Do you think that its right that the republicans are trying to block the added senior citizens, disabled vets, etc part to it?

I think it makes me sick. My dad is a DV who has the worst back issues ever and pretty much lives t the va hospital for appointments. So should he be denied things? Does he not spend into the enconomy?

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/06/news/economy/stimulus_senate.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008020619?cnn=yes

I think it is a great thought, but to do it..Include EVERYONE, or it won't work. I don't think that anyone should be denied this. And you are right. Do seniors not support our economy, too? What, Vets don't buy things?

It's stupid.

And what kills me is that Bush wants people to spend into the economy but his own party seems to be hindering it.

I think they should trash the whole bill. It's really a waste of money we don't have thats not going to solve the problem its designed to solve... but yes I think if they are going to do it they should give it to everyone.

I honestly don't think they were trying to stop it for just those people. I think there were some things they didn't agree with. They wanted to make sure the money was for legal citizens, not for the coal companies, and other little things. It seemed like there were extras tacked on just to push them through.

Don't know.

I think they should trash the whole bill. It's really a waste of money we don't have thats not going to solve the problem its designed to solve... but yes I think if they are going to do it they should give it to everyone.

I actually agree with you :faint

I think they should trash the whole bill. It's really a waste of money we don't have thats not going to solve the problem its designed to solve... but yes I think if they are going to do it they should give it to everyone.

Didn't they try this before? And instead of spending the money people ran out and put it in banks. Ended up killing the economy anyhow?

I honestly don't think they were trying to stop it for just those people. I think there were some things they didn't agree with. They wanted to make sure the money was for legal citizens, not for the coal companies, and other little things. It seemed like there were extras tacked on just to push them through.

Don't know.

That is exactly why they are blocking it. Some are trying to put more into ths than there needs to be. Another example of piggy backing crap trying to make the other side look bad:no

Didn't they try this before? And instead of spending the money people ran out and put it in banks. Ended up killing the economy anyhow?

Pretty sure :yes

I know the bank is where mine will go. Politicians are so stupid. :rolleyes

I would like the money I am sure I can use it to help the economy LOL

Pretty sure :yes

I know the bank is where mine will go. Politicians are so stupid. :rolleyes

But people always say they are stupid but they recieve unexpected money from them then its a different story.

If it's for one it should be for all taxpayers. But, if they need a volunteer to give up their share, they can have mine. I really don't need an "advance" on my OWN freaking money to count against me next tax season.

Espically when its tax season now.

But people always say they are stupid but they recieve unexpected money from them then its a different story.

LOL I'm getting that extra money too, and I still think they're stupid. It is going to CAUSE more problems than it will fix. We'll just put it that way.

Aunt Paulina is -200 in her bank account, but she has an online store selling cat jewelry. She gives everyone in the family money at the family reunion and hopes they'll spend it at her store along with some of their own money which would bring her up to 0 or even some profit. Most don't care to spend it there or at all, so now she's -800 with maybe 200 coming back total. Yay, only -600 now, it MUST have worked! She'll do it again next year for sure! :yes

I am assuming this thread is talking about the extra tax money like 1200 for couples and the 300 for each child up to 3 kids. Is that what this is about? If it is I for one would love to have that extra money back. But I think it should be for all taxpayers. I dont see how its a waste of money because alot of people could use that extra money.

I'm a disabled Vet...I KNOW that I pay my fair share of taxes. I would be pissed if I were excluded because I receive disability benefits!! I have a full time job and pay lots of taxes that would support this rebate!

I'm a disabled Vet...I KNOW that I pay my fair share of taxes. I would be pissed if I were excluded because I receive disability benefits!! I have a full time job and pay lots of taxes that would support this rebate!

I know my dad goes through so much pain and the check he gets isnt even near what he should get.

LOL I'm getting that extra money too, and I still think they're stupid. It is going to CAUSE more problems than it will fix. We'll just put it that way.

Aunt Paulina is -200 in her bank account, but she has an online store selling cat jewelry. She gives everyone in the family money at the family reunion and hopes they'll spend it at her store along with some of their own money which would bring her up to 0 or even some profit. Most don't care to spend it there or at all, so now she's -800 with maybe 200 coming back total. Yay, only -600 now, it MUST have worked! She'll do it again next year for sure! :yes

well call me stupid but I dont see how its going to cause problems for everyone? maybe I am missing something here but I know that if this is passed we will be getting 1500 so how can that be causing more problems for us when it will help us get the money to use to go on our house hunting leave. Sure we will probably have to pay taxes on that next year but I am not seeing something here to see how it will cause more problems? what does the government think we are going to spend it on?

I'm a disabled Vet...I KNOW that I pay my fair share of taxes. I would be pissed if I were excluded because I receive disability benefits!! I have a full time job and pay lots of taxes that would support this rebate!

well thats why I think this should include everyone. is there something that says it wont include everyone?

well call me stupid but I dont see how its going to cause problems for everyone? maybe I am missing something here but I know that if this is passed we will be getting 1500 so how can that be causing more problems for us when it will help us get the money to use to go on our house hunting leave. Sure we will probably have to pay taxes on that next year but I am not seeing something here to see how it will cause more problems? what does the government think we are going to spend it on?
I get what she is saying.... The government is hoping to boost spending...they will fork out money and go in debt hoping that people will spend it and MORE....if people bank it, or spend it on prior debt, that defeats the purpose of them dishing out all this extra money and just puts the govt in more debt.

The point is it should go to TAXPAYERS, not those who get everything back. If you are getting everything back, you aren't paying any taxes......
But alas, they passed it.............so it is a moot point, right? LOL...

^^^People who pay the taxes are probably already contributing to the economy. The problem is that those annoying poor people wrecked the economy again by being poor and not buying enough stuff. So they are giving the money to the poor people to buy stuff. It's a pretty shitty plan. Especially when you consider that it is actually the rich people making people poor. I can think of lots of ways to improve the economy. Raising minimum wage would be an excellent start and it wouldn't cost the US Government anything.

^^^People who pay the taxes are probably already contributing to the economy. The problem is that those annoying poor people wrecked the economy again by being poor and not buying enough stuff. So they are giving the money to the poor people to buy stuff. It's a pretty shitty plan. Especially when you consider that it is actually the rich people making people poor. I can think of lots of ways to improve the economy. Raising minimum wage would be an excellent start and it wouldn't cost the US Government anything.

Totally agree with you there:tu

oh I am all for them raising minimum wage even if I am not working at the present time. But I know we spend plenty of money so it would be nice to get some back too. Maybe it is a crappy plan for some reasons but I for one am glad that it passed and that we can get some extra money out of it.

Unfortunately, when the min. wage is raised so is everything else. It is a vicious cycle.

^^^People who pay the taxes are probably already contributing to the economy. The problem is that those annoying poor people wrecked the economy again by being poor and not buying enough stuff. So they are giving the money to the poor people to buy stuff. It's a pretty shitty plan. Especially when you consider that it is actually the rich people making people poor. I can think of lots of ways to improve the economy. Raising minimum wage would be an excellent start and it wouldn't cost the US Government anything.

How do you figure that to be true?

^^^People who pay the taxes are probably already contributing to the economy. The problem is that those annoying poor people wrecked the economy again by being poor and not buying enough stuff. So they are giving the money to the poor people to buy stuff. It's a pretty shitty plan. Especially when you consider that it is actually the rich people making people poor. I can think of lots of ways to improve the economy. Raising minimum wage would be an excellent start and it wouldn't cost the US Government anything.

How is the heck do you expect poor people to be able to buy anything. They cant buy enough stuff to begin with. And what is your version of who is or isnt poor? Now for people who dont make enough money but are trying and making efforts to do better but no one will hire them I dont have any problem with them getting help but its people who sit on their butts and dont do a damn thing to make themselves better and get a job or who sponge off welfare and keep pumping out babies to take advantage of welfare I dont think those people should get a dime. It should be for people who have been taxpayers or who are taxpayers no matter if they are poor or middle class and there is a limit to who will be getting the rebates. I know I read that couples making up to 150,000 and i think it said either single people making up to 75,000 or something like that. But I also think its nice that they are including Vets too.

^^^People who pay the taxes are probably already contributing to the economy. The problem is that those annoying poor people wrecked the economy again by being poor and not buying enough stuff. So they are giving the money to the poor people to buy stuff. It's a pretty shitty plan. Especially when you consider that it is actually the rich people making people poor. I can think of lots of ways to improve the economy. Raising minimum wage would be an excellent start and it wouldn't cost the US Government anything.

Annoying poor people?? How the hell are they supposed to have money to buy things?

Actually to answer the OP question I dont think its right to block the senior citizens or disabled vets from getting the tax rebate either. The senior citizens who have worked in the past are just as much entitled and so are the disabled vets. I think it would be a shame to not include the disabled vets.

Annoying poor people?? How the hell are they supposed to have money to buy things?

thats what I said too. if you are poor you cant buy crap. thats a sad thing for someone to say about people who are poor.

Everybody just hush, before the government wises up. I want that money!:lmao

she is being sarcastic. of course if you are poor you are spending your money on other things.

she is being sarcastic. of course if you are poor you are spending your money on other things.

who was being sarcastic?

Annoying poor people?? How the hell are they supposed to have money to buy things?

I read what she said to be sarcasm ;)

who was being sarcastic?
viva over her poor people not spending money.
The point being that if you give a "poor" person and a "rich" person the same amount of money, the poor person will spend it on stuff because they have to. The rich person will invest it/save it because they have most of their income to buy stuff when they need it.

I dont think it was meant as sarcasm. I said the same thing and I wasnt being sarcastic. I was saying how can poor people be expected to buy more stuff when they dont have the money to buy more stuff? I dont see how Kara was being sarcastic.

I spend money all year round anyways, so the rebate check will be going to my savings.

viva over her poor people not spending money.
The point being that if you give a "poor" person and a "rich" person the same amount of money, the poor person will spend it on stuff because they have to. The rich person will invest it/save it because they have most of their income to buy stuff when they need it.

oh okay I thought someone meant that Kara was being sarcastic. ok i got confused there for a second. but it was still wrong for her to call poor people annoying.

Because I have read a lot of Viva's posts, I am 99% sure she was being facetious. SHE wasn't calling them annoying.

Annoying poor people?? How the hell are they supposed to have money to buy things?

LOL. Yeah I was being sarcastic. Sorry about that. Here is the thing about the economy... the government gives all these incentives to rich people corporations and business owners. These people care about profit. So they pay the minimum amount of money to their employees and try to make as much profit as they can by hiring as few people as they can. (Thats just good business) Unfortunately, it hurts the people at the bottom. When you starve the workers and they barely have enough money to survive, as the case is now, then they cannot buy your products and the economy stalls. Businesses don't seem to consider this problem in advance when they are moving their jobs overseas, for example.

The irony is that our government and the corporations blame the poor people for this problem, even though they have way more control over it than the poor do, obviously. And since this is that "land of opportunity" nobody seems to feel bad for poor people who are essentially just victims of our ridiculous system.

Thats why the rebate crap isn't going to work. You can give poor people $1000, but that doesn't make them gainfully employed. No matter what they spend that money on they will still be poor next month.

LOL. Yeah I was being sarcastic. Sorry about that. Here is the thing about the economy... the government gives all these incentives to rich people corporations and business owners. These people care about profit. So they pay the minimum amount of money to their employees and try to make as much profit as they can by hiring as few people as they can. (Thats just good business) Unfortunately, it hurts the people at the bottom. When you starve the workers and they barely have enough money to survive, as the case is now, then they cannot buy your products and the economy stalls. Businesses don't seem to consider this problem in advance when they are moving their jobs overseas, for example.

The irony is that our government and the corporations blame the poor people for this problem, even though they have way more control over it than the poor do, obviously. And since this is that "land of opportunity" nobody seems to feel bad for poor people who are essentially just victims of our ridiculous system.

Thats why the rebate crap isn't going to work. You can give poor people $1000, but that doesn't make them gainfully employed. No matter what they spend that money on they will still be poor next month.

:tu:tu:tu

That is exactly why they are blocking it. Some are trying to put more into ths than there needs to be. Another example of piggy backing crap trying to make the other side look bad:no

ITA and that's all I'm saying. I"m so tired of the side bashings.

Thats why the rebate crap isn't going to work. You can give poor people $1000, but that doesn't make them gainfully employed. No matter what they spend that money on they will still be poor next month.

Even if the minimum wage was increased yet again, that is no guarantee people are going to work. Sometimes it's easier for them to stay home and be a couch check collector. At the agency I work for we have people that turn down jobs ALL THE TIME because they would "make too much money" and would not continue to get their Gov't subsidy. So I can't put much stock in the fact that "Corporate America" is at fault for all the poor people, sometimes they are that way because the WANT to be, because it's EASIER to collect your monthly check then get a job.

This whole "refund" thing is a crock. Tax payers getting a loan off the money the Government already takes from you anyhow. I wish there was a way to "opt" out of it. Seriously.

Even if the minimum wage was increased yet again, that is no guarantee people are going to work. Sometimes it's easier for them to stay home and be a couch check collector. At the agency I work for we have people that turn down jobs ALL THE TIME because they would "make too much money" and would not continue to get their Gov't subsidy. So I can't put much stock in the fact that "Corporate America" is at fault for all the poor people, sometimes they are that way because the WANT to be, because it's EASIER to collect your monthly check then get a job.

This whole "refund" thing is a crock. Tax payers getting a loan off the money the Government already takes from you anyhow. I wish there was a way to "opt" out of it. Seriously.

Not to be a jerk, but that makes sense to me. If you only have healthcare because of medicaid and you get offered a job that would take medicaid away from you -- then by taking the job you are losing your healthcare. Sick people CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THAT. Getting a job that pays $5 an hour would not even begin to cover the medical bills that a sick person incurs! When you are faced with working or medical care for your child... the choice is rather simple. Our medicaid and welfare system is set up in such a way that the rewards for not working are better than the rewards for working.

If it was between keeping my daughters healthcare and getting a crappy minimum wage job then I would keep the medicaid. (She has over $1200 in medical expenses a month so the job wouldn't cover that.) We should set up those programs to benefit the people if they do work instead of the opposite.

Even if the minimum wage was increased yet again, that is no guarantee people are going to work. Sometimes it's easier for them to stay home and be a couch check collector. At the agency I work for we have people that turn down jobs ALL THE TIME because they would "make too much money" and would not continue to get their Gov't subsidy. So I can't put much stock in the fact that "Corporate America" is at fault for all the poor people, sometimes they are that way because the WANT to be, because it's EASIER to collect your monthly check then get a job.

This whole "refund" thing is a crock. Tax payers getting a loan off the money the Government already takes from you anyhow. I wish there was a way to "opt" out of it. Seriously.



Well thats why I think that people who are on welfare should have a time frame to find a job so they dont keep collecting checks each month. I think that those who dont put forth any effort to try to find a job even if its something at mcdonalds shouldnt be allowed to keep getting welfare checks but I know that will never happen because there will be kids who wont be getting the things and care that they need.

So who really is to blame for the poor people being poor.

And I dont see how this is a loan. Unless we do have to pay taxes on the money they are giving us. If its a freebie then is it really a loan?

Not to be a jerk, but that makes sense to me. If you only have healthcare because of medicaid and you get offered a job that would take medicaid away from you -- then by taking the job you are losing your healthcare. Sick people CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THAT. Getting a job that pays $5 an hour would not even begin to cover the medical bills that a sick person incurs! When you are faced with working or medical care for your child... the choice is rather simple. Our medicaid and welfare system is set up in such a way that the rewards for not working are better than the rewards for working.

If it was between keeping my daughters healthcare and getting a crappy minimum wage job then I would keep the medicaid. (She has over $1200 in medical expenses a month so the job wouldn't cover that.) We should set up those programs to benefit the people if they do work instead of the opposite.




I can agree with you that its rather sad that its better to not take a 5.00 an hour job and not be able to afford the medical bills and to just stay home and not work and be able to get checks from the gov to pay the medical bills. Its sad but I see your point. But thats just wrong. They need to come up with some kind of program to where people can get a job but yet still be able to afford their healthcare too.

Not to be a jerk, but that makes sense to me. If you only have healthcare because of medicaid and you get offered a job that would take medicaid away from you -- then by taking the job you are losing your healthcare. Sick people CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THAT. Getting a job that pays $5 an hour would not even begin to cover the medical bills that a sick person incurs! When you are faced with working or medical care for your child... the choice is rather simple. Our medicaid and welfare system is set up in such a way that the rewards for not working are better than the rewards for working.

If it was between keeping my daughters healthcare and getting a crappy minimum wage job then I would keep the medicaid. (She has over $1200 in medical expenses a month so the job wouldn't cover that.) We should set up those programs to benefit the people if they do work instead of the opposite.

Very true, my friend goes through this. she can get a little bit better paying job with either expensive health benefits or no health benefits. Or she can continue working crap ass jobs to keep what little benefits she can get. She can't make enough to cover what she loses with a slightly better paying job.

LOL. Yeah I was being sarcastic. Sorry about that. Here is the thing about the economy... the government gives all these incentives to rich people corporations and business owners. These people care about profit. So they pay the minimum amount of money to their employees and try to make as much profit as they can by hiring as few people as they can. (Thats just good business) Unfortunately, it hurts the people at the bottom. When you starve the workers and they barely have enough money to survive, as the case is now, then they cannot buy your products and the economy stalls. Businesses don't seem to consider this problem in advance when they are moving their jobs overseas, for example.

The irony is that our government and the corporations blame the poor people for this problem, even though they have way more control over it than the poor do, obviously. And since this is that "land of opportunity" nobody seems to feel bad for poor people who are essentially just victims of our ridiculous system.

Thats why the rebate crap isn't going to work. You can give poor people $1000, but that doesn't make them gainfully employed. No matter what they spend that money on they will still be poor next month.
:thumbsup :yes

Not to be a jerk, but that makes sense to me. If you only have healthcare because of medicaid and you get offered a job that would take medicaid away from you -- then by taking the job you are losing your healthcare. Sick people CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THAT. Getting a job that pays $5 an hour would not even begin to cover the medical bills that a sick person incurs! When you are faced with working or medical care for your child... the choice is rather simple. Our medicaid and welfare system is set up in such a way that the rewards for not working are better than the rewards for working.

If it was between keeping my daughters healthcare and getting a crappy minimum wage job then I would keep the medicaid. (She has over $1200 in medical expenses a month so the job wouldn't cover that.) We should set up those programs to benefit the people if they do work instead of the opposite.

BUT..that is just it, it' not a crappy $5.00 an hour job, it could be a $10.00 an hour job with BENEFITS because we offer them as does the regular employer and they WON'T take it because they would have to give up the Government Cheese. IT's not about Medicaid it's about being LAZY and not wanting to work...why should they when they can get it for free??

And I dont see how this is a loan. Unless we do have to pay taxes on the money they are giving us. If its a freebie then is it really a loan?

YEP..it's a loan on YOUR money. It will be taken out of your tax return next year.

YEP..it's a loan on YOUR money. It will be taken out of your tax return next year.

Taken out of your tax return, or just added to your income total?

Last time it was added on as non-taxable income or something like that and it came off your returns bottom line. It seems that this time around will be the same thing based on the articles.

BUT..that is just it, it' not a crappy $5.00 an hour job, it could be a $10.00 an hour job with BENEFITS because we offer them as does the regular employer and they WON'T take it because they would have to give up the Government Cheese. IT's not about Medicaid it's about being LAZY and not wanting to work...why should they when they can get it for free??

Yeah because a $10 job is still not enough to pay medical bills. Sorry. For us it really is between paying the medical bills or paying the *real* bills. Our choice is seriously between paying medical bills and being homeless. And medicaid covers everything. Even a job with "good benefits" just gives you an insurance company that pays nothing for anything.

Do you know a yearly pap costs $800??? I do because last time my insurance company told me they would cover it and then the didn't - of course they had a WONDERFUL excuse about how the doctor didn't do the paperwork correctly. $800 just so I can have some birth control. And I HAD insurance. So yeah, some crappy $10 job (even with insurance) DOESN'T COVER THAT. Everyone thinks Tricare is so shitty, but the bottom line is now when I get sick I don't go to the doctor at all. I suffer. Maybe Tricare had crappy docs and crappy service but it sure beat all the NOTHING I have now.

Yeah because a $10 job is still not enough to pay medical bills. Sorry. For us it really is between paying the medical bills or paying the *real* bills. Our choice is seriously between paying medical bills and being homeless. And medicaid covers everything. Even a job with "good benefits" just gives you an insurance company that pays nothing for anything.

Do you know a yearly pap costs $800??? I do because last time my insurance company told me they would cover it and then the didn't - of course they had a WONDERFUL excuse about how the doctor didn't do the paperwork correctly. $800 just so I can have some birth control. And I HAD insurance. So yeah, some crappy $10 job (even with insurance) DOESN'T COVER THAT. Everyone thinks Tricare is so shitty, but the bottom line is now when I get sick I don't go to the doctor at all. I suffer. Maybe Tricare had crappy docs and crappy service but it sure beat all the NOTHING I have now.

Sorry..but not every company offers shitty benefits that does not cover everything, if you think that, that is sad. And FYI in Corpus Christi a $10 an hour job is a good job, it's all relative to where you live.

It still is going to boil down to the fact that SOME people prefer to sit on their asses and feel like they are OWED something from the Government. You seem to be missing that fact because you can't get past the fact that YOU personally have medical bills that a "crappy" $10 an hour job won't help pay. $10 an hour is better than nothing....and better than mooching off the Government in some cases.

I honestly don't think they were trying to stop it for just those people. I think there were some things they didn't agree with. They wanted to make sure the money was for legal citizens, not for the coal companies, and other little things. It seemed like there were extras tacked on just to push them through.

Don't know.

:agree

When you read past the top few paragraphs that paint the republicans in an ugly light, you see why it stalled...

1. The Democrats made it "take it or leave it" and Republicans weren't able to come back with suggested changes. Since there were things in the bill with which they disagreed, they had to vote against the entire package.

2. All through the article it says that Republicans support the measures for Seniors and Veterans.

I think you have to read the ENTIRE article before jumping on the bandwagon...

Yeah because a $10 job is still not enough to pay medical bills. Sorry. For us it really is between paying the medical bills or paying the *real* bills. Our choice is seriously between paying medical bills and being homeless. And medicaid covers everything. Even a job with "good benefits" just gives you an insurance company that pays nothing for anything.

Do you know a yearly pap costs $800??? I do because last time my insurance company told me they would cover it and then the didn't - of course they had a WONDERFUL excuse about how the doctor didn't do the paperwork correctly. $800 just so I can have some birth control. And I HAD insurance. So yeah, some crappy $10 job (even with insurance) DOESN'T COVER THAT. Everyone thinks Tricare is so shitty, but the bottom line is now when I get sick I don't go to the doctor at all. I suffer. Maybe Tricare had crappy docs and crappy service but it sure beat all the NOTHING I have now.



I am just curious. I am confused about something? are you no longer affliated with the military or something because if you were you would have Tricare and wouldnt have to worry about medical bills like that.

Do you think that its right that the republicans are trying to block the added senior citizens, disabled vets, etc part to it?

I think it makes me sick. My dad is a DV who has the worst back issues ever and pretty much lives t the va hospital for appointments. So should he be denied things? Does he not spend into the enconomy?

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/06/news/economy/stimulus_senate.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008020619?cnn=yes

They should just include everyone. Then it is fair. A friend said she read yesterday that this is going to affect our refund for next year. Did you read that?

Sorry..but not every company offers shitty benefits that does not cover everything, if you think that, that is sad. And FYI in Corpus Christi a $10 an hour job is a good job, it's all relative to where you live.

It still is going to boil down to the fact that SOME people prefer to sit on their asses and feel like they are OWED something from the Government. You seem to be missing that fact because you can't get past the fact that YOU personally have medical bills that a "crappy" $10 an hour job won't help pay. $10 an hour is better than nothing....and better than mooching off the Government in some cases.

Do the research. Most people on welfare stay on it an average of only 2 years. Welfare is crappy and you barely get anything. Anybody even with even a slight medical condition (like asthma) wouldn't be able to pay their medical bills. When doctors charge $300 just to see you the bills can easily be $50,000 per year, more than an average persons salary. I have had 4 different insurance companies since Tricare and they have all refused to pay for things and left me holding the bag for THOUSANDS in medical bills.

I have done EXTENSIVE RESEARCH on the insurance industry and I think that they are murderers. All of them. Every company. Every employee. They are engaging in murder for profit and I do take it quite personally that my daughter is caught in the crossfire suffering over it. If it were your child you would feel the same way.

Everyone should be absolutely enraged about what is going on with this issue. Your fellow Americans are being dying of treatable illnesses in the "greatest country in the world" when we have more than enough money to help them. Instead of feeling bad for them we talk shizz about them for being "lazy moochers" >??? Sorry thats not very Jesus-like. We can pay billions in corporate welfare and we spend more money on our military than all industrialized nations put together. Meanwhile the military "misplaces" 2.7 BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR. And the poor people are the greedy, lazy ones? The government is literally losing our money and giving it away to rich people.

$10 an hour is not better than making sure your child gets the medical treatment they need. It doesn't matter where you live. And I do believe that everyone is "owed" medical treatment when they are sick, its an atrocious violation of human rights not to help the sick. My daughter is literally becoming deformed and may eventually become unable to walk because I am poor. I have no choice but to watch my child endure chronic pain while she is becoming crippled. It is all completely treatable and preventable. I am totally going to be "mooching" the medicaid system. So yeah I think its offensive to say that poor people are irresponsible and lazy. I am far from irresponsible and lazy. I have been fighting insurance companies for years and I just realized that defrauding the government is really the ONLY way to get help.

I am just curious. I am confused about something? are you no longer affliated with the military or something because if you were you would have Tricare and wouldnt have to worry about medical bills like that.

My husband got out of the military and my daughter was diagnosed a year later. We had private insurance through his company. I thought they were "good" insurance. They weren't.

Sorry your getting screwed, but not everyone does. And there are SOME poor people that are lazy and mooching, you may not be one of them but they are out there.

Mooch away (as you said you would) at our Gov't asst if it makes you feel better, but I am not going to continue to fight this one out with you You are very bitter against the system itself and anyone that has an opinion that differs from yours.