The Reagans

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
No but there were photos of one of the Rothschilds with little Arnie Schwarzenegger just prior to or during his run for governor.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by gldstwmn
MI doesn't make your monthly payment, just covers the investor if the borrower defaults on the mortgage. She'd still lose the house. Sicne I'm self employed, I pay my own life insurance. It's $65 a month and if you don't pay for a month, just like car insurance, they'll cancel you. No one should depend on the government but if you're down and out they shouldn't tell you to go f**k yourself either.

I agree - most people cannot afford self insurance, but if you can get it even if you have to scrimp and save to do it because you never know.

Also, the govt. (state and fed.) do have programs to help the poor. They are, however complicated and most people would not even know where to go unless someone told them. I just think it ought to be easier. Then again, these programs administer to millions of people, so a system must be in place. I just think the waiting for BOTH public aid and private insurance money (usually at least 90 days from receipt of proof death, which could take the state a month to create) could be lessened somehow.

[Rob67]

Originally posted by jwd
Her life was bad no doubt. Although some of these things could not be avoided, I would think that if she and her husband had only purchased a life insurance policy it would have a least given her and her children a little reprieve from the financial burden she was facing. People need to think of what could happen in their lives like this and to be ready for them. Even mortgage insurance would have helped in this particular situation. And I'm not sure about this, but wouldn't Social Security benefits kick in for something like this? No doubt, life can be cruel sometimes, but you can't rely on the government to take care of you. Head Start Programs and the like are all great, but I would rather have them supported more from the private sector than the public one.


Joe

She would get Social Security payments for all three children until they are 18.

And I agree. Bad things happen to us all and we have to do our best to be prepared. Government assistance is fine in certain circumstances but there definitly needs to be more reform in welfare and Social Security.

Rob

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I agree with you that it would be great if everyone donated without fanfare. But, charities rely of prominent donors to get more money. In essence, they use the name of a prominent person to solicit donations, be it through a concert funcraiser by a big star, or a mailing that annouces a large donation by a well-known person.

I think what you're forgetting is that the charity needs permission to do so.

[dissention]

Originally posted by jwd
People need to think of what could happen in their lives like this and to be ready for them.

No doubt, life can be cruel sometimes, but you can't rely on the government to take care of you. Head Start Programs and the like are all great, but I would rather have them supported more from the private sector than the public one.


Joe

In order to be ready, you have to be able to afford it.

Spoken like a true Republican. Private sector paying for things that should be public. Less government money, more "personal responsibility." Sorry, I was always under the impression that the government should look out for the best interests of it's citizens. Head Start and such programs have always been public, why shouldn't they be? Maybe we should spend more tax dollars for Bush to fly around in his jet instead of such valuable and important programs?

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
I think what you're forgetting is that the charity needs permission to do so.

I know, but my point was many lend their names to charitable things because without their names, the charity would not get as much money from other people. In other words, if everyone donated annonymously, the charities would not get as much money. So, while I agree many people donate to charity pretty much just to say "hey look at how great I am" ( to them I might add ) , the charity's use of the names of these same people no matter their intent, is a good thing in the end.

Of course, when the person's motive is true, it is even better a la Jerry Lewis and the M.D. telethons.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I know, but my point was many lend their names to charitable things because without their names, the charity would not get as much money from other people. In other words, if everyone donated annonymously, the charities would not get as much money. So, while I agree many people donate to charity pretty much just to say "hey look at how great I am" ( to them I might add ) , the charity's use of the names of these same people no matter their intent, is a good thing in the end.

Of course, when the person's motive is true, it is even better a la Jerry Lewis and the M.D. telethons.

Well, that's whole new problem altogether if that's true.

But, for some reason, I don't think the American public is prosperous enough to donate to a cause just because a certain celebrity does. I'll never forget all of the celebs who refused to donate a mil to the 9/11 fund. That was something, huh?

I just don't like it and I never will.

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
In order to be ready, you have to be able to afford it.

Spoken like a true Republican. Private sector paying for things that should be public. Less government money, more "personal responsibility." Sorry, I was always under the impression that the government should look out for the best interests of it's citizens. Head Start and such programs have always been public, why shouldn't they be? Maybe we should spend more tax dollars for Bush to fly around in his jet instead of such valuable and important programs?

Well, a point of order is in order

The Fed. Govt. was not initially made to help the poor and did not to any significant degree for well over 100 years. That it does now, however, is a good thing - thank you FDR. The problem is people see the abuse in the system which causes them to hate it.

Interestingly, I think I read somewhere that a significant portion of the assisstance to the poor or needy (medically, etc.) comes from private sources such as the Red Cross, individual doctors/hospitals cutting their fees in accordance with individual income (believe it or not, it does happen and often), and, without meaning to open a can of worms, faith based charities such as The Covenant House.

I used to be a volunteer after school teacher for The Covenant House ( http://www.covenanthouse.org/ ), a faith based charity. My free services provided after school tutoring/care for these kids and allowed their parents to work until up to about 7:00 p.m. We never taught religion, just the basics (reading writing, and arithmetic) as we really sort of just helped the kids do their homework from the public schools. I probably had anywhere from 15 to 50 inner city kids aged anywhere from 6 to 15 or 16 (the reality was that anyone over 16 was working); they also had pre-six day care but I was not qualified to do that (believe me I had to go through the hellacious security check and other screening I have ever been to - they even called my high school teachers . ). The Covenant House also takes in any (and I mean any) under age 18 kid off the street and, if the kid wants it, The Covenant House will provide guidance and counseling 9usually spiritual but not always). If they do not want it (and they pretty much always wind up in the end wanting it because they see how it works on the other kids), they are still free to stay. I tell ya - those parents were some of the best people I have ever met. They were so grateful, it was almost embarrasing to me.

I know that is just one such organization, but many many more exist. I think that if there was some way for the Fed. Govt. programs to work like that, we would all be better off for it. But, I agree complete privatization probably is not the best answer; nor is blind payment to faith based charities. Maybe there is a happy medium that can be reached. I hope so because IMO the private organizations work a whole lot better than the Fed. or State ones, their is significantly less red tape, and Congress can't screw with the funding of a private org. as much (although give them a chance and they can screw anything up ).

[jwd]

dissention:
Spoken like a true Republican. Private sector paying for things that should be public. Less government money, more "personal responsibility." Sorry, I was always under the impression that the government should look out for the best interests of it's citizens. Head Start and such programs have always been public, why shouldn't they be? Maybe we should spend more tax dollars for Bush to fly around in his jet instead of such valuable and important programs?

There you go again.... I never said the government should abandon social programs altogether, and there are plenty of them still out there to take care of the needy. Some needing more reform like SS and Welfare. What's wrong with voluntarily donating money to charities? IT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED!! Seems like the right way to do it in a CAPITALIST society. Bottom line is I'm sick of the government picking my pockets clean. I look at my check every week and what I pay in taxes is just outrageous. There has to be a limit, unless of course you want to live in a socialist society...I don't. And there's plenty of waste/pork in government and the dollars for Bush flying around in his plane are a drop in the bucket in comparison.


Joe

[dissention]

Originally posted by jwd
There you go again.... I never said the government should abandon social programs altogether, and there are plenty of them still out there to take care of the needy. Some needing more reform like SS and Welfare. What's wrong with voluntarily donating money to charities? IT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED!! Seems like the right way to do it in a CAPITALIST society. Bottom line is I'm sick of the government picking my pockets clean. I look at my check every week and what I pay in taxes is just outrageous. There has to be a limit, unless of course you want to live in a socialist society...I don't. And there's plenty of waste/pork in government and the dollars for Bush flying around in his plane are a drop in the bucket in comparison.


Joe

I suggest looking at the ways the government wastes your money on silly little things, not the ways they actually allocate funds for public services that are needed. Don't look at your check and think 'Get rid of the welfare programs!" Look at it and say "Stop trying to get Reagan on the dime, stop wasting time by delivering fake turkeys in Iraq, and such..." And our Republican government is the one taking all those taxes, honey. "We see no change in sight..."

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
I suggest looking at the ways the government wastes your money on silly little things, not the ways they actually allocate funds for public services that are needed. Don't look at your check and think 'Get rid of the welfare programs!" Look at it and say "Stop trying to get Reagan on the dime, stop wasting time by delivering fake turkeys in Iraq, and such..." And our Republican government is the one taking all those taxes, honey. "We see no change in sight..."

Strand gets on his high horse and says "At least the Republicans do it with less taxes!" I am getting off the horse now and preparing to duck

Actually, W is the biggest spender we have had in years Demo. or R. And, those silly little thing considered together are a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to a 100 billion dollar to programs like Medicare, Social Security, SSI, etc.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
Strand gets on his high horse and says "At least the Republicans do it with less taxes!" I am getting off the horse now and preparing to duck

Actually, W is the biggest spender we have had in years Demo. or R. And, those silly little thing considered together are a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to a 100 billion dollar to programs like Medicare, Social Security, SSI, etc.

I know, that Medicare bill is going to suck BIG TIME. But don't listen to me, I'm just a Democrat!

PS: Did you watch the debate last night? They slaughtered Dean!!

[jwd]

dissention:
I suggest looking at the ways the government wastes your money on silly little things, not the ways they actually allocate funds for public services that are needed. Don't look at your check and think 'Get rid of the welfare programs!" Look at it and say "Stop trying to get Reagan on the dime, stop wasting time by delivering fake turkeys in Iraq, and such..." And our Republican government is the one taking all those taxes, honey. "We see no change in sight..."

That's why everyone needs to be proactive in government and pay attention to what goes on around them. I don't say get rid of the welfare program, I say reform it. I've been paying taxes for 25 years now. Unless you'd say we've had Republican government for all those years, I think to say that the Republican government is the one taking my taxes is inaccurate. "We see no change in sight"...I'm more optimistic than that.


Joe

[strandinthewind]

Originally posted by dissention
I know, that Medicare bill is going to suck BIG TIME. But don't listen to me, I'm just a Democrat!

PS: Did you watch the debate last night? They slaughtered Dean!!

I rarely listen to you

No, I got home too late. I watched Law and Order at 10:00 and fell asleep halfway through it. I must say though I really hate these early on the campaign debates. I usually just watch the final ones.

[dissention]

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I rarely listen to you

No, I got home too late. I watched Law and Order at 10:00 and fell asleep halfway through it. I must say though I really hate these early on the campaign debates. I usually just watch the final ones.

I think they're mahvelous. Watching all of the candidates get catty with each other and watching Sharpton perform stand-up; priceless!