If there’s one thing I’ve learned, there’s no shortage of well-meaning people who want the world to be a better place. But, without the willingness to roll up your sleeves and be part of the solution, you run the risk of making the situation worse.
Obamacare is a good example. Its European-style socialized healthcare system will fail the American people just like Britain’s National Healthcare System (NHS) has failed many of its citizens. When we allow the government in the name of compassion to do for us what we should do for ourselves, individuals become numbers, treatments become quotas, and lack of funding sparks rationing.
I learned a similar, albeit much smaller, lesson recently while adopting a sweet little dog from a rescue organization, which I soon found has more compassion than capability. As is typical with many online advertisements, the dog shown on their website was nothing like the sickly, tartar-mouthed, urine-drenched dog I picked up. As I write, my pup rests in my lap, just happy to have a home. Her first 24-hours included several baths, a vet visit, administering meds, and lots and lots of hugs in between. Although I’ve had to give up time and money, there is peace in my heart that only comes from personal sacrifice.
Arguably, liberals are far more well-known for their love of animals, but that same affection doesn’t extend to those of us walking on two legs. Most liberals actually believe the ill-equipped and incapable federal government is better suited to meet our needs. In Britain, however, some patients are in worse shape than my dog.
According to the San Francisco Examiner, a 2010 report found many “NHS patients were left unattended ‘for unacceptable amounts of time’ in urine-and feces-soaked beds.” The NHS system is in a death spiral. Costs are on the rise; and funds that should be used for improving healthcare are reserved for negligence claims, which rose more than 30 percent from 2010 to 2011, according to the UK Telegraph. And there’s no reason to believe Obamacare will be any better.
It’s easy to say you care when you see a need, but caring is only half the answer. There must be individual action tied to a bleeding heart. The question is: Do you care enough to do something about it yourself?
Awhile back, author Arthur Brooks wrote an unbiased book titled “Who Really Cares,” based on sound research finding conservatives to be 30 percent more generous than liberals; and a Google study a few years ago found conservatives were twice as charitable as liberals. Of course, there’s an exception to every rule; so if we searched long enough, we’d find a few tightwad conservatives and a charitable liberal or two.
To be fair, liberals do give liberally, especially with other people’s time and money. Otherwise, the closest many would come to a homeless or hungry person is if they accidentally hit one with their government-subsidized Chevy Volt while texting on their federally-funded Obamaphone.
Statistics prove liberal programs like the war on poverty do much to line the pockets of bureaucratic administrators but do little to help those most in need. Don’t believe me? Then take a walk around the White House after dark to watch the dumpster diving taking place near the First Family’s organic garden. A few years back, in D.C., my husband and I bought books of McDonald’s gift certificates and spent Christmas Eve walking in the vicinity of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue passing them out to homeless people. We figured we could get away with giving out greasy hamburger gift certificates to the Obama’s next-door neighbors while they were off eating healthy stuff on Hawaiian holiday.
As much as this is going to upset liberals, the only solution to poverty, homelessness, and all other social ills affecting this country is charity motivated by courage and conviction, not penalty of law. We each have a responsibility to put feet to Jesus’ words about caring for the least among us.
Photo credit: terrellaftermath
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
I believe that there re tens of millions of people who really care. The problem lies not in caring, rather, in doing.
Look at how diverse the efforts to demonstrate that caring really are. Tens, hundreds of thousands, perhaps, on occasion, millions, pursuing an effort that has almost no chance of being successful. Petitions, unless coordinated, properly presented (not electronic), voting, etc, have all proven to be ineffectual.
Just how much commitment do we have; are we willing to join forces and move toward a proven effective means of real redress?
The problem:
Divide and Conquer http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=102
The solution:
A Simplified Explanation of “The Plan for the Restoration of Constitutional Government” http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/blog/?p=410
This is an amazing post. Thank you so much I downloaded both.
I would probably never live to see it completed,but its better than the way it is now!
All sounds kind good, but, what IS a person to do for themselves and their wife and kids when they CANNOT go to a hospital ?????? There is NO WAY people can afford the absurd, ridiculous bills acquired even from a few days stay in a hospital. Perhaps Obamacare will be SOMETHING for alot of these folks, even if it’s just in the interim….. If not Obamacare…. Then what else is feasible…. I will say right now that I fully believe that all should have access to medical care. And I think it horribly wrong when say, this person gets to live while the other person dies because they cannot “Afford” a damn bill……… THIS problem has existed for along time before Obama was even born…..
Let me see if I can address your concern regarding health care. Mandatory insurance has no other affect than providing a quiet handsome income for doctors and others in senior positions in that industry.
Years ago, if you needed an X-ray, you went to the hospital, where the price was reasonable. Now, many doctors, or doctor’s clinics have those very expensive X-ray machine, while those in the hospital, so that they can recover costs, are used whenever they can be rationalized as necessary.
Similarly, many injuries and illnesses that were treated at home, or by a visit to the doctor’s office, are now a burden on the more expensive facilities of the profit centers known as health care facilities.
Insurance provides that you can go to the hospital, whenever you want, for whatever you want, unless, of course, you are a working stiff burdened by a “deductable”.
If supply and demand were applied to the medical industry, as it should be in any industry, the market place, not Medicare, would determine the value of the service. Of course, doctors don’t like this idea. They would rather make millions and be able to play the golf course whenever they want — even to the point of asking you, or your children, if there are any firearms in the house.
Finally, a personal anecdote; my second wife was in the hospital for other reasons. An investigative procedure (I don’t recall which one) showed that she had scarring on her heart — that she had suffered a mild heart attack, previously. While watching the news that evening, in her room, there was a story about the first welfare recipient in Florida to receive a pacemaker. The woman was black, had no husband, but did have most of her children gathered around her. She was extremely overweight, if not obese, and appeared to be of the sort who spent her day sitting around watching the children of here various escapades. There was no indication, by her appearance, that she had every done anything along the line of exercise, to maintain her health, nor diet, for the same purpose.
Like food, shelter, and, medical, is not what you deserve from life a return for that which you put into life. By what argument should those who don’t contribute (accept maybe children) become a burden on those who live their lives in a responsible manner? When someone truly is in need, then perhaps that old concept of charity (not doled out and controlled by government) would come back into being. It did provide incentive out of the deplorable condition. However, when there are generations of children who follow the trade of their mother (or father), that being the art of receiving, will that not eventually be the downfall of our once great nation?