but its still a personal choice to try to be healthy or not. I do not believe others should be held accountable for those who do not CHOSE to live a healthy life. In a country continually trying to make things easier for ourselves to avoid physical exertion, to me this should absolutely be a factor as to who should be a priority to get health car and who should pay for it.
maybe sometime when shit opens up more, if you are interested, ill take you to a game and we can arrive early and talk more in person about all of this. Its sometimes hard to keep up im this forum with multiple convos. I do respect your opinions Nd ideas, even if i may not agree with them but then some of my disagreements may also be misunderstandings of ones opinion aNd vice versa. If your down, id love to do that.
It's expensive to be healthy. Our government subsidizes unhealthy foods. Our cities are not walkable, our commutes are long. There a hundreds of things that cause our population to have an unhealthy weight. There is no way to know if somebody has an unhealthy weight because of a mental condition, and we don't yet understand how this is impacted by the microbiome in our gut. Many people try to be healthy yet cannot get it done because they work long hours and have children which, take a lot of time. Which can result in not having time to prepare healthy meals. Then at the end of the day don't have the energy to exercise. Or they become injured and can't be as active, and don't have insurance or the ability to take time off to get treatment. If there were a free shot that took 30 minutes to get and would keep you at a healthy weight for a year, then your comparison to the covid-19 vaccine or smoking would be legitimate. Nobody has to buy cigarettes. You have to buy food. You can't account for the reasons or control the weight of your population. This is a far too complicated and private issue. You can only try to make public policy which encourages healthy behaviors. Ironically, this is far easier to do in a country with universal healthcare.
It sounds fun, though I rarely have time to attend games during basketball season. I've been to 1 game in the last 6 years. I have 3 kids playing basketball, am usually coaching at least one of their teams, and as such have no spare time.
Mthe one main argument or point of contention i have is o think better, more long term planning should go into having more than one child. Meaning many peolple with multiple children couldnt afford thing prior to having a third, fourth , or fifth child. Where is the societal morality regarding that? China has had a child max limit. Not saying we have to have that but it certainly should be a topic of discussion when discussing what families can and cant afford. well we will just have to figure it out! Bring one of the games down as a post game game played at the moda! have those here connect with the Blazers make it happen! In all seriousness a game would be great but doesn't have to be a game.
The policies I've advocated for result in fewer children by encouraging more responsible and healthier behavior. Secure, educated people don't tend to have as many children. Universal Healthcare specifically reduces teen birth rates and results in less abortion
ohh i agree with this and am glad to see links(i havent opened yet) supporting this. In the end i don't think universal health care is the first step. First step is a healthier lifestyle. Get that on track first and then were onto something. Maybe the links say this as well. Ill read up on them tonight.
Waiting for every person to do what you want before enacting logical public policy is just an excuse to continue with harmful public policy. It'll never happen. So what's the benefit of waiting?
But many people don't want to take the vaccines. Hence we fall back to healthcare and the healthcare system. And the education system which has failed us enough to put us in this situation. And politics for that matter.
The healthcare system the US uses is far more costly than the universal healthcare system in Canada and other countries that use it. Universal healthcare would provide equitable access. Emergency rooms are inundated with people daily. Patients without insurance are treated differently than those with it. The level of care differs to a point that those without insurance often return again and again because they dont recieve adequate treatment. For people without insurance, doctors are far less likely to do more expensive tests. With Universal Healthcare, everyone would get the same level of treatment. Imagine the millions of returning patients not returning because they received the right treatment the first time. How much money would that save? How much more space would hospitals have? The cost of returners is immense, far greater than the cost of UH. And you and I and everyone are paying for that already. Universal healthcare also would provide a greater focus on preventative care. This too would cut the numbers of the sick dramatically. Countries with universal healthcare are healthier for the most part. If you look at European countries with universal healthcare or Japan, they have longer life expectancies. That health isn't just about diet, it's about stress. People under universal healthcare are far less stressed. Stress is a big factor in people getting sick. They have healthier workforces because they dont have to worry about medical debt or how they will pay for a medical issue if it should happen. https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/mark...urity/government/health/universal-health-care https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7692272/#:~:text=Universal healthcare in the U.S., which may or may not,economic costs associated with said The cost is a good question. The easy answer is tax the rich. We could also use taxes from cigarettes, alcohol, and the burgeoning Marijuana market as funding for UH. Maybe a junk food tax. It's nickels and dimes but it will add up. How about a piece of the lottery profits? These are a few ideas. There are other methods securing funding through social contribution. Many are so willing to donate to healthcare costs of others via go fund me. Why not a go med me on a greater scale?
It's funny to me that people don't want to "subsidize" others for their health status (etc), but we're perfectly fine having the vaccine subsidized by the government.
People who have had covid are going to have more health problems and greater healthcare costs as a group vs people who haven't had covid. We need to immediately raise their health insurance rates.
They should get the same help. If two people come in with covid and one took the vaccine and the other did not they should still both get the same help. If two people come in terribly sick with covid, like on the edge of death and there is only one bed and one ventilator and you can only save one, you are going to save the one most likely to survive. vaccinated vs non vaccinated may play a part in that. It might not. The vaccinated person might be far worse off, closer to death, and the non vaccinated person could get the ventilator because they have a better chance to survive. Or vice versa. A vaccinated person in that condition though likely has better odds than the non vaccinated. Potato chips vs not potato chips isn't a great apology to pair with that though I see where you were going. I will say a potato chip eater should get the same help as a health nut. That's one of the problems with our healthcare system. An unequitable service of care. The level of healthcare a person gets should not be dependent on financial status. Don't even get me started on the price of prescription medicines which highlights the other big elephant in the room of our healthcare system. It focuses on maintenance not cures because there is no money in cures. The money is in keeping people sick and and need of more and more medications.
Is it waiting? or transitioning the focus on healthy lifestyle first health care second instead of the opposite?
Our pharmacudical system needs major updates no doubt. i also agree the potTo chip eater and health nut should get the same care. But the potato chip should have to pay more into the system than the health nut. Its not fair to ask the health nuts to pick up the extra financial burden the potato chip will innevitably cause.
I think people keep mixing up choice. Some health issues are not based on s personal choice. Those are not part of my equation. Im speaking of innately healthy people that choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle. Please note the distinguishment im calling out here. I see some posts not taking this into count.
Like I said, implement a junk food tax. I would gladly pay 5 or ten cents extra on that bag of chips or cookies if I knew it was going to universal healthcare
