Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Yesterday I saw an interesting report as to the inauguration of President Bush and the social conditions in the U.S. on the German TV station PHOENIX.

We all know how costly the inauguration was and that it is perverse in view of the recent tsunami disaster.
But it is also perverse in view of the social conditions in the U.S.

The report was also about people who are having a job and do impoverish all the same. Then a former bank clerk from NY was shown who lost her job due to 9/11 and hasn't got a new one since the banks hardly hire nowadays.

For several years she lived from the money that she has had saved. But the assets are exhausted in the meantime. Now she is living in an asylum for homeless and has to share her room with 9 other women. She said it is hell.

I was driven by an about 70 years old taxi driver back in 2000 when I was in Daytona. This taxi driver suffered from a lung cancer and has to go to work all the same.

I have often read in this forum that the U.S. is such a wonderful country. Honestly, I would be afraid to live there. If something bad happens to you (unemployment, serious disease) you will lose everything.

In German the social system will take care of you. 100 per cent of the people have a health insurance who pays almost everything when you get ill. So a disease will not drive you into poverty. And if you lose your job you will get enough money from the social system to keep your home and most of your standards.

So please tell me: What's so great to live in a permanant uncertainty? To live in a country where you are going to lose everything when you are seized by bad luck?

Again, I would be scared if I would need to live over there. Why are you so glad to live there? The only thing I can imagine is that you don't know it otherwise.

The U.S. has accomplished many things. In many parts it is the most advanced nation in technology. It is undisputable the #1 military power in the world. It has a great scenery and surely many nice people. But I would give a damn to all of it when I am in a permanent threat of being impoverished.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

We all know how costly the inauguration was and that it is perverse in view of the recent tsunami disaster.
But it is also perverse in view of the social conditions in the U.S.

(ME)Agreed, but for different reasons.

The report was also about people who are having a job and do impoverish all the same. Then a former bank clerk from NY was shown who lost her job due to 9/11 and hasn't got a new one since the banks hardly hire nowadays.
For several years she lived from the money that she has had saved. But the assets are exhausted in the meantime. Now she is living in an asylum for homeless and has to share her room with 9 other women. She said it is hell.
I was driven by an about 70 years old taxi driver back in 2000 when I was in Daytona. This taxi driver suffered from a lung cancer and has to go to work all the same.
I have often read in this forum that the U.S. is such a wonderful country. Honestly, I would be afraid to live there. If something bad happens to you (unemployment, serious disease) you will lose everything.

In German the social system will take care of you. 100 per cent of the people have a health insurance who pays almost everything when you get ill. So a disease will not drive you into poverty. And if you lose your job you will get enough money from the social system to keep your home and most of your standards.

(ME)How is this "social system" that guarantees everyone a good standard of living paid for ? Who pays for it ? Does EVERYONE THERE DESERVE a good standard of living, or are some lazy bums taking advantage of everyone ELSES work ?

So please tell me: What's so great to live in a permanant uncertainty? To live in a country where you are going to lose everything when you are seized by bad luck ?

(ME)It's nice not to have to answer to some halfwitted bureaucrat every so often, and fill out zillions of forums and give more of what we earn to taxes that pay for a "social system" that supports SOME plain lazy bums who refuse to work for a living. It's nice to have motivation to get educated and earn good money that we get to keep ourselves instead of providing handouts to a "social system" that supports unmotivated, rip the system theivery. We DO have a corrupt "social system" here ALREADY called welfare. It's bad enough, when you see people that are perfectly capable of work taking advantage of such "social systems" and staying at home doing nothing but sleeping, eating and breeding.

Again, I would be scared if I would need to live over there. Why are you so glad to live there? The only thing I can imagine is that you don't know it otherwise.

(ME)We're working towards a "social system" more and more here. We may have it sooner than I'd like.

The U.S. has accomplished many things. In many parts it is the most advanced nation in technology. It is undisputable the #1 military power in the world. It has a great scenery and surely many nice people. But I would give a damn to all of it when I am in a permanent threat of being impoverished.

(ME)When we arise to what you describe as a "social system", we'll see if we continue to be the most advanced nation in technology and have the #1 military power in the world.
-----
Thane

To answer your questions:

The social system stands on three colums:

- health insurance
- pension insurance
- unemployment insurance

The costs for these 3 columns are covered by the working class. It is paid 50 percent by the employee and 50 per cent by the employer.

And yes, there is also abuse of this system which leads to a weakening of it. The benefits 10 years ago were much more than now, but it is still enough to keep the needy from being impoverished.

And yes: there are forms to be filled in, but it is not as much as you think and the education of the people here provides them with the necessary knowledge to do it.

The money that you save by your "social system light" flows into prisons. Maybe you should also inquire as to the damage that crime afflicts to the economy (I mean the monetary damage). Poverty creates crime. I think your money for prisons, the keeping of the prisoners and the law enforcement would be better spent on social welfare.

I don't wish it on you, but just imagine you get very ill. You can't go to work and lose your job. Maybe your kidneys fail and you need hemodialysis three times per week. This is so costly (I know this because a friend of mine needs it) that you will soon lose your house and your money and everything.

I think saving a good person from such a fate is worth feeding a certain percentage of crooks who abuse the system.
-----
The #1 Boa constrictor site in the world wide web

....at the expense of the many......

Entirely true Hermann. The Prison-Industrial Complex is one of the largest and most booming industries our country boasts. At a HUGE cost to the average tax payer, the average working person who gets by check by check,on paycheck away from homelessness.

The mentality is to contain those among us that commit crimes.

But not ALL crimes.....

Cocaine posession, drug addiction, marijauna sales(Small amounts) traffic tickets, child support payments that are non existant or late..and even misdemaanor crimes...

People are in prison for ALL of these crimes. The crimes that go unheeded for the most part are the CORPORATE ones...were CEO's and Managers bilk millions of dollars from investors, many who put their life savings into them.....only to find out that they now have NOTHING to retire on.

Mino rock cocaine posession for inner city youth carries a much stiffer penalty than many of these CEOs will ever face.

As if the court really cared about blacks and hispanics selling drugs to people in their neighborhood.

It keeps the hotel full..

Social programs?

We find it easier to clean up the mess AFTERWARD(Incarceration) than preventing it from happening(Education)

As nation...we have failed our children...our elderly...and our poor.

BUT..our CEO's love us!!

And isnt that REALLY what counts nowadays?

Disgusted,

Fredrick Albury

What's the surprise Fred?

Law is a business. Corporations contribute heavily and make more money for the legal system.

So unless they do something too stupid to cover, what profit is there in jailing them?

Besides, busting the druggies makes everyone think the law is doing it's job.

What else is new?

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

I think you are a delusional America hating socialist--either that or you get your news form a very slanted liberal source! I see this time and time again from liberal sources. They never use hard numbers or facts when making an argument, just allegations and feelings that are almost always wrong. And they always make statements without putting the facts in perspective.

Here's where you are wrong on almost all counts.

1) The cost of the presidential inauguration was paid for by donations from people that support Bush. It was not paid for by tax dollars, so to compare it to any tax dollar spending like you are doing is wrong. The money spent on it wasn't paid for by tax dollars in the first place!!!! (so the money wouldn't have been available to spend on anything else anyway.)

2) The amount isn't unusual---in fact, it's about average. (Clinton's inauguration cost was 29.6 million dollars, and when you take into account inflation, that's about even with what was spent on Bush 8 years later.)

3) The amount isn't put into perspective. For instance, the war on the terrorists in Iraq that has been going on for the past year and a half would pay for the inauguration costs in about 2-3 hours!!!. I read that the Kerry and Bush both spent over 1 Billion running against each other!! So, after winning the election, less than 2.5% of the running cost expenses were spent on celebrating a win!--an extremely small amount.
Compared to the tsunami victims donations that the US has given--both in private donations and govt. aid, it is also small. I read about a week ago that it was over 600 million and rapidly growing, so that makes the inauguration costs about 6% of this amount and falling.

Then there is the fact that we are giving this huge amount of money for tsunami aid to a Muslim country, when Muslim countries are virtually absent from helping out their fellow Muslims. Does that make any sense? Shouldn't you be criticizing them instead? At least that would make some sense.

Then there is the issue of international aid. The U.S. is only about 5-6% of the world population, yet we give 40% of the international aid. We give 8 times as much per person than the average of the rest of the world!! Yet we are criticized because this isn't enough? And by those that give far far less? And you criticize our system that allows this large amount of giving to occur, while your's can't due to an unproductive socialist economy? Incredible.

Then there is the issue of social spending in America. Are you aware that America spends significantly more on social programs than it does on it's military? And when you consider the inauguration costs were the equivalent of 2 hours of military spending, then the inauguration costs were only about 70 or 80 minutes of social spending!! A very small price for a celebration that recognizes your leader who will be in office for 4 years!

(Yearly military spending is about 360 billion and social program spending is about 580 billion.) Personally, I think we spend way too much on social programs and not nearly enough on military spending--especially when you consider the military protects 100% of it's citizens and social spending protects a much smaller percentage, and primarily those that are irresponsible. (ever heard of insurance?)

Guess your German reporter wasn't an investigative reporter, or they would have mentioned these facts. (Or they were an investigative reporter, and they eliminated these facts to try and slant the news and falsely deface the U.S..)

I have relatives in Sweeden that visited the U.S. and they were amazed at how good our economy was. Prices were very low, almost everyone ownes their own homes, etc. They absolutely loved it over here, and they said they wanted to immigrate, but due to old age and relatives in Sweeden, they would not. (A lot of pride comes from ownership! I wouldn't want to live in a country where I was dependent on the govt. for my every need.) When my parents went to Sweeden, they were shocked at the enormous tax burden placed on people, the prices of goods in the market place, the fact that most people owned almost nothing, etc. My parents loved the environment/countryside in Sweened, but they wouldn't dream of moving to such a repressive society. I think I know why America has such an illegal immegration problem. Can Germany say the same? Do you have people from all over the world trying to illegally enter your country on a daily basis because of the thriving economy/living conditions there? I don't think so.---then there is unemployment numbers that are far lower here than in Europe--but that's another topic!

Rodney

Considering the population of the U.S., the cost of the presidential inauguration comes out to about 20 cents per person.
(Since you are from Germany, I don't know if you are familiar with our money, but that comes out to about 1/3 the price of a can of soda!!) And you think that is an exorbitant amount to celebrate the election of the most powerful man in the world?

Or consider it compared to the minimum wage here. It works out to a little less than 2 minutes of work. Is that too much? Those of us at the lowest end of the economic scale have to work for less than 2 minutes to pay for a party that celebrates the election of the most powerful man in the world for 4 years?

Wow, are you critical!

Rodney

You are right, this amount is nothing compared to the costs of the war on Iraq and the upcoming war on Iran.

You have got the President that 51% of you deserved. So it is rightful when the party costs that much. In my opinion the money would have been better off in Indonesia or Thailand where more than 200.000 people died several weeks ago.

But it would have needed a president with a minumum amount of decency to be a little more modest in view of the disaster shortly before.

He didn't give a damn as to the catastrophy anyway until his advisers told him to do so. Or how do you explain that he needed 2 days for a statement?

Rodney, I want a refund on my two minutes (lol)

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Rodney,
I have been in the U.S. 4 times now and I saw it with my own eyes. So don't tell me there is not a significant amount of poverty there.

I have been in several countries in Europe (Austria, Switzerland, Italy, UK, Luxembourg, The Netherlands) but nowhere I have seen so many poor people.

I hope you are not offended when I trust my eyes more than your words.

I'm curious as to where you went. Even in our "slums" I don't see that many poor people.
-----
Thane

I have been in Long Beach, Los Angeles, San Pedro and Daytona.
As to my finding: You are accustomed to the number of poor people and see it as normal.

If you would come to European countries like Austria, Germany, Switzerland and so on you would ask yourself where the poor people are.

Hermann,

Your evaluation of the plight of the average citizen in the United States is correct. There are a TON of poor people here, many of them appear INVISIBLE to those that CHOOSE not to see them, or avert their eyes elesewhere.

Poverty here can take MANY FORMS, here are but a
few examples..there are many more...trust and beleive that....

The WORKING POOR: An often underepresented group of folks, whose day to day survival is linked to their low paying jobs. Housing, food, transportation, EVERYTHING is affected. If you cant put up two months rent that you need to secure an apartment, you end up paying through the nose for a room by the week. If your room only has a hotplate at best, you cant save money by cooking large amounts of stew, soup or food and freezing it ahead of time.

If you have no money for health insurance...then you customarily either go without routine care or prescription drugs and end up paying the inevitable price.

There is a totally VICOUS cycle at work here, making OURS not just an economy, but a culture of EXTREME INEQUALITY. Corporate CEO's and even would be two bit bosses of small businesses occupy an economic position MILES above the underpaid people whose labor they depend on. Often this has to do with class...and often racial prejudice. Hence the need for repressive management and ever intrusive measures...such as drug and personality tests. This stuff ISNT free...it cost companies $20-$30,000 a year...$100 a pop on drug tests.

And these are the people that are WORKING. Sometimes they have to work two and even three jobs..leaving their children alone to fend for themselves and educate and tutor themseves. Yet..getting poorer all the time.

People here walk over the homeless, stereotype them all as drug addicts..lazy...bums....asay that it could never happen to them
but it can and often does...

Hermann...you are entirely right in your observation. We are the most wealthy and powerfull nation on the face of this earth, yet we have more homeless, working poor, destitute people than any other society of similar means and clout.

Some peeople choose to ignore this...they walk over it and their eyes are shut to it....

These same people voted in the last election...

51% of them.

And kept Bush as our Presdient

Pathetic.

Fredrick Albury

Herman and Fred are both correct. If you spent time in S. Fla where I am, the poor are there in large numbers (to escape winter). Pan handlers and street vendors are extremely common. Here they even put out a newspaper called THE HOMELESS VOICE which covers their issues. it is printed through the resources of a charity.

Fred, I agree with most of what you said about employers. But one thing I take exception on is that Drug tests are not Intrusuive.

When I was in the Navy a crewman in the navigation Division was high and almost ran out ship aground before his error was caught. Over 1500 lives were put in jeapordy (including mine). Testing for drugs protects the whole workforce. It is not discrimination.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Not to really argue a pro marijuana stance here but in regards to drug testing, there needs to be a better way to do it. Pot stays in your system for much longer than most other drugs. I believe cocaine is only in the system for a couple of days. You will find a lot more pot users and far fewer cocaine users. I am against drug testing in some instances but in a cases like you described, I agree. Anyone who is going to be in a position that will have the health and safety of others at risk should have a clear head.

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
7 balls
2.1.10 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, 6 normal, 4 anery )
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
1 fish
1 mouse
3.3 cats