Political Crossfire Forums

@Phos

No, he's right, though it pains me.

The fact is we have no idea what effect Obamacare would have had since it wasn't fully implemented, and the parts of it in effect had not even remotely enough time to have much of any impact. Which, of course, is why it's so important to get rid of it now before it can have a chance to actually work out and become entrenched. Like Social Security and Medicare. How the GOP would LOVE to strip us of those as well!

What we do know is that tens of millions of additional people had coverage. Not amazing perfect wonderful coverage...but it was at least a start. And now, assuming the Senate doesn't rightfully ax this ridiculous bill (which was blindly voted on, instantly, as an act of political theater before any efficacy studies, or cost projections), we're backsliding to a condition where the rich keep more of their money, the poor lose coverage or get priced out of it all over again, and that tiny little step we'd made towards what every other developed country (and a lot of the developing ones) has with very little drama, could now be thrown away. Because we're completely incompetent at being a modern country. We're still trying to live in the 1800's.

This isn't about health. This is about treatment. You want health? Tax the living shit out of sugary drinks and fast food and processed garbage. Use THAT revenue to finance health programs. France and Germany aren't healthy populations because they have universal healthcare. They are healthy because apparently they don't have these culturally instilled bad habits. For a couple of alcohol swilling, pastry and sausage scarfing populations, they are in remarkably good health, wouldn't you say? Universal healthcare is there to treat maladies...not reprogram the cultural realities of populations. We don't understand moderation. Everything, from cars to houses to food...has to be huge. The bigger the better. The more the better. That is the issue.

That should change, but will it? No, not unless its forced to happen somehow. Meanwhile, an unhealthy population is going to be the ongoing cost of that. We have to deal with that reality, rather than saying "Oh, well, this isn't the perfect solution, so let's not do it." "Oh, this costs money, so let's not do it." "Oh, this doesn't fit with my 19th century political ideology about the rugged individualist in a cowboy hat who whips up his own chemotherapy IV drip from rawhide, black powder, and a copy of The Wealth of Nations."

Actual conditions are what we have to deal with. Not ideals. Not ideology. Not partisan bullshit. People are sick. Heal them. Because it's the 21st century, we have a 20 trillion dollar economy, and what the in actual f**k.

I think there should be incentives for weight maintenance. Just like with my car insurance, I keep a little box in my car that ties into my phone and rates how I drive. My discount is based on how I drive. If I drive well, I pay less.

Same with health care. You should be offered a discount if you pass a physical and are the right weight, say every 6 months. People who stuff themselves with burgers and sit on their asses all day long should not pay the same as someone who is fit, active, trim and healthy simply because they are the same age and gender.

You wouldn't get a discount for being in shape, you'd just avoid the fatty surcharge. Trouble here is that that is regressive...the poorer you are, the more likely you are to be fat, paradoxically. Just another way to screw the poor. If we're going to screw the poor in a way they'll eventually decide they like and work into their kinky time, turn off the free sugar water tap. Maybe that will help.