Skip to comments.Do obese people deserve medical treatment? (smokers, drinkers, hang gliders, homosexuals)
Posted on 12/05/2009 9:34:32 AM PST by Still Thinking
Faced with an obesity epidemic, that has dramatic consequences for medical costs, pundits have proposed different solutions, ranging from excluding obesity from health insurance, government-run prevention campaigns, higher taxes on junk food, or higher premiums for fat people.
The possibility of greater government involvement in medicine with the passing of ObamaCare puts this debate in a new light. If the government decides who gets money for medical treatment, the question of whether fat people deserve medical treatment will become a political issue.
The question of who "deserves" treatment is only conceivable in a welfare state. In a free, capitalist society, people are able to allocate their wealth according to their judgment of the merit of their own and others health, including the degree to which they are culpable for their condition. However, there is no rational way to allocate property taken by force.
Does Jake, who became paralyzed because he liked extreme sports, or Kate, who has lung cancer because she is a smoker, or Mary, who has problems because has a tendency towards obesity which she does not try to control with diet or exercise, or Sue, who is dying from old age, and whose life might be slightly extended at tremendous cost deserve my money?
Do (obese) people deserve sunshine?
Unfortunately, we are already here. If not in practice, it is in mindset by a near majority of citizens in one degree or another.
Already we have Zeke Emanual, the man who wants to scrap the Hippocratic oath, advising the Kenyan warlord. We're all supposed to line up for this in the name of reduced costs, which won't happen. What about ethics? We've seen how government ethics work with the IRS. If you can't pay your taxes, SCREW YOU! We'll take your home and everything else. We're heading for the day when it will be, "Oh you're too fat SCREW YOU!!! No more blood pressure meds!".
Yup. The only moral way to ration health care is through good old Supply and Demand. This is true for everything. It's always been true. You can have anything you can pay for.
The problem (of course) is that as we move further and further from a market-based health care system, the government-imposed mandates become a bigger disturbance in the chain of supply.
If virtually everyone's current healthcare provider covers mammograms for women in their 40's, then that's great. But as soon as the government determines that mammogras are not needed by this group, you can bet that virtually everyone's healthcare provider will stop providing such coverage.
At that point, we've left Supply and Demand behind, and we are left to deal with the fallout of what our masters feel we deserve to have.
There is no freedom down that road.
That is exactly why it is so important to force every citizen to pay at least some federal income tax. Half the population thinks the federal coffers grow on trees, since they pay no income tax.
We're all in the same boat together -- we're not in particular groups.
||"I simply turn on the Golden EIB Microphone and share my honest passions and beliefs with people.
And they're free to go elsewhere.
They're free to ignore; they're free to believe; they're free to be entertained, I don't care.
They're free to do whatever they want.
But a lot of people aren't free to smoke cigarettes where they want;
they're not free to drink where they want;
they're not free to eat the kind of food they want to eat;
they're not free to eat trans fats;
they're not free to drive certain places.
Pretty soon we're going to be told what kind of cars we have to drive.
I can't cause that.
I can't restrict anybody's freedom.
We've elected a guy who can, does, and wants to, all under the guise of saving us.
So I appreciate the effort, and I appreciate somewhat losing my temper here.
But don't compare me ever to an authoritarian who thinks so little of people that without him they can barely breathe on their own.
Don't ever do that."
LEARN IT, LOVE IT, LIVE IT!
If one cannot understand Rush's words above, then one does not truly understand FREEDOM!
Will they be allowed to pay for it under Obamacare?
They are just ASKING to catch something nasty.
Let's not forget to put them on the list.
BY THIS IDIOTS THINKING no THEY chose TO ENDANGER THEIR WELL BEING SOOOOOOO, NO HEALTH CARE FOR THEM.
This is the type of thinking you get when the inmates start running the asylum.
They are more likely to pay for it than drug addicts, ghetto fathers who impregnate multiple women, illegal aliens, young adults, etc...
Yes, but the “pursuit” of life liberty and happiness is a right. That could be interpreted as including the attempt to acquire medical care when desired.
If a government pre-judges a class or type of individual as undeserving of public health care, is the government not violating rights?
Who deserves to pay for it?
Well then you had better pursue obtaining the means to pay for your health care.
That’s what has yet to be decided.
EVERYONE should PAY SOMETHING for healthcare — EVERYONE.
Rush forgot to say that people aren’t free to use recreational drugs, to sell recreational drugs, to sell sexual services, to buy sexual services or to procure lethal drugs to commit suicide. A lot more people would like to have those freedoms than the freedom to eat trans fats.
I do so! It's a metabolic disorder, I tell ya'.
IMHO anyone who needs anything beyond basic care will find that they get no care or care will come too late. There is a reason30% more people die of cancer in countries with this sort of healthcare system. The wait weeds them out. I’m personally petrified since I am a type 1 diabetic and am at the 39 year mark but still in relatively good health. What happens in 15 years when something major could happen and I’m 64 yo? Right now my private insurace would take care of me at 80%.
They’ll cover AIDS drugs but not anything obesity related.