OT - the upcoming social change - | Arthritis Information

I think by know everybody realizes I'm a...liberal! I know, hard to believe. So today after taking my daughter to school I think I found a way to explain the differences between the neo-cons and the 'other side'. To me, and maybe I'm wrong here, but I see a great lack of empathy for the 'have-not's'.

Well, we're the 'have not's'. All of us. And we must be careful to not allow what happened in the last 2 elections happen again. Don't get caught up in allowing media to 'reframe the agruement'. Last time it was 'gay marriage' but it really was economics'. This time it's not 'socialized medicine' it's basic human decency in the US.

For those who have lost the way, you might seriously consider what this song says - walk a mile in somebody else's shoes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z9f9Eybv4I

And for the lyrics -

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/everlast/whatitslike.html

Hugs,

Pip

I love this song, although I've only ever heard the 'clean' lyrics, not what is linked. Wow, that sounds like some of the protest songs we had in the 60's and 70's.

They put it out there, don't they? Sometimes these things get way too easy to ignore.

Most conservatives are no less empathetic than liberals they just differ on the solutions to social issues. You may disagree with them but to say that conservatives are "lost" or imply that they are less caring than liberals is not really fair and to me deepens the divide among people with different political beliefs rather than trying to find a common ground to build consensus and foster more togetherness.

My former boss sent me this today regarding the differences between the two sides [QUOTE=buckeye]

[/QUOTE]

Couldn't agree more.

You cannot build consensus with people that lack empathy. They think they are logical and precise when in reality their souls are not touched by the same things that those on the 'outs' of society face.

In the next election, and then in the new administration, there is going to be a huge shift to the right trying to undo a lot of the social losses we American's have had during the last regime. And the fight is going to get ugly. But in the end, it's going to come down to the same thing it always does - money. Business wants to keep 'business as usual' and the only way they are going to be able to do that is if they convince everyday Americans that they need to protect and hold on to what they have. They will use fear and appeal to greed.

My fear is that they will succeed.

Pip

don't equate business concerns with conservativism they have 2 seperate agendas. Liberal businessmen want to make a profit just as much as coservative ones do,

In the next election, and then in the new administration, there is going to be a huge shift to the right trying to undo a lot of the social losses we American's have had during the last regime

Moving to the right means more conservative I assume you meant towards the left,

You can't make a change in this country without some consensus even the God of liberalism Ted Kennedy has realized that...he gets things done because he has learned to work with those who disagree with him politically. You can hold onto to your moral superiority about conservatives and they can hold onto to theirs about Liberalism and nothing happens simply status quo occurs because no one can convince the other side to move and neither side is willing to compromise

Conservatives and Liberals disagree on solutions to social problems not on the concern and empathy towards the people in plight, It does neither side any good to claim that they are better than the other because they care more. Actually its kind of ugly and self promoting..."look how good I am because I care about people more than you do" I've never understiood why either side thinks they are promoting their ideas when they are bashing the other side. You could have made your point by simply saying that the song and video really show why you are a liberal instead you made it a post about you as a Liberal caring more than a conservative.

Buckeye, couldn't agree more. Mab, funny story. There are too many people looking for a handout and refuse to do jobs "beneath them".

Pip, I find your note insulting. I'm a republican and proud of it. Are there problems in the world, absolutely. To say that Republicans don't care about people like the democrats is pure bull****.

I heard another one similar to mab's:
A college freshman proudly called her dad to report that her hard work had paid off and she had received all A's for the semester. Then she said she felt sorry for her roommate, who had stayed out late partying and skipped a lot of classes and was getting D's and F's.

The dad asked if she wanted him to call the dean and ask if he could work it out so they would both receive all C's. Wouldn't that make her feel better?

No!, she said. That wouldn't be fair! I did all the hard work and earned those grades!

Welcome to the Republican Party, my dear.
Suzanne...................BrilliantI'm sure there are an abundance of jokes that put down this group or that group, and try to cleverly reduce complex issues or people's belief systems to simplistic little anecdotes.

The difference between political groups is not only a difference in opinion on how to solve our countries problems, but a difference in the perception of the causes of these problems, and we will never reach a consensus if we do not listen and hear other points of views.

And for the record, the liberals or Democrats that many here are enjoying putting down, are responsbile for Social Security and Medicare -- programs that have benefited many Americans.

My bad, I meant left. It was around midnight my time with I posted, way past my bed time.

The problem with the first example is it plays on the 'fear' that all your hard work goes to others. A kid earns and give the whole thing to help the homeless. Since children are incredibly selfish people and empathy is taught, if that first story is true - Catherine will probably remember that story and grow up to be 'mine is mine'. A fine example of the Republican Party teaching others to be selfish.

In the second story - splitting the difference - is more an example of communism and again plays on the 'fears' people have that somehow they are going to 'lose' what they earned.

And exactly my point and why I posted the video.

You know the funny thing - this is a board with disabled people on it. People who can't work and can't 'pull their own weight'. And yet they still can't see that they are now 'one of them' and are going to lose, personally, if the social programs about to be offered on healthcare are not passed.

Pip

I think it's wrong to generalize what you or your children will become based on parties - or adults for that matter. I think it comes down to family/community/faith values and your children learn what you teach them, no matter how you vote. I also disagree that disabled people can't "pull their own weight" there are ways to "pull your own weight" other than working.

The Republic Party doesn't teach people to be selfish. The point I see, if the homeless man wants to have money or food, do something about it. GET A JOB.

I also disagree that people with RA or other diseases can't pull their own weight. Some may not be able to get out of the house to get a job, but can make phone calls, or whatever. When there is a will, there is a way. I think it's easier to sit back on your easy chair and say "I can't do this, or I can't do that". Find something you CAN do. I also know there are some that are in a bad position and can't do anything right now, but that doesn't count them out for the future.

I really think you have blinders on Pip, can't you find the good in people for regardless how they vote? You have no idea how many empathetic Republicans that are out there that are helping people "without".

[QUOTE=Debrakay]The Republic Party doesn't teach people to be selfish. The point I see, if the homeless man wants to have money or food, do something about it. GET A JOB.

[/QUOTE]

Many of the homeless are mentally ill.

And many are not. It's a lose-lose here. It's just heartbreaking to see people that can't see both sides, that think that the republicans are this selfish group of people without a heart. That's sick.Personally, I think we need to bring back institutionalized care for the severely mentally ill. These people often have nowhere to go and end up cycling between homelessness and jail. They cannot hold a job, they are incapable of managing their personal affairs (disability payments, medicaid, etc), they are unfit for minimally-supervised community-integrated living arrangements. I know it's politically incorrect to say so, but I truly think that some of these folks need to be institutionalized. I would rather see them in a treatment-based mental institution than in jail/prison. [QUOTE=Debrakay]The Republic Party doesn't teach people to be selfish. The point I see, if the homeless man wants to have money or food, do something about it. GET A JOB.

[/QUOTE]

Yes, not ALL homeless are mentally ill, but many are, but you're statement above implied it was simply a matter of GETTING A JOB, which you emphasized in capital letters.

I worked in downtown Sacramento, because of our mild winters, we attract a lot of homeless folks, I remember the women, one walked the mall wearing a coat even in the summer, another sat on the sidewalk, rocking back and forth. Its a sad problem, and its difficult to address if the mindset is that they should simply pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

Sometimes there is a quickness to judge, without deeper consideration of the issue or problem or person, I think of the phrase, "There but for the grace of God go I."

And my point exactly.

I am referring to 'pulling your own weight' via earning money and PAYING TAXES. I'm not working right now (I should be) but I'm not. Right now, my husband is doing this for the family. If I were disabled and he somehow got hit by a bus - those taxes he (and I used to pay) should cover my daughter and myself.

How many posts must we see here of people who can't afford to 'retire' because they don't have enough money to make ends meet? How many people can't afford their meds?

Think PoGo - we have met the enemy it it is us.

Pip

And Jas - I agree about institutional care for the mentally ill. Nobody is getting good treatment on the street. But Reagan dismantled the mental health care system so states would pick up the burden and people got to save taxes. But did they - no - the money was just used for other things.

Pip

Pip, it was more than just Reagan. Many people on the left wanted the mentally ill "liberated" from the institutions. All sides share the blame. We didn't want them 'liberated'. What the cons did was exploit the sad situation where some people were involuntarily committed when there was nothing wrong with them. Now everybody is 'liberated' and nobody is getting treated. In California, there are stories in the papers all the time of family desperate to get somebody committed before they hurt somebody and not being able to - until after somebody else is dead. Then they end up in jail and still don't get treatment. LA solves the problem by incarcerating them.

Pip

So once again the left is blameless.

nice.
I think it's universal that the jails are full of mentally ill people because there is no place else to put them. Some hospitals have the space, but not the resources to help them. And besides that, they have no insurance and we all know that that is a no-no. What a freakin mess! There are a lot of problems, and yes I said GET A JOB because not every homeless person is mentally unstable. And I'm not just speaking of the homeless. There are a lot of people that sit on their ass and complain, you have this or you have that and I don't and it's not fair. Well guess what, somepeople are careful with their money and they work more than one job to make ends meet. There are people that just like to sit back and complain about life being not fair and they are the "have nots".

Have you ever seen the stories on 20/20 etc. that show people that are out in cities begging for money. There are a lot of people that are not mentally ill, they pretend and sucker people to pay them money cause they're too lazy to work. How about the ones on the street that are doing crack cocaine or drinking themselves stupid. That's my point, it's a choice they are making. I'm not a republican person without a heart, I do lots for people that need it, not the lazy ass slobs that complain about fairness.

and exactly how is pointing fingers about who's to blame for the problems ever going to get things fixed?Ask PipPip, what your original post really did was show the great misunderstanding that liberals have concerning the difference in what we believe. Mab, Suzanne, Jas and others have hopefully cleared your thinking and you are now "enlightend". :) Linncn2008-06-07 13:35:49Pip speaks for Pip, just as Debrakay speaks for Debrakay. Pip does not speak for all liberals, nor does Debra speak for all conservatives. There is a danger in this type of generalization, this "they" thinking -- all liberals are this way, all conservatives believe such and such, those homeless are bums that won't work, those "have nots" sit around on their lazy asses and complain, the uninsured choose to blow their money and not buy insurance. We will never solve our countries problems with that type of limited thinking.

Generalities are ok to some extent I think. I mean, if liberals, conservatives etc. didn't have something in common in the way they think, they wouldn't be a group. Also, if you are referring to a comment I made the other day about the statistical breakdown of the uninsured, it is a fact that millions of the unisured are that way because they choose to spend their money on other things. I didn't say, imply, nor did it even cross my mind that all the uninsured choose to be that way. But whether it suits your purpose or not, many do.

Pip, I agree with you - the cost of keeping a autoimmmune diseased human under proper medical care is going to be tough for medicare, medicaid and social security to keep up with, so I too share your fear. Cathy[QUOTE=Linncn]

[/QUOTE]

and the source of the statistical breakdown of the uninsured and the fact that millions of the uninsured are that way because they choose to spend their money on other things?

yes, some spend their money inappropriately, but there are many working people that cannot afford health premiums that have nearly doubled in 10 years. More employers do not offer insurance. Those with preexisting conditions are uninsured because insurers will not sell plans to a bad risk. My objection is that whenever I bring up the subject of health insurance it becomes an issue of personal responsibility, and these other causes of being uninsured are overlooked. Fixing our health care system is not only a concern for those w/out insurance but also for those of us w/insurance, as prescription drugs and insuraance premiums increase. This July, Medicare will be cutting the reimbursement rate to physicians by 10.6% and again in 2009. This affects seniors, the disabled, and also TRICARE patients (the military health plan). The consequence, doctors will either reduce the number of Medicare patients they see or simply not accept Medicare patients making it difficult for seniors, disabled and retired military and active service to have access to medical care. Its a very serious and complex problem, there is no one approach that everyone supports, but we can at least have a discussion, that one day, maybe, will lead to a better health care system than we have now.

For the record, I am a blissfully happy unaffiliated voter. I have never voted in a primary, even though we can declare here and do so. I posted that joke because I thought it was a funny joke, not because I think certain parties are communists.

I do not live in an area that clings to many stereotypes, fortunately. My gay next door neighbor had a Bush sign in his yard in 2004.

Joy, I'll say it again. In the post that you referred to from a couple of days ago, I never even came close to suggesting that all the uninsured are in that posistion because they choose to blow their money on other things. In your anti generalization post you made it sound like I did.

Their are millions who do make that choice, but I can't link you to the site with the stats. It was something I read several months ago. I wasn't thinking at the time that I would in the future be challenged when I talked about it and would need to prove it. You can believe it or deny it.

So then we agree

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you Linn, I would really like to have an ongoing discussion about health care reform, though I know its a controversial and complex issue and its difficult having a dialogue in this format. We're not likely to come up with a solution, all I hope is to increase awareness and consideration of possibilities and not have them hastily dismissed as not workable. We're the richest, strongest country in the world, surely we can do better. Do we care enough to make it a priority?

http://www.coverageforall.org/the_uninsured.htm

Very interesting site that's food for thought. LindyJoy... I just wanted to clarify what I said before, it seemed that their was a misunderstanding.Lindy -

Yes, that site is interesting food for thought. They are Foundation for Health Coverage Education which is owned by Wellpoint Inc - which is an insurance company. If you look under their financials you'll see who incredibly well they are doing.

http://www.wellpoint.com/

That's kind of the fox watching the henhouse. They know there will be a move to possibly make insurance non-profit in the US in the near future. It's in their best interests to 'show' how 'misinformed and uneducated' the public is about the how many Americans cannot afford their insurance.

Pip

Hi Pip:

I've voted for Democrats, Republicans and Independents. I'm probably more right then left. I can't believe how much I've changed living outside of the U.S. It's made me appreciate all the freedoms we have. I'm presently living in very different circumstances.

I have a lot of opinions and not a lot of answers. I feel whoever is elected knows the challenges they face in an everchanging world. It's a difficult job in the best of circumstances and when is the last time that has happened.

I just hope that we will agree to disagree but support each other in our life journeys. I miss the U.S! I also miss talking in English!

Love you Pip!! You always have my back and I'll have yours.

A few months after moving to Korea, we were in Seoul and saw a Korean holding up a "Free Hugs" poster in English and Korea. No one would hug him (they don't hug in Korea). I felt so sorry for him that I went up and hugged him. It shocked the Koreans I was with along with everyone else. It will forever be one of my fondest memories here.

Heres the video that started the "Free Hugs" campaign:

http://kr.youtube.com/watch?v=vr3x_RRJdd4

I still love to watch it.

Becky in Suwon, South Korea

Hey Pip, why don't you draw a schematic of who and what are the correct sites to post for stats and information. Seems like any of the pharma, insurance, doctor, clinic, hospital, and certain political group sites aren't reputable according to one group or the other, thus their info is questionable. Lindy Yep, total corruption from Congress to corporations, from doctors, the AMA to pharmaceuticals. We have been had. Becky, I got that video in my email a few months ago! I love it :)

Pip...correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that you've already decided what you want to think, so you sift through information discarding anything that contradicts your chosen belief. Where is the fabled liberal open mind? Does it really exist?

Simple answers sometimes really aren't...

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=123Regarding websites. There is so much information on the internet, the websites look nicely organized, the names sound very respectable, but yet we must always consider who funds them or supports them.

I went to that website, the foundation . . . , the info there was different from most everything I have read -- the number of uninsured wasn't that high, people are eligible for Medicaid but don't sign up -- so I looked a little further and found several insurance companies fund this site and the exec director is from the insurance industry. So I take that into consideration.

The American Association of Family Physicians is another website I've visited. They have a lot of good info, but I also know they are supportive of a single payer system (I think if I remember correctly-it's early here and only had one cup of coffee and fingers to achy to go double check). So I take that into consideration.

I suppose anyone could cherry pick info, and present it in a manner supporting one's position or opinion, so we need to be mindful of that. We need to be a little more critical, I mean look what happened to the media, they were mislead by the pro-Iraq War advocates, accepted what they were told without doing their job, in depth investigative reporting and critical analysis, and look at the consequences. Sorry, didn't mean to bring "that subject" into this, but just wanted to make the point we must evaluate information we're provided.

[/QUOTE]

I think most people do cherry pick, at least to some degree. It's like what you said about the website for the American Association of Family Physicians. Because of your foregone conclusion about healthcare you assume that that website is slanted because they are not in support of social medicine. Maybe they are, but maybe they aren't. Maybe they support single payer healthcare for good reason. Do you do the same sort of background search on groups that do support universal healthcare? Do you "follow the money" when they share your same views? Maybe you do, but if so I think you'd be the exception. I think most people who's minds are made up aren't going to be changing them. The motives of the "other side" are always suspect, are always accused of twisting things just a bit to prove they're point, so they're always taken with salt. I think just about everyone is guilty of some sort of bias. That's why jugdes recuse themselves, why docotrs don't usually treat family, why lawyers are careful to avoid conflict of interest. It's human nature to be that way. Not saying it's a good way to be, just saying it is what it is.

Linncn2008-06-08 10:08:15Lindy and Linda -

Actually, I consider myself as having one of the most open minds on this board. Of course, I would....

They had started using the term 'RA' before I was diagnosed. At diagnosis, I started searching. Some of the first research I found had little disclosures at the bottom saying the researcher had connections to various companies that were funding the study. And my little brain said 'whoa' and I tossed that research. And I kept tossing research that was 'paid for' by the company that funded the research. That just made sense to me. What else were they going to say...it didn't work???

And I've noticed over the last few years less and less legitimate research has those disclosures any more. But that's a different rant.

I totally ignore astroturf. Except to point it out.

The same thing with political slanted websites that are forwarding an agenda. Who is paying for it? How much do they stand to gain? Because it always comes down to money.

There is no 'approved' site for either side for info on meds, PAC's, whatever. It's trying to figure out who has the most accurate info and who is pushing an agenda. Then taking what's left and taking the info to the middle and tossing off the stuff at the extreme outer edges of the self-made graph. In another post I mentioned that I'd seen some info on a natural meds website that I thought was garbage. Lots of ranting and 'they're trying to kill us" rhetoric that as far as I can tell, had no basis in fact. I may believe what they said to some degree, but I didn't post it here as it was BS with no facts to back it up - yet.

As with what works for us with these diseases - it's a HUGE learning curve. The MPers are totally into western meds and rotating a ton of antibiotics for 3 to 5 years to get the 'cure' and while I think they are probably right - they are not addressing my concerns about issues that may have contributed to this disease in me.

For example - dealing with the stress I was under when this all came down. Or leaky gut and the possiblity of 're-infection'. For them, its all about the antibiotics. For me, it's all about making sure I address all the issues that got me sick - PH way out of balance, possible parasites (love sushi but that can't be good for us), sleep patterns so out of whack I hadn't slept correctly in over a decade. Diet issues. All of this is interrelated.

There are legitamate studies out there linking protazoan infection with elevated RF and SED and other inflammatory markers. Do I want to do a cleanse? Or 15? Hell no - but will I? Yes, when I can pull up my big girl panties and get over my inherent fear of that.

So, when I see post after post on AI by sick people that cannot question their own biases and who are against 'socialized medicine' because some twit somewhere scammed money off a program when most people are too sick here to afford their meds here...yes...I'm gonna call 'bias' when I see it.

Find me some paid for conservative stats and I'll incoprorate it into my graph. Give me junk science and I'm gonna ...*itch.

Pip

"I think most people do cherry pick, at least to some degree. It's like what you said about the website for the American Association of Family Physicians. Because of your foregone conclusion about healthcare you assume that that website is slanted because they are not in support of social medicine. Maybe they are, but maybe they aren't. Maybe they support single payer healthcare for good reason. Do you do the same sort of background search on groups that do support universal healthcare? Do you "follow the money" when they share your same views?"

Lin, I'm a little confused, when you say "your foregone conclusion about healthcare" do you mean me or the general you? Cuz my "foregone conclusion" about our health care is it needs fixin' and I'm not alone in that thinking.

Perhaps I didn't make my point clearly. I was just giving examples of 2 "different" websites, trying to be fair, not judgemental, making the point one always has to consider the source. I was not being critical of Amer Assoc of Fam Physicians (AAFP). I do not "assume" their website is slanted, but I am aware of their posiition. Are you saying you think AAFP is not in support of "social medicine"? What is your definition of social medicine? Cuz I hear the average person say socialized medicine is government run health care, and a single payer system is a government or quasi-government administered system that would do away with private health insurance, with medical care delivered by private doctors and hospitals. AAFP is supportive of universal health care, which means providing access to affordable health care to all citizens -- how that is delivered is another matter. I like the idea of single payer health insurance but believe it is politically difficult to achieve and the public would not embrace a system so different from our current system.

I always consider the source of my information. I like websites that are .org, or .edu. I read a variety of newspapers. I like research from non partisan, non profits groups.

I don't know how I come across, or how I am perceived, I have my opinions, but I do try to be fairminded. Discussions are difficult in these types of formats, misunderstandings occur, but I was not being critical of AAFP and actually am supportive of the idea of a single payer system, but I know any change is difficult, so I'm not too hopeful.

FYI, the Foundation site is supportive of a "free market approach" to health care, while AAFP is supportive of a more government regulated system. I was trying to be fair and present 2 different sites.

Bravo, civil discourse. Constitution Convention time: terms limits for Congress and SCOTUS.

Joy, I did assume that you were already "all in" for universal healthcare. But I was only saying you in particular because I was commenting on your post. I could have just as easily been talking about myself and my own conclusions. I only mean that for those who have made up their minds, their is not much chance of changing them. I think that's true in general in regard to how stats, polls and the like are interpreted by the public and by the people who put them out. What their motivation is, whether $$ or power or what they really believe is true and best, who can say? I know I don't know these people, I am hesitant to judge their hearts.