With the new healthcare legislation ensuring that all of society will pay for each other's health woes, if you see someone doing something harmful to their body will you say something to them? Will you tell them that you do not condone what they are doing and you shouldn't have to pay for the healthcare of individuals who do not take good care of themselves?
If you've been buying health insurance you've been paying for other people's health woes anyway.
If I haven't, then I won't have any choice now will I.
drfeelill wrote:
With the new healthcare legislation ensuring that all of society will pay for each other's health woes, if you see someone doing something harmful to their body will you say something to them? Will you tell them that you do not condone what they are doing and you shouldn't have to pay for the healthcare of individuals who do not take good care of themselves?
Uh, we've already been doing this all along via the insurance industry.
In hindsight maybe I should have worried more about who is going to pay for the opioid crisis. Certainly not Trump even though it mostly affects poor red states and for sure not the drug makers responsible.
drfeelill wrote:
In hindsight maybe I should have worried more about who is going to pay for the opioid crisis. Certainly not Trump even though it mostly affects poor red states and for sure not the drug makers responsible.
Obama signed the legislation that helped the opioid crisis along. Passed after a bipartisan vote. No objection from DEA or DOJ.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/dea-drug-industry-congress/?utm_term=.5f26d4656cfdLuv2Run wrote:
Obama signed the legislation that helped the opioid crisis along. Passed after a bipartisan vote. No objection from DEA or DOJ.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/dea-drug-industry-congress/?utm_term=.5f26d4656cfd
I know you're not the brightest person here (putting it very mildly). But what "helped the opioid crisis along" started in Bush's first term with the push by the manufacturer of OxyContin to get a drug clearly aimed at opioid-tolerant people approved.
But my point is obviously that the issue, regardless of its origins, is now deeply affecting lots of cracker states like the one you come from, and Trump has no more intention of helping them than he does of doing anything else he says. But as long as he's not black and the U.S. is full of faithtards like you, h ell maintain a certain level of support.
1) Socialized healthcare benefits the sick(unhealthy) people more than it does the healthy.
2)Sadly, the healthy have no right to tell the unhealthy how to live their lives.
We've had a socialized military for years. Somehow everyone's okay with that.
Medical insurance is socialized medicine but for a profit.
Maybe we need a burger tax instead.
dr phil wrote:
Medical insurance is socialized medicine but for a profit.
Maybe we need a burger tax instead.
Burgers aren't the problem. Taxes are the problem. I don't need my sales taxes going to fund bums, addicts and burger eaters. Income neither. I switched to a keto diet three days ago and love it. Got the flu but no more bloat from cheese for me. I get tired of obese sickos and anorexics/bulimics, that whole nightmare's not my bag. I was on unemployment for two years and hated it all. All I did was train for marathons. Now I don't need the unemployment because my partner has money and I can eat a better diet. Might have some pasta tonight but not sure. People on this board make me sick with their judgy ways.
Down heaahhh in Geooorrrgia
At midnight
We drink our Rufus Teague
If socialized healthcare does in fact benefit you, why do you care if it benefits other people more?
hrgsdgresg wrote:
1) Socialized healthcare benefits the sick(unhealthy) people more than it does the healthy.
2)Sadly, the healthy have no right to tell the unhealthy how to live their lives.
Welp, turns out burgers aren't so bad for runners away.
It's all the glutards and vegan trustafarians in the running world that cause these misdelusions about "junk food."
"guess what, gluttons? Turns out that fast food does your muscles good.
"According to an upcoming study in the International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, the frozen-and-fried crap you get from your average food court is effective in replenishing glycogen, a form of carbohydrate energy used by your muscles that gets depleted during a workout. (It's also the reason why bodybuilders carbo-load.) Not only that, but fast food may be just as good at replenishing glycogen as a meal of energy bars and sports drinks."
So, health nuts can suck it. I know there's lots of runners on here who don't eat meat and judge others but they're the ones being left behind and I know that now.
HRE wrote:
If you've been buying health insurance you've been paying for other people's health woes anyway.
I wonder...is everyone who resists the idea of helping pay for other people's insurance entirely capable of covering their medical expenses out of pocket?
How exactly does this free market idea work? OK, so people get insurance from their employer as a "benefit." But let's say someone who has worked at one of these benefits-providing jobs for 10 years suffers from a catastrophic accident or illness and suddenly has a $75K medical bill (not unheard of, unfortunately). This person, who has an individual rather than a family policy, has not paid even close to this much into the system through his premiums over a 10 year period. Not even close to a quarter, in fact. Does such a person suddenly change his mind about the idea of risk pool based insurance? Or does he offer to pay tens of thousands of dollars out of his own pocket?
If this were really as simple as "Why should I fund some fat smoker's lifestyle" and not an issue of a mercenary insurance and medical model.