To: SamAdams76
What, your taxes and insurance premiums not high enough? :) 9 billion down the rathole to pay for obesity-related illnesses doesn't bug you? Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?
2 posted on
06/08/2003 2:26:44 PM PDT by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
Well you know the money is not going to defray our taxes and insurance premiums. Instead, it will go to support more social services and we will have more welfare families on food stamps going to the Piggly Wiggly and buying, you guessed it, more junk food.
3 posted on
06/08/2003 2:29:52 PM PDT by
SamAdams76
(Back in boot camp! 268 (-32))
To: mewzilla
Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?The other side of the obesity equation is lack of exercise - should extra taxes be imposed on people whom the government says do not exercise enough?
7 posted on
06/08/2003 2:41:34 PM PDT by
CFC__VRWC
To: mewzilla
If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem? The article suggests that the government is specifically targetting fat; as such, things like sausages are apt to be taxed more than bagels or pasta, despite the fact that the latter are for many people more likely to contribute to obesity.
12 posted on
06/08/2003 2:43:36 PM PDT by
supercat
(TAG--you're it!)
To: mewzilla
Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?PLEASE make a profile page, I'm praying you're a yankee liberal.
13 posted on
06/08/2003 2:44:30 PM PDT by
HoustonCurmudgeon
(PEACE - Through Superior Firepower)
To: mewzilla
"Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?"Well, the problem is that there's alot of convincing research out there that implies that the culprit in obesity is sugar, not fat at all.
26 posted on
06/08/2003 2:59:12 PM PDT by
Sam Cree
(HHDerelict)
To: mewzilla
Why would you want government intrusion at that level? Your quote is the equivalent of saying "as long as they don't tax me, I don't care how high the rate is..." For a moment I thought I was on du.com.
43 posted on
06/08/2003 3:44:36 PM PDT by
Petronski
(I"m not always cranky.)
To: mewzilla
9 billion down the rathole to pay for obesity-related illnesses doesn't bug you?I think the better solution is to let them start paying for their own health care costs ---one way would be to have insurance plans that match the needs of the buyers. If you use little health care, then you should be in a low-user group with low premiums. If you want an extravagant policy then you should pay for it.
I think we need to get away from the idea that health care is something the government can do for you, or that health care is only going to doctors for medicine and surgery. Health care is really a do-it-yourself program, you have to eat and drink right, exercise and all the rest. Getting to be 400 pounds and then thinking there's some magic cure out there for your heart and other problems that you don't have to pay for is just bad thinking.
46 posted on
06/08/2003 3:50:36 PM PDT by
FITZ
To: mewzilla
Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?I don't eat the stuff, but I see a lot wrong with governments mandating life styles, we are on a dangerous path here.
To: mewzilla
Let 'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?Sure, what a little less freedom and a little more government nannyism among friends? As long as it doesn't cost you much personally, why worry about it, right?
To: mewzilla
Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem? I thought conservatives were anti-tax.
101 posted on
06/09/2003 5:28:12 PM PDT by
Dan from Michigan
("Once you stop testing yourself, you get slow. When that happens they kill you" - Young Guns)
To: mewzilla
"Let'em tax. If you don't eat the stuff, or much of it, what's the problem?"
Hopefully, you will remember that attitude when they begin taxing something that affects you.
108 posted on
06/10/2003 7:05:35 AM PDT by
MEGoody
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson