Login to Change.org
Create an Account
Lee Butz
Retired from Purdue business services, Accounting degree from Ivy Tech Community College '98, Phi Theta Kappa Honor Society, legal guardian of an 11 year-old granddaughter for 10 years, 9 year-old grandson for 2 years. Married for 34 years. 1/2 American Indian, Oneida of Wisconsin.
Recent Activity
-
Lee commented on the article |
Kenneth,
Thanks so much for your perspective. I'm also concerned that doctors may not be represented in this debate. Do you have a voice here? I would think your input would be at least as important as those who need the health care.
What do you see as "must haves" or "deal breakers?" In our discussion group Saturday, military- and Medicare-like health care systems were suggested by some as good examples to use in drafting a new system. What is your reaction to this? I'm not familiar with either of these. My husband just retired and has had Medicare since May, and he was not in the military, so we really don't have any experiences on which we can base an opinion. -
Lee commented on the article |
As grandparents raising our grandchildren, I can tell you that it doesn't matter how much legislation, money, qualifications, or guidelines you have, if there are no doctors existing in your area who accept or take new patients using SCHIP or any future "available to all" health care programs, it is useless. We live in a college town in Indiana with hundreds of doctors and at least three huge hospitals, but we can't find a doctor for the kids less than 30 miles out of town. When our grandson got an ear infection, we called the local clinic and were told that walk-ins were not seen for 2 days. One of the restrictions...you can't pay cash once the clinic knows you have SCHIP.
-
Lee commented on the article |Nice article, Leigh! This whole administration has been one big carnival game - low income housing gets demolished in New Orleans, and, WHOMP!, before you can hit it, a civil liberty is gone, then WHOMP! Saddam Hussein is responsible for attacking the twin towers, then WHOMP! we're reversing our commitment to a world treaty. Give up and move on to the snake-oil salesman. He's selling terrorist repellent today. Does it work? Have we been attacked lately?
How can we talk about lack of oversight when we, the American people, are the most guilty? How did this guy get a second term? Why is there a perception that all politicians are corrupt? Who's in charge here?
That would be us. We've just learned a valuable lesson in democracy. You know, FOR the people, BY the people? The signs of failure and corruption are out there in plain sight, but if you don't take the time to read about them, you believe the lies. Trust, but verify. Then work your tail off to throw the bums out!
President Obama (will Tuesday ever come?) is not a savior, but he appears to be genuine, not based on what he promises, but on what he does. I think his biggest challenge is not the economy, keeping us safe, health care, reducing poverty, or any of the other issues that have been discussed and debated on this site. I think his biggest challenge is keeping our trust. As one of his daughters said, he'd better be good. -
Lee commented on the article |Leslie, thanks for that last fact. As a per cap recipient, we're pretty proud of turning ourselves away from extinction. My father would never have believed it. I just want to point out - before the snarks these revelations always seem to generate - that taxes are paid on the per cap (my pc was $750 for last year), as if we made a profit on the land "sale", and welfare is adjusted when that payment comes. As a matter of fact, my concern about the $1 million came from reading about nations who pay so much that the kids don't feel they need to finish school or to work.
I'm still chewing on that penalty for quitting a job or closing a business. I liked it at first, but you couldn't penalize a person who gets laid off, or force a business to stay open if it isn't making a profit, and I'm afraid there would still be a lot of that at first.
Could there be a point on an existing measurement device (GNP, inflation, something) at which the incremental payments ceased? I wouldn't want a stimulus to turn into a prop.
The main idea is that money gets to the people, without having to trust it to trickle down. That's been tried a couple of times, and it just doesn't work. In our case, the 'reparation' comes to the nation, and we decide how much goes for per capita and how much goes to build schools and elder care facilities, and provide security. WE decide. And, as you point out, it works.
Sorry for injecting my personal circumstances into this discussion, but I'm very interested in following up on the ideas, and hope, too, that someone is listening. -
Lee commented on the article |
Okay, Leslie, I'm intrigued. Suppose the amount is lowered to $250K, since that seems to be the amount under which most Americans earn, for anyone over a certain age, like 21. Then, if someone uses the money to purchase, say, a solar unit or one of those individual wind generators, they can get back 50% of the cost, once it's installed. In other words, if they use the money - or credits, maybe - to purchase something green, they could get back a percentage. That would keep people working who would be inclined to quit after receiving a million dollars, plus, it would increase the demand on green products, including cars, which would get more people working. I also think it would allow people to catch up on mortgages, but not pay outright for a home. Lenders would be required to ignore the stimulus in figuring income, so there wouldn't be a bunch of houses built or purchased, only to go back on the market when the stimulus money was gone.
Also, what about a National Clean Out The Basement/Garage Month? I have a whole garage full of stuff I might need some day, that has been there for 7 years. Before I moved, it was in my basement. Advertise months in advance and send out contact information for people in the area (like freecycle.org) and drop-off points to get stuff to people who need it anywhere in the country.
Just thinking out loud. -
Lee commented on the article |I understand the concerns here, but to me, the moral dilema is doing nothing to help, or being ineffective because we're worried about the relatively few abusers. These people will eventually fall through cracks of their own making. Forget them.
To base the qualification for care on who does or doesn't want to work is ignoring those who are struggling because they can't work, due to things such as health, age, or need to care for someone else. For instance, one of the fastest-growing communities in the U.S. is grandparents raising their grandchildren. These are not always children of addicts or law breakers, and the grandparents' only income may be Social Security. The only way to get a higher SS allowance is to adopt the grandchildren, which is financially difficult for many, and, while foster families get school lunch and tuition reductions automatically, grandparents must meet income guidelines, even if the court has appointed them legal guardians. A senior's Social Security allowance is above the income cap. Using only the child's income to qualify may be the guideline, but it is not the reality.
Now is not the time to worry about leeches, who live in all income levels and social communities. We're already years late in taking care of those who need and deserve our help and gratitude, no strings attached.
Impact
0 Actions
0 Recruits