Originally posted by Melanerpes Wajoma. Those smokers are stealing your property.
When people choose to engage in unhealthy lifestyles, they're more likely to impose extra burdens on the healthcare system. Because of the extra demand that those unhealthy people impose on the system, premiums and prices are higher for everyone.
Which means that people like Wajoma who responsibly en ...[text shortened]... they still need -- because of all those people who smoke or engage in other unhealthy behavior.
Correct, that is why guvamint needs to get right out of the health care business, that way those that are reckless with their health bear the consequences of that recklessness. It's not just smoking, that is one example amid many thousands if they're going to impose a 'sin' tax on smoking then there also needs to be a 'sin' tax for sitting in front of the internet too long and a 'sin' tax for watching too much tv and a 'sin' tax for indulging in risky sports activities.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra I benefit from other members of society being productive. Logically it follows that I am disadvantaged if other members of society are less productive.
You only benefit in so much as you have something of benefit to trade, if someone doesn't want to be productive leave them to it, mind your own business, you have some kind of compulsive disorder about being concerned with every other persons life.
Originally posted by Wajoma Correct, that is why guvamint needs to get right out of the health care business, that way those that are reckless with their health bear the consequences of that recklessness. It's not just smoking, that is one example amid many thousands if they're going to impose a 'sin' tax on smoking then there also needs to be a 'sin' tax for sitting in front of the in ...[text shortened]... lging in risky sports activities.
....it's not the smokers stealing my property.
Assuming the government got out of the healthcare business and everyone was paying for their own healthcare (or relying on private charity) -- those people who engage in unhealthy behavior would STILL be imposing an extra burden on the healthcare system - by driving up the prices and premiums and thus stealing money from the wallets of those living healthier lifestyles.
You are correct in stating that smoking shouldn't be the only unhealthy behavior that should face "sin taxes". There should be other ways of requiring people who engage in unhealthy behavior to pay for the extra costs that they impose on the system because of their behavior. I do agree that these taxes or penalties would need to be imposed in a way that was as minimally intrusive as possible.
Originally posted by Wajoma You only benefit in so much as you have something of benefit to trade, if someone doesn't want to be productive leave them to it, mind your own business, you have some kind of compulsive disorder about being concerned with every other persons life.
It is my business because I help paying for their police, fire and legal protection as well as the infrastructure they use. If they want to be a hermit in Somalia or WajomaWorld, I don't care if they are productive or not.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra It is my business because I help paying for their police, fire and legal protection as well as the infrastructure they use. If they want to be a hermit in Somalia or WajomaWorld, I don't care if they are productive or not.
You're getting confused again, WajomaWorld is not anarchy, Somalia is.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra It is my business because I help paying for their police, fire and legal protection as well as the infrastructure they use. If they want to be a hermit in Somalia or WajomaWorld, I don't care if they are productive or not.
You're doubly confused, your only concern should be that they pay for the services they use, not how productive they are compared to you.
Originally posted by Wajoma You're doubly confused, your only concern should be that they pay for the services they use, not how productive they are compared to you.
Once again you are contradicting yourself. You claim that "guvamint" should provide law and order, and this costs money. Someone who chooses not to be productive is not helping to pay for maintaining law and order. This means I have to pay more, even if the role of the state is as small as in WajomaWorld.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra Once again you are contradicting yourself. You claim that "guvamint" should provide law and order, and this costs money. Someone who chooses not to be productive is not helping to pay for maintaining law and order. This means I have to pay more, even if the role of the state is as small as in WajomaWorld.
Yep, well when we get guvamint down to it's rightful size and core responsibilities i.e. protecting you from me, and me from you we'll talk about it, first things first...
Originally posted by Wajoma Yep, well when we get guvamint down to it's rightful size and core responsibilities i.e. protecting you from me, and me from you we'll talk about it, first things first...
...slashing guvamint.
As long as you understand that "protecting me from you" means preventing you from withholding resources I need then you might have a point.
The police do not exist to deny the poor access to property.
Originally posted by AThousandYoung As long as you understand that "protecting me from you" means preventing you from withholding resources I need then you might have a point.
There might be a couple of oddballs collect things for the sake of collecting, generally these take the form of barbie doll collections, or beer can collections. People holding other resources can usually be persuaded to part with them for the right price.
Originally posted by whodey So Americans can't afford health care eh? Well then, lets just make it "free" via at the tax payers expense. That should solve all our problems.
Too much wealth is frozen up in private hands. Thus America in total can afford health care but most Americans cannot.
In words you might like better, the rich can afford all of our health care, and they have no right to be that rich at the poor's expense. See the writings of James Madison.
Originally posted by AThousandYoung As long as you understand that "protecting me from you" means preventing you from withholding resources I need then you might have a point.
The police do not exist to deny the poor access to property.
Take it easy on the edit button.
I don't want the cops helping a homeless person smash my window to gain access my house. I expect them to stop that type of behaviour.
Healthcare Plans Explained
03 Mar '10 22:22
Back to Top