Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: THE Issue: "Culture Crisis"

Posted 1 year ago on March 8, 2013, 9:29 a.m. EST by Justoneof99 (80)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Dear Mr. President:

During my shift in the Emergency Room last night, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient whose smile revealed an expensive Shiny gold tooth, whose body was adorned with a wide assortment of elaborate and costly tattoos, who wore a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and who chatted on a new cellular telephone equipped with a popular R&B ringtone.

While glancing over her Patient chart, I happened to notice that her payer status was listed as "Medic...aid"! During my examination of her, the patient informed me that she smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and somehow still has money to buy pretzels and beer.

And, you and our Congress expect me to pay for this woman's health care?

I contend that our nation's "health care crisis" is not the result of a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. Rather, it is the result of a "crisis of culture", a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on luxuries and vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.

It is a culture based on the irresponsible credo that "I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me". Once you fix this "culture crisis" that rewards irresponsibility and dependency, you'll be amazed at how quickly our nation's health care difficulties will disappear.

Respectfully, STARNER JONES, MD

71 Comments

71 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by forourfutures (393) 1 year ago

Uh that's not culture, that's society. Culture, to cultivate. To grow needed food together as a social activity.

Americans are forgetting the differences between wants and needs. Media is to blame and the fact that free speech is abridged.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

even if it is true ... who cares ? ... cannot we as the human race... not help those in need ? ... we can.... we can do anything we set out to do,,,

We can have a world w/o hunger, poverty or war ... if we simply wanted to

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

The problem isn't helping those in need. Most would agree that is the right thing to do.

The issue arises when people take advantage of the help.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

The issue arises when people take advantage of the help.

who cares ? ... would you care if your child or parent took advantage of it ... if they felt they needed it ?

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

I guess the difference is taking advantaging of something you need and taking advantage of something when you don't need it.

If someone is on food stamps and rent assistance, for instance, is it OK for them to spend the little money they have on things like cigarettes, alcohol, junk food, and tattoos?

I would argue that if you can afford those things you may not need assistance with food and housing. Or at least the money spent on those items should first be used for actual necessities and then welfare can make up the shortcomings.

There is only so much assistance to go around. Those who take assistance without really needing it are simply taking from the taxpayers as well as from those who really do need the help.

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

Nader ... do you relay the same concerns towards the corporations and banks that are taking MUCH more massive handouts? ... or how about the do-nothing congressman and senators who get free everything... pensions for life ... and do nothing to help the economy or anyone except themselves... yep... good to be concerned about the guy that can afford a tattoo

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Yes, the corporations and the politicians are just as bad. Everyone is squeezing the working man.

I just think if you can afford cigarettes or a tattoo, common sense would say that you can also afford to pay your own rent and buy your own food because clearly those things are more important than cigarettes or tattoos.

Corporations should fail or succeed based on their own merits and should not be allowed to donate a dime to our politicians. It is a clear conflict of interest that, like the welfare abuser, is squeezing the working man.

As someone who pays quite a bit of taxes, both groups upset me.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

I noticed the words "want"and "need" fairly well used. Eventually, after not wanting to evolve, a species is faced with the need to evolve to assure survival.

What is left out is recognition of the need to limit strife. When needs are met, strife is not common.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Hahahahahahaha. Yeah, 2009. Is that all you have? A letter to the editor from 2009?

Sweeping generalizations made by one doctor on one individual. Love it.

[-] 1 points by grapes (2741) 1 year ago

Matthew 5:45: 'rain on the just and the unjust'. Once I handed out a sandwich to a child and he discarded the bread and ate the meat inside. Then he asked me for more sandwiches and I said no because there could be more children that I could give to. Well, I outgrew that because sandwiches can rot. What if there is no more child in need to come? Wasn't it actually better to have fed that child with more meat?

[-] 1 points by RoccoXXX (8) 1 year ago

Dr. Jones is casting stones. Of course he would shy away from such stones as 'the medical community and drug kickbacks.

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/is-your-doctor-getting-drug-kickbacks/

Abuse runs rampant throughout all levels of society. Does that mean we should abandon those in need? No system is perfect, but we can regulate the regulators. A chore for sure, but a necessary one.

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1002) 1 year ago

I agree with you that we have a "culture crisis", but believe it to be more complex than you described. I didn't understand it and believed the same as you until I was thrust into a world of the weak, and sadly, the hopeless.

My small business, now closed, employed only the poor because no one could survive on the meager pay they earned. Five years of living among them changed my life forever, and for the better. There are some that have the slacker attitude and some that live with enormous stress of how to eat from day to day. They had no choice but to live with others, share cheap cars with garbage bags for windows trying to work out how to survive. They were paid weekly and that's when they went to the grocery store with their $250 because last weeks pay was already gone. They had to hope the toothache they had would go away, never going to the doctor until they had no other choice. If their car broke down, they walked, sadly some turned tricks just to get their car repaired. The stories like this were an everyday revelation to me that we have a "culture crisis" because they had no hopes for the "American Dream", unless they hit the lottery.

As I gave them their final paychecks when the store closed, I asked all 18 of my employees if they knew that Social Security taxes were not paid by everyone on all of their income. None of them knew anything about it, or capital gains. Their paychecks had SS taxes deducted from 100% of their income, of course, but they weren't outraged, they just didn't understand.

Our current culture allows the strong to prey on the weak, and the apathy and ignorance of the fortunate who live in comfort complaining about these people upsets me. When people have their taxes raised on incomes over $400,000 by 4%, they scream no more. Quietly, the SS taxes went up on the poor at the same time. I'm not sure you can understand what the increase in gasoline prices has done to these people. Currently my county is proposing a 4 cents per gallon tax increase for something... they are clueless. The many poor must buy gasoline, meaning less money they can spend at businesses. The economy will not get better, and the have nots will continue to suffer more.

~alterorabolish1~

Large corporations targeted my profits and got them, anyone considering opening a small business now will need to be very lucky. Our culture is in crisis, but the primary reasons are much bigger than you see them.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Was this first reported on Breitbart, or was it Drudge?

After so long, it's hard top remember.

I do however remember posting a rebuttal to this earlier today, complete with links.

You deleted the thread and posted a new one.

That's so cute.........................:)

[-] -1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Is that how this new game is played?

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Yep.

It's not the first time either.

I had a pic of the "good" doctor too. I won't bother a second time, this guys a jerk.

[-] 3 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Do you really think the "good" folks that the doctor describes don't exist?

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What kind of "folks" are you referring to?

[-] 4 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

People who are supported by our tax dollars who seemingly have money to spend on things like tattoos, high end cell phones, cigarettes, designer clothes and handbags, etc.

There are so many people in this country who are genuinely trying to better themselves and need a little help and people like the doctor describes in the article above make their lives even harder because they make tax payers resistant to supporting the programs that the poor need.

We have way too many people who need help to tolerate people who may not need the help taking advantage of our system. People who abuse the system should be reported as they are taking advantage of us tax payers as well as the people who truly need the help.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

So like the CEO of GE?

Or the State of Mississippi, or maybe Alabama?

What kind of "folks"?

You're still not really saying?

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

I am talking about people who take advantage of programs meant to help those who really need it. Both at the high end of the income spectrum and the low end.

You don't see anything wrong with someone who is so poor that they need government assistance to pay rent, buy food, and get medical care use the little money they have to get things like tattoos, cigarettes, alcohol, etc?

It is just as bad as rich people paying a tax rate of close to 0%. Middle class workers get squeezed from both directions.

[-] 0 points by elevenT (-99) 1 year ago

you mean welfare cheats?

[-] 1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Yes. Whether it is corporate welfare or welfare for the poor.

It takes advantage of both those who provide the funding for the welfare as well as those who actually need the welfare.

[-] 1 points by elevenT (-99) 1 year ago

those the provide the money for welfare are the taxpayers.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What about whole States that have done that for years?

Many of those States that supported them are now having troubles of their own and the States that they supported have turned their backs on them. They wasted all that money for all those years and made NO improvement to themselves.

Why is that?

[-] 2 points by justiceforzim (-17) 1 year ago

What about dealing with the topic? He's talking about the many that game the system and you are changing the subject talking about the states!

A friend of mine has 3 bastards from a real loser. She rarely works even tho my friend watches her children more than baby mama does. She just got a free furnace and water heater from some group (WIC?) and her kids lost their free daycare cuz she didn't manage to take them there enough....easier to take them to grandma. What she does with her $700+/mth in food stamps is disgusting. She went out the other day for coffee and brought me back a $5 starbucks. That was probably the 2nd starbucks I ever had. The first was merely for a chance to sit and smoke while in San Francisco.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You say that like the States don't game the system.

Buying you a Starbucks would indeed be very disgusting.

Nice of you to call the children bastards though. You're real understanding gent, you are.

Now would, like to talk about those "hundreds of thousands, if not millions", and who it is that's standing in judgement?

[-] 2 points by justiceforzim (-17) 1 year ago

Once again, you fail to stay on topic and resort to childish insults (omg, I sound like Vqack)! Fyi, a bastard is a child born out of wedlock. You know, marriage? Just like 1/2 the kids being born today and folks like you wonder why there are so many children growing up in poverty.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

The topic is finding the great mysterious welfare cheat that stays at Trump Towers, and buys you the occasional Starbucks.....or was that the other guy?

I'm just trying to find out who picks who they are?

Most of the children in poverty are born to poor people. It's strange, how that works, eh?

[-] 1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Who is them? I am not following you there.

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

Holy crap, my state gets screwed big time.

But I don't care if it is an individual person, a corporation, or a state. If they don't need help they shouldn't get any and we need to have measures in place that ensure that our tax dollars are actually be used for good. We don't have that right now.

We seem to agree on the fact that there are corporations and states that get money they don't deserve. I am not sure why you have a hard time accepting the fact that there are also hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of welfare cheats using our tax money and also taking from those who really do need the help.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Who says those hundreds of thousands, if not millions ARE cheating????

Limbaugh??? Hannity?? and by who's measure?

BTW: those States often have the highest level, per capita, of welfare recipients too.

[-] -1 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

What exactly am I assuming?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

So far??

Everything.

[-] -2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

I don't assume they have iPhones and Jordans. I see them with my eyes. I see the $10 per pack cigarettes in their Coach bags.

And I also see their bank statements, their SSD checks, food stamp statements, etc. No assumptions.

Someone taking in $1000 per month who needs the state to pay for their food, housing, and medical expenses simply do not need any of those things listed above. Their priorities are messed up and our system is messed up for allowing such a situation to repeat itself over and over.

Just as we don't hold corporations accountable for the money we give them we also don't hold our citizens accountable. And it is the working stiffs like you and me who ultimately get screwed from both ends of the income spectrum.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

So you just go forward basing it all on assumption.

You didn't answer ONE of the questions.

[-] -2 points by Nader (74) 1 year ago

I have no idea what those clowns say.

I work at an FQHC and I see people on Medicaid, SSD, section 8, etc. all day. Many of them carry around high end smart phones, elaborate tattoos, gold teeth, designer bags, wear the newest Jordans, etc.

Those that aren't on Medicaid declare incomes of as low as $1000 per month in order to get reduced rates based on that low income. The difference is made up by the Feds. Yet they can afford these luxuries. How does that make sense?

If they are not cheating then our welfare system is beyond broken. I, and I would think most other people, have no problem helping those that need it with food, healthcare and housing. I love seeing those who really need the help and the appreciation on their face.

I just think that if you need to rely on others to pay your bills you shouldn't be using the limited funds you have to buy things that are nothing but luxuries.

There is really no good argument against making our welfare programs less wasteful by making it more accountable.

[-] 4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

OIC

You judge them then, from your lofty position at FQHC.

How do your lofty observations prove they are "cheating"?

Do you follow them home?

Do you investigate their every activity?

Do you have records of all of their purchases?

Do you have records of everything they might barter?

Because all I see are assumptions.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

So, the dirtbags are out in full force it would seem.

[-] 0 points by Gillian (1842) 1 year ago

Starner Jones is just another ignorant, arrogant elitist who paid too much for his inferior education. Typical doctor today.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

WallStreet!

The REAL culture crisis.

Neoplexia as a way of life.

[-] 2 points by windyacres (1002) 1 year ago

Yes, more is the only word they care about. Wall street ate me.

~alterorabolish1~

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

That's what they do.

Sorry about your name change. It seems that when the forum is under heavy attack, the innocent sometimes get banned.

Stay strong, as it seems this attack is not yet over.

I was banned for while during one of the early thrassy attacks.

It happens, take it in stride.

[-] 2 points by windyacres (1002) 1 year ago

I will accept it, although it was disappointing.

If anyone needs specifics about how large corps do their dirty work on small businesses, I've got info.

Thanks shoooz

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I can always tell now when the attacks are happening.

This one is rather prolonged and began with the invasion of the gun nutters.

Start a thread on corporate malfeasance and you will see what they do to keep it off focus.

[-] 1 points by justiceforzim (-17) 1 year ago

Invasion of the gun nutters. Ha ha. I'd call it the invasion of the gun snatchers. I haven't seen many pro gun threads and I have been here since the beginning.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

There's people and/or gremlins running through your neighborhood snatching guns?

Seeing as you're hallucinating, I sincerely hope you're not a gun owner.

Have you been known to go to the range a lot?

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1002) 1 year ago

I intend to post about how the large corps targeted my profits, but can't today. If someone had told me I could do over 5 million in sales and lose money...I would have never believed it.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Do you call First Amendment supporters "free speech nutters" too?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Free speech doesn't have the financial backing of the NRA, ALEC and HUGE host of other lobbying interests.

Free speech doesn't FEED an entire profit industry with the FEAR to make it even more profitable....

There is NO comparison between the two.

None whatsoever.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Sure it does. Free speech has CU behind it... Not to mention campaign finance laws which support the wealthy's control over our political system. Remember the old $$$ = speech equation?

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Let me know when that money allows an actual free speech protest to occur.

Buying the courts to give nonliving "things" "rights", is perhaps the biggest tragedy ever perpetrated on the living.

There is no relation between the two.

Corporations have no tongues.

[-] 1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Asked and answered shooz, or did you forget?

"The 2nd amendment is the ONLY one tied to a profit industry....."

Not true, there is a large financial interest in the First Amendment. What do you protest -- money dominating politics as protected, First Amendment, speech. Prima facia

Free speech has CU behind it... Not to mention all the campaign finance laws which support the wealthy's control over our political system. Remember the old $$$ = speech equation? And let's not forget the MSM.

So tell me: If money owns the law, why does the law need a jury? It's not a trick question, but is fundamental... to the rule of law and consent of the governed.

It's a genuinely important question and one you might find interesting... Ever considered occupying the jury box? What would that require? What might it accomplish?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You asked and answered you own question, so no wonder you keep repeating yourself, even though you know it's wrong.

You've actually provided proof of what I said.

Those corporations and "special" interests BOUGHT THE LAW regarding the 1st amendment.........

So in your book, whoever has the most money rightfully owns the law.

Your OK with that.

I get it.

Yer nutz, but I get it.

That's exactly why I keep saying...WallStreet IS the culture problem.

Pleonexia is an illness, not a goal.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

You miss the point shooz... Willful ignorance perhaps?

The law cannot be legitimately applied without the consent of a jury... Ring any bells? Suggest any courses of action? Ever think some of you armchair occupiers ought consider doing something constructive? Like occupying a few jury boxes in your hometowns? (But occupying a lot of them would be even better;>) If the elite own the law, should we not exercise our right to judge it?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

No, I made a point and you missed it, over and over again.

You got hung up on a detail, in retrospect a poor analogy on my part, but the gist is what you missed. Intentionally, there's no doubt.

Laws are applied every day without a single jury. My point being that the law is owned.

Do you always miss the forest, for getting hung up on a tree?

BTW, you also never explained the video. Just one more question you've left unanswered.

[-] 1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

And my reply is that we have a right to judge the law in a jury box.

I get your point, and do not necessarily disagree. But laws do come round, sooner or later, to the jury box. As a matter of right. Do you believe in exercising your rights? Think shooz, don't just blindly attack. Assuming you're a real person, and not a spokesmodel, consider the power we exercise in civil and criminal matters... Is it limited? Insofar as a case must come round, yes. Is it powerful? Extremely, that's why we have a right to a jury trial when accused. And why the NDAA's indefinite detention provisions are causing such hue and cry in the legal community.

But you have to be willing to exercise this power. It's a duty and responsibility.

I'm happy about your video -- care to read a few good books? Or are you content to let others explain things to you?

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Still can't find the forest, eh?

Sad indeed.

See you around douche bag.

BTW, corrupt judges in the pockets of big money and (R)epelican't tell juries exactly how they want then rule. I'm always amazed when they do otherwise.

Now get back to your usual capitalist douche baggery.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Well shooz, there's simply no other way to put this -- you're a dick. You've not made any points and asked no questions. You know where I stand. But you hide behind a screen name and mindlessly attack anyone crossing your narrow path whom dare not cleave, with slavish devotion, to your partisan politics. What a shame. Ignorance must indeed be bliss... just look at all your twinkles.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Aww isn't that sweet of the little, small minded (R)epelican't.

Name calling.

I know where you stand all right.

In a shit pile, swatting the flies in your mind.

You should know all about ignorance being bliss. I can see you smiling.

You can leave now and take your ALEC, art5 shit with you, along with your anti-voting crap.

As far as the screen name?

I offered to tell you, if only you would answer a question I asked you in an honest fashion.

You didn't..........That was no surprise.

Keep up the name calling.

I want your small mind to do that.

Really, I do.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Just like a firearm or knife, free speech cleaves to the bone...

The jury box is part of our democracy. An important, but neglected part. Sound familiar?

And I agree, corporations have no tongues, but they do have mouthpieces and deep pockets.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Jury boxes are pointless, when one side owns the law.

Money has no tongue either.

Yet your endorsement of it's voice is reminiscent of the Twilight Zone.

Are you suffering from pleonexia?

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

"Jury boxess are pointless, when one side owns the law." -- shooz

You are a fool... Words fail me...

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Your words have been failing you, that's the point.

Money has no tongue, and the money side owns the law..

How long did it take a jury to convict the tobacco corporations?

It doesn't really matter, does it. I never got paid and I never will.

Money owns the law.

Perhaps it's your thought process that's failing you.

The only fool here is YOU.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Answer one question shooz: If money owns the law, why does the law need a jury? It's not a trick question, but is fundamental... to the rule of law and consent of the governed.

"How long did it take a jury to convict the tobacco corporations?" Good point. Apply this result to the general principle you derive above...

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Well Mr. capitalist Samms, you first.

I can recall a few threads where you you didn't, you just let them die, rather than try, and now you insist I answer YOUR question?

You called ME a fool rather than deal with what I said.

This is so far off from the original premise that I absolutely refuse.

The 2nd amendment is the ONLY one tied to a profit industry.....

DIRECT ties at that, and the NRA is nothing but a front for that profit industry.

An industry that profits from death. This not true of the first amendment.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

You, sir, are a man of zeal, with no understanding...

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

'Splain this 'O' great and holy infallible thinker of pure and holy capitalist thought, free from intelligence.

Please do explain, as what I am describing is a side effect.

It's a video, as you seem to have trouble with words.

Money paid for what people "think" about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

Anybody who works in social welfare fields knows this is absolutely true.