US Health Reform - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

04/02/2010 01:06:55 AM · #376

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by dponlyme:
So are you saying that it is better...

I'm saying you can't claim to value life in the very same breath that you demand everyone to fend for themselves or die. It's profoundly hypocritical.

I value my freedom more than I value health-care. I value an unborn babies right to a chance at life more than I value the right of a mother to control her own reproductive system. I value hard work and I value personal responsibility. Hypocritical is to say that just because a baby isn't outside of the womb that it can be killed legally.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/02/2010 01:13:29 AM · #377

Originally posted by dponlyme:

... I value an unborn babies right to a chance at life more than I value the right of a mother to control her own reproductive system.

Just out of curiousity, would you feel the same if:
- your spouse or daughter were raped?
- if terminating a pregnancy would save the life of a love one;
- if the unborn child would suffer a lifetime or excruciating pain from an incurable disease.

Ray

04/02/2010 01:20:54 AM · #378

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Honestly Ray... stop trying to boil everything down to strict logic and argument construction... it's tedious. I could say by your way of thinking the government should provide toilet paper for everyone because everyone should have a right to wipe their ass with dignity regardless of their ability to buy the toilet paper. those that can afford the toilet paper would have to pay a tax so that the have nots can stop using a corncob ( very uncivilized ).

Sorry folks, I will need to take a brief sabbatical...it is really too difficult for me to type what with all these tears streaming down my face. Thank you DP for this moment of hilarity...I truly needed that. :O)

Ray [/quote]

Glad you liked thought that was funny... seriously though there has to be a point where people should have personal responsibility for themselves. Would you all be in favor of banning fast food? If not then why not? Maybe we should all have to report to the IRS the number of times we have eaten at a fast food restaurant during the year. It would be for your own good right? Isn't it the governments job to make sure you make healthy choices in your life.. after all if the government is paying for your health-care with taxpayer dollars shouldn't they also have a right to force you to make better decisions in regard to your health?

04/02/2010 01:26:22 AM · #379

Originally posted by dponlyme:

I value my freedom more than I value health-care.

Originally posted by RayEthier:

All together now...I wanna talk about me and only me.

Originally posted by dponlyme:

I value an unborn babies right to a chance at life more than I value the right of a mother to control her own reproductive system.

Correction- you value a chance at birth. After that you don't appear to care in the slightest if they live or die, nor whether the mother's life would be risked in the process. Interesting that you consider it your business what a woman does with her own body under the pretense of life, but none of your business if that same body requires assistance to live.

Originally posted by dponlyme:

I value hard work and I value personal responsibility.

We all do. If only we all valued the benefit of sharing as well.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

04/02/2010 01:30:16 AM · #380

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by dponlyme:

... I value an unborn babies right to a chance at life more than I value the right of a mother to control her own reproductive system.

Just out of curiousity, would you feel the same if:
- your spouse or daughter were raped?
- if terminating a pregnancy would save the life of a love one;
- if the unborn child would suffer a lifetime or excruciating pain from an incurable disease.

Ray

Granted it is not always so completely cut and dried and we both know that the issue of abortion is complicated but I would say yes,no,and hard to say really. That said I guess I should say that I really would not want abortion outlawed as one might suspect from my posts... personally I would not want my wife or daughter to abort a baby conceived out of rape but It would not be my place or the governments to make that choice in that situation. Bottom line here is that we know that the huge majority of abortions are as a result of consensual sex and it is abortion under these circumstances that I refer to in my comments.

escapetooz

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

04/02/2010 07:10:41 AM · #381

Originally posted by dponlyme:

Glad you liked thought that was funny... seriously though there has to be a point where people should have personal responsibility for themselves. Would you all be in favor of banning fast food? If not then why not? Maybe we should all have to report to the IRS the number of times we have eaten at a fast food restaurant during the year. It would be for your own good right? Isn't it the governments job to make sure you make healthy choices in your life.. after all if the government is paying for your health-care with taxpayer dollars shouldn't they also have a right to force you to make better decisions in regard to your health?

The government should step in and do something about our crappy food. Yes!! Absolutely! But not on the consumer level. On the company level. Strict regulations about advertising, ingredients, etc. I'd love something like what they are did with cigarettes, restricting when and where they can advertise is certainly a first step.

You keep forgetting the fact that personal responsibility is only a piece of the puzzle. None of us live in a vacuum. Friends, adverts, what's available, all influence your life. You talk about my view as a utopia, this view that we can all just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps is a utopia. The rich don't always deserve their money, and the poor don't always deserve their low status.

There seem to be no fights from this "freedom" group fighting against this health care bill about the govt. banning certain drugs. I can tell your right now some fast food every day is going to do more harm than some pot. But you have commercials telling you how yummy yummy that big mac is, and ones telling you the evils of pot. And people eat it up... literally. I've even used this argument before when people were saying how bad pot was. I'm not saying its good, but there are a lot more harmful things in the world that are perfectly legal and not demonized, such as fast food, aspartame, alcohol, and I get laughed at like I'm an idiot. "What are you talking about food for! Pots a drug!" As if it only matters what your body inhales, and not what it ingests. Apparently people can't see Americans bloating up and dying off of heart disease right before their eyes? Am I the crazy one?

I also would like to point out, again, that you have to have car insurance. Why is it such a leap to say you have to have health insurance?

Message edited by author 2010-04-02 07:14:43.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

04/02/2010 09:06:44 AM · #382

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by dponlyme:

Glad you liked thought that was funny... seriously though there has to be a point where people should have personal responsibility for themselves. Would you all be in favor of banning fast food? If not then why not? Maybe we should all have to report to the IRS the number of times we have eaten at a fast food restaurant during the year. It would be for your own good right? Isn't it the governments job to make sure you make healthy choices in your life.. after all if the government is paying for your health-care with taxpayer dollars shouldn't they also have a right to force you to make better decisions in regard to your health?

The government should step in and do something about our crappy food. Yes!! Absolutely! But not on the consumer level. On the company level. Strict regulations about advertising, ingredients, etc. I'd love something like what they are did with cigarettes, restricting when and where they can advertise is certainly a first step.

You keep forgetting the fact that personal responsibility is only a piece of the puzzle. None of us live in a vacuum. Friends, adverts, what's available, all influence your life. You talk about my view as a utopia, this view that we can all just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps is a utopia. The rich don't always deserve their money, and the poor don't always deserve their low status.

There seem to be no fights from this "freedom" group fighting against this health care bill about the govt. banning certain drugs. I can tell your right now some fast food every day is going to do more harm than some pot. But you have commercials telling you how yummy yummy that big mac is, and ones telling you the evils of pot. And people eat it up... literally. I've even used this argument before when people were saying how bad pot was. I'm not saying its good, but there are a lot more harmful things in the world that are perfectly legal and not demonized, such as fast food, aspartame, alcohol, and I get laughed at like I'm an idiot. "What are you talking about food for! Pots a drug!" As if it only matters what your body inhales, and not what it ingests. Apparently people can't see Americans bloating up and dying off of heart disease right before their eyes? Am I the crazy one?

I also would like to point out, again, that you have to have car insurance. Why is it such a leap to say you have to have health insurance?

Maybe the government should just tax the hell out of anything it deems not to be necessary to good health and survival. We wouldn't buy too much fast food if it cost $20/burger. Hell why not outlaw beef all-together. I understand there are better more nutritious options to fuel your body with than red meat. Perhaps we should all be mandated to be vegetarians... it would be for the good of public health. Maybe we should have a national id card sort of like a Kroger shopping card that we would have to provide when making any purchase so that the feds can keep track of our spending and then tax us individually such that the person who buys more fast food than others is taxed at a higher rate. This is just crazy. Where exactly do you draw the line at government intervention and shaping of your life? You know I'm quite sure that a lot of people see the advertising for fast food and simply 'choose' not to buy it or at least do not make it a staple of their diet. The key thing is that we as Americans should get to choose what we do with our lives even if that means running them into the ground. literally. I do not want the government making my decisions for me and using the carrot of lower taxes and free or subsidized health-care to get me to obey. Far fetched you say. It's exactly how the bill treats the states because if they do not fall in line and do as the feds say then they will lose their medicaid $$. This is something that the individual states cannot afford.

I would prefer if the government just stayed out of my life as much as is possible.

You say the rich don't always deserve their money. Just who are you to make such a determination?

For the record I am for the legalization of marijuana. It is far less destructive than alcohol which is legal. I don't think you can put it in the same category of harmfulness as fast food because pot does effect one cognitively in addition to being unhealthy.

I am also not in favor of all social programs going by the wayside either. There are people with a legitimate need for a safety net. However ssi disability is riddled with people who do not need or deserve the free handout that is being given them. I was on food-stamps for quite a long period of time and am now off of them and it was truly wonderful that this option existed for me as it allowed me to keep my family together. It shouldn't be a permanent situation for any able bodied person however. There really should be time limits or some other such device to force people to provide for themselves if they are able to. I would venture a guess that a lot of food-stamp recipients are selling them to get alcohol,tobacco,pot etc. Just recently I was stopped in the Wal-Mart by a young mother who wanted me to give her $100 cash and in return she would allow me to purchase $200 worth of food with her food-stamps. If this person can afford to give up $200 worth of food to get $100 cash then that person does not need to be on food-stamps. I, of course, declined.

I don't have to buy car insurance. I don't have to own a car if I cannot afford to be insured or just prefer to take public transportation. I cannot opt out of healthcare mandate without being punished. There's no punishment for not driving.

escapetooz

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

04/02/2010 09:56:50 AM · #383

Originally posted by dponlyme:

Originally posted by escapetooz:

Originally posted by dponlyme:

Glad you liked thought that was funny... seriously though there has to be a point where people should have personal responsibility for themselves. Would you all be in favor of banning fast food? If not then why not? Maybe we should all have to report to the IRS the number of times we have eaten at a fast food restaurant during the year. It would be for your own good right? Isn't it the governments job to make sure you make healthy choices in your life.. after all if the government is paying for your health-care with taxpayer dollars shouldn't they also have a right to force you to make better decisions in regard to your health?

The government should step in and do something about our crappy food. Yes!! Absolutely! But not on the consumer level. On the company level. Strict regulations about advertising, ingredients, etc. I'd love something like what they are did with cigarettes, restricting when and where they can advertise is certainly a first step.

You keep forgetting the fact that personal responsibility is only a piece of the puzzle. None of us live in a vacuum. Friends, adverts, what's available, all influence your life. You talk about my view as a utopia, this view that we can all just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps is a utopia. The rich don't always deserve their money, and the poor don't always deserve their low status.

There seem to be no fights from this "freedom" group fighting against this health care bill about the govt. banning certain drugs. I can tell your right now some fast food every day is going to do more harm than some pot. But you have commercials telling you how yummy yummy that big mac is, and ones telling you the evils of pot. And people eat it up... literally. I've even used this argument before when people were saying how bad pot was. I'm not saying its good, but there are a lot more harmful things in the world that are perfectly legal and not demonized, such as fast food, aspartame, alcohol, and I get laughed at like I'm an idiot. "What are you talking about food for! Pots a drug!" As if it only matters what your body inhales, and not what it ingests. Apparently people can't see Americans bloating up and dying off of heart disease right before their eyes? Am I the crazy one?

I also would like to point out, again, that you have to have car insurance. Why is it such a leap to say you have to have health insurance?

Maybe the government should just tax the hell out of anything it deems not to be necessary to good health and survival. We wouldn't buy too much fast food if it cost $20/burger. Hell why not outlaw beef all-together. I understand there are better more nutritious options to fuel your body with than red meat. Perhaps we should all be mandated to be vegetarians... it would be for the good of public health. Maybe we should have a national id card sort of like a Kroger shopping card that we would have to provide when making any purchase so that the feds can keep track of our spending and then tax us individually such that the person who buys more fast food than others is taxed at a higher rate. This is just crazy. Where exactly do you draw the line at government intervention and shaping of your life? You know I'm quite sure that a lot of people see the advertising for fast food and simply 'choose' not to buy it or at least do not make it a staple of their diet. The key thing is that we as Americans should get to choose what we do with our lives even if that means running them into the ground. literally. I do not want the government making my decisions for me and using the carrot of lower taxes and free or subsidized health-care to get me to obey. Far fetched you say. It's exactly how the bill treats the states because if they do not fall in line and do as the feds say then they will lose their medicaid $$. This is something that the individual states cannot afford.

I would prefer if the government just stayed out of my life as much as is possible.

You say the rich don't always deserve their money. Just who are you to make such a determination?

For the record I am for the legalization of marijuana. It is far less destructive than alcohol which is legal. I don't think you can put it in the same category of harmfulness as fast food because pot does effect one cognitively in addition to being unhealthy.

I am also not in favor of all social programs going by the wayside either. There are people with a legitimate need for a safety net. However ssi disability is riddled with people who do not need or deserve the free handout that is being given them. I was on food-stamps for quite a long period of time and am now off of them and it was truly wonderful that this option existed for me as it allowed me to keep my family together. It shouldn't be a permanent situation for any able bodied person however. There really should be time limits or some other such device to force people to provide for themselves if they are able to. I would venture a guess that a lot of food-stamp recipients are selling them to get alcohol,tobacco,pot etc. Just recently I was stopped in the Wal-Mart by a young mother who wanted me to give her $100 cash and in return she would allow me to purchase $200 worth of food with her food-stamps. If this person can afford to give up $200 worth of food to get $100 cash then that person does not need to be on food-stamps. I, of course, declined.

I don't have to buy car insurance. I don't have to own a car if I cannot afford to be insured or just prefer to take public transportation. I cannot opt out of healthcare mandate without being punished. There's no punishment for not driving.

Where to even begin. It seems you don't want the government doing anything. There are plenty of countries where that goes on. I can pretty much promise you won't like them very much. I think the point I was making that you are failing to grasp is that the corporations are seizing more and more power over our lives, and its up to the government to step in and stop them. Phillip Morris is a good example. You know, the cigarette company that was spreading ads and paying "researchers" to prove that cigs were ok for your health. What people think about cigs still if no one stepped and said, wait a sec, this isn't right?

Like I said, it's not about the little guys in this case (as in watching what we individually eat), its about the big guys. I don't know why you have to go down the slippery slope slide into the govt watching our food intake. As if they have time for that.

Choice is a funny word. You act as if there are limitless choices. What if one day, no one steps in, and our ONLY choices are crap food? We aren't that far from it. I certainly had next to no healthy options at my school cafeterias. Very few out on the town that is inexpensive and fast enough for the type of lifestyles some of us lead. The government stepping in in regards to these issues would help provide us with BETTER choices. Not less choice. Perhaps your model of the world worked in the past when America was full of little mom and pop shops and lots of choices, and the bad places went under, and the good places thrived (one would hope) but that's just now how it is any more. We see the same crappy food all over the nation, all over the world. I'm living in Korea now and I love how food is over here. Basic, inexpensive, available everywhere, lots of small businesses. The more and more McDonalds and other fast food junk popping up, the more I fear that this is gunna turn into America part 2 (or part 500 as our crap food is spreading everywhere).

You are for legalization of pot. What about meth and herion? You said where do you draw the line right? Well where indeed. You propose no line for food that can be just as harmful. And that, is just really careless.

"You say the rich don't always deserve their money. Just who are you to make such a determination? "

Who am I? The kind of person that pays attention. You think people deserve to get rich off of stealing hard earned money from the poor? Off of offering tricky, bad loans, manipulating the stock market, putting small businesses out of business and paying their employees minimum wage in return? Please. You want to tell me ALL rich people deserve their money. That certainly would make the world seem dainty and nice wouldn't it. If everyone got what they deserved.

Fast food effects you cognitively as well. So does lack of exercise. So does watching TV. Probably more than pot but I don't feel like looking it up. Although I do recall reading that obsessively checking your email lowers your IQ more than smoking pot. Also, your brain is more active when you sleep than when you watch TV.

No punishment for not driving except if you are in cities with abysmal public transit. Then how do you get to work or take your kids to school?

And wait... waaaiit. Wow... someone who just talked about not wanting the government to give aid to the lazy and you had food stamps? Hello hypocrisy. Not calling you lazy, just baffled at the fact that you have been in a situation where you needed govt help and I'm assuming you wouldn't call yourself lazy. Seems pretty judgmental. And as for your story, I don't much see the point. Plus, you don't know what she was going to use the money for. Maybe for some medicine because she doesn't have health care?

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

04/02/2010 10:11:02 AM · #384

Originally posted by escapetooz:

I also would like to point out, again, that you have to have car insurance. Why is it such a leap to say you have to have health insurance?

To be fair, this isn't the same playing field. I've never seen anyone argue that driving a motor vehicle is a "right" and that if someone can't afford the insurance then the government should subsidize it. One always has the option not to drive.

R.

ETA: I see dp beat me to this point...

Message edited by author 2010-04-02 10:16:08.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

04/02/2010 10:59:09 AM · #385

Originally posted by dponlyme:

I don't have to buy car insurance. I don't have to own a car if I cannot afford to be insured or just prefer to take public transportation. I cannot opt out of healthcare mandate without being punished. There's no punishment for not driving.

Oh yes there is...it's called taxes. You pay road tax whether you drive or not.

When you take public transportation... do you honestly believe that the pittance you pay actually covers the total cost of this mean of transportation...of course not, you are being subsidized by tax payers.

I no longer have children that go to school, why should I be required to pay school taxes.

I have paid employment insurance since 1966 and yet will never be able to claim any of it even if I lost my job tomorrow...is that fair.

There are a bevy of things that are incorporated into taxes that are not used by a good segment of society but you seem to be focused on only one thing.

Ray

Message edited by author 2010-04-02 11:05:46.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

04/02/2010 03:46:24 PM · #386

Originally posted by dponlyme:

[
Glad you liked thought that was funny... seriously though there has to be a point where people should have personal responsibility for themselves. Would you all be in favor of banning fast food? If not then why not? Maybe we should all have to report to the IRS the number of times we have eaten at a fast food restaurant during the year. It would be for your own good right? Isn't it the governments job to make sure you make healthy choices in your life.. after all if the government is paying for your health-care with taxpayer dollars shouldn't they also have a right to force you to make better decisions in regard to your health?

Absolutely I would be in favor of banning such foods, and also have producers limit the amount of sugar and salts in their products. While we are at it, serious consideration should be given to having limits on growth hormones, preservatives and a bevy of other chemicals found in our foods today.

I have no idea as to your annual income, but I would wager that I pay in income taxes what numerous people earn as a salary annually...and you know what... I still manage to find a few thousand a year to dole out to various charitable groups. I am quite involved locally with entities that endeavour to provide solace and assistance to those in need...wanna know why...it's because I grew up dirt poor, and one never forgets poor.

Perhaps I am totally misreading you, but as things stand now, you give me the impression that your moral compass is being influenced by monetary magnetism and is leading you astray.

Ray

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/02/2010 04:10:37 PM · #387

Originally posted by escapetooz:

You are for legalization of pot. What about meth and herion?

Actually, from a purely medical standpoint, if any of the currently illegal drugs is to be legallized it should be

... like the other opioid drugs it is constipating and addictive, but otherwise does remarkably little damage to the body or any organ systems.

citymars

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

04/02/2010 04:17:17 PM · #388

General, are you saying heroin does remarkably little damage to the body? That surprises me. All the heroin users I see look like hell. But maybe they think they look good! ;-)

04/02/2010 05:09:48 PM · #389

Originally posted by citymars:

All the heroin users I see look like hell.

Maybe he meant heroine? They generally look awesome.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/02/2010 05:13:27 PM · #390

, heroin is (was) actually the brand name for a pharmaceutical product -- this was not cooked up in some clandestine lab by a mad scientist somewhere. It's really no or more less dangerous (pharmaceutically) than the wide range of other opiates currently in the pharmacopeia, e.g. morphine, codeine, Vicodin, Percocet, Dilaudid, Oxy-Contin, etc. ... but (apparently) it's easier to make from poppy sap than those are.

*e.g. criminal activity, prostitution, working three jobs, dealing -- whatever it takes.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/02/2010 05:14:37 PM · #391

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by citymars:
All the heroin users I see look like hell.

Maybe he meant heroine? They generally look awesome.

Makes you wonder how the marketing folks at Bayer came up with the name, eh?

pawdrix

Nikon D700

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

04/02/2010 05:41:46 PM · #392

Originally posted by citymars:

General, are you saying heroin does remarkably little damage to the body? That surprises me. All the heroin users I see look like hell. But maybe they think they look good! ;-)

Might not be the Heroin but the Methadone they use if they've ever been in rehab. Tough drug to quit so people go back and forth...in and out of rehab and the methadone is the stuff that makes your teeth fall out and gives you that wiry look.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/02/2010 05:47:37 PM · #393

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by citymars:
General, are you saying heroin does remarkably little damage to the body? That surprises me. All the heroin users I see look like hell. But maybe they think they look good! ;-)

Might not be the Heroin but the Methadone they use if they've ever been in rehab. Tough drug to quit so people go back and forth...in and out of rehab and the methadone is the stuff that makes your teeth fall out and gives you that wiry look.

Nope -- I've been working with methadone for over 25 years, and if they have bad teeth and a "wiry" look it's usually due to their co-existing addictions to tobacco and/or cocaine; most people complain of weight gain when the enter a methadone program, probably because they have more money for food and get less exercise climbing through windows ...

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

04/02/2010 05:54:45 PM · #394

Seems I've stumbled into "The Myths of Heroin Addiction" thread. Well, gotta run. Things to do...

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF

04/02/2010 06:46:17 PM · #395

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I've been working with methadone for over 25 years...

TMI.

pawdrix

Nikon D700

04/02/2010 08:56:57 PM · #396

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I was teaching Heroin addicts in rehab for a number of years and and they told me the tooth loss thing was due to the methadone they are given in the clinic...also the glassy eyes. They were all tested regularly for the other substances regularly so, the methadone being the cause seemed accurate. Actually had a few lose teeth during class...really gross.

I could be wrong but I heard it from a number of different sources, a number of different times over the years.

Message edited by author 2010-04-02 20:58:36.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

04/02/2010 09:21:52 PM · #397

There are many myths about methadone as with other drugs. Unless they're sucking on opiate-laced lollipops I can't think of any physiological reason for methadone to cause tooth loss. Cigarette smoking and Vitamin C deficiency certainly can contribute. I don't know what setting you were working in -- my experience is solely in outpatient treatment, and cocaine (or other drug use) does not necessarily disqualify someone completely from participation in the program, though it will curtail certain privileges.

It would certainly improve health and health care if we would start treating substance use/abuse as the medical/psychological problem it is, rather than criminalizing it. One overlooked source of funding for the "health care bill" is the criminal justice system -- we could be funding clinics instead of prisons. In California, if you arrest and imprison a heroin addict, it will cost upwards of $40,000/year. For that same person to be in treatment at our clinic -- including medication, counseling, testing, etc. -- costs about $4,000/year. Yet many of our prospective clients can't even afford the $10/day for treatment ... why wouldn't the State make funding available for treatment-on-demand?