earth
Moon
the awesome
Posts: 245
|
Post by earth on Jun 4, 2010 12:58:45 GMT -5
well you're right that its not like the one in european nations, its got alot of differences. if it was like the one in european nations i think americans would go berserk or something idk, i mean they accuse obamas plan of being socialist and its just slightly like the system in europe. i think i get what you mean now. but how are they forcing us to buy health care? there i can't speak, idk what you mean. but why wouldnt you want health care? now im kinda lost.
|
|
|
Post by ladystardust on Jun 4, 2010 14:52:29 GMT -5
krzych32 says: " I wouldn't mind if the taxes went up just to cover the health care. What I am agains is govermant forcing us to buy health care. "
Isn't that a contradition? I was under the impression that the taxes WOULD go up to support universal health care.
As to answer your question: Taxes, for the most part, are a necessary evil. There are so many people in this country that need assistance, that the government is simply unable to bear that burden on their own. It's our duty as able-bodied, employed citizens to share in that burden.
I think your theory that taxes are "an action to a certain reaction," even when not backwards, is inaccurate, but I'd like very much to have you explain why you think this way.
|
|
|
Post by The Monster on Jun 4, 2010 15:04:19 GMT -5
He's right, cause when it comes down to it, it's people genetics which influence their vulnerability to various ailments. Um no, actually my claim is scientifically proven. Removed villages all over the world lived without these chronic diseases until they had access to sugar and western foods. The Inuit, the Masai, the Tokelauans, the Maori have all been studied and are a few of the peoples that are/were living proof. There are also other isolated villages that have been studied as well, like the natives of the UK, Switzerland, Peru and Africa. Read Weston A. Price's book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration if you want that proof. And no, genetics is a poor excuse. If you're parents both have type 2 diabetes and die of cancer or heart disease you aren't more likely to get type 2 diabetes and die of heart disease or cancer because of genetics, but rather because your parents' poor eating habits will rub off on you and you'll simply succumb to the same diseases of I'll definitely check it out "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" seems interesting "And no, genetics is a poor excuse. If you're parents both have type 2 diabetes and die of cancer or heart disease you aren't more likely to get type 2 diabetes and die of heart disease or cancer because of genetics, but rather because your parents' poor eating habits will rub off on you and you'll simply succumb to the same diseases of" Yes, when considering eating habits everyone is vulnerable to various diseases, but how would you explain iconic sports figures diagnosis with cancer (who are health and nutrition wise perfect) i.e. Neil Armstrong and Terry Fox?
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Jun 4, 2010 15:15:42 GMT -5
[quote author=babinator12 board=debateclub thread=177 post=49737 time=1275681859[/quote]I'll definitely check it out "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" seems interesting "And no, genetics is a poor excuse. If you're parents both have type 2 diabetes and die of cancer or heart disease you aren't more likely to get type 2 diabetes and die of heart disease or cancer because of genetics, but rather because your parents' poor eating habits will rub off on you and you'll simply succumb to the same diseases of" Yes, when considering eating habits everyone is vulnerable to various diseases, but how would you explain iconic sports figures diagnosis with cancer (who are health and nutrition wise perfect) i.e. Neil Armstrong and Terry Fox?[/quote] Neither [Lance] Armstrong nor Terry Fox had perfect diets. I don't know much about what they ate but you'll know that they didn't eat 'perfectly' once you take a look at the book. Btw the book was written a while back so the copywrite has been lifted. You can find the book on the internet somewhere. I'd found it at one point but I've lost the link. And Nakor I'll look at those sources tonight, but from glancing at the Inuit one right now I can tell you that it is only proof of my point. These stats are of Western-influenced Inuit from 2009. I'm referencing Inuit on their natural diet that lived without any influence from Western man. If you want to find documents on this check things that date to around 1940 or earlier, before most Inuit were westernizing. And as for the Tokelauans check the Tokelau Island Migrant Study (TIMS) and I just found this as well. www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/34/8/1552.pdfI'll edit this again later... EDIT: OK... I've looked at the other two sites briefly and, just like the Inuit source, they talk about disease rates from the past 30 years. This isn't going far enough back, since by this time they would have been consuming a western diet rather than their natural diet. If you look at the sources from the early 20th century (like Nutrition and Physical Degeneration) you'll see that these removed cultures were living without chronic diseases (the life expectancy may have been less in some cases, but not due to diseases, but rather because of the dangerous lifestyle). From all my research, I kid you not, a healthy diet will keep you free of chronic disease and make you more immune to infectious disease. Now, what makes a healthy diet is another discussion and I'd be happy to outline it if anyone is interested.
|
|
|
Post by The Monster on Jun 4, 2010 15:29:39 GMT -5
There
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Jun 4, 2010 18:38:10 GMT -5
Yes you have. =) (Except you're missing a lower case l at the end, as in 'html')
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 4, 2010 23:34:42 GMT -5
I think The Monster has an unclosed table tag somewhere in his post....
|
|
|
Post by RandiKthxxx on Jun 5, 2010 10:59:20 GMT -5
Does this page look a bit flickted for anyone else?
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Jun 5, 2010 11:18:57 GMT -5
Does this page look a bit flickted for anyone else? The post boxes are inside the previous post boxes and stuff? yeah.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 5, 2010 11:30:22 GMT -5
Like I said, The Monster has an open table tag in his post.
|
|
|
Post by The Monster on Jun 5, 2010 19:53:57 GMT -5
Like I said, The Monster has an open table tag in his post. It was like that when I typed it out...I tried to fix it but it kept on coming out the wrong way. I'm sorry...I guess
|
|
|
Post by The Monster on Jun 5, 2010 19:57:07 GMT -5
I Fixed it!! I should try physics now
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 5, 2010 21:48:34 GMT -5
^5
|
|
|
Post by KipEnyan on Jun 5, 2010 22:30:01 GMT -5
qooqǝɯɐƃ Nakor pretty much hit it out of the park. You're basing your argument on hearsay claims and pseudo-alternative medicine. Have you ever taken a genetics class? Do you understand how cosmic radiation works? It appears that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the mechanisms of the human body, or any living creature for that matter. @kryzch32 That's like saying "I'm against the government forcing us to breathe. I'll choose whether or not I want to breathe, bastards." Health care is just air that has no choice but to cost money.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Jun 5, 2010 22:56:38 GMT -5
To clarify for those non-Americans (or even Americans) who aren't aware why some are complaining about being forced to buy healthcare, and why they treat it differently from a tax, it's because they are literally being required to take a policy with a private company -- no money is going to the government like with Canadian healthcare (MSP in BC for example). However, the government will cover the cost in whole or part for people who do not have the income to pay for their own healthcare.
So it is a bit different than just a tax as people are required to buy a plan from a private company. Hopefully that clears up some of the confusion.
|
|
Trent
Meteorite
Posts: 18
|
Post by Trent on Jun 7, 2010 11:08:49 GMT -5
Yes. I believe that universal healthcare is a step in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by krzych32 on Jun 7, 2010 11:42:06 GMT -5
"Health care is just air that has to choice but to cost money."
what?
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Jun 7, 2010 14:58:59 GMT -5
qooqǝɯɐƃ Nakor pretty much hit it out of the park. You're basing your argument on hearsay claims and pseudo-alternative medicine. Have you ever taken a genetics class? Do you understand how cosmic radiation works? It appears that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the mechanisms of the human body, or any living creature for that matter. lol no I am not. If you would just read the books you'd know they're not hearsay claims. And no I haven't taking a genetics class, those aren't even in the curriculum of my high school. But I don't believe my understanding of the human body is incorrect, it may be different, since I do read "alternative" health literature, but that doesn't make it incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by swan on Jun 7, 2010 15:16:56 GMT -5
I don't know if I'd go as far to say that a proper diet will keep you cancer-free, but apparently it can help prevent cancer.
|
|
|
Post by binini on Jun 7, 2010 15:25:21 GMT -5
The point most people are missing out on is the obvious. Everyone including people with little or no money will be able to receive good health care, if it stays the same then many people wouldn't be able to get the treatment they need to get better and they may suffer from crippling disabilities or even death. Isn't saving people's lives the main point of health care?
|
|