Don White wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:38:41 -0500, Boater
wrote:

One more time: most retirees on fixed incomes cannot afford to lay
out $2300 for necessary surgery. You're a rich retiree. Your
perspective is not relevant to retirees who are trying to decide
whether to buy food or medicine because they cannot afford both.
It's called personal responsibility - something that is sorely
lacking
in post-modern society.

However, let's take your posit and extend it a little bit. Why
should
the working union man who retires have to rely on the public dole
for
health care? Why can't he rely on his Union to help him - he was a
Union man his entire life, made a good living, maybe lived to his
economic ability without saving for future rainy days - he lived the
good life with the Union, why not rely on the Union to help him
continue that life?
What if he didn't have a pension through the union?
Why didn't the union see to it that he had a pension? Why wasn't the
union looking out for its members?

What if the pension he had through his union was very small?
Why didn't the union see to it that he had a pension that would enable
him to continue to live at the same quality of life when he retired?
Why wasn't the union looking out for its members?

What if the employer with whom his union negotiated a pension
completely or partially welched on the pension and he's only getting
part of what was agreed to, and only because of the pension guarantee
agency? That happens frequently.
The union screwed up and should take it on the chin and pay for the
guys pension out of the unions treasury. The union member relied upon
the union management to look out for him and union management failed
him.

Or are you saying retired union members without pensions should be
able to have their health care paid through the general fund of the
union?
Yes. What other purpose is there in being in a union if it is not
going to lookout for the general welfare of its members through their
working life and into retirement. The union derived a benefit from
having them as a member. But, it appears that when they can't keep
tossing money into the union coffers the retired union members get
kicked to the curb.

Or maybe he did save enough, but he's been nearly wiped out by recent
medical bills in his family.
Happens to union and non union people all of the time. They have
insurance that will cover situations like this. All you have to do is
purchase it. I am surprised that the union did not make the member
aware of this situation and how the union member could protect
themselves. Or, why doesn't the union negotiate for a group policy,
they could get great rates for their members.

Most middle income retirees are not that "Fixed" well enough to be
able to handle the costs of serious surgery or an extended hospital
stay.
See response above.

In many cases, being flatlined by medical expenses when you are
retired has very little to do with "personal responsibility."
It has a whole lot to do with personal responsibility.


You obviously are not someone to be taken seriously.
Why?

What does the union do for the dues that the union collects from its
members? It seems that the only thing the union is good at doing is
collecting dues and make threats about going on strike.
Amazes me that someone who knows so little can talk so much about a given
subject.
It amazes me that someone who worked for a union all his life can't say
what the union actually did for him for all of the union dues the union
pulled out of his paycheck for all of those years?

You talkin' to me? I've never worked for a union.
I've belonged to one pretty well all my working life and served on the local
executive.



Of course he wasn't talking to you. You jumped in, as usual, from
nowhere out of pure stupidity.