Sugar is the new "Devil"

Meerataila

People want to work and have nice things

Are you sure about that?

Can you say it with 100% certainty that people want to work and have nice things because I have known plenty of people who lost jobs and sat back collecting unemployment -- and kept getting it extended when it ran out -- because they made more collecting than they did if they got another job. There are plenty of people who are capable of getting a job but they choose to sit back and stay on welfare because it's easier to hold your hand out and get money than it is to get off your butt and get a job.

I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.

The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?

Let me ask you a question. I work in 911 here in NYC. I've had days, where in one day I responded to a guy stabbed 16 times who we didn't let die, a guy shot in the leg, a drunk who's friend hit him in the head with a beer bottle and cut hit artery and a young boy playing football who broke his tibula in half, how much doe you think my job is worth doing? I wake up at 430am to go to work. Snowing a foot, my office doesn't close, because my office is the street, people will still need us.

How much should I demand before I accept going to work?

One thing I can guarantee to is i don't make anywhere near what I'm worth. What I deserve, for the role I play. Have you ever know what it's like to actually have someone's life in your hands? Like really, live or die if you get flustered?

Meerata,

Bumping my question because I'd like to hear what you think.

You would be one of the richest people in America under Participatory Economics.

Your job is dangerous, dirty, and unpleasant. What stumps me (because I'm just learning about parecon and it's an evolving idea anyway) is how your work would be divided or whether it would be.

In Parecon, %80 of work is skilled work, %20 is grunt work, and everyone must do that mix of both. So if I were a professor %80 of the time (a low paying job under Parecon) %20 of the time I might be responsible for cleaning the university toilets (higher paying but not as high as your job, because it's not dangerous, just gross).

But you are already working a mix of dirty grunt work and skilled work, so why have you switch your roles? Although you could do %20 training of other people and/or %20 of time in classes getting even more skilled, I guess. That would make sense even though it's a reversal of the 80/20.

Edit: I realize I misread this. I claim sun blindness (I just came in from the pool). I thought you were an EMT/first responder. A dispatcher wouldn't be quite as well paid, but still, the hours sound like they suck and the job sounds more onerous than professor (I personally think stress is a killer and stressful jobs should pay quite well). Now the people you send out, they'd be making big bucks, due to the danger.

bunnylion

For my reference:

Bottled water in South Africa 1.358 cents/ml
Soda 1.664 cents/ml

Are those US dollar cents? A small bottle of water is really around 6 bucks?
Good beer in Germany 0.17 cents/ml. Cheap beer is around 0.06 cents /ml around the same price as bottled water. That is Euro cents.

Meerataila

I'm not mixing anything. If you don't want to subsidize food so the poor can eat, I don't want to subsidize your military, police force, or National Guard. Hire protection or defend yourself.

You are mixing things

It is in constitutions both state and federal for those things....it is a government role...
It is not in those constitutions to influence the market place...
Or to take money from one group and give to another

And I do protect myself, I take advantage of the 2nd Amendment

Either you want taxation for society or not. If you don't, you're an old fashioned, all out anarchist. If you do, you're for government intervention. It's just a matter of your opinion on what government should be involved in vs mine. If we actually had real democracy we could find out what the majority of Americans really want. We don't. We have an oligarchy dressed as a Republic with a constitution that is conveniently ignored every time the real decision makers want something different.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION
It is written down in black ink on parchment, that government has a role in those areas.....
You live in this country, it is what our law states

Exactly
WE ARE A REPUBLIC, not a Democracy...
Democracy is mob rule....
it is 2 wolves and a sheep sitting and deciding what is for dinner

A Republic is
Two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner, but the sheep has a gun

I'd rather mob rule than rich rule, which is, if you know your history (and I suspect you're intelligent enough to know it) is what we've always had.

Oh boy. Really? The only reason you can say that is because of how far we have come as a society. If we were a mob rule government, minorities would never have a fair shot. Women's suffrage would have never happened. And people would still find a way to gain the system for their benefit.

I disagree. Bigotry arises from societies that take advantage of minority groups or groups lacking power in order to benefit the those in power. This is rampant in capitalist and fascist societies and can't exist at all without the ability to make a profit from the labor of another, which will not exist under a better system. You can make money off your own labor, never the labor of another.

But safeguards would be good to vote into place and I respect our society enough to believe that is immediately what would happen. First and foremost, no disenfranchisement of any group or person would be permitted, economically or politically. Everyone would have their voting power for their lifetime and under participatory economics everyone would have the greatest say in whatever working conditions affect them most.

Meerataila

I'm opposed to making humanity more vicious rather than more civilized by rewarding people with power for wealth accumulation. I see no reason why a Bush should have more decision making power in policies that affect my life than I do just because many great-great-grandaddy Bush's ago the family made a killing in the slave trade. I'd rather take my chances on direct democracy for anything that absolutely has to be decided on to maintain society together.

Thank you for the civil and intelligent discussion, though, hope you have a nice day! :flowerforyou:

well let's be fair (i am no fan of the Bush family)
But there are wealthy on both sides of the political spectrum.
Clinton's are doing just fine
Gore is doing just fine
Obama is worth millons
Nancy Pelosi is worth a TON
Harry Reid, ditto

So let's just say politicians......not just direct it at one family.

I see no reason why 535 ppl have the ability to determine and make choices for my life in general....outside of what is in the constitution.

Yep, been a great discussion

You just named a whole crop of politicians I despise every bit as much as I despised Bush. I'm done with representative democracy unless we can recall them and bring them up on criminal charges when they fail to do what they promise (impractical). I'd rather we create the laws and vote on them together. And the technology will now allow us to do that. Is it perfect? Heck no! It could be really chancy at times. But it beats what we have now.

extra_medium

Joining the "Weepy, left wing commie 'murica-hating sissy government sheep " in the pro "sin" taxes corner.

Where I'm from (not 'merica) the taxes are pretty darn high, on most thing actually, but the benefits are substantial. We have FREE health care and free education for everyone so there is nothing stopping anyone from getting the help they need or the education they desire. Just sayin

It ain't "Free", you are paying for it in many ways....and not just taxes.

and here in "merica", no one is turned down for health care.
Hospitals cannot turn a person away it is against the law, so they are forced to treat people.
Regardless if the person can or cannot pay

What you are referring to only applies to emergency situations or women in labor. Many people cannot afford the maintenance treatments they need for chronic diseases or other diseases like certain kinds of cancer. Those aren't considered emergencies - until the person is about to keel over for it. And even then, they are given the basic treatment that will prevent death - not necessarily the maintenance treatment they need. And they are still billed for it.

I was talking to my Mom's oncologist, who we trust and have a good relationship with. He says that the unregulated pharmaceutical companies and biotech manufacturers are driving up the costs of healthcare. By comparison the doctors are cheap. My Mom's ONE medication of the ten she takes costs $100,000+ a year. We are lucky that insurance covers it. Others are not so fortunate.

One of the most disturbing trends I've seen (not saying you feel this way, just what I've seen in the media) is the blatant disregard for the lives of people who can't afford basic healthcare. Can't afford it? Too bad, you're poor so you don't really deserve to live anyway. And if you get the treatment you need? Be prepared to be hurdled into even more debt if you don't have insurance.

What's happened to us?!

I'm not an economist, so I can't tell you if sin taxes or socialized medicine are the right answer. I know that SOMETHING needs to change - both on the healthcare end and on the personal responsibility end. People need to start taking personal responsibility for their health (read: obesity) but the healthcare system needs some sort of change too.

Before you offer an opinion on health care please be sure you really know how it works. I, work in health care, live in america, and let me tell you something, people are not stupid and they know how to get around things. So you say it has to be an emergency situation where someone is Keeling over? Have you ever considered going to the ER for the flu, a headache, a toothache? No? Well I have picked up hundreds of patients that dial 911 that want to be driven to the ER due to those issues. And I'm told plenty of times that they do that because they can't pay for a doctor. Guess who pays that bill? Us, who work and pay for insurance.

I didn't say that ALL people in the emergency room are ready to keel over. Many people wait to get treatment because they weren't able to go to a regular's doctor's office. They wait until things get bad.

You're absolutely right - people do go the ER for little things too because they can't go see a regular doctor. What does that tell you about how screwey the system is, if people can't afford to go to the doctor? The hospitals do end up covering the cost. That's not right - because the system is not right in the first place.

That doesn't mean people who can't afford it don't deserve healthcare, in my opinion.

I'm sorry but I do not agree with the whole 'people can't afford to go to the doctor' argument.

So you don't have insurance. Big deal. Guess what? Doctors take CASH and it's NOT as expensive as one would think for a simple visit. Don't have a doctor? Go to a clinic. My husband sprained his ankle really bad several months back. We don't have a GP so we waited until the after hours clinic opened up. We have insurance but we have a $10,000 deductible because our insurance is for a catastrophic emergency only so we always say we don't have insurance. His exam including the 6 x-rays they took was around $250.

Oh, and you know what else? Doctors and hospitals will put you on a payment plan if you can't afford to pay the bill up front. A friend of mine had to go to the hospital and she had no insurance and was put on a payment plan and they worked with her and asked her what could she afford every month and that's what she paid.

So not being able to afford a doctor/not having insurance is a weak excuse. And since Obamacare came into play more doctors are going to be only accepting cash.

and if someone walks into a clinic and requires surgery or an extended hospital stay, they will likely be on a payment plan for the rest of their lives without insurance. heaven forbid they get a serious illness, or their kids might be on that payment plan too.

CarynMacD

For my reference:

Bottled water in South Africa 1.358 cents/ml
Soda 1.664 cents/ml

Are those US dollar cents? A small bottle of water is really around 6 bucks?
Good beer in Germany 0.17 cents/ml. Cheap beer is around 0.06 cents /ml around the same price as bottled water. That is Euro cents.

No... South African cents. Our Rand trades at roughly R20 to the British Pound and around R12 to the US Dollar.

So 6 bucks in ZAR (South African Rands) is around R72

A 500ml bottle of water here costs roughly R6.79 (I think) which in US $ is 57c

A beer is around (depending where you buy it from) R12 per bottle which equates to approx US $ 1

bunnylion

Suggestion: Shorten your quotes to the part you are actually answering to, to keep the thread readable. Just an idea...

Very entertaining debate... very entertaining...

PatsyFitzpatrick

Wild eyed, gun-toting, tea party, flag waving Jeebus lovers... step to the right.

Weepy, left wing commie 'murica-hating sissy government sheep... to the left.

Get it on!!

LOL Amen

CarynMacD

Suggestion: Shorten your quotes to the part you are actually answering to, to keep the thread readable. Just an idea...

Very entertaining debate... very entertaining...

^^^Like :flowerforyou:

bunnylion

No... South African cents. Our Rand trades at roughly R20 to the British Pound and around R12 to the US Dollar.

So 6 bucks in ZAR (South African Rands) is around R72

A 500ml bottle of water here costs roughly R6.79 (I think) which in US $ is 57c

A beer is around (depending where you buy it from) R12 per bottle which equates to approx US $ 1

Ok. That is acceptable I guess. Then again, I have no idea how much people earn in SA. Putting prices into perspective is not an easy thing to do ^^

Meerataila

Wild eyed, gun-toting, tea party, flag waving Jeebus lovers... step to the right.

Weepy, left wing commie 'murica-hating sissy government sheep... to the left.

Get it on!!

LOL Amen

Wait, where do the wild-eyed commie anarchist corporation-hating atheists go?

Never mind. We won't do what you tell us, anyway!

CarynMacD

Ok. That is acceptable I guess. Then again, I have no idea how much people earn in SA. Putting prices into perspective is not an easy thing to do ^^

No it is very difficult. We are in process of looking into re-locating to the UK. It is an absolute nightmare trying to figure out a "budget". Salaries, housing, food, fuel, car prices (and let's not forget Beer :drinker: and cigarettes :smokin: ) differ so vastly. I think even applying ratios/percentages would not work.

extra_medium

News Flash: NOTHING is free. Your healthcare isn't really free because you're actually paying for it in the form of higher taxes.

To the original post: I am against a "sin" tax. The government needs to stop trying to control every aspect of our lives because that's exactly what this is about: control. Next they're going to put a "sin" tax on anything that they deem to be unhealthy. Next they'll be telling us what we can and can not eat.

Sugary drinks are not a necessity, similar to alcohol and tobacco. They are luxury items. Candy is also a luxury item. I could see a day where more things are taxed as such. It's not going to stop anyone because it's pennies on the dollar. It's a non-issue.

And as far as this comment goes: Who determines what is a luxury for someone and what isn't? Why should anyone have the authority to tell me what is a luxury and what isn't? My cleaning lady could be considered a luxury but to me she's not because I hate cleaning. Our landscaper could be considered a luxury but for my husband it's not because he doesn't have the time to do all there is to do around the yard. My laptop could be considered a luxury but it's not because without it I can't work.

You see my point?

It's pretty simple...your laptop is not a luxury item because you need it for work. If it was your third computer that you use to watch Netflix in the bathroom, then I'd consider it a luxury item. Your cleaning lady and landscaper are luxuries because you just don't feel like cleaning or working in the yard. For me, I hate tying my shoes - it's boring and takes seconds out of my day. If I hired someone to do that for me, so that is a luxury and I'm at peace with calling it that. Whether or not we should be taxed for enjoying luxuries we've earned is an entirely different debate.

As far as nothing being free, that's absolutely true. Personally, I'd much rather pay higher taxes than insurance premiums if it means everyone can get the medical care they need -- not just those whose work pays for 70-90% of their insurance costs. Oh, and when the insurance company you've been paying those premiums to for years decides you deserve it when you finally have need of it.

Meerataila

News Flash: NOTHING is free. Your healthcare isn't really free because you're actually paying for it in the form of higher taxes.

To the original post: I am against a "sin" tax. The government needs to stop trying to control every aspect of our lives because that's exactly what this is about: control. Next they're going to put a "sin" tax on anything that they deem to be unhealthy. Next they'll be telling us what we can and can not eat.

Sugary drinks are not a necessity, similar to alcohol and tobacco. They are luxury items. Candy is also a luxury item. I could see a day where more things are taxed as such. It's not going to stop anyone because it's pennies on the dollar. It's a non-issue.

And as far as this comment goes: Who determines what is a luxury for someone and what isn't? Why should anyone have the authority to tell me what is a luxury and what isn't? My cleaning lady could be considered a luxury but to me she's not because I hate cleaning. Our landscaper could be considered a luxury but for my husband it's not because he doesn't have the time to do all there is to do around the yard. My laptop could be considered a luxury but it's not because without it I can't work.

You see my point?

It's pretty simple...your laptop is not a luxury item because you need it for work. If it was your third computer that you use to watch Netflix in the bathroom, then I'd consider it a luxury item. Your cleaning lady and landscaper are luxuries because you just don't feel like cleaning or working in the yard. For me, I hate tying my shoes - it's boring and takes seconds out of my day. If I hired someone to do that for me, so that is a luxury and I'm at peace with calling it that. Whether or not we should be taxed for enjoying luxuries we've earned is an entirely different debate.

As far as nothing being free, that's absolutely true. Personally, I'd much rather pay higher taxes than insurance premiums if it means everyone can get the medical care they need -- not just those whose work pays for 70-90% of their insurance costs. Oh, and when the insurance company you've been paying those premiums to for years decides you deserve it when you finally have need of it.

:drinker:

However, if you are handicapped, someone to help you with house and yard care is not a luxury anymore. Though I certainly hope you never suffer any handicap that requires you to hire someone to tie your shoes for you!

bunnylion

and if someone walks into a clinic and requires surgery or an extended hospital stay, they will likely be on a payment plan for the rest of their lives without insurance. heaven forbid they get a serious illness, or their kids might be on that payment plan too.

So how much does health insurance cost in the US? I understand that health insurance is not mandatory in the US but how does it work if you want it but can't afford it (being a student or being unemployed etc.)?

weightliftingdiva

I'm sorry but I do not agree with the whole 'people can't afford to go to the doctor' argument.

So you don't have insurance. Big deal. Guess what? Doctors take CASH and it's NOT as expensive as one would think for a simple visit. Don't have a doctor? Go to a clinic. My husband sprained his ankle really bad several months back. We don't have a GP so we waited until the after hours clinic opened up. We have insurance but we have a $10,000 deductible because our insurance is for a catastrophic emergency only so we always say we don't have insurance. His exam including the 6 x-rays they took was around $250.

Oh, and you know what else? Doctors and hospitals will put you on a payment plan if you can't afford to pay the bill up front. A friend of mine had to go to the hospital and she had no insurance and was put on a payment plan and they worked with her and asked her what could she afford every month and that's what she paid.

So not being able to afford a doctor/not having insurance is a weak excuse. And since Obamacare came into play more doctors are going to be only accepting cash.

and if someone walks into a clinic and requires surgery or an extended hospital stay, they will likely be on a payment plan for the rest of their lives without insurance. heaven forbid they get a serious illness, or their kids might be on that payment plan too.

^^ This!

CarynMacD

Moved to end.

lemurcat12

So how much does health insurance cost in the US?

It depends. A good bit of the US system revolves around employer-based insurance. If you have to buy it yourself,* there are now exchanges, but the prices vary depending on what state you are in and what you buy as well as (to some extent) personal details. Before the exchanges the prices for private insurance varied even more depending on personal details and the kind of plan purchased, and of course there was the preexisting condition factor.

I understand that health insurance is not mandatory in the US but how does it work if you want it but can't afford it (being a student or being unemployed etc.)?

Well, it kind of is now (although there are exceptions and also the penalty if you don't have it is only a pretty small financial one (tax, contrary to the preferred language of Congress, but as explained by Justice Roberts).

But the answer is that it's subsidized. And those up to 26 will or can be covered by their parents' insurance.

*People with employer-based pay for it, whether it's taken out of their salaries or their employers pay for all of it directly as a benefit that's in reality part of their salary, but they don't have to contract for it, as it's a group plan their employer contracts for.

bunnylion

I suppose I should have said 'most people'. I defy you to make the argument that we'll have less people working hard for long hours at dirty and dangerous jobs if they're actually paid well for those jobs.

The reason many choose welfare (aside from the fact that outsourcing has made it so we don't have enough jobs) is because working doesn't lift many out of poverty at all, so why work if you aren't getting anywhere for it?

How much should I demand before I accept going to work?

One thing I can guarantee to is i don't make anywhere near what I'm worth. What I deserve, for the role I play. Have you ever know what it's like to actually have someone's life in your hands? Like really, live or die if you get flustered?

I'm sorry EXCUSE ME.....where did you get that I was a dispatcher? I am a first responder. In NYC don't run into fires because that's why we have the Fire Department. I'm not even sure where you even got the inclination that I was a dispatcher.

You have a heart attack, you cut your hand off, your mother is dying, you dial 911, I show up. You rely on me.

Now answer the question without all the mumbo jumbo. You said if people got paid what they felt they deserved they would be willing to work, so how much is my job worth in your opinion. What is the minimum I should hold out for before I go to work now. Not in a fantasy world. Today 2014.

I believe the argument was that people stay in welfare because working does not result in having more money.
And if the argument is about people being willing to work if they got paid what they felt they deserved, then why does it matter what anybody else thinks your work is worth? It's about what you think your work is worth...
I'm really not sure what you are getting at here?