- Joined
- Jul 19, 2011
- Messages
- 55,694
- Reaction score
- 52,785
- Location
- Twilight zone
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
That's dignity for all.Hmm… isn’t that the goal of Medicare For All?
That's dignity for all.Hmm… isn’t that the goal of Medicare For All?
Posts like this can’t even be taken seriously.Then we should make it illegal to be unhealthy, or stop forcing the rest of us to subsidize their healthcare.
Bullshit. As usual.can give you half credit on that one. They absolutely do not provide better care, however what care they do provide, they provide it much cheaper. However, the cheaper comes with rationing and waiting lists
“Research”?Having done a great deal of research, and coming “off” sugar I realized that sugar is an addiction. I also realized a while ago that beef tallow, real butter, and eggs are not “the enemy”. After years of being told to eat fake butter and avoid eggs I am learning an entire much healthier lifestyle.
The portions are insane. I couldn’t agree more.The other people here is that many Americans live an excessive lifestyle. They drive large cars. They eat large proportions. They demand more meat, more diary, and more carbs, but will not touch a dietary vegetable
My town started a community garden a few years ago - so did the next town over. HUGELY popular. Especially with people that live in townhouses, etc and don’t have their own yards.Reintroduce victory gardens and/or community gardens. A huge segment of our population live in separate homes meaning space is available….
But the FUNDING for that science absolutely does, as we are witnessing.After all, the science of nutrition and what constitutes healthy versus unhealthy choices does not change based on which politicians are in office at any given time
Yes, it does. We are watching one of the largest measle outbreaks I can remember play out currently, for example.Again, this isn't about a specific president, as the science of nutrition and what constitutes healthy versus unhealthy behaviors doesn't get altered by which politicians are in office at any given time
Sounds like conspiracy theory bullshit to me.Salt is added where it is not needed for sure. But, sugar is a secret enemy to our health. And yes, our food industry is very scary. We have been misled for years. Being told cereal is wonderful for you, and eggs and bacon are horrible. Eat your oatmeal, and don’t eat eggs. And don’t even get me started on the prevalence of statins to control “cholesterol issues”. Here…take a pill.
So, dumb things down because people are ignorant and stupid?What I personally want are food labels that tell the actual truth about what you are putting into your mouth. Perhaps, not twenty different labels for “sugar”. It is sugar, call it sugar
Yep. Public knowledge.Do you realize that some breakfast food companies were owned by cigarette companies
No, apparently you just didn’t bother to pay attention.That would be a start. Those cigarette companies moved onto cereals. Helped to turn our Country from one addiction to another. And it was a well kept secret for many years.
I've been commenting on a few posts but back to your OP. Thank you for asking.If you are in favor of this but disagree with strategies that have been utilized so far, please share proposals of how we, as a society, could implement changes to improve our health through nutrition.
HFCS should definitely Not be in our food supply. It has no nutritional benefit and a lot of downside in obesity and sugar metabolism problems. However, in general, I hesitate to give federal health nuts control over everyone's diet. They are way too dumb, and think they are way too smart.
I've been commenting on a few posts but back to your OP. Thank you for asking.
We need to make fresh and nutritious food available for all. If that means subsidizing local farmers, I am all for it.
We need to pay working people a living wage so they don't have to work 2, 3 or 4 jobs to make ends meet.
I recall working 16 hr shifts and I couldn't have cared less if I shoved a Snickers bar or a day old hot dog in my mouth because I was too darn tired to care.
We need to dignified health care.
And thank you for answering and sharing your ideas!
Leave your diet out of this.Bullshit. As usual.
In the short term yes, however an immediate result will be rationing and waiting lists. And Medicare for all would not be free. There will be premiums. They would start out low, however they would rise rapidly, until at some point you would be paying roughly the same premiums you may now be paying for private health insurance, and you would still have to add private policies at a cost to make it work like real insurance, just as present seniors on Medicare do. At some point you will say: "Wait a minute, I thought this was non-profit healthcare."Um, the costs would be lower than what people are paying currently for private ins. This has been gone over a zillion times,
You are only correct in that we pay much more. The rest is left wing fantasy. The stats that you likely read are misleading. The reality is that if you take two patients with identical health conditions and general health, including living habits, diet, etc, the outcome is likely to be better under the American healthcare system. The stats that you read likely do not take into account many unhealthy American lifestyle habits, vices, etc.the US pays out much more for worse outcomes than any other industrialized nation.
The suggestion that the ACA has kept costs down is hilarious. What the ACA caused was an immediate and significant increase in the cost of health insurance. In my case, I would have faced a 300% increase in the cost of monthly premiums and a 500% increase in deductibles. How is that keeping costs down? If you are referring to slowing down the rate of increase, it's still increasing in cost every year, except for the relatively few that are subsidized. The ACA was sol to the voters as the "Affordable Healthcare Act". When is the affordable part coming?What is it about reality that you find humorous?
Denial on your part. Universal health is massively expensive.Objectively false.
Depends on what you want to call "fine". Their healthcare is rationed, and I have seen the results streamed on Prime.Every other first world country that has it manages to just fine.
The fraction of what we pay is correct, however the "provide better care then we do" is hilarious They have a shortage of hospital beds, hospitals, and specialists. If you are scheduled for a surgery, you are lucky if it does not get canceled/ delayed one to several times for lack of an available intensive care bed in case the surgery goes south.They objectively provide better care than we do, while also at a fraction of what we pay.
That is a common librul fable. The reality is that the only healthcare that is rationed in the US is organ transplants as only so many organs are available at any given time. Ofcourse the common librul comeback is: "It's rationed because you have to pay for it. That's like saying that milk, butter, eggs and bubble gum is rationed at your local supermarket.No it doesn’t. And care is rationed in the US already.
Well…if you saw a video on a streaming service…it MUST be the full and comprehensive story and of course, you are fully informedDepends on what you want to call "fine". Their healthcare is rationed, and I have seen the results streamed on Prime
It’s demonstrably true lol.The suggestion that the ACA has kept costs down is hilarious.
Demonstrably false.What the ACA caused was an immediate and significant increase in the cost of health insurance.
You are lying.In my case, I would have faced a 300% increase in the cost of monthly premiums and a 500% increase in deductibles.
Because you made that up.How is that keeping costs down?
Yes, that is what keeping costs down means.If you are referring to slowing down the rate of increase, it's still increasing in cost every year, except for the relatively few that are subsidized.
Already shown.The ACA was sol to the voters as the "Affordable Healthcare Act". When is the affordable part coming?
I said single payer, not universal health. Single payer is less expensive than our system.Denial on your part. Universal health is massively expensive.
No you haven’t. US healthcare is also rationed.Depends on what you want to call "fine". Their healthcare is rationed, and I have seen the results streamed on Prime.
Demonstrably true.The fraction of what we pay is correct, however the "provide better care then we do" is hilarious
The US has hospital bed shortages, hospital shortages and specialist shortages.They have a shortage of hospital beds, hospitals, and specialists.
This happens in the US as well.If you are scheduled for a surgery, you are lucky if it does not get canceled/ delayed one to several times for lack of an available intensive care bed in case the surgery goes south.
No it isn’t.That is a common librul fable. The reality is that the only healthcare that is rationed in the US is organ transplants as only so many organs are available at any given time.
No, it’s nothing like that.Ofcourse the common librul comeback is: "It's rationed because you have to pay for it. That's like saying that milk, butter, eggs and bubble gum is rationed at your local supermarket.
It is actual segments at actual hospitals in the UK and Australia, not sitcoms. Perhaps you should watch them. I have watched several seasons.Well…if you saw a video on a streaming service…it MUST be the full and comprehensive story and of course, you are fully informed![]()
It’s demonstrably true lol.
GMO is today's overreaction to an insignificant issue. Last number I saw was that about 80% of food has some GMO content.
Without modern agricultural science innovations such as GMO famine rates would increase in poorer countries.
The GMO is not required to be labels, but I would like it to be. Sellers have chosen to mark items accordingly saying they do not have GMO, hormones, etc. I am less concerned with the GMO, though I do buy hormone free and look at the ingredient list.
You are in denial.It’s demonstrably true lol.
You are in denial.Demonstrably false.
I am not.You are lying.
I did not.Because you made that up.
So when are the costs coming down to pre-ACA?Yes, that is what keeping costs down means.
BS.Already shown.
They are both for all practical purposes the same. they both nearly wipe out for profit healthcare, which leads to less hospitals, less clinics, less nurses, less doctors, less specialists, and less immediately available healthcare. What you simply do not want to accept is that when government bean counters are making the spending decisions, there is going to be less of everything, other then administrators.I said single payer, not universal health. Single payer is less expensive than our system.
You clearly do not understand the term "rationed".No you haven’t. US healthcare is also rationed.
You are in denial.Demonstrably true.
Only during pandemics like Covid.The US has hospital bed shortages, hospital shortages and specialist shortages.
Rarely. I have had nine surgeries in my lifetime. None were canceled. One was delayed about 30 minutes in order to get an old man into the OR sooner. If there is a major accident, in a given community, and multiple patients, local hospitals may delay surgeries, of again, during a pandemic like Covid.This happens in the US as well.
Again, you do not understand the term "ration".No it isn’t.
Have someone teach you the difference between commerce and rationing.No, it’s nothing like that.
Refuted all of this. The ACA kept costs down. Single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of our system. This is objective reality.You are in denial.
You are in denial.
I am not.
I did not.
So when are the costs coming down to pre-ACA?
BS.
They are both for all practical purposes the same. they both nearly wipe out for profit healthcare, which leads to less hospitals, less clinics, less nurses, less doctors, less specialists, and less immediately available healthcare. What you simply do not want to accept is that when government bean counters are making the spending decisions, there is going to be less of everything, other then administrators.
You clearly do not understand the term "rationed".
You are in denial.
Only during pandemics like Covid.
Rarely. I have had nine surgeries in my lifetime. None were canceled. One was delayed about 30 minutes in order to get an old man into the OR sooner. If there is a major accident, in a given community, and multiple patients, local hospitals may delay surgeries, of again, during a pandemic like Covid.
Again, you do not understand the term "ration".
Have someone teach you the difference between commerce and rationing.
You are living in librul lalaland and probably have never had to purchase an individual health insurance policy on your own.Refuted all of this. The ACA kept costs down. Single payer systems provide better care at a fraction of the cost of our system. This is objective reality.
Weird…MAGAs say that they’re is too much and too many people in government agencies, but here you are saying too few?They are both for all practical purposes the same. they both nearly wipe out for profit healthcare, which leads to less hospitals, less clinics, less nurses, less doctors, less specialists, and less immediately available healthcare. What you simply do not want to accept is that when government bean counters are making the spending decisions, there is going to be less of everything, other then administrators
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired.Weird…MAGAs say that they’re is too much and too many people in government agencies, but here you are saying too few?
TDS.I think you may want to go back and check what messages you’re supposed to be relaying…don’t want to be off brand and displease Dear Leader and have loyalty questioned.
Wasting your time. The facts have been repeatedly posted for him but he's indifferent to them.Weird…MAGAs say that they’re is too much and too many people in government agencies, but here you are saying too few?
I think you may want to go back and check what messages you’re supposed to be relaying…don’t want to be off brand and displease Dear Leader and have loyalty questioned.
Have a tariff, oops I mean great day.Wasting your time. The facts have been repeatedly posted for him but he's indifferent to them.
Have a tariff, oops I mean great day.![]()
Eh, I don’t expect actual intelligent debate from MAGAs.Wasting your time. The facts have been repeatedly posted for him but he's indifferent to them.
I was OK with what Michelle Obama was trying to do.If you are in favor of this but disagree with strategies that have been utilized so far, please share proposals of how we, as a society, could implement changes to improve our health through nutrition.