And apparently smoking is A-OK....at least if you are among the ruling elite...
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 other’s 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?
“Numerous people on this thread have stated that they do not want to pay for someone else’s health care.”
...someone else’s health care vs. EVERYONE else’s health care vs. anyone else’s health care...
Is there a distinction here you are trying to make?
I am part of EVERYONE, and have never been aided in paying my medical expenses except for the portions paid by the insurance companies I paid premiums into. Medicare and Medicaid are supported by taxes I pay, but are a choice benefit for only certain select “groups” in our society.
I am either misunderstanding your statements, or you are grossly misinformed.
Do you understand why I posted Rush’s two quotes?
No, not if you are using them to clarify your comment #3.
I guess I’m too simple to connect your dots.
EXACTLY.
I’m sorry that I’m not very good and detailed with words. :-)
So...what? Socialized medicine already exists in a free market system? Woman please.
I would like to see a system where EVERYONE pays something for healthcare.
I would like to see a system where people can tailor-make an insurance policy that is right for them (just like car insurance).
I would like to see a system where litigation is a little more under control.
I didn’t say I was for socialized medicine.
All I said was that we are all paying the price for the ENTIRE (EVERYONE) health care system.
1. More people needing health care (baby boomers, which will only increase); and
2. The cost of the advances in medical technology, which is a good thing and which will only increase as well).
If I can make you pay for it, maybe I won't give a d*mn about taking care of it.
If I have to pay for my own health care I am more likely to take care of my health.
Why shouldn't I be required to pay more if I don't take of my health? Why shouldn't I get to pay less if I do take care of my health?
I concur on three out of four of those points.
Re: your point #2—How about the folks (I deal with greatly with people who are chronically homeless: welfare single moms with children from multiple unions out of wedlock, drug/alcohol addicts, mentally ill wondering loose, and even drifters that just want to stay off the grid) who have no taxable income? They’re part of EVERYONE. Should we discontinue treating them, their kids? Or here in Flagstaff, AZ, should we let the drunk Indians freeze in the gutter when they pass out?
Where to draw the line is much simpler NOW, than if we group everybody together and force everyone with a taxable income to pay into one big pot, which the insurance companies would surely align themselves into if EVERYONE is forced to buy insurance.
We must resist this move to implement social medicine.
I’m not sure the effort is worth it here. Jeesh.
On another note, once everyone is covered by health insurance or anything else, “people” become a burden. In socialism, that’s the result. In free enterprise, more people are better. That’s one of the big dangers of socializing anything. Then, the socialists try and eliminate people (by rationing etc) because they are too expensive and the distribution decisions get made by bureaucrats and not by pricing.
And apparently smoking is A-OK....at least if you are among the ruling elite...
It’s amazing how slick that slippery slope is, isn’t it? Damn thing didn’t even pass yet and people are already thinking of eugenic-like tactics.
Yep.
And how many times do people around here have to say it before everyone around here understands?
Nah turn them into Soylent Green and give the health dollars and tax money they paid to illegal aliens. And give the illegals the Soylent Green Parfait to enjoy while waiting at the mail box for their next check.
OK
But the issue that has brought this topic to the forefront of the citizens of this country is that even middle class folks can’t afford to pay for the insurance policies they would prefer. i.e. unlimited benefits in the cases of extensive cancer treatments, AIDS treatment, etc.
The “It takes a village” idiot FELT that universal health coverage was a necessity for you and me, and somehow got the whole freaking Dem party to see how that could be a perfect opportunity to seize power from the populace. With the aid of the MSM they convince enough people to win some elections based on the promise of what appeared to them to be the health insurance policy they could not previously afford. An old trick, promise something for nothing. This along with teaching the public that virtually unlimited health care is a right. We don’t deserve to suffer and die just because we can’t come up with the millions of dollars it will cost to stay alive and well.
Now this thread. The big slice of reality pie that the promisers had hoped no one would notice: Some people are a higher risk than others, so should we refuse to give them the treatment required to keep them alive and well, or charge them more than others for the free gift we had offered to win their votes.
I can’t find it acceptable to be forced to buy what will probably be a crappier policy so that EVERYONE can have as good (or bad) of a policy as I have.
The truth is: if I can’t afford to have the same treatment a gozillionaire can afford, I’m going to die. We all do eventually. Big deal. Make your peace with everyone you deal with every day, get right with God and stay ‘fessed up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.