Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Does that mean it's too hard for you to answer?
Do you think the state should impose restrictions so that people don't abuse the health care system with their bad health habits?
youre welcome to want what ever you want,, you arent allowed to force others into it,,Medicare is voluntary?
And who doesn't want heath care insurance?
Everyone who has a job and their employer offers it, is enrolled in employer provided insurance.
Give it a rest.
I want the government involved with paying my health care bills.
I'm tired of paying 1309.35 a month in insurance premiums. Insurance I barely use but need incase breast cancer returns to try to kill me again.
I don't believe it's fair that those who don't have an employer who offers insurance or aren't working have to either go without heath care or have to pay astronomical rates. Like I have to pay.
I'm paying a lot of money for someone else to have health care and for an already filthy rich insurance company to get even more filthy rich.
If the government paid the bills instead of a private insurance company, I wouldn't be paying anywhere close to what I have to pay now and I would get much better coverage.
So would most people.
Those working wouldn't be at the mercy of their employer as to what kind and how good of health care they get with single payer.
Should I be able to deny you health care because you eat red meat? It's been proven over and over how lethal it is, it causes a long list of lethal health problems.
Should I deny you health care because I don't like your lifestyle? Or because you don't go to a gym 5 days a week? Or because you participate in a sport that I believe is dangerous?
Does the government deny people on medicare or medicaid health care because of their "bad habits?"
No they don't.
So there is no reason to believe that the government would if we had single payer.
NOPE,,Of course. But if they've already inserted themselves and looks like their role will be expanding. And people like Anomalism will use it as an excuse for government to dictate our health habits. Will you?
Good. But lots of other people will. I hope your on board for fighting it.I already answered that. No.
There ya go. That's what I'm talking about!It scares me everyday we get some of the ideas on this forum...
Lets be clear there is a whole continent call Europe which has generally solved this and they didn't do it by forcing people...
Europe has a few thinks worth looking at:
- Restrictions on unhealthy food advertising - they are talking now after 9pm for TV ads
- No prescription drug advertising
- Government have a well paid public health media campaign - this allows them to compete with the unhealthy advertising
- Government Sponsored and subsidised healthy living and local sports grants
Right, but government does have control over trade agreements.How do we stop what exactly? Government has no responsibility to maintain our manufacturing infrastructure. We're not fully socialist just yet.
In the long run, trade barriers almost always harm the country erecting them more than they help.Right, but government does have control over trade agreements.
I am just curious what you think we should do about it, if anything.
You would support a UBI proposal?Which makes a solid argument for universal income, which Milton Friedman supported as a way to decrease the administrative cost and fairness issues associated with only providing it to certain people.
Watch the Milton Friedman video that Progressive Hunter posted above. I would support it under those conditions.You would support a UBI proposal?
Some grown people can't manage themselves. I think UBI is an inevitability, but is it not true that even then there will be adults mismanaging that money and ending up in unfortunate situations? How many people would spend it all on drugs and alcohol and end up a complete wreck? Do we then still need to help those people, or do we leave them to drown?Watch the Milton Friedman video that Progressive Hunter posted above. I would support it under those conditions.
theres also no reason to create a system expects them not to,,,Some grown people can't manage themselves. I think UBI is an inevitability, but is it not true that even then there will be adults mismanaging that money and ending up in unfortunate situations? How many people would spend it all on drugs and alcohol and end up a complete wreck? Do we then still need to help those people, or do we leave them to drown?
Some people cannot be counted on to behave like grownups, and therefore there's not a whole lot of sense in creating solutions that expect them to.
It becomes a problem for other people when large groups of adults are disrupting society because they can't manage themselves.the fed gov has no business in personal lives at all,,,
thats a state or local problem not a fed one,,It becomes a problem for other people when large groups of adults are disrupting society because they can't manage themselves.
The main thing is, for some people, EVERY problem is a government problem.thats a state or local problem not a fed one,,
Those conditions would never last. And I'm quite certain UBI would be used as leverage to fuck with people.Watch the Milton Friedman video that Progressive Hunter posted above. I would support it under those conditions.
those are just useful idiots,, and what government is the problem,, we all have 3,,fed, state, and local,,,The main thing is, for some people, EVERY problem is a government problem.
Some kind of UBI is inevitable. Once giant swathes of the job market start getting swallowed by automation we won't have another choice.Those conditions would never last. And I'm quite certain UBI would be used as leverage to fuck with people.
Nope.Some kind of UBI is inevitable. Once giant swathes of the job market start getting swallowed by automation we won't have another choice.
