(no subject)
Oct. 7th, 2007 04:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
johnny9fingersObviously I'm doing too many drugs and am too lazy to get a proper job like 'real' poor people. (This thread continues from yesterday....but actually came about partially because of another thread on ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
politicartoons*, and partially because I got hold of some really good drugs.)
I'll be perfectly candid: most of the lower-to-middle classes couldn't afford to support a drug habit without crime. I have a hobby, rather than a habit (I smoke weed), and am reasonably (but not entirely) self sufficient: ergo I can indulge myself.
The idea that the lower end of the wage-slave class who, having lost their jobs through no fault of their own, and then being unable to afford medical care for their children, would be content with GWB's decision if it were only explained properly to them is amusing. But that's not as much fun as claiming that it's all their own fault that they're poor.
It's not my fault that I'm reasonably well-off: I am not to blame for this circumstance in any way. Cash is always a problem and liquidity is too, but I'm self-employed and quite good at what I do and I work just enough in a year to get by. I'm the really lazy, idle, drug-taking, over-educated, privileged, single person with no dependents who should be denied healthcare; me and people like me, who in general have full healthcare: not the newly unemployed.
I live in the UK, so almost none of this applies, thank the Gods.
There is no correlation between moral worth and wealth, excepting possibly an inverse one. And that is certainly no justification for denying the poor medical care. Perhaps all the administrators and folk who run and manage hospitals and the Health Insurance Companies should be forced to take the Hippocratic oath: and the head of the arm of government within whose remit lies the Nation's health....they might not find it so easy afterwards to walk on by.
Perhaps I do them wrong: I hope they're better than that.
It'll all change in time, however. What at one time crucified Hillary may prove to be her resurrection too. What did for last year doesn't do for now.
*
http://community.livejournal.com/politicartoons/918087.html?thread=17868871#t17868871
politicartoons*, and partially because I got hold of some really good drugs.)I'll be perfectly candid: most of the lower-to-middle classes couldn't afford to support a drug habit without crime. I have a hobby, rather than a habit (I smoke weed), and am reasonably (but not entirely) self sufficient: ergo I can indulge myself.
The idea that the lower end of the wage-slave class who, having lost their jobs through no fault of their own, and then being unable to afford medical care for their children, would be content with GWB's decision if it were only explained properly to them is amusing. But that's not as much fun as claiming that it's all their own fault that they're poor.
It's not my fault that I'm reasonably well-off: I am not to blame for this circumstance in any way. Cash is always a problem and liquidity is too, but I'm self-employed and quite good at what I do and I work just enough in a year to get by. I'm the really lazy, idle, drug-taking, over-educated, privileged, single person with no dependents who should be denied healthcare; me and people like me, who in general have full healthcare: not the newly unemployed.
I live in the UK, so almost none of this applies, thank the Gods.
There is no correlation between moral worth and wealth, excepting possibly an inverse one. And that is certainly no justification for denying the poor medical care. Perhaps all the administrators and folk who run and manage hospitals and the Health Insurance Companies should be forced to take the Hippocratic oath: and the head of the arm of government within whose remit lies the Nation's health....they might not find it so easy afterwards to walk on by.
Perhaps I do them wrong: I hope they're better than that.
It'll all change in time, however. What at one time crucified Hillary may prove to be her resurrection too. What did for last year doesn't do for now.
*
http://community.livejournal.com/politicartoons/918087.html?thread=17868871#t17868871
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-07 04:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-07 10:18 pm (UTC)Just joining the debate....that's all. Anything else would be too too Machiavellian, my dear.