St. Judes. "Do you think the parents don't value the treatment and services provided for their children just as much as they would if they had to borrow or scrimp and save to pay for those services?"

Of course they are quite pleased and happy. I would be quite pleased and happy if everyone in the forum sent me money and benefits, free of my doing anything to earn it. I would be happy if I received a bill for medical treatment but then somebody else paid for it. Very pleased indeed.

But I do not want to live in a nation where almost everything is free. Because that leaves to poverty, ignorance, poor health, and multitudes children crying in the night because of their lack.

In Scandinavia business taxes are very low. Pro business laws are more the norm, compared to say America. There is lots more capitalism happening there than in America. But then they tax wages over 50%, more like 80% when all is added up. But meanwhile on the production end, it is a capitalist system, more so than America's.

Scandinavia does not have, and the majority want no part of socialism. They have instead elected economic social democrats, not socialists into power. Of course the ruling parities have a different name but they are social democrats. They are in fact much like the Tony Blair Labor governments were and what they hoped for, instead of a Jeremy Corbyn Labor government. Blair repeatedly won. Corbyn lost. In other words, the population in the UK is not stupid.

 

24 minutes ago, Fielder said:

What miserable standard of living their citizens have.

The same could be said here of many Americans and American Families on the street and in shelters.  Homelessness is a growing problem and there seems to be no solution for it.  We need food banks and soup kitchens to the hungry.  In Roswell the Catholic Church provides free meals to the indigent but all the churches in town contribute to it.  My daughter volunteers to hand out groceries at a food bank in South Carolina.

Is the United States to be an 'every man for himself' society or an 'all for one and one for all' society.  I believe in the latter.  Would you charge rent for a life saver tossed out to man who fell overboard?  Or his he entitled (ah, there's a dirty word) to be rescued free of charge?

Noel

 

 

I read the papers. There are more jobs than willing workers in America.

McDonalds offering $22 an hour in Pennsylvania, that's 44 grand a year at 8 hours a week for 50 weeks of 5 day per week work. Every news page on the internet is of not enough workers willing to work. Labor shortage. Goods rot, not enough truck drivers. Businesses downsizing due to lack of workers that apply for jobs. The stories are everywhere. I do not feel sorry for any able bodied and able minded adult in America who does not have enough to live on. What exactly is their excuse?

I would throw a lifesaver to someone drowning. Not to an seemingly normal person begging money at this time in America. Anybody giving to charity might want to consider donating to people living overseas. We donate to people in Kigoma, in Africa. Those people are dirt poor and have excellent excuses for their poverty, they have no chance. Not like in America.

Wise people see situations when it is not a good idea to give handouts at large. Like Saint Paul for instance. The new faith called Christianity set up a charity for all ethos. People took advantage of that right away. Paul saw it and objected. The problem was rampant, even at the communion services of bread and wine, but not just there.

(2 Thessalonians 3:7):

"For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord ******* Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing."

1960's. China. The Great Leap Forward Policy of Mao. Everything was to be controlled and monitored especially the economy. The result was mass starvation. Chaos. Misery. Something had to change. So, then, exit from power the Red Guard socialists with their Little Red Books, and enter the enlightened reformers who set up a stock market and free enterprise. Enter prosperity and food for all in China. Same as it ever was. It never fails.

 

 

52 minutes ago, Fielder said:

2 Thessalonians 3:7):

"For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord ******* Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing."

makes me wonder why ******* fed the 5000 ... or the 4000.  surely there were those who would not 'work' amongst them.  what exactly is that work anyway?

Getting too close to religion and politics to respond.

Noel

I don't recall giving out the loaves and the fishes only to the 'deserving' - it didn't seem to be means tested in any way. If there was ever a blanket judgment made in that book based on wealth, it was about the rich. And it was not very complementary.

As for the loaves and fishes story, the text plainly says that a mob of people began to follow J* around immediately after that incident. And he was forced to run away and avoid them. There is a moral that the Gospel writer Saint John is trying to tell us here. The crowd, having been fed, were not at all satisfied. And they chased after J* for even more. ******* fled to a high mountain and then to Capernaum. The crowd swarmed after him and (24) seeing he was gone to the other side of  the sea, they also took shipping and followed after J* to Capernaum. (25)And when they had found him, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither? ******* answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you.

But after J* tells them very plainly to stop seeking for more bread and meat, but seek the bread of life instead, they are not pleased. This story with its sad ending is a lesson to be learned from the Gospel of Saint John. Mobs of people running after J* demanding more, which of course was not forthcoming. And immediately much of their interest in J* goes away and the number of J*'s followers decreased and many "walked no more with him". They wanted hand outs, instead of wanting to change and become good people instead.

John 6

¹⁰ And ******* said, Make the men sit down. Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, in number about five thousand.

¹¹ And ******* took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would.

¹² When they were filled, he said unto his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost.

¹³ Therefore they gathered them together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto them that had eaten.

¹⁴ Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that ******* did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

¹⁵ When ******* therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

¹⁶ And when even was now come, his disciples went down unto the sea,

¹⁷ And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and ******* was not come to them.

¹⁸ And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew.

¹⁹ So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see ******* walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid.

²⁰ But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid.

²¹ Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately the ship was at the land whither they went.

²² The day following, when the people which stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, and that ******* went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone;

²³ (Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks:)

²⁴ When the people therefore saw that ******* was not there, neither his disciples, they also took shipping, and came to Capernaum, seeking for *******.

²⁵ And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?

²⁶ ******* answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled: for him hath God the Father sealed.

²⁸ Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

²⁹ ******* answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. (And after more from ******* in  the same vein)..."from that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

 

 

 

17 hours ago, dave2013 said:

The secret is to have politicians who aren't being bribed by Big Pharma and Big Healthcare.

 

Or the fossil fuel industry. 

10 hours ago, Fielder said:

But I do not want to live in a nation where almost everything is free.  

and something that's seemingly free is not valued by students and their parents as much

 

That nation you don't want to live in is a fantasy. And that notion you have that if its free its never valued is also a fantasy. That notion you have that if university gets you in debt its valued is also a fantasy, Its a false premise. Many things are free AND valued. Many things are free and not valued. Appreciation is a subjective emotion that's generated for many reasons.

As previously stated, university in the UK was free for 30 years and the degrees obtained within that 30 years were valued by most, in fact more appreciated than when free, than now and paid for. Appreciated because they were hard to obtain and the entry qualifications were higher than today. A degree was a huge deal in those days.

And today its easier to obtain a degree, despite the fact you have to pay for it, you just end up in debt for decades. And yes, many value their degrees but not because they have to pay for them, but because it enables them to work in the field they desire and earn the salary they desire. And yes, some don't appreciate their degrees despite having to pay for them. Appreciation is an emotion, a subjective emotion and you shouldn't be gentilising and claiming it cant be, or usually appreciated, if free. 

My daughter did fantastic at university and yes it cost her money. And yes she values it. And no she doesn't value it because it put her in debt, she values it because it enabled her to get a fantastic job and salary. And guess what, if it had been free she would have valued it even more because she would have obtained a fantastic job and salary and be debt free.

Sorry but to claim something isn't valued if free is illogical and simply not true. The topic hear was supposed to be higher education, and yes, if free its appreciated more not less by most people. They appreciate its free very time they open their wage slip and see zero deductions for their student loans.

The entire "not valued" thing isn't relevant anyway. It matters not if some or all don't value it. What's important is that they get the qualications to do the work they desire and thus contribute to society... without being in debt for decades.

Edited November 10, 20214 yr by martin-w

@Fielder  you lack knowledge.  Read WHY Paul said that.  It was audience specific.

Your very implication that 'free' stuff shouldn't be given to one who won't work is belied by the FACT that this thread is about people WHO WANT TO WORK AT COLLEGE but can't for financial reasons.

and by the way - debts are to be forgiven every seven years.

Edited November 10, 20214 yr by sightseer

Sorry, guys!   Way off topic and now into religion...we're done here!