Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Lilypad beat me to this)...Briefly, somehow over the past ferw decades we as a society have decided to become more caring and supportive of everyone. A "kinder, gentler" society, if you will. Any act by the government to "look after" us comes with a corresponding cost; in dollars, in freedom, or in self-determination.
Just one example would be mandatory helmets for motorcyclists. In a wide-open "old west" society, we'd just allow any biker to crash, if he insisted, and if he became disabled, he'd just have to live with that.
We don't want paralyzed, disabled bikers lying around and begging for change on our public sidewalks. So we've agreed to provide medical care if needed, often at enormous cost over his entire lifetime. It then becomes our "right" as his benefactors, to demand that he wear a helmet to lower "our" financial risk.
Sounds a bit cold-hearted but I think you'll find this reasoning to be part of any legislation designed to help us despite ourselves. Annoying in theory, it suddenly becomes a very good idea if we or a loved one needs its benefits.....
Well, I have a mother who has a very serious breathing problem...and there are people who do not want to smell smoke when they eat, and they shouldn't have to...there may be people believe it or not, who have breathing problems or alergies to smoke, and they'd never complain...so that is why I feel if people want to smoke, they should go outside, where the air takes it away. I used to smoke, and there was nothing more disgusting to me, then bringing a face towel to my nose in the morning and smelling that stale odor of cigerettes...so, after that, I never smoked in my home...nor in the homes of others....
What would the financial structure of an insurance scheme have to do with it? We don't have a national auto insurance regime and we still have seat belt laws. Why would targeted efforts to control the costs of medical care work out any differently under a single-payer health regime than under the regime we have in place right now?
There is a little thing out there called free enterprise. When the government controls the health care, and they are the only single acting body, don't you think they are going to want a say in possible preventions and more control? I can actually choose between health care providers right now.
Down with nanny laws in all respects and fascist slime-balls like Michael Bloomberg. Don't like smoke in a restaurant or bar? Then don't go in. Saturated fats? Self-education doesn't apply? I'm not recalling any class at any educational level that taught me "thou shall not kill". Mandated seat belt and helmet laws for ADULTS?? You die without them, oh well, "survival of the fittest" still is a concept that has to prevail at some point still, doesn't it? At what point do our personal choices outweigh supposed "cost to society", particularly when these statistics are generally always cooked up to meet the needs of fat cat lobbyists and insurance companies? Mandated seatbelt usage may not seem such a big deal to some, but oh lord, the slippery slope you are creating for your future assumed freedoms you still have that you take for granted: you might be surprised one day. This is part of the reason the "Free Staters" in New Hampshire helped kill legislation last month that would have made that state the last to require adult seatbelt usage. Amen for "Live Free or Die" still applying some what anyhow!!!
Give me liberty, or give me death...
Cremebrulee, I confess that I am very happy with our anti-smoking laws here in California, as smoke really does cause me and my spouse to experience very real discomfort- must be some sort of allergy (?)
I was raised by a smoking Dad and smoked for a few years myself. But, selfish as I may be, I'm now glad not to be subjected to it in public. Smoking in a restaurant is like "pe*ing" (urinating) in a swimming pool...it can and does impact the entire area. If you want to smoke, step outside---please!!
I just would like to portray something that never works
Years ago, when we Had a fake gas shortage and we were allowed to gas up on odd and even days, meaning the last number of your license plate, they imposed a tax on gas at that time. That money was supposed to go towards all road repair, bridge repair...and guess what, our infostructure is even worse. All townships seem to be broke, our roads and bridges in the US are very bad. And yet, all that money is still being collected?????? Going where.
Now Ed Rendell wants to propose raising the Turnpike tolls, and they want to impose more toll roads, i.e. I-80. to help pay for road repair and bridge repair and new roads. Yeah right, and the money will once again, become lost in the shuffle, especially now, when we're near the end of one administration waiting to elect another. All the new people elected forget where all the monies were allocated.
and so, the beat goes on.....
Just a little tid bit to remind you how efficently our nationwide health care will be run....it's a nice idea, but whose going to mind the office?????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
