| Posted By |
Message |
| Pages: << 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 >> |
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by mamabear
one logical question on health care/health insurance--
for those who don't think everyone should get health insurance, do you also think these people should be denied treatment/health care, and in what circumstances?
Here's my understanding, and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. I think most people without insurance avoid basic care and preventative care/meds, and show up at an ER with severe problems that are costly to treat. They cant be denied treatment, so now they get their treatment. They get billed. They have no money. They can't pay. The taxpayers, who dont want to pay for health insurance for all, end up paying for this treatment. But, if this sick person had some basic care along the way--annual check ups, meds for minor illnesses before they become major, mental health meds so this person can function better/contribute more--maybe they would actually be less of a burden on society on other taxpayers. preventative care is essential for maintaining health and keeping medical costs low, and that's what gets skipped when there is no insurance.
i wont even say that everyone should have the same level of med insurance. but everyone should get an annual check up. every should get antibiotics for a minor infection before it becomes a massive, life-threatening infection. Everyone should get their mammograms and colonoscopies and pap smears so that g-forbid there is something, it can be treated early, easily, and at a relatively low cost. much easier/cheaper to cut out a small tumor than to treat widespread cancer. much cheaper to take antiobiotics for 2 weeks than to show up on death's door at the hospital needing a lengthy stay and IV antibiotics, and possible surgery because of a massive infection. much wiser to give a person suffering from a mental illness treatment and meds and have them become a functioning member of society than to give them scraps and let them continuously show up in the ER for assorted ailments.
It goes beyond that. My sister is an ER nurse and there are plenty of people without insurance who show up there with a cold or cough or minor injury because they know they will be treated there, unlike with a doctor. This not only takes up valuable ER resources, but you know the cost of taking care of that in the ER is astronomical compared to what it would be if people had access to a local doctor or clinic with a modest copay.
|
Posted 10/18/11 12:18 PM  |
| |
|
Long Island Weddings
Long Island's Largest Bridal Resource |
DiamondGirl
You are my I love you
Member since 7/09 18802 total posts
Name:
DiamondMama
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by julz33
Posted by annoyedTTCer
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Hofstra26
And I may be "jobless" but I don't consider my DH's money HIS money. He works to provide for OUR family. It's OUR money. And we use OUR money to pay into OUR health benefits.
Ha! I'm sure he feels that way too, especially when he's stuck in some bullpoop meeting, or stuck on a train or in traffic during his commute. Yeah, I'm SURE he's thinking it sucks for the BOTH of you. Don't kid yourself, it's HIS money, HIS salary. You're just LUCKY he's sharing it with you.
Wow, what a horrible attitude you have.
Are you married?
I'd leave my husband in a heart beat if he he had an attitude like that.
I'll make about $75k more than my DH this year but the money goes into OUR account for OUR family.
I agree. Actually just started a post on parenting about this.
I wasn't going to respond but to the person who said the above................my DH does NOT in ANY way have that attitude. I am NOT lucky, I married a man who genuinely cares about providing for his family with NO selfish motives. Everything we have we BOTH worked towards in some way and that includes his career and salary. Everything we have, including "his" salary is OURS. If my DH ever thought otherwise he'd have a problem on his hands.
Sorry that your relationship is so lacking in respect for one another that your DH or significant other would actually think that way.
That's all I wanted to say because that comment actually disgusted me.
you were a teacher? 
your sense of entitlement is outrageous.
people commented on your character based on statements you made that said some people are more entitled to basic health care then others. No one made that up...you said it and if you feel that way, then yes IMO that is a HUGE character flaw.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:18 PM |
| |
|
Little-J-Mommy
I'm a Big Brother
Member since 5/06 8041 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Right now I'm a SAHM too. I would LOVE to find a job, but this market is shiit. As much as DH works and provides for us, I know that I am DAMN lucky!! He has job security as much as the next guy...but in this economy, I don't trust anything! I am thanking my lucky stars that he has a good job with decent benefits. Can the wool be pulled out from under us at any given moment? You bet it could. And then what? My kids don't deserve basic health care because our world was just turned upside down? What if it takes years to find something else?
Hofstra, I think Jenn was just saying that YOU don't deserve basic healthcare more than anyone else just because you married someone who has a good job and they didn't. It's an issue of human decency and for people to stop and give a shiit about someone else for a change.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:18 PM |
| |
|
tara73
carseat nerd
Member since 11/09 3669 total posts
Name:
Buttercup
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by mamabear
one logical question on health care/health insurance--
for those who don't think everyone should get health insurance, do you also think these people should be denied treatment/health care, and in what circumstances?
Here's my understanding, and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. I think most people without insurance avoid basic care and preventative care/meds, and show up at an ER with severe problems that are costly to treat. They cant be denied treatment, so now they get their treatment. They get billed. They have no money. They can't pay. The taxpayers, who dont want to pay for health insurance for all, end up paying for this treatment. But, if this sick person had some basic care along the way--annual check ups, meds for minor illnesses before they become major, mental health meds so this person can function better/contribute more--maybe they would actually be less of a burden on society on other taxpayers. preventative care is essential for maintaining health and keeping medical costs low, and that's what gets skipped when there is no insurance.
i wont even say that everyone should have the same level of med insurance. but everyone should get an annual check up. every should get antibiotics for a minor infection before it becomes a massive, life-threatening infection. Everyone should get their mammograms and colonoscopies and pap smears so that g-forbid there is something, it can be treated early, easily, and at a relatively low cost. much easier/cheaper to cut out a small tumor than to treat widespread cancer. much cheaper to take antiobiotics for 2 weeks than to show up on death's door at the hospital needing a lengthy stay and IV antibiotics, and possible surgery because of a massive infection. much wiser to give a person suffering from a mental illness treatment and meds and have them become a functioning member of society than to give them scraps and let them continuously show up in the ER for assorted ailments.
Preventative care WILL cut down drastically on catastrophic care. Even cancer care. Screenings and catching cancer early can prevent it from becoming a catastrophic illness
I am not in favor of eliminating health insurance companies. There is a happy medium. You can have health insurance through work, but should you NOT have insurance there is the government funded care. Yes, insurance may provide more than the essential care that the government care provides.
Essential care = non cosmetic, non elective procedures. Preventative care, emergency care. It's not perfect but at least the basics would be covered. No one should have to die because they can't have access to essential care.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:19 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
I really hope NO ONE has to go through this, but "ours" turns into "mine" REALLY quickly in the event of a divorce. My dad left my mom high and dry after 35 years of marriage. Yet another thing I believe can happen to anyone.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:20 PM |
| |
|
marianne13
LIF Adolescent
Member since 6/10 887 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by julz33
Posted by annoyedTTCer
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Hofstra26
And I may be "jobless" but I don't consider my DH's money HIS money. He works to provide for OUR family. It's OUR money. And we use OUR money to pay into OUR health benefits.
Ha! I'm sure he feels that way too, especially when he's stuck in some bullpoop meeting, or stuck on a train or in traffic during his commute. Yeah, I'm SURE he's thinking it sucks for the BOTH of you. Don't kid yourself, it's HIS money, HIS salary. You're just LUCKY he's sharing it with you.
Wow, what a horrible attitude you have.
Are you married?
I'd leave my husband in a heart beat if he he had an attitude like that.
I'll make about $75k more than my DH this year but the money goes into OUR account for OUR family.
I agree. Actually just started a post on parenting about this.
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:21 PM |
| |
|
Hofstra26
Love to Bake!
Member since 7/06 27915 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by colette
I won't speak for Jenny but what i inferred when I read that was in the (God forbid) event of separation/divorce, that wonderful husband today will be protecting his assets tomorrow kwim? I haven't been divorced but I know many who have and have been SHOCKED at the "breadwinners'" propensity to become a stingy a-hole the minute the separation is effective- no longer wanting to support their ex, and barely making timely support payments for their child(ren). They will move assets into other family names, sell property at a loss, basically do anything to protect what they see as "theirs and theirs alone". It's not pretty and it DOES happen more often than not imho.
Posted by rojerono
I actually don't THINK Jenn meant it the way you are taking it. I am thinking she more or less meant that if that marriage were to implode the money would become HIS real quick. Everyone shares when things are good and happy.. but if things go south.. the sharing is suddenly kaput.
My husband is currently the sole breadwinner and pays our insurance. He does it happily and I know he doesn't think twice about the fact that he's supporting more than just himself.. but guaranteed that if we decided to split up that tune would not remain the same.
I used to be the only provider in the house at one point.. and my salary was always OUR money.. but if we broke up.. that would have changed.
Ladies this is EXACTLY where I'm coming from. I'm glad some people understood.
And I LOVE how everything else I said went ignored. 
but then again, she was "so over this thread " back on page five yet continues to post. 
Annoying when someone misses your point because you weren't clear, isn't it?
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:22 PM |
| |
|
Celt
~~~~~~~~~~
Member since 4/08 7758 total posts
Name:
colette
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by colette
I won't speak for Jenny but what i inferred when I read that was in the (God forbid) event of separation/divorce, that wonderful husband today will be protecting his assets tomorrow kwim? I haven't been divorced but I know many who have and have been SHOCKED at the "breadwinners'" propensity to become a stingy a-hole the minute the separation is effective- no longer wanting to support their ex, and barely making timely support payments for their child(ren). They will move assets into other family names, sell property at a loss, basically do anything to protect what they see as "theirs and theirs alone". It's not pretty and it DOES happen more often than not imho.
Posted by rojerono
I actually don't THINK Jenn meant it the way you are taking it. I am thinking she more or less meant that if that marriage were to implode the money would become HIS real quick. Everyone shares when things are good and happy.. but if things go south.. the sharing is suddenly kaput.
My husband is currently the sole breadwinner and pays our insurance. He does it happily and I know he doesn't think twice about the fact that he's supporting more than just himself.. but guaranteed that if we decided to split up that tune would not remain the same.
I used to be the only provider in the house at one point.. and my salary was always OUR money.. but if we broke up.. that would have changed.
Ladies this is EXACTLY where I'm coming from. I'm glad some people understood.
And I LOVE how everything else I said went ignored.
but then again, she was "so over this thread " back on page five yet continues to post.
Jeannie and I *ARE* the 1%.
Of braincells
NOW GIVE US ALL YOUR MONEY.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:22 PM |
| |
|
tara73
carseat nerd
Member since 11/09 3669 total posts
Name:
Buttercup
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by marianne13
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
You can't just "skim" you have to read it thoroughly because that wasn't really what was being said. 
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:22 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by marianne13
Posted by julz33
Posted by annoyedTTCer
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Hofstra26
And I may be "jobless" but I don't consider my DH's money HIS money. He works to provide for OUR family. It's OUR money. And we use OUR money to pay into OUR health benefits.
Ha! I'm sure he feels that way too, especially when he's stuck in some bullpoop meeting, or stuck on a train or in traffic during his commute. Yeah, I'm SURE he's thinking it sucks for the BOTH of you. Don't kid yourself, it's HIS money, HIS salary. You're just LUCKY he's sharing it with you.
Wow, what a horrible attitude you have.
Are you married?
I'd leave my husband in a heart beat if he he had an attitude like that.
I'll make about $75k more than my DH this year but the money goes into OUR account for OUR family.
I agree. Actually just started a post on parenting about this.
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
Like I said, I hope you NEVER experience this, but after 35 years of working in the house and my dad not letting my mom get a job after the kids were older, my dad complained in the divorce that my mom never worked. He took out a huge mortgage right before he left and god knows what he did with the money because a few days after he left they were coming to turn the heat off.
I hope it NEVER happens to ANYONE, but it CAN.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:24 PM |
| |
|
Little-J-Mommy
I'm a Big Brother
Member since 5/06 8041 total posts
Name:
D
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by marianne13
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
I don't think any SAHM is saying "I'm lucky that DH shares with me", but rather "I'm lucky that DH CAN share with me."
Huge difference IMO.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:31 PM |
| |
|
HoneyBadger
YourWorstNightmare.
Member since 10/06 15979 total posts
Name:
BahBahBlackJeep
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by colette
I won't speak for Jenny but what i inferred when I read that was in the (God forbid) event of separation/divorce, that wonderful husband today will be protecting his assets tomorrow kwim? I haven't been divorced but I know many who have and have been SHOCKED at the "breadwinners'" propensity to become a stingy a-hole the minute the separation is effective- no longer wanting to support their ex, and barely making timely support payments for their child(ren). They will move assets into other family names, sell property at a loss, basically do anything to protect what they see as "theirs and theirs alone". It's not pretty and it DOES happen more often than not imho.
Posted by rojerono
I actually don't THINK Jenn meant it the way you are taking it. I am thinking she more or less meant that if that marriage were to implode the money would become HIS real quick. Everyone shares when things are good and happy.. but if things go south.. the sharing is suddenly kaput.
My husband is currently the sole breadwinner and pays our insurance. He does it happily and I know he doesn't think twice about the fact that he's supporting more than just himself.. but guaranteed that if we decided to split up that tune would not remain the same.
I used to be the only provider in the house at one point.. and my salary was always OUR money.. but if we broke up.. that would have changed.
Ladies this is EXACTLY where I'm coming from. I'm glad some people understood.
And I LOVE how everything else I said went ignored.
but then again, she was "so over this thread " back on page five yet continues to post.
Annoying when someone misses your point because you weren't clear, isn't it?
No, you were pretty clear. You don't give a hoot about anyone but yourself.
Sorry if my reality check is so distasteful but as someone who knows "life isn't fair" I'd think you, of all people, would understand where I was coming from.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:32 PM |
| |
|
HoneyBadger
YourWorstNightmare.
Member since 10/06 15979 total posts
Name:
BahBahBlackJeep
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
fork it over!!!
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:32 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Little-J-Mommy
Posted by marianne13
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
I don't think any SAHM is saying "I'm lucky that DH shares with me", but rather "I'm lucky that DH CAN share with me."
Huge difference IMO.
Right. Exactly.
I'm not a SAHW. I work FT but my DH makes a LOT more than I do. Our standard of living is really from him. if we had to live off of my salary we'd barely be able to pay the rent and the electric bill. I feel LUCKY that he has a job that pays a higher salary. I don't feel lucky he shares with me. That's his job. He's mys husband. i own him
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:33 PM |
| |
|
HoneyBadger
YourWorstNightmare.
Member since 10/06 15979 total posts
Name:
BahBahBlackJeep
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by tarabelle99
Posted by marianne13
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
You can't just "skim" you have to read it thoroughly because that wasn't really what was being said.
Agreed.
You're referring to what I said but not realizing that I was responding to someone who said that those who don't bring in a salary don't deserve healthcare.
Yes, I took it to the extreme but the technical truth is that she DOESN'T bring home a salary and through HER LOGIC technically doesn't deserve healthcare.
Ironically, I disagree with her and believe regardless of what someone makes, or doesn't we ALL should have healthcare.
She actually BENEFITS from MY thinking...
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:35 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Jennie0898
.
She actually BENEFITS from MY thinking...
Reality benefits from your thinking.
Message edited 10/18/2011 12:36:32 PM.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:36 PM |
| |
|
marianne13
LIF Adolescent
Member since 6/10 887 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by JenniferEver
Posted by marianne13
Posted by julz33
Posted by annoyedTTCer
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Hofstra26
And I may be "jobless" but I don't consider my DH's money HIS money. He works to provide for OUR family. It's OUR money. And we use OUR money to pay into OUR health benefits.
Ha! I'm sure he feels that way too, especially when he's stuck in some bullpoop meeting, or stuck on a train or in traffic during his commute. Yeah, I'm SURE he's thinking it sucks for the BOTH of you. Don't kid yourself, it's HIS money, HIS salary. You're just LUCKY he's sharing it with you.
Wow, what a horrible attitude you have.
Are you married?
I'd leave my husband in a heart beat if he he had an attitude like that.
I'll make about $75k more than my DH this year but the money goes into OUR account for OUR family.
I agree. Actually just started a post on parenting about this.
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
Like I said, I hope you NEVER experience this, but after 35 years of working in the house and my dad not letting my mom get a job after the kids were older, my dad complained in the divorce that my mom never worked. He took out a huge mortgage right before he left and god knows what he did with the money because a few days after he left they were coming to turn the heat off.
I hope it NEVER happens to ANYONE, but it CAN.
I know things like this have happened to people and I feel sorry that your mother was screwed over like that after she made sacrifices to take care of your father and the family. But I'm sure we will all agree that your father was wrong to do that. I'm not saying that things like this don't happen but I was trying to say that a HEALTHY marriage does not consist of one person saying "yeah my spouse is lucky I'm sharing my $$ with them even though they are taking care of our family."
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:38 PM |
| |
|
violet5
LIF Infant
Member since 7/11 54 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by JenniferEver
I would gladly pay a much higher tax rate if it meant that everyone could have access to QUALITY FOOD (actually tested with a federal agency that has power to shut down plants when they produce food that KILLS people), HEALTH CARE and SAFE HOUSING.
GLADLY. In a HEARTBEAT.
I am lucky that I have a roof over my head, I have health insurance, and I could shop at Whole Foods if I wanted to I guess without too much sacrifice. If they raised my taxes significantly I'd probably have to sacrifice some other comforts but I am telling you I would do it GLADLY. I would HAPPILY pay my share, not to finance another war, but to make sure that we take care of others in this country, to make sure that everyone has a chance at a basic standard of living.
I absolutely wholeheartedly agree with every word.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:39 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by marianne13
Posted by JenniferEver
Posted by marianne13
Posted by julz33
Posted by annoyedTTCer
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by Hofstra26
Posted by Hofstra26
And I may be "jobless" but I don't consider my DH's money HIS money. He works to provide for OUR family. It's OUR money. And we use OUR money to pay into OUR health benefits.
Ha! I'm sure he feels that way too, especially when he's stuck in some bullpoop meeting, or stuck on a train or in traffic during his commute. Yeah, I'm SURE he's thinking it sucks for the BOTH of you. Don't kid yourself, it's HIS money, HIS salary. You're just LUCKY he's sharing it with you.
Wow, what a horrible attitude you have.
Are you married?
I'd leave my husband in a heart beat if he he had an attitude like that.
I'll make about $75k more than my DH this year but the money goes into OUR account for OUR family.
I agree. Actually just started a post on parenting about this.
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
Like I said, I hope you NEVER experience this, but after 35 years of working in the house and my dad not letting my mom get a job after the kids were older, my dad complained in the divorce that my mom never worked. He took out a huge mortgage right before he left and god knows what he did with the money because a few days after he left they were coming to turn the heat off.
I hope it NEVER happens to ANYONE, but it CAN.
I know things like this have happened to people and I feel sorry that your mother was screwed over like that after she made sacrifices to take care of your father and the family. But I'm sure we will all agree that your father was wrong to do that. I'm not saying that things like this don't happen but I was trying to say that a HEALTHY marriage does not consist of one person saying "yeah my spouse is lucky I'm sharing my $$ with them even though they are taking care of our family."
I don't think anyone thinks that WHILE they are married. or I hope they don't.
I think this whole subthread is really a response to a PP who feels she's entitled to something even though she doesn't work because her DH does work, meanwhile other people who don't work are not entitled to anything.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:39 PM |
| |
|
julz33
i run for bacon
Member since 5/05 20584 total posts
Name:
julz
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by JenniferEver
I don't think anyone thinks that WHILE they are married. or I hope they don't.
I think this whole subthread is really a response to a PP who feels she's entitled to something even though she doesn't work because her DH does work, meanwhile other people who don't work are not entitled to anything.
Her DH works and pays into a family plan for her.
If something happened with her DH's job I am sure she would go back to work if needed. Right now her income isn't needed.
Couldn't the same things be said to a FTWM who opts out of her insurance plan because she is on her DH's family plan?
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:42 PM |
| |
|
marianne13
LIF Adolescent
Member since 6/10 887 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Jennie0898
Posted by tarabelle99
Posted by marianne13
Wow, I just skimmed this thread and wasn't going to join in but I have to say that if I was a SAHM I would never consider myself "lucky" that DH is "sharing his money with me." I wouldn't have that attitude if he was a SAHD either. Both people are working (and I do believe that SAHMs work very hard). Yeah one person is earning the taxable income but the other person is doing the jobs that would have been given to the nanny, cook and maid, all of whom would have to be paid (if both parents were employed outside the home).
You can't just "skim" you have to read it thoroughly because that wasn't really what was being said.
Agreed.
You're referring to what I said but not realizing that I was responding to someone who said that those who don't bring in a salary don't deserve healthcare.
Yes, I took it to the extreme but the technical truth is that she DOESN'T bring home a salary and through HER LOGIC technically doesn't deserve healthcare.
Ironically, I disagree with her and believe regardless of what someone makes, or doesn't we ALL should have healthcare.
She actually BENEFITS from MY thinking...
I'm sorry- I didn't read the earlier posts!
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:44 PM |
| |
|
Woodsy
LIF Infant
Member since 6/05 241 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Ophelia
Posted by Hofstra26
I stand by what I have said and I don't really see the need to justify my position any further (it's pointless) or even defend the silly remarks that I lack compassion. Attacking someone's character is childish. This isn't elementary school, grow up. You may not agree with what I have to say but to question my character as a person is not only obnoxious but out of line.
It's always the same cr@p on this board, different day. People get overly offended by EVERYTHING and god forbid someone should have a difference of opinion on ANY thread............it's war. It happens constantly on here. You don't have to agree with everything you read, I surely do not, but I do draw the line at being outright obnoxious to fellow posters. But I am not surprised, it's usually the same few who think they know everything and are always right.
thinking that Jews should be exterminated and blacks should sit on the end of the bus is also an opinion.
so, as you can see, people can have ****** opinions.
people can also make remarks on their facebooks statuses about wanting to cause bodily harm to people when they don't agree...but I am sure that is the mark of maturity.
I have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to this thread except to make one point:
I skimmed this thread and I just have to compliment Hofstra26 on standing up for herself to the relentless unfair attacks that have been levied against her (e.g. calling her selfish, and saying that she is a drain on society as a SAHM.) She has been expressing a very common opinion regarding personal responsibility and individualism. I agree with her wholeheartedly.
To compare the legitimacy of her (and my) opinion to the legitimacy of racists or nazis is completely outrageous and unfair.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:47 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by julz33
Posted by JenniferEver
I don't think anyone thinks that WHILE they are married. or I hope they don't.
I think this whole subthread is really a response to a PP who feels she's entitled to something even though she doesn't work because her DH does work, meanwhile other people who don't work are not entitled to anything.
Her DH works and pays into a family plan for her.
If something happened with her DH's job I am sure she would go back to work if needed. Right now her income isn't needed.
Couldn't the same things be said to a FTWM who opts out of her insurance plan because she is on her DH's family plan?
That's not the point.
It was a parallel between her saying that people who don't work and don't "contribute to society" shouldn't have insurance, and her position, which is that if you extend her argument, she doesn't contribute and shouldn't get insurance either. No one is saying that's actually the case. We're just trying to tell her to get off her high horse, but it isn't working.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:48 PM |
| |
|
Blazesyth
*yawn*
Member since 5/05 8129 total posts
Name:
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by julz33
Posted by JenniferEver
I don't think anyone thinks that WHILE they are married. or I hope they don't.
I think this whole subthread is really a response to a PP who feels she's entitled to something even though she doesn't work because her DH does work, meanwhile other people who don't work are not entitled to anything.
Her DH works and pays into a family plan for her.
If something happened with her DH's job I am sure she would go back to work if needed. Right now her income isn't needed.
Couldn't the same things be said to a FTWM who opts out of her insurance plan because she is on her DH's family plan?
But at that point there could be a high probability they couldn't find a job, or it would take a while to find a job. Then opinions would change and it would be necessary for all americans to have healthcare.
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:49 PM |
| |
|
JenniferEver
The Disney Lady
Member since 5/05 18163 total posts
Name:
Jennifer
|
Re: On the subject of Occupy Wall St...
Posted by Blazesyth
Posted by julz33
Posted by JenniferEver
I don't think anyone thinks that WHILE they are married. or I hope they don't.
I think this whole subthread is really a response to a PP who feels she's entitled to something even though she doesn't work because her DH does work, meanwhile other people who don't work are not entitled to anything.
Her DH works and pays into a family plan for her.
If something happened with her DH's job I am sure she would go back to work if needed. Right now her income isn't needed.
Couldn't the same things be said to a FTWM who opts out of her insurance plan because she is on her DH's family plan?
But at that point there could be a high probability they couldn't find a job, or it would take a while to find a job. Then opinions would change and it would be necessary for all americans to have healthcare.
Yup
|
| Posted 10/18/11 12:50 PM |
| |
|
| Pages: << 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 >> |
