Posted on 12/04/2010 10:07:17 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
The government has unveiled a new plan for improving public health in more than 40 categories by 2020. Specific goals to combat obesity include providing healthier food in schools and day care centers, encouraging schools to open their gyms and tracks for after-hours exercise, and building more community sidewalks. The plan also places first-ever emphasis on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health.
"Healthy People objectives are to some extent a road map for public health, cataloging the places we can and should go over the span of a decade," David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine, told HealthDay. "To date, we have failed to achieve fully the aspirations of Healthy People. Whether or not 2020 proves different will depend to a lesser degree on the creation of new ways to get there, and to a larger degree on the will to follow paths already open to us."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
“The plan also places first-ever emphasis on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health.”
You can’t make this stuff up.
It looks like the year 2020 is the new “year of the month” for all political rhetoric.
hopefully, a lot of this can be repealed when the fairies get out of dc...
U.S.News and World Report needs to read: SODOM News and SODOM World Report - soon to be destroyed...
Apparatchiks just love ten year plans. They fancy themselves as directing us little revenue streams in ways more conducive to their objective.
When Charlie Rangel and Barney Frank and Chris Dodd look like Chip’n’Dales . . . THEN the Government can tell me what to do about my health.
Until then, they can just . . . stuff it where the sun don’t shine.
“The plan also places first-ever emphasis on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender health.”
That’s racist....lol
They have to lay off the fudge.
Exactly. They also love expanding their turf. When they started this goals stuff they had a dozen or so goals. Now it's up to 40.
The goals may never be met, but they create more gummint jobs, which is the unspoken goal.
Here is the plan...Queers could be a lot healthier if they stopped taking the off ramp. Go back in your freaking closet! You can never be ‘main stream’ as long as you insist on driving the wrong way on ‘one way’ streets!
More sidewalks. Yes, the federal government should have a $500 billion plan to build sidewalks everywhere. That will fix the problem.
Government overreach in spades. Shut the whole fetid DC cesspool down and start over.
How about this: Cut subsidies to unhealthy food crops and start subsidizing vegetables instead. Personally, if you also want to put extra taxes on unhealthy foods, that’s fine by me, as long as we have cheap healthy foods.
Not likely to happen that way, though.
Why don’t they solve the aging problem.
Thats "fine" by you, huh?
C'mon, people, let's just tax everything that Jeff doesn't like or doesn't eat or doesn't buy. After all, Jeff won't be affected, so why should he care?
Real words to live by.
The right answer is that government bureaucrats and politicians have no business setting goals for the rest of us.
They have an app for that: death panels.
We're not in disagreement as much as you think.
Generally speaking, I'm all in favor of less government. But like it or not, our food choices are RIGHT NOW being largely dictated by the government.
Do some investigation of the subsidies that the feds give to farmers and you'll start to understand why a Big Mac is cheap and why families can't even afford to buy healthy vegetables.
So first of all, the government has to a good degree created the American obesity crisis by subsidizing the wrong things.
At this point, those subsidies are not going to go away. If you think otherwise, I hate to tell you this, but you're living in fantasy land. About the best we could hope, at least for now, for would be that the government would stop subsidizing garbage and start subsidizing better food.
But even if they stopped subsidizing the crap (can you say "french fries," the #1 "vegetable" consumed by kids in America?), it still wouldn't "solve" the obesity crisis.
There was a study that basically found that if you subsidized healthy foods, it looks like people would most likely buy more of them... but they would still buy loads of crap on top of that. So not a huge improvement.
But if you taxed the unhealthy foods (theoretically, you could use the tax revenues to help pay for the health care for people who lived on that crap), it would cut down on consumption and result in people becoming healthier.
The other part of the puzzle is that, again, like it or not, the government is committed to paying a lot of money for health care for most if not all American citizens. Not to mention illegal aliens.
Where do you think this money comes from? It comes from you and me.
So it isn't just a matter of my personal preferences (although I will admit that I would rather eat healthier food and live a healthier life). It's a matter that, if the government doesn't positively influence Americans' eating habits, you and I ARE GOING to pay the price, in an absolutely literal monetary sense.
Personally, I would rather not unnecessarily pay more taxes for the rest of my life because millions of Obama voters habitually gorge themselves on Big Macs.
Whether you still disagree or not, I hope that helps you understand my rationale.
I'm willing to entertain slightly lower percentages to start.
|
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.
We're all barnyard animals now! They're gonna put phosphorus supplements in our gruel, build big hamster wheels that we have to run in, and check us weekly for mange.