• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Need for Regulation: Fighting the Obesity Epidemic

What do you think we should do about the Obesity Epidemic?

  • Total voters
    68
Boo Radley said:
This is what we're trying to do. Juvenile diabetis or adult onset (type 2)?
Click to expand...

Type 2, it runs in the family. Since the day I was diagnosed, I've paid 100% of my own way in treatment. I expect the same from everyone.
 
I think there is a direct correlation between smoking and obesity. Everyone used to smoke and this delightful, satisfying, sexy, cool behavior was attacked and diminished through extensive campaigning, prohibition and taxation. Without a cigarette to stick in your mouth, you have no way to tell that your meal has ended and you just keep on shoveling down the chow.

Of course, I could be wrong about this.
 
Cephus said:
Type 2, it runs in the family. Since the day I was diagnosed, I've paid 100% of my own way in treatment. I expect the same from everyone.
Click to expand...

Same here. type 2. My "treatment" is limited. Doesn't cost to run or not eat, and I knew as much as the diabetic nurses, so I didn't need them. Having insurance helps with other costs. Cost are more for my wife and her physical problems. With insurance, we pay $200 plus for her meds. Without it, the cost would be a couple of thousands a month. Few could afford that.

But, few would run as I do. I meet few young healthy adults who do. Can is more tricky. But most stop long before they get there.
 
lizzie said:
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking? If people paid for their own health care costs and insurance, we wouldn't need to cut back government costs.
Click to expand...

I'm not adept at insurance, but I was more or less asking Cephus what we should do, and if we should cut back anywhere if need be. Insurance costs are already too high imo, so maybe sin taxes and regulation would be better. Insurance is already a seeming nightmare, and a lot of people unable to pay for it will probably go on eating their bad food while being a burden on healthcare costs in the future, for serious things that require hospital care/treatment.
 
specklebang said:
I think there is a direct correlation between smoking and obesity. Everyone used to smoke and this delightful, satisfying, sexy, cool behavior was attacked and diminished through extensive campaigning, prohibition and taxation. Without a cigarette to stick in your mouth, you have no way to tell that your meal has ended and you just keep on shoveling down the chow.

Of course, I could be wrong about this.
Click to expand...

Only in that I did gain more weight after I quit smoking. But hardly the only factor.
 
specklebang said:
I think there is a direct correlation between smoking and obesity. Everyone used to smoke and this delightful, satisfying, sexy, cool behavior was attacked and diminished through extensive campaigning, prohibition and taxation. Without a cigarette to stick in your mouth, you have no way to tell that your meal has ended and you just keep on shoveling down the chow.

Of course, I could be wrong about this.
Click to expand...

Smoking supposedly reduces the desire to eat, or it somehow helps in losing weight. I can't vouch for this.

However, smoking releases its own myriad of problems.
 
Wake said:
If you support this freedom, will you support paying for the cost of this freedom through your taxes?
Click to expand...

in what way? if you mean health care, yes. i'd rather spend tax dollars on that than on global interventionism.
 
Wake said:
I'm not adept at insurance, but I was more or less asking Cephus what we should do, and if we should cut back anywhere if need be. Insurance costs are already too high imo, so maybe sin taxes and regulation would be better. Insurance is already a seeming nightmare, and a lot of people unable to pay for it will probably go on eating their bad food while being a burden on healthcare costs in the future, for serious things that require hospital care/treatment.
Click to expand...

No, they will go on eating bad food, doing the wrong thing, and if they choose not to pay for healthcare or the costs of their own bad behavior, they will DIE and we'll be done with them. Personal responsibility. It's one thing to have a demonstrable genetic problem for which you have no control, it's another to just eat until you can't get up and then expect others to take care of you.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
When it's a small segment of the population, the bold applies, but when it's a great deal of the population, the choice is no longer just a matter of the individual. On the contrary, it's a matter of the entire society because society pays the costs of those choices.
Click to expand...
The only reason why society is bearing the costs of obesity is because of how messed up our health care system is. Individual responsibility means simply that. The individual should bear the costs of what they do to themselves.

I should not have to pay higher taxes for them and their problems. I should also not have to pay higher prices for food that is not a problem for me because they choose to sit around and do nothing or do not practice moderation.
 
Wake said:
We seem to be breaking down, wallowing in our debilitation and lack of willpower. There is a group of people in America that on one hand opines that we Americans should be allowed to slowly kill ourselves through unhealthy food, and on the other hand complain about increasing taxes for the costs of affording the results of said unhealthy living. You should not be able to have it both ways; either support unhealthy living and pay taxes because of it, or don't support unhealthy freedom and don't pay taxes for it.

Look, we've got problems, and people need to start caring before America develops its own heart attack, per se.



Overweight and Obesity in the U.S. « Food Research & Action Center

Supposedly 2/3 of all U.S. adults are overweight/obese. That's insane.



Obesity Costs America $4 Billion Per Year At The Pump

This directly affects the cost of our gasoline. This likely affects our airlines in some way as well.



Health Buzz: 42 Percent of Americans Will Be Obese in 2030 - US News and World Report

The supposed projection for obesity in America is that 42% of all adults will be obese by 2030, and 1/4 of that group severely obese. The next 100 years if nothing is done...?



We need to act. If sin taxes "don't work" then perhaps we need to start applying regulations, because obviously education isn't reaching enough people. Charge people through their insurance for being obese. Don't feel sorry for them, because they know what they're doing. Don't charge them obscene amounts of money; start it very gradually, and moniter those results. Incorporate a "sin" tax as effectively as possible, like a scalpel. If taxing sugar and salt doesn't work, target doughnuts and fried food. Target what this group of people is inclined to devour.

Add some sort of gradual and minute benefit to those with the foresight of healthy eating. Wean the fat man off the nipple of the taxpayer, and wake up the taxpayer who supports unhealthy behavior yet complains about rising taxes.

You may think you have the freedom to kill yourself, but you don't have the freedom to kill America's future.

If there are valid links that showcase the results of Europe's regulation of healthy living that'd be deeply appreciated.
Click to expand...



Do you think our grandparents and great-grandparents were vegan ******s who ate nothing but salad? **** no they didn't eat vegan ***** food.They ate cheeseburgers, organ meats, french fries cooked in animal fat, candy bars,unfortified bread, stuff loaded with butter, stuff cooked in lard and other animal fat and a whole **** load of other unhealthy stuff.We do not need any regulation or food police to curb obesity. The cause of obesity is the fact Americans are living more sedimentary lives.Our jobs are more sedimentary and due to the length of distances some people have to travel to get to work or to a store we have to drive or ride to those places.

Maybe we can do something for public school kids and kids on public assistance so that they are not obese when they are in school.For example-

1. Make PE mandatory in all school grades.Get rid of a music class, foreign language class or some other elective to make it happen.

2.Get the schools to have recess and or make it mandatory.

3.Starting from kindergarten start offering only healthy low calorie food at public schools.Yeah there are kids who bring their own lunch to school, but a lot of kids are on the free or reduced price lunch program they will eat the food if they are hungry enough and if the food actually taste good.

4.Ban unhealthy food from public school vending machines.

5.Ban the following from food stamp and welfare purchases cookies,candies, cakes, sugary snacks, energy drinks and other junk food. As tax payers we most certainly have the right to demand that those asking for our help not waste the money we give them on junk food.
 
00timh said:
The only reason why society is bearing the costs of obesity is because of how messed up our health care system is. Individual responsibility means simply that. The individual should bear the costs of what they do to themselves.

I should not have to pay higher taxes for them and their problems. I should also not have to pay higher prices for food that is not a problem for me because they choose to sit around and do nothing or do not practice moderation.
Click to expand...

This ideology covers a lot of ground. To implement this, we will have to turn people away, even in emergent situations.
 
jamesrage said:
Do you think our grandparents and great-grandparents were vegan ******s who ate nothing but salad? **** no they didn't eat vegan ***** food.They ate cheeseburgers, organ meats, french fries cooked in animal fat, candy bars,unfortified bread, stuff loaded with butter, stuff cooked in lard and other animal fat and a whole **** load of other unhealthy stuff.We do not need any regulation or food police to curb obesity. The cause of obesity is the fact Americans are living more sedimentary lives.Our jobs are more sedimentary and due to the length of distances some people have to travel to get to work or to a store we have to drive or ride to those places.

Maybe we can do something for public school kids and kids on public assistance so that they are not obese when they are in school.For example-

1. Make PE mandatory in all school grades.Get rid of a music class, foreign language class or some other elective to make it happen.

2.Get the schools to have recess and or make it mandatory.

3.Starting from kindergarten start offering only healthy low calorie food at public schools.Yeah there are kids who bring their own lunch to school, but a lot of kids are on the free or reduced price lunch program they will eat the food if they are hungry enough and if the food actually taste good.

4.Ban unhealthy food from public school vending machines.

5.Ban the following from food stamp and welfare purchases cookies,candies, cakes, sugary snacks, energy drinks and other junk food. As tax payers we most certainly have the right to demand that those asking for our help not waste the money we give them on junk food.
Click to expand...

Many died young. Just saying.
 
Wake said:
But if you support that freedom, shouldn't you take responsibility for the cost of it?

A nation has taxpayers. If you support a person's activity to eat bad foods resulting in obesity and burgeoning medical costs, those costs will fall on the taxpayers.
Click to expand...
Why do we feel by doing nothing that that would mean we support such actions. Not paying or restricting does not equal supporting. There are millions who are alcoholics, yet we have bars, liquor stores, its served in restaurants... Doesn't mean that we support the alcoholics. they make their choices on how to live. Maybe they can't handle the booze as well as those who are not alcoholics, but we are not making them drink it either. They do not have to.

Why should I or anyone else be made to pay higher taxes for another persons problems, or be forced to pay a sin tax price on something because THEY choose not to moderate the food they eat. I say we should do nothing in terms of taxes, or regulations. Let people live as they want to and make the choices and deal with the consequences of those choices. Perhaps if they did have to deal with the consequences, their choices would be wiser because society isn't taking care of them. The liberal approach to obesity is enabling even though they do not see it that way.
 
00timh said:
The only reason why society is bearing the costs of obesity is because of how messed up our health care system is. Individual responsibility means simply that. The individual should bear the costs of what they do to themselves.

I should not have to pay higher taxes for them and their problems. I should also not have to pay higher prices for food that is not a problem for me because they choose to sit around and do nothing or do not practice moderation.
Click to expand...
Society does not pay solely in terms of taxes or food prices. It pays in terms of higher insurance premiums and in terms obese people's lower work productivity. No matter how you swing it, a society wide problem with obesity affects the totality of society so you're going to bear the costs of that problem no matter what.
 
00timh said:
Why should I or anyone else be made to pay higher taxes for another persons problems, or be forced to pay a sin tax price on something because THEY choose not to moderate the food they eat.
Click to expand...
You're going to pay regardless. You're either going to pay to eliminate the problem or sustain it. It's your choice.
 
Wake said:
But if you support that freedom, shouldn't you take responsibility for the cost of it?

A nation has taxpayers. If you support a person's activity to eat bad foods resulting in obesity and burgeoning medical costs, those costs will fall on the taxpayers.
Click to expand...

I don't support the activity, but I am not in favor of regulating what a person does to their own body. I'm not disagreeing with you on the cost because our tax system is flawed. I am in favor of a tax overhaul and major reforms.
 
Ikari said:
K, how so then?
Click to expand...
You advocated humiliating overweight people. Since that neither solves the problem nor exists for anything other than your own amusement, it's a stupid idea.
 
Wake said:
I'm not adept at insurance, but I was more or less asking Cephus what we should do, and if we should cut back anywhere if need be. Insurance costs are already too high imo, so maybe sin taxes and regulation would be better. Insurance is already a seeming nightmare, and a lot of people unable to pay for it will probably go on eating their bad food while being a burden on healthcare costs in the future, for serious things that require hospital care/treatment.
Click to expand...

Insurance costs are high and rising fast because we the sheeple ask for that. Do you expect your auto insurance to cover oil changes, worn out tires or brake pads? Do you expect your homeowners insurance to cover changing light bulbs, fixing/replacing your clothes dryer or keeping the lawn maintained? Of course not, you say, those are normal expected expenses! Yet many expect to use their "health" (it should be called medical care) insurance for the simple cleaning, stitching and dressing of a wound, a minor infection and fever or even an annual check-up. That is nonsense, and responsible for massive amounts of paperwork, driving up the costs for all.

Insurance is designed for the rare, unexpected and expensive events ONLY; that is why people rarely use their auto or homeowners policy protections, yet many of these same folks use their medical care insurance all of the time, perhaps multiple times in a month, certainly more than once every year.

A simple "catastrophic" medical care (not "health", that is free) insurance policy with the highest deductable that you can afford, has a very much lower premium and usually a higher annual benefit limit too. Get one and you will be amazed how much you save.

We are tricked into working for lower wages so that our employer can 'buy us' expensive "all inclusive" nonsense medical care insurance policies as "benefits" that we feel compeled to use as much as possible, after all it is nearly "free", save for a minor co-pay (not much of a disencentive not to go to the doctor for every little thing). We act like morons and then wonder why it is SO expensive.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
You advocated humiliating overweight people. Since that neither solves the problem nor exists for anything other than your own amusement, it's a stupid idea.
Click to expand...

According to you, perchance. But maybe the bullet hit too close to the mark on that one? Perchance my own amusement is worth it. I'll be paying for these guys one way or another anyway; I should get a little something something for my money.
 
Ikari said:
According to you, perchance. But maybe the bullet hit too close to the mark on that one? Perchance my own amusement is worth it. I'll be paying for these guys one way or another anyway; I should get a little something something for my money.
Click to expand...
In other words, you're just following the libertarian pattern: advocating ideas that have little to no value for society.
 
Perhaps too much government involvement is what got us here in the first place. The high price of sugar because of tariffs and cheap corn because of subsidies has lead to the increased consumption of HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) which has been shown to be extremely unhealthy. Now, I am not blaming the government for people choosing to eat items with HFCS, but when it is in the majority of food and drink and using real sugar is more expensive, sounds like a recipe for disaster.

The decline and fall of high-fructose corn syrup. - Slate Magazine
 
ThePlayDrive said:
In other words, you're just following the libertarian pattern: advocating ideas that have little to no value for society.
Click to expand...

Well why can't I play along with everyone else? Y'all seem to like doing the same, so I figure it's fair game for me to join in as well. What is this Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer **** going on here? I can't play in your reindeer games cause I'm different? No presents for you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom