On a conservative blog I found the following list of questions –
So I ask…
- When did the government begin to try and take over what we eat and what doctor we use? When did that start?
- When did it become fashionable to make too much money, to work too hard and do really well for your family?
- When did it become good business sense for the country to own two of the three American auto manufacturers?
- When did it start making good business sense for the U.S. to hold preferred stock positions in small local banks as the new small business stimulus allows?
- When did it become fiscally responsible to have to borrow just to pay interest on the National Debt?
- When did it become fiscally responsible governing to owe so much money to a country like China?
- When did we become a nation that WE THE PEOPLE said to do what we wanted, and that was ignored by those we voted into office?
I’m going to attempt to answer a few these questions today and I’m going to leave a few of them for later on. Let’s look at the first question, when did the government try and take over what we eat? As far as I know this never happened. I guess what the author is referring to is the fact that the government is suggesting that we eat healthier. Isn’t it in our government’s best interest for its citizens to be healthier? Doesn’t it cost all of us more if we can’t curb the costs of Medicare and Medicaid? The answer is of course. Instead of honestly looking at the question, the author is posing this as some sort of invasion of personal rights, an extension of the government into our private lives. The food pyramid been around for over 20 years. The food pyramid replaced “food groups” which are classified by types and nutrition. This has been around since the 1980s, yet the author of this question seems to be pointing a finger at President Obama for designing something so intrusive. Nothing could be further from the truth. Conservatives jump up and down about government spending but when progressives try to do something about the rising costs conservatives will have none of it.
Let’s look at the rising cost of obesity. According to the CDC, Americans spent $92.6 billion in 2003 on obesity and obesity-related illnesses. This would include diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular diseases, strokes, renal failure, skin infections, loss of eyesight (in relation to diabetes) and many other diseases. Multiple studies have clearly shown that prevention costs significantly less than treatment. So, let me ask the question again. Why wouldn’t it be in our best interest for all of us to eat healthier?
Many of us do not see the problem in our society. I would say that the problem is rampant and then relate the tale of one single patient whom I took care of some years ago. She and her family had been out on a boat and got severely sunburned. The four-year-old daughter, who was sunburned basically from head to toe, was morbidly obese. I placed the child in the hospital for pain control and care of her burns. I sent pediatrics to see the patient and to counsel the family on nutrition. The pediatrician asked the mother if she ever fed her child any fruit. The mother replied, yes, enthusiastically. She then went into her purse and pulled out a fruit rollup. Now, before you roll your eyes, go out to your local mall and just sit down on a bench and watch the crowd. What percentage of kids are obese? I’m not talking about kids that are just a little chubby. I’m talking about obese. We have to fix this. BTW, do you think that this patient’s family could benefit from some nutritional information?
The second part of the question is simply sad. The question is – when did the government began to try and take over what we eat and what doctor we use? What doctor we use? The government has never tried to tell us which doctor we use. Never. This is been reiterated over and over during the health-care debate by both President Obama and others who are pushing for reform. You can choose your own doctor. Quoting from HealthCare.gov – “You select the doctor: The new rules permit you to choose any available participating primary care provider as your doctor and to choose any available participating pediatrician as your child’s primary care doctor.”
More on these questions later. What are your thoughts? Are these questions specifically designed to elicit an emotional response or do you think are they designed to elicit a thoughtful discussion about the role of our government and our society?
“I guess, what the author is referring to is the fact that the government is suggesting that we healthier.”
Probably not. He's most likely not referring to 'suggestions' at all.
He is probably referring to things like outlawing transfats and the practice of government imposing financial penalties on eating 'the wrong foods' i.e. calorie taxes.
These go way beyond 'suggestions' into coercion and outright bans.
“The new rules permit you to choose any available participating primary care provider as your doctor and to choose any available participating pediatrician as your child’s primary care doctor”
yes and the government chooses which doctors participate and which cant. That means you dont actually get the doctor of your choice.
Some medical schools run by public universities are attempting to deny medical degrees to doctors who wont participate in abortions, for instance.
“That same year, California enacted a state law that required abortion training at the state's 6 public medical schools. ” http://www.lifenews.com/nat255.html
Joe White said:
“yes and the government chooses which doctors participate and which cant. That means you dont actually get the doctor of your choice.”
I work for a major corporation. I am limited to the doctors selected by their choices. Unless of course I choose to pay everything myself. So in your statement, substitute either “insurance company” or “your employer” and it is the reality we live in today. The Obama plan doesn't change that but conservatives choose not to listen.
Actually it is quite a difference because the government can compel action and your employer cannot.
If the government takes all other options off the table, it's game over.
Your employer doesn't have that power.
Please provide a reference to your claims. How is the government excluding doctors??
I don't understand. The government can compel action? What does this mean?
Dog shit is also outlawed in foods, as well as transfats…..
The word 'compel' means 'to force'.
There are several good dictionaries online, I suggest you become familiar with them so that words like this don't stump you.
A meaningless response indicates an empty argument.
Jeff wrote:
“A meaningless response indicates an empty argument”
And thank you for providing a great example of same.
My post was in answer to an actual question Dr Thompson asked, and my previous post was a rebuttal to your erroneos earlier post.
But what did your most recent post add to the discussion?
Zip. Zero. Nada.
Your post mistakenly identified 'the insurance company' as the problem when in all likelihood your employer is self insured.
Do you even know what that means?
It means that the employer collects the premium, the employer pays the claims, the employer pockets the difference.
Your employer is the insuring party, not 'the insurance company'.
Under a 'self insure' arrangement , the 'insurance company' provides ASO (Admin Services Only) and a little bit of re-insurance to the employer in case of a really large claim or two.
But the 'insurance company' isn't insuring you, Jeff.
Your boss is.
So, do you have a choice?
Of course.
You chose who to work for, didn't you?
[…] first 2 installments are here and here. Let’s […]
[…] first 2 installments are here and here. Let’s […]