free care; you do have to be insured. If you can't afford private insurance the government will take care of it for you. It's sort of like having private insurance vs. Medicaid in the US, and I know in the US you will receive a higher quality of care if you have private insurance. I've gotten treated better when I've had NO insurance than when I've had Medicaid. They say "The doctor doesn't know what plan you have, only the billing staff" but it's not true. I used to be a counselor in a mental hospital and we all knew which patient had which plan, and we spent more time with the patients who could bring in the most money.


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*People from countries with socialized medicine do move to America, so their country can't be all that great. Some of them tell me that although affordable, it's not very high quality. It's not like you walk in and get free care; you do have to be insured. If you can't afford private insurance the government will take care of it for you. It's sort of like having private insurance vs. Medicaid in the US, and I know in the US you will receive a higher quality of care if you have private insurance.*
I wonder what countries you are talking about? I live in France, and this certainly doesn't accurately describe the French system, which was recently classified by WHO as the best healthcare system in the world. That of course does NOT mean that it is perfect -- but it is possible to have workable, affordable universal health care. Some info about how the French system works can be found here: http://www.info-france-usa.org/atoz/health.asp

"THE FRENCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM

The French healthcare system has been in place and has continued to evolve for more than one hundred years, and was classified the "best health system in the world" by the World Health Organization (WHO) in June 2000. It permits all French citizens access to treatment and to the latest discoveries in medical research. The success of the French health system is evidenced in the general health of the French population. Their life expectancy increases more than three months each year, and French women have the second highest life expectancy rate in the world.

The Healthcare System and its Users:

The French government provides a number of diverse and comprehensive healthcare rights. For more than 96 percent of the population, medical care is either entirely free or is reimbursed 100 percent. The French also have the right to choose among healthcare providers, regardless of their income level. For example, they can consult a variety of doctors and specialists or choose a public, private, university or general hospital. Moreover, the waiting lists for surgeries found in other government supported healthcare systems do not exist in France. "

And here is a very interesting comparison of the US health care system and how bad it really is:

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-healthcare.htm

"Myth: The U.S. has the best health care system in the world.

Fact: The U.S. has among the worst health statistics of all rich nations.

Summary

The U.S. does not have the best health care system in the world - it has the best emergency care system in the world. Advanced U.S. medical technology has not translated into better health statistics for its citizens; indeed, the U.S. ranks near the bottom in list after list of international comparisons. Part of the problem is that there is more profit in a pound of cure than an ounce of prevention. Another part of the problem is that America has the highest level of poverty and income inequality among all rich nations, and poverty affects one's health much more than the limited ministrations of a formal health care system. "

Continued at link above -- many enlightening statistics!


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I was referring to people I've known from Sweden who move to the US. The France system does sound good!

It makes sense to provide quality care for those who cannot pay for it themselves. It costs less in the long run. The Perinatal Healthcare Index that I've seen in Mothering demonstrates this. The best way to prevent low-birth-weight babies is to provide prenatal care for the mother. The cost of care for one LBW baby is equal to the cost of prenatal care for 30 women. Yet there are still many pregnant women who can't get care. Being pregnant does not automatically qualify one for Medicaid, the way we are led to believe.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

I reread the op and if a person is working 40 hr+ a week I don't mind giving assistance. I would rather help someone who isn't expecting a handout than the person who expects one. I still believe though that we need to limit social assistance. My fil also has gone to a VA and I agree with applejuice socialized medicine would be a bigger nightmare. The quality would not doubt stink.

Let me say though I believe in charity and helping people, but government funded help is forced charity with no control on who is being helped. I think it infringes upon our freedoms. I takes away our choice on who and what type of charity we want to donate too.


----------



## Marlena (Jul 19, 2002)

CanOBean's link is a good one; also check out the recent IOM report on the uninsured in America for more enlightening stats.

Don't misunderstand the primary purpose of VA hospitals. The VA is set up not merely to care for vets, but also to care for soldiers in the event of a war (a real war, that is). Thus, the equipment is kept up to date and top of the line, even where patient volume is terrible and where the folks staffing the VA are just putting in time (and sometimes not even that). Resources are spent not in order to preserve the health of vets (that's incidental, almost), but rather to keep up a level of combat readiness.

If you wonder why people don't pay their medical bills anymore, then check out the billed cost of health care, in contradistinction to the amount docs, hospitals and other health care providers actually get paid by insurers.

The price tag on care for the uninsured is far higher - often at least double - than that on the care of those of us who have health insurance, or are insured through a gov't program.

Having a sound primary care system to which all Americans were entitled univeral access would do far more for our population health than just about any other measure I've seen proposed (short of going to a full universal system).


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*My fil also has gone to a VA and I agree with applejuice socialized medicine would be a bigger nightmare. The quality would not doubt stink.*
Did you read my post? Do you understand when I say we have socialized medicine in France, it isn't a nightmare, and the quality is excellent -- the best in the world according to the WHO. France beats the US on almost every measure of health, and pays a lower percentage of its budget in health care costs. Why do you continue to cling to the idea that socialized medicine would necessarily mean low quality care and a "nightmare?"


----------



## Britt (Nov 19, 2001)

As someone who lived in Sweden for nearly four years, I want to chime in and say that I have high praise for the Swedish medical system. I experienced local care, emergency care, and one of my children had surgery and an overnight in the hospital while we were there. The waits were shorter than the wait I generally have in Connecticut, and the qualilty of care was far superior. I was able to choose a public or a private doctor (I was very pleased with public GP, though I chose a private midwife). In fact, I had every bit as much "choice" as I have with my US insurance---and here in the US I'm shelling out $900 a month to insure my family. (We work freelance.)

Sweden is also well known for its medical research; many cutting-edge procedures and treatments come out of Uppsala and Stockholm.

We certainly had a few complaints in Sweden, but having experienced both US and Swedish medical systems, I would choose the Swedish medical system hands down.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*Do you really think a person working at McDonalds fulltime should be able to support a family of 4?*















:

could you explain to me why some people should have to work full time and not survive? I just simply can't get the idea behind this, that some people are entitled to the good things in life and others are entitled to crap. Just do not get it.

I think a person working fulltime should be able to support themselves and one dependant, at a minimum. and that should include decent housing, the ability to eat nutrtiously and well, basic healthcare, etc. of course, I personally am also in favor of a total overthrow of the capitalist system, but we're no closer to that than we are to any sort of universal living wage, are we.

I'm so tired of being so cynical but I just can't stop!!!


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

I agree with Greaseball.

When I have not had insurance, I was able to get better care when I could negotiate it for myself. I had my four children at home, and I had insurance for only the second one. I paid for the midwife, pediatrician, and doctor all of of pocket for the other three.

I have paid out of pocket for care for myself these last seven years, and I am still standing. I am healthy.

Back to the OP....
Regarding working full time and getting a living wage...

When I gradauated from college, I had worked the entire four years full time, and went to school full time, no small fete...yet when I went out with my degree, employers were reluctant to hire me at anything but a low wage because of, well, you choose the reason, ... my young age (22?), my lack of experience ( I had been working all through school!!!), so what was I to do? I took any job I could find and got all of the experience I could. Still , after all of that, years later, I came to the conclusion that employers simply do not want to pay a decent wage to anyone for the work they want to be done.

Yes, I feel someone who has an investment in himself and works full time should receive a living wage. Why bother with any kind of education otherwise? What would the point be? I am glad that I did not graduate with a huge debt to pay off. What would I have done then?


----------



## Alvenchrst (Feb 3, 2003)

There were a lot of shoulds in your question. I'd love to be able to answer yes to every one of your shoulds, but there is no such thing as a perfect system. Ya we should always try to improve upon what we already have, but while were at talking about shoulds, why don't we make up a list of all the things in the world that we want to happen. I agree with trying to make things better, but I'm not going to dam the system we have b/c it is faulty because of what we all do every day. We, people are the ones who have created this imperfect system. As for me, I'm going to enjoy this life, but heaven is my home!


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Greaseball_
*People from countries with socialized medicine do move to America, so their country can't be all that great. Some of them tell me that although affordable, it's not very high quality.*

Uhm...I lived in the UK and, yes, actually, I did just walk in and get care. I wasn't even a citizen. My roommate was too sick to go in and got a house call even. No insurance.

With the McDonalds/Cookie Cutter way that medical clinics are going, I don't see much difference than socialized health care...just a lot more paper work.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by sleeping queen_
*

Let me say though I believe in charity and helping people, but government funded help is forced charity with no control on who is being helped. I think it infringes upon our freedoms. I takes away our choice on who and what type of charity we want to donate too.*
I see that as a GOOD thing....God forbid people decided who to help based on things like their sexual orrientation or if they had a child out of wedlock or if they have mental illness or chemical dependancy.......I can't imagine the system being any more discriminatory than it is.


----------



## member234098 (Aug 3, 2002)

RE: European Health Care System

Do any of you recall the heat wave that sweltered throughout France and the rest of the Continent last summer?

With all that wonderful healthcare, why were so many people dropping dead from the heat? I know everyone will die eventually from something. Yet all we heard here on the international news was how many people were keeling over from the heat and no one was there to help them. Where were all those healthcare professionals who make house calls? Where was all those wonderful nurses that the European tax money pays for in the way of health?

The bottom line is no system is perfect so no system has bragging rights over another.


----------



## anothermama (Nov 11, 2003)

Quote:

_Originally posted by miriam_
*RE: European Health Care System

Do any of you recall the heat wave that sweltered throughout France and the rest of the Continent last summer?

With all that wonderful healthcare, why were so many people dropping dead from the heat? I know everyone will die eventually from something. Yet all we heard here on the international news was how many people were keeling over from the heat and no one was there to help them. Where were all those healthcare professionals who make house calls? Where was all those wonderful nurses that the European tax money pays for in the way of health?

The bottom line is no system is perfect so no system has bragging rights over another.*










I don't think it says a thing about their healthcare.

1) Yeah, we heard all about all of it...because the American media loves to sensationalize.

2) While it's perfectly normal for *me*, in Northern California, to see temps well over 100 in the summer, it's NOT the norm in France. Have you been there?? They complain its too hot when it's 85!!!

3) If, here where I live, next summer we had a heat wave that hit, say, 125...you'd probably see MORE deaths in California alone than in Frances heat wave. I mean...it just seems like a no brainer to me...when you introduce a weather anomoly OF COURSE things are gonna go wonky and it doesnt have much to do with the quality of healthcare.

Yes, all have their downsides. But thats no reason to be complacent, its no reason to accept the status quo, and it's CERTAINLY no reason to blanketly poo poo socialized healthcare, which, by the way, DOES have bragging rights over the American system of healthcare.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

I was somewhat inspired by the OP question, due to the fact that I have been thinking about this resently due to a thing I heard on NPR.
It seems to me that anyone who is working 40 hours a week should beable to support theselves. I mean think about it... we have all these inovations to make things "easier" to "simplify" life so we don't "have' to work OT and such, so you can spend time with your family. But, yet people have to work 40+ hours a week just to make ends meet.
Sleeping Queen... are you saying that 2 people with kids should have to work 40+ hours a week and send their babies to substandard childcare that costs a freaking fortune, because they can't make above minimum wage. Why should anyone HAVE to work 100 hours a week, 2 jobs, just to get a crappy place in a crappy part of town.
You know all those "unworthy of help people" those are the people who clean up after you... the janitors, the house keepers, the bagger at the store, the fast food people who are to serve you swill from the behind the counter with a smile on their face. NOT evryone who works a low paying job is a teen looking for some fun money. I mean really take a look at these people, REALLY look at them.
What makes America so "great" is that we can get above what we are born into... but some people can't ever get out. Maybe their kids can, but why should they never get a chance? It is easy to say when you have everything you need, that some else just need to buckel down and work harder to get ahead, to stop being poor. But how can you get that better job , if you work so damn much you can't go to school to get a better education. How are you suppose to work 16 hours a day and then go to school ,and then sleep, study and spend any kid of time with your family? OH wait... your NOT suppose to! That is right you don't deserve too, cuz your poor! Is that it?
And if those are the people who do deserve a helping hand, why not someone who actually wants to see their kids? Maybe they refuse to work 2 jobs at low wage palces, why not help them! Aren't they worthy?
Who desides who is worthy of having enough to get by?
Here is what I consider enough...

1.) a desent house... not some rat/roach infested slum!
2.) good healthy food
3.) health care/insurance...that covers prenatal visits and midwives (something mine doesn't so that is an issue with me! :LOL )
4.) enough time to spend with your kids! YEAH those people who they are working so freaking hard to suuport!
5.) desent public transportation or enough to buy a good car and pay for gas and insurance
6.) paid vaction, so they can relax and be able to have some down time.

You know if we actually took care of each other and looked at each other as people... PEOPLE!!! Why is it a "burden" to take care of each other? Why are some more worthy than others? Not all homeless are those wine-o's on the street corner asking for a hand out. A good % of them are WORKING people! Yeah, people with JOBS! And those drunks??? They very well could be people who have been kicked out of our mental health system. Who really aren't capable of having a job... they aren't just stackers. THEY ARE HUMAN BEINGS!

H


----------



## Lucky Charm (Nov 8, 2002)

Quote:

Where were all those healthcare professionals who make house calls? Where was all those wonderful nurses that the European tax money pays for in the way of health?
Werent they on vacation? I remember reading somewhere that during the month of august, many of the healthcare workers (doctors & nurses included) have a 3 week break of some sort. Kind of mandated, i think. entire floors of hospitals were closed because they couldnt staff them. I magine if that sh*t happened in America???oh, the litigation! The lawsuits!

Of course, i could be wrong, but i think thats what i remember reading.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

It's so sad when a mother has to work well over 40 hours a week and she doesn't even get to see her kids except to tuck them in.









So everyone complains that children are growing up without fathers, and their solution is to take away the mothers too? No matter how good your daycare is, I guarantee it's nothing like being raised by your own parents. If you're poor and the state is paying for daycare, it's even worse than other care centers.

Parents are a necessary part of life for children. When did we stop realizing that?


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Speaking as a nurse... about closed hospital units... happens here too. Not cuz people are on vacation, but because people are so burnt out as nurses that they quit and so the hospitals either run short staffed (equalling increased mortality rates... yes even in the USA!!), or they close floors/units and accept less patients.
Working in the health care system, at least in this country, is so freaking frusterating.

H


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

sweetbaby 3

So, does that mean that the wonderful government healthcare system in Europe shuts down for three weeks a year?

abit







T , but pertinent...

I seem to recall that everytime medical doctors go on strike, and they have - many times in the past - the mortality rate actually goes down...

...which is a good reason for a perpetual doctor's strike.

*Edited to change months to weeks, something I should have done the first time.


----------



## CanOBeans (Apr 7, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by miriam_
*RE: European Health Care System

Do any of you recall the heat wave that sweltered throughout France and the rest of the Continent last summer?

With all that wonderful healthcare, why were so many people dropping dead from the heat? I know everyone will die eventually from something. Yet all we heard here on the international news was how many people were keeling over from the heat and no one was there to help them. Where were all those healthcare professionals who make house calls? Where was all those wonderful nurses that the European tax money pays for in the way of health?

The bottom line is no system is perfect so no system has bragging rights over another.*
Yes, we discussed this back when it happened. It was a result of many factors, including the fact that nearly the entire country is on vacation in August, that there was no plan in place to deal with a heat wave of that magnitude and length (as it is an extremely rare thing here), and that the government did not respond as quickly to the crisis as they should have.

Interestingly, though -- and I posted this the last time we discussed -- the 1995 heat wave in the Chicago area killed just as many people, as a percentage of population, as the heat wave here did last summer.

And using the fact that no health care system is perfect as an excuse to not ditch the currently unworkable, unfair health system in the US is quite a cop out. No, the French system is not perfect -- I could write quite a bit about the problems. But it way trumps the US system.


----------



## Lucky Charm (Nov 8, 2002)

Quote:

So, does that mean that the wonderful government healthcare system in Europe shuts down for three months a year?
Applejuice, i said three weeks, not months. I believe many people vacation during the month of august, healthcare workers too. I saw this on the news.

Quote:

It was a result of many factors, including the fact that nearly the entire country is on vacation in August,
This is what i read too, COB's


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

I get it.

Healthcare in Europe is available except for three weeks in August.

Therefore one should ever get sick in August in Europe since there is no one to take care of them.

When one talks about healthcare, one is speaking about availablity and accessiblity when it is needed. If it is not there when YOU need it, regardless of the season, then there is something wrong.


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Sorry, sweetbaby3, I think I'll just take a break.

Too much excitement.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

Quote:

_Originally posted by applejuice_
*I get it.

Healthcare in Europe is available except for three weeks in August.

Therefore one should ever get sick in August in Europe since there is no one to take care of them.

When one talks about healthcare, one is speaking about availablity and accessiblity when it is needed. If it is not there when YOU need it, regardless of the season, then there is something wrong.*
yes, and healthcare is available 24/7, 365 days a year, IF YOU ARE INSURED. If not, well, I guess you should just never get sick, since if you are uninsured there is no one to take care of you.
Yeah, I'd say there's something wrong.


----------



## kama'aina mama (Nov 19, 2001)

This morning my pastor reminded me of something that was said on NPR last week... don't know which show, etc... that Americans work, on average 250 hours more per year than their British counterparts. 500 hours per year more than their German counterparts. Combine that with the fact that the gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid in this nation is exponentially greater than the same gap in any industrialized nation and think on it for a bit. We are in many ways a nation of slaves, nose to the grindstone, fingers to the nub shoveling money into the pockets of a very few at the very top who have little or no interest in our well being or our quality of life. This is insane. This is not the freedom we sing of.


----------



## aussiemum (Dec 20, 2001)

This all reminds of a doco I saw on the telly about a year ago- Poverty in America, or something like that. It was an overseas production I think, so most of you prob won't have seen it. But it hit home, very deeply for me, because I grew up in rural Ohio. One of the people they profiled was Tammy, a single mum living in a run-down trailer in rural southern Ohio. Her benefits had been cut, her clapped out car was dead & she had 3 or 4 boys to provide for. She walked 8 miles one way (sounds like one of grandma's stories, but it's true) to work a part-time job at a Burger King in Chillacothe, or Centerville, or some little Ohio town like that. That was the only job she could get at the time- no HS diploma, no real skills, trying to feed & clothe teen-age boys & keep them out of trouble & in school so they have a better chance at life......so, whadda ya do? Just abandon the Tammy's of the world? IMO, Tammy needs more help, not to have her benefits cut off. She's a great (or sad, perhaps) example why one person, working full-time, should be able to have my aforementioned minimum standards. Can you imagine the difference it would make in her life? Whereas, say, Paris Hilton having to forgo the umpteen Versace dresses this year with the matching Manolo Blahniks, oh the tragedy of it!!!









Redistribute the wealth, I say, before we're all powerless peasants!!!!

"You can't take it with you, even if you try,
It's so much easier for a camel to pass through a needle's eye..."
Paul Kelly, Aussie singer & songwriter extraordinaire


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

The countries with the lowest hours per week worked have longer life expectancies than the US does.


----------

