So now with my taxed insuring kids -- I can supervise their lifestyle, eating habits, etc.
Posted By: Patti on 2007-10-03
In Reply to: Senate passes Children's Health Plan - Great news imo! (see msg) kam
Insurance premiums for kids only are not that expensive, adults can go without if they want their children to have insurance. Why should I pay for that. So now, if my tax dollars are going for that, can I go up to an overweight kid and start monitoring their diet, can I watch what they eat, make sure that they get enough exercise, not be exposed to second hand smoke, etc. Because if the government starts to provide everything for these kids, pretty soon they will be telling everyone what to feed, how to exercise, and everything else. Why don't we just hand over our paychecks to the government and they can just take care of us.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Number one, less peole SHOULD eat at McDonalds, some of the most unhealthy eating habits...sm
of this country, contributing to the obesity problem and the rising cost of healthcare. Come on, EVERYONE deserves an honest living wage where they can feed, clothe, and house their families, and that is just not happening, in the NorthEast I see it every day, most families are working two or three jobs, really good for the children and marriages, I respectfully think that is Bull (which it tastes like McDonald's and other fast food places put in their burgers). JMHO
If Palin is unable to supervise her young ones, how can she supervise a nation?
When I saw the picture of her daughter who is pregnant, my heart broke. She has the look of an adolescent. What in the world is she doing having sex? How could her mother miss the signs that her daughter was taking part in adult activity with dire consequences? Because she failed to provide supervision, this child woman will now be forced to forego a young adulthood in which Bristol discovers herself during the difficult phase called identity crisis all young people go through, disocvering the world and entering academia without the huge responsibility of raising a child, and making the choice of when to have a child when she is mature enough. This is a monumental failure.
Sigh....Republicans are not against insuring children...
they passed the bill the first time. They asked the Democrats in Congress to do like a 6-month or year extension on the program (keep it in place for another 6 months or a year) while they worked a new plan that more strictly administers it. For one thing, make it harder for illegal aliens to get their kids on it. Yes, millions, count them MILLIONS, of illegal aliens have their kids on the SCHIP program. If they want to go the path of citizenship and pay taxes like the rest of us then yes, their kids should be included. Things like that are why Bush wants to veto the bill. The Democrats wanted their bill or no bill, and would not agree to an extension. So you tell me who is the most at fault? Why extend a program as it is that is a drain and is not reaching the very people it should reach? That being American children, not children of illegal aliens, American children whose parents cannot afford insurance. Should that not be the focus of this program? People are so quick to judge, see a headline that says "Bush wants to veto bill for childrens health care" and don't even look into what the bill really says. All I am saying is, at some point, if we don't look at all the programs and trim the fat, one day no one will be able to afford anything past working to pay taxes for programs. When just under half your gross earnings already go to taxes, how much more do you think any of us can pay? That is all I am asking. Maybe we need to prioritize programs? That would be a start.
Are we going to pick on his toileting habits next?
How petty.
So you think you won't be taxed?
Taxes don't JUST come out of your paycheck..... you need to look at what you'll be paying for that Obama has put into place. He knows the average Joe will actually just look at their paycheck, not even thinking about where they're gonna be screwed in other places, i.e., taxes! The ONLY way to keep taxes down is to limit government spending..... how do you think that is going to happen when Obama has increased the size of government by leaps and bounds in just a few weeks?
How do you get up when you've been taxed to the
xx
Right, Sam! If businesses are taxed more, they are
nm
Tax break? I have been hearing we will all be taxed.
I have been hearing on the news, what about the middle class? Well, we will be taxed.
Aren't you sick to death of being taxed to
subsidize the wealthy? How 'bout congress getting $4700 in COLA to "subsidize" their housing? They don't need mansions to live in while doing their jobs in Wash, DC. They don't need the top to be driven by chauffers. They don't need to be treated to banquets and dinners because they do their jobs in Wash. Congressmen constantly say they are serving the American people, or are they getting rich off the backs of the middle class? IMO, it is the latter. Or, how 'bout subsidizing oil companies who have made outrageous profits? Those subsidies should come to an END, NOW! These handouts go both ways!
At one point in my life, newly divorced, I worked for minimum wage, raising two young children. Although I was very frugal, it was extremely tough making rent, utilities (old junk car, no car payment), and food. One night, I broke my elbow, could not work, had no money except child support. After hospitalization, called Welfare Dept, could not receive food stamps because I "made too much money the month before." End of story as far as Welfare Dept was concerned. So, my mom and dad helped me out with groceries for my two kids. So, as far as welfare handouts, I received none. So, in my experience, I don't know where your b*tch is!!
Since everyone is eating
and you can't find a place to park, can you explain this: 57% disapprove of Bush's handling of the economy? Oh, no, people aren't struggling.
The Associated Press/NEW YORK
By ANNE D'INNOCENZIO
AP Business Writer
Consumer confidence sinks in September
SEP. 27 4:27 P.M. ET Consumer confidence suffered its biggest drop in 15 years in September as Hurricane Katrina made Americans anxious about the rising costs of heating their homes and filling their gas tanks. The decline raised questions about consumer spending for the rest of this year, including the holiday shopping season.
Meanwhile, the government reported Tuesday that new home sales plunged in August by the largest amount in nine months, continuing a string of mixed signals about the health of the housing boom.
The Conference Board said its Consumer Confidence Index, compiled from a survey of U.S. households, dropped 18.9 points to 86.6 from a revised reading of 105.5 in August.
That marked the biggest slide since October 1990, when the index fell 23 points to 62.6 amid the onset of the recession, the buildup to the first Gulf war and a spike in gasoline prices. The September reading was also the lowest level since October 2003, when it registered 81.7.
Analysts had expected the September reading to be 98.
Wall Street took the news of both reports fairly well. The Dow Jones industrial average, up about 30 points before the index was released, fell into negative territory but was only marginally lower.
The Commerce Department said new home sales fell 9.9 percent last month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.24 million units. Even with the slowdown, the median sales price rose 2.5 percent from July's level to $220,300. The bigger-than-projected drop in new home sales could signal that the nation's red-hot housing market is starting to slow down, but reports so far are mixed.
In Washington, Republicans were assessing the political impact of the numbers, particularly the drop in consumer confidence, saying it gives them more reason to worry about next year's elections.
These are serious numbers, said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., a political operative-turned-congressman, referring to the consumer confidence figures. The question is whether this is a trend or a reaction to Katrina and Rita.
Cole said he suspects the public's mood will improve by this time next year when Republicans, who control Congress and the White House, will face the judgment of an uneasy electorate. But in the intervening months, he said, the political consequences of consumer anxiety are real serious.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Republicans are on the defensive. Any time our approval ratings go down we have problems. That's why we're working on Katrina. That's why we're working on Rita, he said.
The latest AP-Ipsos Poll, conducted Sept. 6-8, showed more Americans are uneasy about President Bush's handling of the economy. The poll found that 41 percent of respondents approved the president's handling of the economy, while 57 percent disapproved and 1 percent were not sure. That rating is the lowest since January 2002, when Ipsos began tracking Bush's approval ratings.
The drop in consumer confidence, which followed an unexpected gain in August, also raised concerns about shoppers' ability to spend in the critical fall and holiday seasons with gas prices expected to remain at $3 per gallon. That's due to tight supplies and the fact it may take weeks to restart refineries that closed due to Hurricane Rita.
Even before Katrina slammed into the Gulf Coast Aug. 29, consumers were struggling to fit higher gasoline prices into their budgets, with that strain showing up in August's modest retail sales gains. Sales have been disappointing again this month, and analysts are concerned that consumers will further retrench when they start paying home heating bills.
Economists closely track consumer confidence because consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of all U.S. economic activity.
Today's numbers show that consumers are not very optimistic about the economy. As a result, we will see consumer spending reduced until we see some relief on energy prices, said Gary Thayer, chief economist at A.G. Edwards & Sons. He added, If we don't get some relief, it looks like it will be a very weak holiday season.
Thayer wasn't as concerned about home sales report, saying the sector was due for a cooling off. However, he doesn't think the housing market is headed for a bust.
Scott Hoyt, director of consumer economics, at Economy.com, was more upbeat about consumers, warning against reading too much into September's confidence figures. He noted that the key fundamentals for spending -- employment and income -- are holding up.
We need to be careful not to overstate the potential (of consumer confidence) on consumer spending, he said.
While there have been job losses along the Gulf Coast as a result of Katrina's fallout, economists predict overall healthy job gains of 169,000 when the Labor Department reports its figures Oct. 7.
Still, how fast consumer sentiment will rebound to the 100 reading seen over the past year remains to be seen.
Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board's Consumer Research Center, noted that as rebuilding efforts in the aftermath of Katrina take hold and job growth gains momentum, confidence should return to more positive levels by year-end or early 2006.
--------
AP Political Writer Ron Fournier in Washington contributed to this report.
------
On the Net:
http://www.conferenceboard.org
Commerce Department: http://www.doc.gov
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8CSQMEG0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down&chan=db
Nothing's eating at me
I'm just having fun watching the wacky reactions of an unhinged leftist. It's kind of like watching a nature show...entertaining.
He IS EATING IT UP!
He loves making his speeches and being in the center of attention. He is a ME, ME, ME.
I don't believe it is a lifestyle CHOICE, but, sm
even if it were, it is none of your business. EVERYONE is entitled to equal rights under the law.
Lifestyle choices
Just wondering where the line should be drawn.
For some people this is a lifestyle
and raising the minimum wage is not going to change anything. Believe me, I understand your point, and I commend you for using the system for the purpose it was intended for, but I know people who have made a career out of collecting welfare and are doing a lot better than I am.
I was a single, struggling mom once (okay, I'm STILL struggling!), and I was grateful there was help available when I needed it most. But what I learned along the way was that making a "decent" living is not incentive enough to work when it's easier and more lucrative to accept free handouts. My husband and I can't afford to help our kids with college, but my girlfriend's kids both got a free ride from the state. We have to decide between paying the electricity bill and buying groceries some months, but she gets foostamps and eats steak five times a week, and her housing and utilites are 95% subsidized. We can't afford medical insurance but she and her kids have always had health coverage. Her kids' daycare was paid for while she went to school (for free) and got a degree that she never put to use in the work world because she was smart enough to realize it wouldn't benefit her in the long run. I think what I resented most through the years was that she got to stay home and spend quality time with her family while I was out working like a fool to make ends meet.
Her story unfortunately isn't the exception to the rule. The welfare system is broken and has been for YEARS. It's not going to change as long as it's comfortable to sit back and have all your needs met by a system that encourages you to do so, no matter what the minimum wage.
Sometimes I think nature has it right when the fledgling is tossed out of the nest and has to learn to fly on his own.
The "gay" lifestyle
is a perversion that most parents do not want for their children and it is dangerous for your health. Parents have no desire to control their children but they want better things for them than that type of "lifestyle." Homosexuality deprives parents of grandchildren and healthy children. You might as well inform your children of the "prostitution lifestyle, drug-induced lifestyle and criminal lifestyle" as well. Those are all just as dangerous as a "homosexual lifestyle." I would much rather have a "bigotted" child than a dead one.
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
Supports his lifestyle?
So you're saying if he's poor, he won't be gay anymore??? You don't have to have money to be gay. How are you supporting his lifestyle?
crow eating
that was me :-P lol
I hope you didn't take it offensively!
Crow eating s/m
Well, may as well start cooking up the crow. When Obama appoints Hillary SOS I'll start eating. HOWEVER, I still maintain that McCain would also have been more of the same. I fear we're under Bush/Clinton dictatorship and any "change" Obama makes is likely to be just to carry on their agenda which is to sell out American IMHO. Maybe we'd all better develop a taste for real crow as that may be all that's left for us to eat.
Sorry you don't like eating your words
You said that God takes life because the the person made the wrong choices. Obviously, that bike you ride doesn't pedal as comfortably backwards, does it?
Ever consider you and your lifestyle is just 1 or 2 layoffs away from poverty?
What if you're laid off, maybe your jobs are sent out of the country and you can't find another job. Would you be too proud to take a handout from the government in the form of unemployment benefits? Maybe food stamps so you could eat. Judge not...............
Not everyone is looking to have you and your cohorts fork over part of your paycheck so they don't have to work. Think overpaid CEOs. Think companies (also MT companies) who send jobs out of the country so they can bloat their bottom line and put more in THEIR paycheck while taking it out of YOUR paycheck. Isn't that what's being done already? Is your MT pay getting better......or worse?
YOUR almighty lifestyle is what's deviant.
?
Well we were talking about eating and manners. sm
At least I was.
the snack you can't stop eating
slime
You can't compare race vs. a deviant lifestyle.
x
How is listening to his music exposing her to his lifestyle? nm
x
Listening to his music won't expose her to his lifestyle; however,
purchasing his CDs directly or indirectly supports his lifestyle.
I like Melissa Etheridge's music, but I have never purchased a CD.
I hope that in 4 years you will be eating your words. nm
.
Turkeys are for eating. Embryos and fetuses are
for loving, growing, giving birth to, nurturing, seeing smile for the first time, seeing walk for the first time, celebrating birthday parties with, chasing butterflies with, reading books to, hugging and kissing daily, taking to preschool, graduating kindergarten, running with friends on the playground, learning and developing opinions, going to camp with, fishing with, swimming with, sledding with, snowball fighting with, celebrating report cards with, taking to his/her first dance, first kiss, first date, surviving high school with, graduation, college/military/vocation, finding that special someone, landing a great job, getting married themselves, having more babies to continue that love......
It's called the next generation.
I suppose that you personally "know" he's eating it up. Get real!
Geez, I guess if negativity were wealth, you people must be stinkin' rich. LOL
You're still eating aren't you? Lets pick this back
Or maybe you know enoug folks that will be getting the free handouts and can live off of them, like I see going on around my town already.
Just teach "no bullying" PERIOD and leave the lifestyle crap out of it.
I'm sorry, but you're very naive about what these children are actually being taught - i.e., that one family is "just like another" (there's a cute little song they sing about this), etc.
You want to teach kids not to be physically violent toward any other kids - fine. You go beyond that and start preaching the gospel of lifestyle equivalency and you're wandering off into the parents' domain.
Oh, yeah - I almost forgot. Get back to T E A C H I N G!!
pays her own kids way? I think that Alaska pays her kids way! nm
x
His Kids
I know the "C" story is true. As far as the kids go, he has 7 from what I understand. Two boys in the military and 1 or 2 adopted kids. I stated an opinion about his daughters because any man that would disrespect women the way he has (letting "H" be called the "B" word, laughing and not speaking against it, and then calling his wife a "C" publically), has no respect for women (which include his daughters). Then he comes out with this fake persona that he respects women and he welcomes their vote. Please --- anything to win.
We really would not have know about the kids other than
Palin herself putting them before the public like she did, kept the smaller 1 out of school and people questioned as to why they were not in school. Oh, now it is ne're-do-well beau. I remember what a warm reception he got from John welcoming him into the circle. All white trash, both sides.
Now really, kids!!
I think a lot of it has to do with the attempt to incite violence. While Olberman, Maddow, and the MSNBC crew may be left of center, they don't incite violence. Nor do I think Hannity falls into that category, either. Rush, Rev. Phelps, and Michael Savage are names that immediately pop into my head on the conservative end that seem to like to stir up crap. On the other side, I really wish we could find a way to export Sharpton, but I doubt any other country wants him anymore than I do.
Of course, WE are the country that denied Cat Stevens entrance, too, so I guess we can't get too holier than thou about Britain's keeping out the rabble rousers.
Kids - this is funny.
When Vífill Atlason, a 16-year-old high school student from Iceland, decided to call the White House, he could not imagine the kind of publicity it would bring.
Introducing himself as Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson, the actual president of Iceland, Atlason found President George W. Bush's allegedly secret telephone number and phoned, requesting a private meeting with him.
"I just wanted to talk to him, have a chat, invite him to Iceland and see what he'd say," Vífill told ABC News.
A White House official, who asked not to be identified, denied the young man had accessed a private number but instead dialled 202-456-1414, the main switchboard for the West Wing.
Vífill's mother, Harpa Hreinsdottir, a teacher at the local high school, said her son did, in fact, get through to a private phone.
"This was not a switchboard number of any kind," she told ABC News, "it was a secret number at the highest security level."
Vífill claims he was passed on to several people, each of them quizzing him on President Grímsson's date of birth, where he grew up, who his parents were and the date he entered office.
"It was like passing through checkpoints," he said. "But I had Wikipedia and a few other sites open, so it was not so difficult really."
When he finally got through to President Bush's secretary, Vífill alleges he was told to expect a call back from Bush.
"She told me the president was not available at the time, but that she would mark it in his schedule to call me back on Monday evening," he said.
Instead, the police showed up at his home in Akranes, a fishing town about 48 kilometers from Reykjavik, and took him to the local police station, where they questioned the 16-year-old for several hours.
"The police chief said they were under orders from U.S. officials to "find the leak" -- that I had to tell them where I had found the number," he said. "Otherwise, I would be banned from ever entering the United States."
Vífill claims he cannot remember where he got the number.
"I just know I have had it for a few years," he told ABC. "I must have gotten it from a friend when I was about 11 or 12."
Atlason's mother Harpa, who was not home at the time, said she was shocked to find her son had been taken away by the police but could not quite bring herself to be angry with her son.
"He's very resourceful you know," she said. "He has become a bit of a hero in Iceland. Bush is very unpopular here."
Vífill was eventually released into his parent's custody, and no charges have been brought against the high school student.
When ABC verified the number, it was the Secret Service Uniform Division, which handles security for the president.
"If the number were not top secret, why would the police have told me that I will be put on a no-fly list to America?" Vífill asked.
"I don't see how calling the White House is a crime," he added. "But obviously, they took it very seriously."
Calls to the Secret Service press office were not returned.
Maybe the kind that has 3 kids
already and the 4th pregnancy could put her life in peril. Does she allow her other children to go motherless?
Maybe the kind who underwent extensive testing and was told that her child would be born limbless or so developmentally delayed that any kind of life would be miserable?
Maybe the kind who was raped and does not want to bear the child of a rapist, whether she would be able to put the child up for adoption or not.
A woman's body is her body. No one should have the right to tell her what to do with it. There are many reasons to have an abortion. I personally feel that in the above cases, an abortion is a reasonable option. I certainly wouldn't wish any of the scenarios above on anyone. Outlawing abortion in general is wrong. If you want to prevent it from being used as a form of birth control, then by all means put limitations on it, but don't outlaw it completely. Sometimes it is the only choice.
Not pro-abortion but definitely pro-choice. There is a difference.
THis is not about taking anything away from kids...they
still have access to birth control...health departments, planned parenthood, clinics, any number of places. It is common knowledge. You hear about it on television on a daily basis, and television, movies, and the internet are where most kids get their information. And frankly, listen to it much more closely than to their parents. Throwing more federal money into any kind of sex ed and/or abstinence programs to me is a waste of money. That was the original question, did I think federal funds should be used for sex ed and abstinence programs.
No, in this culture we live in today, to remove contraception would be idiotic. Sex has been reduced to "expression," having one partner for life has disappeared, multiple partners are fine, yada yada...in that kind of culture to remove birth control would be nuts. Think what the abortion rate would be if that was done...good grief.
By education and programs that doesn't mean dispensing actual birth control. At many schools kids can get condoms. Nearly every health department in the country will dispense birth control and any planned parenthood place will, and that is not going to change.
If you want to reach kids, put those programs on the internet or introduce that kind of information to the shows the kids watch all the time. If you want the information to get to them, that is where it should be covered.
almost 700 kids in 1 cemetary
http://www.careforkidsnow.com/index_files/news.htm
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/14-Mar-2007.html
But the conversation is about kids who are having
things done without the parents' knowledge.
If what kids see is what they think is normal
then where did the gay people come from, assuming they had both a father and a mother?
On another note, I would rather have been raised by Rosie O'Donnell and her partner than my dysfunctional parents. They are much more "normal" than either of my parents.
The UN is not trying to tell anyone how to raise their kids.
in the idea of addressing global poverty. BTW, you need to do a little boning up yourself on the purpose of the United Nations, what it is, how it works and who benefits before expecting anybody anywhere to engage you in any serious debate on this subject. You have been spending way too much time hanging with the fringe. Trust me on this. There is life after fringe.
Why don't you let your kids decide for themselves
what they want to do. I'm glad I had responsible parents who taught me right from wrong, watched me grow, get married, but I also know that if I wanted to be gay they would love me still the same.
Unfortunately too many parents try to control every single aspect of their kids life, and the kids grow up as biggoted and unloving as their parents. Of course I'm not saying that is you, but you just see it too many times on TV.
Parents believe one thing, so they force their kids to believe the same thing, when all along the parents were pretty messed up.
You need to teach your kids on the different lifestyles people in America have and that's why it makes a great nation (or would you rather have the public floggings of gays like they do in the other countries because they don't share the same viewpoints as you). You need to teach your kids the different lifestyles and what it means as a lifestyle for them. Then let them make their own decisions as to what life they wish to choose for themselves.
You need to stop telling people to get a clue because you obviously don't have one.
Hey Kids! Run for President!
But if you screw up we will prosecute you and make sure you're labeled a criminal the rest of your life!!!
I hardly think that teaching kids...(sm)
how NOT to bash LGBTs is going to "force homosexuality upon your kids." Give me a break! They aren't teaching Peter how to kiss Paul. They're teaching Peter how not to beat up Paul. I think it's really sad that this actually has to be a lessen in school in the first place, and in grammar school at that --- not because of the LGBT issues being brought to light, but because of the parents who have obviously taught their kids that its okay to bash others who are different. How many times have you called an LGBT a bad name in front of your kids? Hmmm....
Lets take care of those kids already here
Some have such loud voices when trying to stop a woman from chosing what decisions to make about HER body but, yet, you hear nothing from these same people when it is shown there is so much child abuse, children living with drug and alcohol addicted parents, children living in poverty, not getting a good education, not getting the immunizations they need, not getting health care, on and on. Lets take care of those already on this earth..
I guess you can't think for yourself. I suppose the kids that just
got arrested for setting churches on fire were *indoctrinated* even though 2 of them are from a Methodist college? I guess it goes you show YOU fear *indoctriation* because you can't think for yourself.
It can end with affordable healthcare for kids.
I would like to see more affordable healthcare for all Americans, but really if kids got free or very affordable healthcare I would be happy. We spend outrageous amounts of money on the space program, the war, gourmet food for Congress, etc. I don't agree with the hoards of money going to those things, but I would think we could ALL AGREE on money being redirected to provide healthcare to all American children, because that is obviously a good and just cause.
Kids from families making as much as $83,000
Bush was lying about that, as the $83,000 income level limit was not a part of the bill that he vetoed. Also, Democrats already worked with Republicans and compromised quite a bit to come up with a bill that many in both parties agreed upon - too bad only one guy matters, huh? It's a sad day for many struggling middle-class families, but at least the issue has had a big spot light shined upon it - hopefully we can make some much-needed changes to make healthcare more affordable now. All kids deserve healthcare, regardless of how much money their parents make or don't make!!!
Here's a section of a New York Times Article that states that the $83,000 guideline was not a part of the bill that was just vetoed:
"This program expands coverage, federal coverage, up to families earning $83,000 a year. That doesn't sound poor to me," the president told the Lancaster audience.
Dorn says that's not exactly right, either. "This bill would actually put new limits in place to keep states from going to very high-income levels. SCHIP money would no longer be available over 300 percent of the federal poverty level, which is about $60,000 for a family of four."
The president gets to make the $83,000 claim because New York had wanted to allow children in families with incomes up to four times the poverty level onto the program. That is, indeed, $82,600. The Department of Health and Human Services rejected New York's plan last month, and under the bill, that denial would stand. White House officials warn, however, that the bill would allow a future administration to grant New York's request.
link to the entire article: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14962685
|
