How funny. The Washington Post article I linked to is also linked to in Myth #5 in the above Salon article.
Interesting observation, Geoffrey. I found this commentary also interesting - from the article:
“And why should smoking pot exclude someone from getting food stamps, anyway?”
Because it illustrates that the person has discretionary income with which to buy marijuana (so how “poor” can he be?), also because of the obvious plan of action for a pot-head: “Hey! A SNAP card. I can trade this for money so I can buy even more marijuana!”
As an aside, I am “picking-on” SNAP only because this thread’s conversation had veered into it, not because I think it the worst of all government programs. If I had the power to abolish either (but not both) the U. S. military or SNAP, I would abolish the military without hesitation.
Duelling articles, duelling statistics. I’m suspicious of both. But extrapolating from the utter mess of other huge government programs, and the waste and fraud in them that has been articled and statisticked to death, SNAP would be much the same.
Why not accountability? If we weeded-out the scammers and con-artists, the actual poor would get MORE assistance than they are getting now. I’m in favor of that.
I’ll go out on a limb here qaz, but I have always thought that *basic healthcare *could be provided to the US population in the same way education is done. Not perfect in any stretch of the imagination but possible. But the problem seems to be the Idea of healthcare that is reactive… I’ve got this problem… verses a healthcare system that is… we need to do every test known so we can be sure you are going to live. The Idea is to give quality healthcare, within the boundaries of a people. When we can do that and figure out how to pay for it, we’re on our way.
If the people’s view of the promised land is that we all come to live off the government in some way or another, becoming wards of the state and vying for mere scraps from the “king’s” table, then I would rather be elsewhere. I believe that a hand up is better than a hand out. Anything less than this is nothing more then self righteousness under the guise of doing good.
I’ll add something to that. The US is the only country, without a universal health care system. And it’s also one of the least efficient. See
U.S. Health-Care System Ranks as One of the Least-Efficient
World Health Organization’s Ranking of the World’s Health Systems
And here’s an interesting article I’ve tweeted today:
These Are The College Majors With The Fastest Salary Growth
Notice the ranking of medicine 
Now it’s time to meet some US doctors. 
or
The best single article I’ve read on why U. S. health care is so expensive is right here:
uta.edu/faculty/story/2311/M … dGreed.pdf
What an eye-opener that was when I first read it back in early 2013. Let’s give some examples of what does NOT cause our high health-care prices:
- greedy doctors
- greedy nurses
- greedy researchers
- high-tech equipment
- research and development
The short answer to what causes our high healthcare costs is: administration. When you get sticker-shock from health care in the U. S., it’s because you are paying for the real estate investments of the administrators in the health care industry. And there are a LOT of administrators. For every such administrator who existed in Colorado in 1970, there are now 30 to 35 of them in Colorado (even though the number of doctors during that same span of time in Colorado has only doubled)!
The U. S. does not have anything remotely resembling a free market in health care, and this was already true before the Affordable Care Act passed. What we have does not even rise to the level of any “ism”. What we have is a scam foisted upon us by well-connected multi-millionaires/billionaires.
Sometimes I help out, at a local church food pantry. On Monday, a gentleman there got to talking.
Long story short. He had a house paid for, medical insurance and 280 K, saved up for retirement. Then he had to go to the hospital. And he spent 4 weeks or so there.
Guess what?
Even though he had medical insurance, he went through the 280 K savings/investments, paying the hospital off. And he still pays around $700 a month to them.
Go figure.
Another example.
I once helped an elderly patient, with a hospital emergency - for one week. And they had both Medicare and Medicaid. In case you don’t know how this works, Medicaid kicks in - after Medicare pays the bills. And I even filled out the paperwork, for a hospital aid to needy patients.
In theory, with these 3 options in place, a hospital shouldn’t need to bill a patient. Especially if they have no resources and are elderly.
But they tried to. Until I called on their behalf. And I told them:
Medicaid approved their application, as a low income person
Their own hospital, approved the application for financial help - for needy folks
I informed them of the three sources of payment.
I would put the person in touch, with free legal aid. There are such resources, where the attorneys volunteer their time and expertise.
Then they finally backed off. Go figure. 
Don’t know how this got printed twice. Just ignore this post.
The worst medical story concerning someone I know happened a few years ago. A woman’s young teenage daughter suddenly became very ill, which illness killed her within several days. She brought her daughter to the hospital, and the hospital returned to her a corpse. Charge for this woman who had health insurance: $200,000. (“Will that be cash or check?”)
“Yeah, we’ll try and fail to save your daughter’s life. Even though we accomplished literally nothing for you, you owe us $200,000. Have a nice day!”
I have always heard it as standing for “Delirium Tremens.”
qaz, again I believe you fail to recognize what the Bible is saying. This is why Jesus reestablished the Kingdom of God/church. What you are suggesting is that since the government uses force to do this or that, then it is okay for us to use the government to force people to do what we want as well, even if we think it is good.Two wrongs don’t make a right, and it becomes a never ending battle. We are told that the only way to fix it is through the Kingdom of God/church, not through the law. We have the state( kingdom of god) and the church(Kingdom of God).These two operate side by side in the same world(we are to be in the world but not of the world). Inside this Kingdom, we give to each other voluntarily and take care of the sheep in whatever capacity that may be. THIS is the safety net, and inside THIS Kingdom we find peace and love, while outside there are thieves and murderers. We are to be the light of the world.
Typo?
We have the state (kingdom of man) and the church (Kingdom of God).
I hope one phase doesn’t become a synonym for the other.
I think that discussions over politics always end in contradiction because of the inherent incoherence of the secular world. Nothing will ever work properly out there.
In my view, the only proper state is an Orthodox monarchy, and the only proper role of the Orthodox monarch is to physically protect the Church from the violent ragings of those outside the Church.
Everything else is best handled within the Church (cf. I Corinthians 6:1-5).
I think the foundational problem is that in the minds of most people, the Church has been relegated to an almost utterly inconsequential and incompetent thing, reserved merely for a very optional light hour’s entertainment on Sunday morning. All the important things, in their minds, are the purview of the (supposedly!) competent state.
Geoffrey, consider the state-Churches of the past. Once they had the political power, there was no one to hold them accountable. Thus the drowning, torture, and burning at stake of the “heretics” in the middle ages.
.
Geoffrey, yes, you may be right. I used the kingdom of god to reflect that it is the kingdom of another “god”, in other words that of a false god. I suppose in this case it would be the kingdom of man as well. 
I would say that the Law (capitalized) is also an institution of God. However, as I mentioned before, I believe it has it’s limits and boundaries. This goes for the church as well. They are to remain separate. As Paidion has mentioned, the mixing of the two is detrimental either way. When we take up the power of the law as a sword against one another, it becomes a case of manipulation of the law(which is also a no-no) and is just as bad or maybe even worse than using actual weaponry because it can kill just as many people. I believe you have already recognized this fact.I also agree that some no longer have an understanding of what the true church is.
qaz, our biblical perspectives seem to be totally different. Paul speaks of the law in his epistles and warns us against it. As Galatians 2:16 says, “for by the works of the law, no flesh shall be justified.” You seem to insist on an “eye for an eye” which Jesus Himself said is not the way. However, if people wish to continue to fight the battle through the law, we are warned that the consequences of doing so end in destruction.
In answer to your questions, the Kingdom of God works I many different ways. We are to use the talents that God has each of us. For example, a doctor may offer his services at no charge for some, or at a cheaper rate. An employer may offer someone a job and pay him a fair wage. But, we all work together as one.