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?
Yep.
Excellent point. I love seeing liberals hoist by their own petard.
Yup. Have a life-style that is not “STATE” approved of and you get nothing. “das ist die ORDNUNG!”
So basically people who have jobs and can afford to pay for healthcare will be denied healthcare if the government decides the person doesn’t meet government standards which say this person is deserving of healthcare. Hmm, sounds uncompassionate, uncaring, judgemental, domineering, and ripe for corruption to me.
Exactly government ownership. Which means every citizen would be stamped with a grade, like beef, only this grade would tell which level of healthcare each citizen deserves. What a nightmare!
Here’s another paradox in the lefty’s thinking that you just pointed out in your post.
There is talk of excluding or taxing elective surgery...like cosmetic and such.
Well hell! isn’t abortion elective? isn’t pregnancy elective?
Cant have it both ways you lefty assclowns.
Nobody “deserves” or is “entitled” to health care.
Healthcare is not a RIGHT guaranteed by the Constitution.
However, when a war is funded .. it should include medical care as part of the package. Anyone who is willing to defend this country with their life should be afforded that kind of treatment.
We know that certain illogical criterion are used by liberals according to income, formal education, skin color, sexual preferences, etc. Will the smokers, drinkers, and obese of all these categories be denied, or only the obese within specific groupings?
Perhaps that’s another “complexity” wherein the “nuances” will have to be pondered.
They only THINK they are God. They are not. We will not stand for this.
No. You don’t get it.
I’m not paying for your health care. I’m not paying for your dental care. I’m not paying for your car, your house, your hair appointments.
We’re all not in this together. You posted some statements from Rush Limbaugh which don’t pertain to this thread. Rush is saying we are all free to eat and drink what you want. People are free to listen to him or not.
You seem to be saying that we should all pay for everyone else’s health care. I disagree. We are in particular groups. My group is my family. We have decided to be healthy and thus have lower health care bills. Some others have decided to be unhealthy so they have higher bills. Some others have diseases that will fall on the state to pay. But NOT until after the individual has exhausted their ability to pay.
The point is that we do not place people into groups in this country. We are all Americans. When it comes to health care, we’re paying for each other already — Medicare and Medicaid.
We’re paying for Medicare and Medicaid therefore National Health Care is OK?
What nonsense. By your logic, because we pay for public schools, we should also pay for colleges free for everyone. Because we pay for meals for some school kids, everyone should get free food. And on and on until nobody has anything, which is what happens in a socialist country.
Also, what makes you think we don’t put people into groups in this country? Nonsense. What’s wrong with that anyway?
From Rush:
“There was a time in this country where almost — in fact, it was slightly over 50% of adults smoked cigarettes, over 50% lit up. They puffed, they inhaled, they exhaled smoked cigarettes, let’s not even count the cigar and pipe smokers. Today less than 25% of the population are smoking cigarettes. We’ve gone from 50% to 25%. Smoking has been cut in half, and obviously secondhand smoking has been cut even more. There’s less secondhand smoke out there because there’s less firsthand smoke, right? Now, what were we promised? We were promised better health and what else were we promised? If we could cut smoking and get people to stop smoking, get it banned in public, what were we promised? We were promised lower health care costs. What do we have? After half the people who smoked have quit, we’ve gone from 50% to 25%, promised better health and lower health care costs, what do we have? We have higher health care costs. In fact, we have much higher health care costs.”
Now, substitue smoking for obesity (or anything else). That is the point that myself and others have made on this thread.
‘Exactly. If you don’t want to treat a certain segment of our population for the results of willingly , then those segments should be defined and exempted from paying INTO the system.’
This is the “loophole” I’ve been waiting for. We motorcycle riders will have to step aside, especially when we don’t want to wear helmets.
So sorry, I can’t participate. Neener neener neener!
If the “motorcycle loophole” doesn’t work, I can come up with others, probably enough for EVERYBODY!
“Deprive any of my loved ones treatment, for any reason whatsoever, and you will have me to deal with.
I suspect that there is a dark side within every man, even us law abiding nice guys. These libs should not want to meet my dark side.
I doubt that I am alone on this.”
I’m with you. If I pay for something, you don’t want to deal with what will happen if you don’t deliver, or tell me you will not deliver.
But the “IF” in ‘If I pay for public health care...” won’t happen, because I will go to jail after I run out of ammo fighting off the revenuers.
I doubt that I am alone on THIS.
Rush said the government has not followed through with its promise of lower health care costs.
This has nothing to do with your previous insinuations that National Health Care is ok because we’re already paying for Medicare and Medicaid.
Are you for National Health Care or not? you don’t have to cut and past someone’s comments to answer that.
Numerous people on this thread have stated that they do not want to pay for someone else’s health care. I responded that we already are — Medicare and Medicaid. That’s all I said, not nationalized health care is okay.
As far as the cost and the topic of this article, people look for scapegoats as to the increase in premiums — smoking, obesity. What’s next?
Now, can you see the correlation of the two Rush quotes that I posted?
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.