[StBernard] adults acting like a bunch of children

[Westley Annis]

What is wrong with the people on the da-parish service?  You sound like a
bunch of kindergarten children behaving badly.
Regarding the insurance issue:  Don't kick someone when they are down.  We
have all had our own individual struggles to face.  If a person did not buy
flood insurance in a "no flood" zone, I'll bet they are already kicking
themselves without your help.  Some of the people responding sound like they
are "keeping score" and worrying that someone else might get a better
"deal".  As far as I can see with or without flood insurance, we have all
shared in the losses in various ways.  The responses I keep reading remind
of a greedy child saying "He got more than me".
Additionally, I can't fathom why anyone believes that the government (or
anyone) should pay you for losses that have already been reimbursed by
another party (such as insurance).


Maybe we just need to look at things from a different angle occasionally.  
Try considering a similar situation put in a healthcare example:  You are a
young person (25 years old with no obvious health risks) who purchased
health insurance and suddenly need an unexpected life-saving surgery.  You
purchased insurance because it was the prudent thing to do.  Anyway, the
premiums didn't really cost all that much a year given the large percentage
paid by your employer.  The procedure is covered at 80% (after your $500
deductible) by any doctor in the US.  Chances are, you would have the
surgery and find some way to scrape the money together to pay the remaining
20% of the bill all the while continuing to pay the monthly premiums for
this plan.
Joe (exact same age and overall health scenario) doesn't have health
insurance and needs the same surgery.  He  works for a small company with
fewer employee benefits (employer doesn't contribute any money to defray the
cost of the employee's healthcare premiums) and was advised by friends and
family to not waste his money on health insurance because odds are against
him needing any kind of major medical needs in the next few years.  Even if
he got into a car accident, his medical rider would cover him in that
scenario, maybe he would get a health insurance plan next year.  While Joe
might get lesser quality care (waited longer for appointment or care, didn't
get a choice of physician, etc.) he can go to a charity-type healthcare
facility and still get the same surgery at little or no cost.  Society
doesn't deny him the life-saving surgery procedure because he didn't have
insurance coverage due to lack of foresight, naiveté, ability to pay, or
whatever reason.  Instead the charity institution would give appropriate
medical care and try to recoup the financial burden based on his estimated
ability to repay.  If Joe is unable to pay his bill, the burden gets picked
up by the entity supporting the charity institution (e.g. government,
religious group).  Is this fair? Maybe, maybe not? This situation has
occurred countless times, isn't it kind of the same thing?

Kellie