http://www.cracked.com/article_21468_5-things-i-saw-as-911-first-responder.html
The reason i am posting this is to help raise awareness. Not from the scum that said on this forum "the first responders don't deserve help". I would like normal, decent americans passing by to find out a thing or two about the Zadroga bill. If at least some call their elected officials to declare their support, it would still make a difference.
"If you go back and watch the news clips from the aftermath at Ground Zero, look at the swarms of people stomping around the wreckage, trying to dig victims out -- you ever wonder who those people were? The city didn't have that many rescue personnel (no city does). The answer is, they're everybody -- regular people, from all over the country. While most of us sat glued to a television in a stunned silence that was interrupted only by the occasional, "Dude, can you believe this #$^&?" others drove or walked toward the scene of the horror. They showed up in droves to the mountains of still-burning rubble and breathed toxic smoke for days and weeks in hopes of doing some good."
"The Zadroga Bill that Feal and others fought so hard for has definitely saved lives, but it's going to expire in 2016. This is a problem, since the victims didn't have the kind of illnesses that could be cured with a bottle of pills and a surgery or two -- they're going to need care for the rest of their hopefully long lives."
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
There is a sort of FAQ on the subject at
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/wtc/html/health_compensation/health_compensation_act.shtml
What I am not clear on is this: There is a deadline to register, but does this mean that payments will end on that date? I would think not.
Originally posted by ZahlanziOne might argue that this is a debate forum and if you feel something isn't for debate you might want to use a different forum.
i won't debate this. i don't ever want to debate with questionable humans whether first responders deserve help. that in my opinion is not up for debate.
Originally posted by Zahlanzi"When life hands you a lemon, break out the tequila and the salt." @Zahlanzi
i won't debate this. i don't ever want to debate with questionable humans whether first responders deserve help. that in my opinion is not up for debate.
Why "not up for debate" over a salt rimmed glass of "tequila" or two?
Edit Note: DeepThought's insightful comments are instructive. Having read your OP again, I retract my overly casual reply.
Originally posted by quackquackThat sounds like censorship. If he wants to not debate that topic on this forum then that is his right. I don't want to debate it either so will you ban me too?
One might argue that this is a debate forum and if you feel something isn't for debate you might want to use a different forum.
Originally posted by finneganOn the contrary I am against censorship here. I think it is inappropriate to present a topic and then say I wish not to debate it (especially when it is far from being as established fact). It is my position that all topics on the debate forum should be up for debate. It is not a place to post something that may be controversial, insult those who may disagree and declare that you don't wish to discuss the issue.
That sounds like censorship. If he wants to not debate that topic on this forum then that is his right. I don't want to debate it either so will you ban me too?
Originally posted by finneganIf he doesn't want to debate something on this forum then not starting the thread strikes me as a better strategy. Having started the thread he has to accept that some posters may disagree with him. I assume what he meant to do was explain why he wouldn't respond to disagreement, but the second post sounded like censorship in itself.
That sounds like censorship. If he wants to not debate that topic on this forum then that is his right. I don't want to debate it either so will you ban me too?
On the actual issue I don't know enough about it to really comment, but based solely on the contents of the O.P. and no other knowledge of this I'm sympathetic to his position in the OP.
Originally posted by finnegani won't stop you from discussing it (i can't and i wouldn't anyway).
That sounds like censorship. If he wants to not debate that topic on this forum then that is his right. I don't want to debate it either so will you ban me too?
like i said, i want some americans that have not heard of this bill to look it up.
i want some americans to call their congressman to state their support.
i don't want to hear that republicans fillibuster this bill because they wanted tax cuts for the rich to be passed first.
i want americans wondering who helped out when the country needed the most to know it was ordinary citizens. people who, like the article said, could have been at home, watching tv and wondering who is helping out. people that would not have gotten cancer and sarcoidosis and other illnesses that their medical insurance won't cover.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat's fine, but if you post it here, you get more that you want. Like my reasonable question, above. Because as you want, i did look it up.
i won't stop you from discussing it (i can't and i wouldn't anyway).
like i said, i want some americans that have not heard of this bill to look it up.
i want some americans to call their congressman to state their support.
i don't want to hear that republicans fillibuster this bill because they wanted tax cuts for the rich to be passed first.
i ...[text shortened]... have gotten cancer and sarcoidosis and other illnesses that their medical insurance won't cover.
Originally posted by ZahlanziFirst up, this reeks of attention seeking flame bait, but I'll bite.
http://www.cracked.com/article_21468_5-things-i-saw-as-911-first-responder.html
The reason i am posting this is to help raise awareness. Not from the scum that said on this forum "the first responders don't deserve help". I would like normal, decent americans passing by to find out a thing or two about the Zadroga bill. If at least some call their ele ...[text shortened]... and a surgery or two -- they're going to need care for the rest of their hopefully long lives."
Who precisely are these 'scum' that said (double quotes here) ""the first responders don't deserve help"".
You are quoting someone here right? That is what the quotation marks denote, so who are you quoting and can you direct us to that post.
Charity is not the role of the goobermint, any charity for any reason. For two reasons;
1/ It's no longer charity when the guvamint does it, all it is, is people responding to a big stick. Charity can only ever be voluntary ( I know, I know, the 'v' word just flew right over the top of zeds head, don't ever use it when responding to zahlanzi)
2/ When the goobermint and bureaurats step into this role it kills true charity, it stunts true benevolence. As it grows more people step back. They see someone that needs help, - problem belong the guvamint. They see someone ill - problem belong the guvamint. THey see someone without a job - no worries guvamint will look after that.
And that is truly despicable
Originally posted by WajomaThere also is an issue of why 9/11 first responders should be compensated more than other people injured performing their jobs. If a fire fighter or a police officer got the same condition on 9/10 or 9/12 (or in a different city on 9/11) should they get any less compensation? If someone who was not a first responder but instead a coal miner develops the same condition should they get less compensation?
First up, this reeks of attention seeking flame bait, but I'll bite.
Who precisely are these 'scum' that said (double quotes here) ""the first responders don't deserve help"".
You are quoting someone here right? That is what the quotation marks denote, so who are you quoting and can you direct us to that post.
Charity is not the role of the goobermi ...[text shortened]... omeone without a job - no worries guvamint will look after that.
And that is truly despicable
Like any governmental program, there are probably millions of valid issues. But the idea that we should implement without debate is more offensive to be then being for or against any single program.