Socialised Medicine the myths and the facts - page 33

The first and the most obvious concern is the cost to the patient and their family, we all know how devastating an illness can be for patients and their family many times I have witnessed the despair... Read More

  1. by   lamazeteacher
    Answers to posts #413 and #414

    Canada's medical programs don't cover vision, hearing or dental, either. You can sure tell that by going to the offices of those uncovered services. They are state of the art gorgeous, just like those in the USA! However the doctors' offices and hospitals look like poor children by comparison, which is due to emphasis placed on paying doctors, labs, X-ray, etc. as their priority. Equipment that will change soon after it's installed, isn't at each facility because hospitals don't vie for business - it's available for those who need to have studies done, just at regional hospitals and distributed evenly throughout a region.

    When I went home to Toronto a few decades ago, I wanted to have medical care for a back injury I'd sustained. I was afraid to have the work done in the US because I knew that surgery might be advocated by avoricious surgeons based on their needs, rather than mine. When I mentioned that even the simplest initial X-ray hadn't been done at the time I went for care right after I injured my back, as it was considered too expensive by my insurance company then, the Canadian doctor mused, "Oh, you need to think of that in the USA". In other words, when tests, x-rays, etc. are deemed necessary by a physician, it's done. There hasn't been any "kickback" to doctors from labs or radiology offices there, as there have been here.

    I think the moral deterioration in physicians who are "on the take" here, has degraded the entire profession. The insurance and pharmaceutical companies as well as companies/corporations that own many hospitals and doctors' practrices have colluded with physicians, buying their support of higher medical costs with free lunches, dinners, trips, etc. That sustained the upward trend of prices, and demeaned their profession further. They've been fighting against nurse practitioners services, in fear of losing money, often overworking to sustain their standard of living, which is quite privileged. Canadian doctors live well, have nice cars and homes, but depending on the size of their families, they certainly don't live as ostentatiously as their peers here do. They also haven't been as burdened by scholastic loans at the beginning of their practises, as education is liberally subsidised in Canada.

    In Canada, physicians are paid appropriately for their time, based on their educational preparation, teaching roles, and specialties. Since most of them go to American seminars/conventions and hear what doctors have been collecting here for their service, they now are allowed to charge more, so Canadians are buying extended insurance policies from American companies to cover that. It isn't very costly now, but I fear that the insurance companies have a "toe in the door" through that; and policies sold for medical care to those who travel outside Canada. When they receive lower premiums in the US, they'll probably raise those in Canada, as might the pharmaceutical companies.

    The pharmaceutical companies that didn't originate in Canada (as the Salk vaccine for polio did), must negotiate their prices in Canada, or leave. It blew my mind when I found out that the VA has had the ability to negotiate on drug prices for many years, but there has been a law in the USA prohibiting the private sector doing that!! Doctors are ill informed about the charges for medications they prescribe, which poses a huge problem for anyone who must pay for them, themselves as have Medicare patients on fixed incomes and those without insurance coverage.

    The reform of health care act reversed that law, allowing all pharmaceutical products' prices to be negotiated to lessen thyat burden on government coverage as well as private insurance companies. That and controls/ close monitoring of billing for hospitals, physicians and all other medical services will lower health care costs, as will educational programs for prevention of illnesses. The latter will be genetically based and involve occupational safety hazards. There will be less witholding of information from people at risk of specific conditions. For example, breast cancer has been linked with ovarian cancer for 25+ years, yet most women haven't been told that. In Canada special "Breast and Ovarian Cancer" treatment facilities have been entitled that for at least that long. There is more active research done on those kind of illnesses in Canada, as well.

    When I worked for the preservation of umbilical cord blood stem cells, the private sector took priority and les endowed patients were unable to avail themselves of that. After I hired an area coordinator in Canada, her educational program was recognized by the government there, and that process is covered by their medical programs. The saving of money through early diagnosis and autologous stem cell use greatly lowers cost of treatment there, now. Here, we're still looking for matches and holding fundraisers for bone marrow transplantation, when it has been proven for some time, that immature stem cell use (from full term births) is much better than unrelated yet matching donations of bone marrow. A tremendous number of cancers, blood dyscrasias, genetic diseases, and neurological illnesses have been successfully cured by amending stem cells to produce healthy tissue.

    The much higher cost of research programs here and political meddling interfers with timely discoveries and new treatment modalities. Researchers here who are physicians, are paid commensurate with their peers' earnings in private practice. Pharmaceutical companies claim that the expense of researching new drugs is born by them, yet none have been produced without generous grants from our government and charitable organizations. That is called "double dipping", a very unethical tax claim for deductions and sympathy, when people exclaim over the high prices of treatment.

    THE HEALTH CARE COSTS WILL EASILY BE PAID

    The initial increased cost of health care will be covered by employers and those with extremely high incomes. While those earning $200,000 to $250,000 yearly are at the bottom of the scale of those paying 1.8% and 3.8% (lower than the 5% initially thought to be fair) added tax of the earned amounts above that line, the huge amount of earnings of the financial, insurance, pharmaceutical and many other businesses will collect heretofore unclaimed amounts of money. Loopholes in taxation will be closed and close monitoring of tax returns of the extremely wealthy will be evident, which will result in more than plenty amounts for health care, with the overages sent to cover our country's indebtedness to other countries.

    As time goes on, there will certainly be greater longevity, less extensive illness, and more people able to earn longer if they choose. Genetic diseases will be treated in utero and fewer disabled people will be born, resulting in lower health care costs and more taxes collected from earners, people who might otherwise be a burden on society through disability. Hopefully the lives of premature infants saved through advancements in medical care, and less CP will find them having high quality lives through research that is done through greater funding and less expense.

    Educational costs for professional care providers would be lower when up to date texts are available online, and professors at universities continue to have private group practises. There would be more teaching physicians, at less expense if that was a requirement by hospitals at which they have admitting privileges. When those facilities are managed to save expenses by paying for less required diagnostic equipment, and don't decorate their lobbies as extensively as they do now, they will dote less on physicians' business, treating them as equal members of the health care team, rather than customers. I don't see economizing on nursing staff as a viable way to maintain quality care. When the patients come first, more staff will be needed. Now that's a recipe for successful health care!
  2. by   bethygean
    In a perfect world...yeah it would be great, but no our nation is no longer the nation that we used to be. now we have to pay for other's healthcare. those that choose not to work, who get paid by the government for a bogus injury (i know of a few people who get this), who spend their money on drugs, alcohol, etc... Personally I want my money that I earn, not higher income tax, and not something that will only get us into a deeper recession. Unfortuanately, our administration did get it through, but they neglected their job doing so. Say this bill is going to actually work and will benefit our country, they still ignored the people's wants. Their job is to represent the American people, and obviously they ignored the majority and did what they wanted.
  3. by   lamazeteacher
    quoted post # 417 by bethygean:
    in a perfect world...yeah it would be great, we may not be able to have that, but we certainly should make every effort to achieve thye closest possible thing to it! but no our nation is no longer the nation that we used to be. of course it isn't. change happens throughout time, hopefully for the better. years ago women were sterilized without their knowledge or permission, if their doctor thought they'd had too many children now we have to pay for other's healthcare. we always have done that - at astonishingly high costs, due to the progression of disease unchecked, when those who cannot afford health care let their disease go untreated those that choose not to work, when people are sick, they cannot work, may spread a contagious disease if they have one, and may need psychiatric care, which is the situation most "homeless" people face who get paid by the government for a bogus injury (i know of a few people who get this), if you checked statistics at osha's website, you'd find out that the majority of claims for injuries sustained at work, are due to actual unsafe conditions in the workplace who spend their money on drugs, alcohol, etc... not all those on the downside of life abuse drugs personally i want my money that i earn, not higher income tax, unless you make more that $200,000, you will pay as you do now, for health care coverage and not something that will only get us into a deeper recession. the recession wasn't caused by higher taxes unfortunately, our administration did get it through, but they neglected their job doing so. those who are responsible for passing the health care act did so with great barvery, in the face of rabid wealthy individuals who didn't want it, hired lobbyists to oppose it, and don't respect truth. say this bill is going to actually work and will benefit our country, which it will they still ignored the people's wants. maybe those you know, not the majority - depending upon myths that are believed by uninformed folks in certain geographical locations and the fact that "there are none so blind, as those who will not see".their job is to represent the american people, and obviously they ignored the majority and did what they wanted. that is the biggest myth, perpetrated by the minority who opposed the results of the 2008 election. i've never heard or seen such a bunch of sore losers in my life. get over it!!!!
  4. by   resumecpr
    I miss Canada for the healthcare. I work hard in the US (they recruited me) and find that even with insurance I still have multiple bills to pay for physician visits (annual exams). And for some reason, now that I'm 30, my body has decided to go haywire and give me cancer and chipped teeth. To make matters worse, I am moving across the country so my insurance will lapse and I will be forced to pay "pre-existing" condition bills. I may as well move back to Canada. It's frustrating for me because I do work, I do pay for insurance, but when I really need the care, I can't afford it. Even COBRA is almost $400/month simply because I have a "pre-existing condition." In Canada, I may have to wait a while for chemotherapy, but not usually longer than 4 weeks (which is the time it takes for pathology etc. to come back). I'd say the wait is worth it, especially since it won't make you go hungry and homeless.
  5. by   Sade
    QUOTED FROM JSTAND “I love it when people start to assume what the framers of the constitution mean and put their own spin on it. The truth is that YOU, nor Rebelyell, nor I know exactly what the framers meant when they said "general welfare".

    We can know exactly, with great detail and certainty what our founding fathers thought of the "General Welfare" clause. Please read below. Keep in mind these are just a few quotes and if you need me to provide more, please let me know.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
    - Thomas Jefferson
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”
    - James Madison
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “The nature of the encroachment upon American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer; it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity and frugality become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole of society.”
    - John Adams
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare... they may appoint teachers in every state... The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.”
    - James Madison
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “The constitutionality and propriety of the Federal Government assuming to enter into a novel and vast field of legislation, namely, that of providing for the care and support of all those … who by any form of calamity become fit objects of public philanthropy. ... I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States. To do so would, in my judgment, be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive of the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.”
    - Franklin Peirce
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
    - James Madison
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”
    - James Madison
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
    - Thomas Jefferson
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    “To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association -- the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
    - Thomas Jefferson
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity, ... [it] would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.”
    - Franklin Peirce
    Last edit by dianah on Sep 12, '10 : Reason: Terms of Service
  6. by   deborahp
    As a Canadian nurse who has practiced through more than one major restructuring , I actually once had to chose between a job in Florida and a one in the far north. Because I am a diehard fan of the socialized medicine I chose the north inspite of an allergy to cold. I truly believe healthcare is basic human right. That
    said I also believe it can only work when the majority values such a system. It is true the Canadian system is not perfect. To most Canadians it is still better than the American system. It is because we fear a return to the time when an illness could reduce you to poverty that we are willing to fund a universal system of care. It has become apart of our national identity. That makes it worth saving for us. But it has to be a priority or it becomes something that is not worth having.
  7. by   bethygean
    People in the United States are not necessarily living in poverty because of an illness. A vast majority of people living in poverty have gotten themselves into that situation through a chosen lifestyle of drugs, gangs, or other illegal activities. Not all, but most can change whether or not they live in this environment. There is a difference between being poor and living in poverty. If the United States carries through with this health care reform then people will lose the value of hard work and become idle.
  8. by   dlatimer
    I don't think that is true. The United States spends more per capita than anyone besides the Marshall Islands. The US also ranks 37th in rankings of health care. Just think if all that excessive money was in your pocket instead of profit for some insurance/health care organization/corporation? Lots of people have know this was going to happen, but greed got in the way of reform. Beware of the messages out there. The insurance companies, healthcare organizations and those they serve and serve them have a lot to lose. It just make sense that if health care was universal there would be more people available to work, be educated and raise our level of income, societal norms, etc. Besides, I was between jobs, got sick and hospitalized. $30,000 dollars and years of trying to pay forced me into bankruptcy. The American dream is to own your home and put your kids through college. That dream is gone for me.
  9. by   Jstand
    Quote from Sade
    QUOTED FROM JSTAND "I love it when people start to assume what the framers of the constitution mean and put their own spin on it. The truth is that YOU, nor Rebelyell, nor I know exactly what the framers meant when they said "general welfare".

    We can know exactly, with great detail and certainty what our founding fathers thought of the "General Welfare" clause. Please read below. Keep in mind these are just a few quotes and if you need me to provide more, please let me know.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
    - Thomas Jefferson
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
    - James Madison
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "The nature of the encroachment upon American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer; it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity and frugality become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole of society."
    - John Adams
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare... they may appoint teachers in every state... The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America."
    - James Madison
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "The constitutionality and propriety of the Federal Government assuming to enter into a novel and vast field of legislation, namely, that of providing for the care and support of all those ... who by any form of calamity become fit objects of public philanthropy. ... I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States. To do so would, in my judgment, be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive of the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."
    - Franklin Peirce
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
    - James Madison
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America."
    - James Madison
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
    - Thomas Jefferson
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father's has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association -- the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."
    - Thomas Jefferson
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity, ... [it] would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."
    - Franklin Peirce
    Every last quote that you have attached here speaks in broad generality about "general welfare". My criticism was that you as well as the other people I have quoted like to determine for themselves what they think it means and then try to say that the framers of the Constitution agree with them. And forgive me if I am wrong, but I do believe that only one of the people you quoted here was a signer of the Constitution. You might want to check your history before you go quoting the "Framers of the Constitution".
  10. by   lamazeteacher
    From post # 421

    ".........we fear a return to the time when an illness could reduce you to poverty that we are willing to fund a universal system of care. "

    In 1962, when the concept of Canada's medical program was conceived, healthcare cost were a fraction of the amounts now received by providers of care. One has to consider that diagnostic procedures, tests and medications available today were not available then. However the inflated charges for them and already established things in the USA have inflated grossly, according to "what the traffic will bear" - which is what health insurance companies agree to pay. Huge profits have accumulated due to the belief (false) that pharmaceutical companies pay for all the research done to develop new medications. Grants accessed by those companies pay for the research in glitzy facilities they build to attract credible researchers.

    The Canadian program had staff that negotiated lower prices for drugs, lab supplies and hardware, and controlled hospital costs and prevented the overbuying of individual facilities when sufficient machinery was close to other labs/hospitals. In the USA, capitolism is the excuse for competitive facilities to have all the equipment their neighboring facilities have. Since new discoveries in the health care field provide great changes that present a need to obtain more and more of those advances, older proliferation of equipment is wasted. Most of that can't even be recycled!

    Therefore it is essential that our country places controls on the amount expended for equipment in communities that are affluent, to provide it for less monied communities. However many Americans see their rights invaded whenever public money is spent on those with fewer economic opportunities...... You can point to decades old provisions in the constitution here, to your heart's discontent, yet the bottom line is usually greedy selfishness and an attitude as that expressed in post # 422.

    Since political campaigns have become more and more vicious, with claims by candidates that are unresearched and/or purposely misinterpreted for their own interests. Reality is hard to find these days, yet the evidence of a diminished "middle class" is extensive and the affluence of the rich is even more obvious. Since poor people (other than those who are homeless)haven't the opportunitiy to be seen due to transportation issues, they have hidden in the dark recesses of big cities and in rural areas. It is truer now than at any other time, according to my observations that those without monehy have fallen into a "quicksand" environment that piles debt after debt on their heads, some of which is appropriate and much that is not.

    Banks have assigned repeated fees for one error, to those who haven't kept up with their expenses, making any one error exponentially larger according to the ability of account holders to straighten out mistakes and negotiate to pay off debts slowly. Once a debt has been reported to "Unfair Isaac" by the big 3 reporting companies, one's ability to access money to dig themselves out of a financial "hole" become more expensive (higher interest rates, refusals and lack of ability to get out from under the (usually) unjustified amounts claimed to be owed a creditor. If someone can't obtain work where they are currently, and have no reliable transportation to move or commute further away, they slip further into that quagmire of "quicksand", eventually giving up efforts to return to their former lifestyles.

    That grim picture is repeated millions of times, with some tragic repercussions. It is a horrible failing to our fellow Americans, to refuse to "lend a hand" to those who have fallen, and derive satisfaction from not being them. Nurses, more than anyone else should be able to appreciate the dilemma of those who have become unemployed due to no fault of their own (mine was becoming 55 and having health insurance companies present me as a liability greater than my employers wanted to bear). We know how anxiety has negative effects on peoples health, presenting autoimmune diseases for them that are life threatening. Then the pharmaceutical remedies' costs exceed realistic expectations. My medications cost me $1500/month for 15 years before a drug program through Medicare became available, which made them affordable and therefore available to me. Meanwhile the symptoms of several illnesses and increasing age affected my ability to work.

    My savings are gone, and I am about to lose my home because my income from my exhusband has diminished, which was decreed by a Judge to continue for my entire life and was to end or change only upon the death of my ex spouse or my remarriage. Only hiring an attorney with an "up front payment" of $10-15,000 can change the dilemma in which I find myself. When I applied recently for modification of the mortgage that should make my housing affordable, I was told that I didn't "earn" enough money for one. The only alternative is foreclosure.

    The only positive thing I can see, is that I am not alone, millions of others are in my position; and we presently have a government that is actually creating solutions for problems such as those I have described above. Only big business investors and those with large inheritances, who have bilked the public and lied consistantly see that as being negative. Please VOTE thoughtfully and considerately next week!
  11. by   Sade
    Quote from Jstand
    Every last quote that you have attached here speaks in broad generality about "general welfare". My criticism was that you as well as the other people I have quoted like to determine for themselves what they think it means and then try to say that the framers of the Constitution agree with them. And forgive me if I am wrong, but I do believe that only one of the people you quoted here was a signer of the Constitution. You might want to check your history before you go quoting the "Framers of the Constitution".
    The founding fathers wrote much concerning the subject of "General Welfare." Try reading the Federalist Papers to start with. It is a long and dry read. But it is filled with specifics from our founding fathers. FYI, our founding fathers wrote the Federalist Papers precisely for the reasons of discrediting and exploiting the attempts of some at that time to change the original intent of our Constitution, as you are trying to do now. The 10 Amendment was passed (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) in order to re-enforce the original intent of Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. Some at the time of ratification were trying to say, as you are now, that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Federal Government unlimited powers. And....as we can see by the ratification of the 10th Amendment (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) the consensus at that time definitively answered this question....NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE UNLIMITED POWERS. BUT ONLY THE POWERS SPECIFICALLY EXPRESSED IN OUR CONSTITUTION and for the sake of this conversation SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF OUR CONSTITUTION. Can you tell me what books or other information you've read that led you to the opinion that no one can possibly know what the original intent of our founding fathers?
  12. by   deborahp
    re post 423
    When I said that Canadians fear a return to a time of poverty due to medical bills I was referring to the middle class. We hear stories of Americans who are employed and have medical bills that have bankrupted them. I have also heard that some American lose their jobs because employers feel they are too expensive to insure. This is something Canadians have decided we will not accept. Forgive me if I have been misinformed but I heard that the American poor already have medical coverage. No taxpayer based system could ever have been created if the middle class had not decided it was a priorty.
    I also must say that as a nurse I find your statements about people living in poverty shocking. If we as members of the caring profession can not look at all people and see the humanity who will ?
  13. by   Jstand
    Quote from Sade
    The founding fathers wrote much concerning the subject of "General Welfare." Try reading the Federalist Papers to start with. It is a long and dry read. But it is filled with specifics from our founding fathers. FYI, our founding fathers wrote the Federalist Papers precisely for the reasons of discrediting and exploiting the attempts of some at that time to change the original intent of our Constitution, as you are trying to do now. The 10 Amendment was passed (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) in order to re-enforce the original intent of Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution. Some at the time of ratification were trying to say, as you are now, that Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives the Federal Government unlimited powers. And....as we can see by the ratification of the 10th Amendment (by elected delegates as well as non-elected delegates of the Constitutional Convention) the consensus at that time definitively answered this question....NO, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE UNLIMITED POWERS. BUT ONLY THE POWERS SPECIFICALLY EXPRESSED IN OUR CONSTITUTION and for the sake of this conversation SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8 OF OUR CONSTITUTION. Can you tell me what books or other information you've read that led you to the opinion that no one can possibly know what the original intent of our founding fathers?
    Unlimited Powers = General Welfare?? What kind of comparsion are you making here? I don't care what books you have read, it doesn't give you the authority to tell me what general welfare means. I didn't hear you answer to my question in this post either. If you are such a history expert, then why are you quoting " constitutional framers" who never signed the document???

close