Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
ace....I propose a deal, with you....
I'll support your "every state on it's own"....independently raising taxes to sustain it's own programs....and when your changes take effect...and the impact of them is felt..... I have your approval to leaflet the residents of these two states:
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/prof...6&cat=1&ind=10
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/prof...0&cat=1&ind=10
.....to inform and encourage them to move to your county. I'll use a catchy slogan like..... there is more quality of life and better opportunity awaiting in ace's county.....even if I have to camp in a vacant lot there....or sleep on a park bench....than there is living where I live now..... |
I have not updated my profile but I live in North Carolina now. I moved for a number of reasons including the cost of living. When I was doing research on various places, I was intrigued by the wide difference in the cost of living between the various states.
Again the data you reference requires more analysis prior to reaching accurate conclusions. Certainly the national poverty level is an interesting number, but it is more or less an average. I am certain that what is hardly livable in Ventura County, California would be a good standard of living in Mississippi.
Also, don't misinterpret my position. If people in a state are sending money to Washington to support a state program, then Washington sends the money back, at the very least less will come back to the state just to cover the Federal overhead. That is wasteful. If a state needs to be subsidized for some reason, call it what it is. Otherwise national issues are national issues. Health, education and welfare of children is a national issue in my opinion. Every child in this country should have food, clothing, shelter, education, medical, and a responsible and caring guardian or parent(s). I have no sympathy for adults who have made poor choices unless they are disabled or a senior citizen. My view is not complicated.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rekna
It is funny now that the dems have changed the bill to address GOP concerns the GOP are still voting against it. It is clear that the GOP have taken an obstructionist stance in politics. The best way to deal with obstructionists is to vote them out.
|
They have not changed the things that are the most problematic. The program will still be a mess relative to what could be done. Is it your opinion that the bill is as good as it could be? Do you this this approach is the best approach to making sure children have health care coverage?