USA: Care at Indian health facilities "horrifying"

Post Reply New Topic

What's possibly wrong with government providing services to the people? Incidentally, part of that includes helping businesses starting up. Do conservatives want to see that go, too?

Been over it all before many many times...

So, people are going to be alright if you just yanked the safety net out from under them? That, with business hiring as few people as possible, and paying lower wages with fewer or even no benefits? There might not be a need for the social safety net if business were actually responsible to the American people, by providing enough employment to everyone in need of a job, along with good pay and benefits. But because business doesn't, people who are left behind need to look to the government for help.

Government provided the people of Flint with contaminated water, while quietly supplying their own employees with clean bottled water. Private companies, including the horrid, evil Walmart, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Nestlé, are now supplying Flint citizens with clean water. It couldn't be better dramatized in a novel.



Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?



Ours is a mixed economy, still mostly market-oriented – but Indian reservations are little pockets of socialism, where everything belongs to various government agencies or to the tribal collective. Not coincidentally, they are also pockets of Third World poverty, with all the crappy living (and medical etc.) conditions that implies. It couldn't be better dramatized in a novel.



Pure fantasy on your part. (Are you so repulsive, that you think nobody would willingly help you?) People did in fact contribute to such things, and in large numbers.

I once helped a young neighbor do some research for a history paper on charitable organizations in this city at the start of the Great Depression, before New Deal programs kicked in. I think she expected to find that they were few and overwhelmed. Instead we discovered there were hundreds of them. Agencies which helped men find work, agencies aimed at recent immigrants, at minorities, at unwed mothers, at orphans. Soup kitchens on every corner. Mutual aid societies of all kinds. The notion that economic hard times meant that emaciated bodies were piling up in the streets, until the federal government got involved, is utterly false.



The government takes my money, and does a lot of things with it that I don't like (welfare is actually one of the least offensive). Aren't I people?

Let 'em starve, the lazy bassturds.
How dare they hold thier greedy little hands out as I whisk by in my Lamborghini.
The nerve!!

While you might not know it in your sarcasm, that's about right.

Sure the government poisoned the water in Flint - local and state government, which is headed up by a small government, pro-business governor.
And sure, it's commendable that private business has donated water to the people of that city. But if you want to blame government for that problem, you should realize that pretty much everywhere else, government environmental protections work.
And while there were doubtlessly some private social nets that worked on a local level, I hardly think that's going to work nationally, or for the long term.
And guess what, I don't like everything that taxes fund. Stuff like the pointless and self destructive military adventures the right had dragged us into. If you don't like it, write your congressman.

Yeppers, and this is my little back yard with my modest home in the background up on the hill.



And here's the front.


Now the cat's out of the bag.

Arguments which amount to "My gang would do it differently" will not be entertained.



Who else could you blame? Thomas Jefferson? Ayn Rand? The Koch brothers, maybe?



Pretty much everywhere else, government environmental protections are a colossal waste of money which accomplish nothing.



What you hardly think is irrelevant, since it is based on nothing. Even knowing that government programs are in place to support everything conceivable, private Americans give $250 billion to charity every single year. Those in need would be far better served via small agencies, and larger groups such as the Red Cross and Shriners, rather than depending on what is left over after trickling through millions of overpaid bureaucrats.



I'm pretty sure there were military adventures under Wilson, FDR, and Truman, and they haven't exactly stopped during the last seven years. Either you are somehow unaware of this fact, or you count Obama and those others among "the right." Your gang does not do it differently.