The Political Environment: How To Cut Heart Attacks, Health Care Costs

Friday, January 2, 2009

How To Cut Heart Attacks, Health Care Costs

Ban Smoking.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...: Why not just make it illegal like other harmful substances?; January 2, 2009 at 4:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Ban smoking...thats good,it's a start aleast.Why not stop eating cheese and fast food....why not a sin tax. Why don't we all become Socialist? We subsidize heathcare already with Medicare and Medicaid thats why heatlh care cost are out of hand,its free money.Make it so the user pays,you will have something that is kinda like a heathcare system.One of the main reasons people file for Bankruptcy.
I love how some people know whats best for the rest, They are a socialist at heart, another way to put it they are control freaks.
They want to give your rights and choose your freedoms. I am not saying we shouldn't have rules and regulations,and people should be respectful of others,but out and out BAN SMOKING. After that then what,where does it stop?
I can rant for hours ,but you get me,maybe....lol; January 2, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Ban smoking I like the idea but the State gets too much money from it, and the poor who is affected by the tax more are good sheep who will not put up a fight.
Next Soda tax!
Hey how about a tax on condoms?; January 3, 2009 at 1:05 PM
Anonymous said...: From NYT Jan 2, THIRD HAND SMOKE:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/health/research/03smoke.html

"Toxic residue from cigarette smoke clings to hair and carpets, endangering children, experts say. .."

To Anon, the big investment banks have (swindled us)privatized profits and "socialized," (their) debt already, what's your beef, really? Anyone who is buying health insurance is already paying gobs more than they should to cover the uninsured, and the high (insurance company) administration fees and lawyers and bean counters to tell you that you are somehow not entitled to get reimbursed for a claim on on your policy. Really sick and tired of your uninformed opinion on the matter of socialism, get a grip on reality.

Your rights against search and seizure are already pretty far gone under Homeland Security, warrant-less wire-tapping. Search the web for, ACLU "Constitution Free Zone." Two thirds of WI falls into the zone and then decide who is trying to control everything.

Colt, "poor," does not automatically equate with stupid as you seem to imply. Many smart people (I include here, many poor people) are quitting or trying to quit because they understand the adverse health risks. Check the stats at the state quit smoking program.; January 4, 2009 at 2:11 AM
Anonymous said...: non quixote,,,get a grip...lol. you will beleive anything.. "Toxic residue from cigarette smoke clings to hair and carpets, endangering children, experts say. .." yeah third hand smoke what a joke...if you believe that what about third,,,fourth,,,,fifth...and so on ,germs and etc....lol..if thats the case maybe you should consider ending it all now.
Anyone who is buying health insurance is already paying gobs more than they should to cover the uninsured...thats what they want you to believe so you blame the unisure so the government will socialize heatlh care and rob it blind even more.You need not be so emotional with your knee-jerk reactions and get better informed.You probably believe the FARM BILL is just for farms too....rofl.
Your funny and your Constitutional Rights are still in full effect...its citizens like yourself being apathetic and whinning are letting this country slip away....stand-up develop a backbone...lol; January 4, 2009 at 9:27 PM
Anonymous said...: to anon, jan 4

I attempted to address the points of my previous post to comments that you made. Attempting to belittle someone by re-directing the topic away from the points being discussed (i.e. making inferences about the Farm Bill)is a common tactic for someone arguing a point with no info cited to back your arguments. You claim someone is uniformed yet belittle them for pointing out a newspaper article. Ranting is ranting, not a discussion.

Although your reference is off the original topic, I feel there are serious flaws with the Farm Bill, in my opinion, too much socialized welfare to some huge corporate "farms," at the expense of more traditional family farm operations, and to the detriment of getting a healthy food supply to our nation's populace. But it does also factors into increased health care costs for our nation (for the marked increased incidences of obesity and diabetes) from subsidizing high fructose corn syrup production.

Where you inferred anything about my possibly blaming the uninsured for anything by what I said, is beyond me. Letting health insurance companies decide someone is no longer insurable because they have a medical condition or were born with a medical condition is simply criminal. I prefer having a doctor decide proper medical attention based on medical reasons, not on insurance co. bottom lines.; January 5, 2009 at 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: non

The poor ( Under poverty Lv) smoke more then any other group there by paying more of the tax. Fools of all classes smoke. Bonus for us is we get to pay the cost of there poor health choices.
Maybe we should ban fatty foods soda
TV cars.....; January 5, 2009 at 9:25 AM
Anonymous said...: colt @1/5/09

I understand you are being a tad facetious about the banning of soda, cars, fatty foods, etc. Intensive education about the negative effects of too much of those sort of things needs to continue for more public awareness of better or worse choices to be made.

Allowing smoking in public places takes away my choice/right to breath clean air in those public places I may have a legitimate need to frequent. A direct physical assault on my person with a known deadly substance. Banning those other things is a more indirect assault on my pocketbook causing me to pay higher insurance premiums and higher taxes. Therein is a difference that I see.

Banning smoking in public places will not eliminate anyone's ability to poison her/himself in the privacy of their own homes. Increased taxes on cigarettes should be reserved for paying for the ultimately higher health costs associated with smoking.; January 5, 2009 at 4:49 PM
Anonymous said...: gratnon quixote

and the high (insurance company) administration fees and lawyers and bean counters...thats called addressing points...lol. Your points are called 98% of business models and practices. Very general and vague...someone is uniformed yet belittle them for pointing out a newspaper article...one newspaper article makes you an authority on a subject...sounds about right...lol.
The Farm Bill I couldn't bare to converse with the untutored,,so I will leave it at that.

Where you inferred anything about my possibly blaming the uninsured for anything by what I said, is beyond me. Anyone who is buying health insurance is already paying gobs more than they should to cover the uninsured. Your words not mine,and you wonder how I inferred anything about blaming the uninsured by anything you wrote...oh man...lol.

Really sick and tired of your uninformed opinion on the matter of socialism, get a grip on reality...more on this emotional and knee-jerk recation...read on...lol.

Letting health insurance companies decide someone is no longer insurable because they have a medical condition or were born with a medical condition is simply criminal,,,,lol. All business not just Insurance companies have the right to decide who they want to do business with. Instead you don't want the Insurance companies to have a choice,you want it forced upon them as you want taxes and restriction forced on smokers,as a SOCIALIST would.

I prefer having a doctor decide proper medical attention based on medical reasons, not on insurance co. bottom lines. You want the Insurance company to fork the bill,the fact is if the DOCTOR decides on a medical attention for you ,,,you can pay for it youself and stand up on your own two feet and not expect a handout. Now YOU have graduated form a SOCIALIST to a full blown communist,,,roflmao.

YOUR DISMISSED....lol; January 5, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Good morning, Anon 1/5 8:21 pm

I'm really glad that I have been able to provide you with a source of seemingly endless happiness, laughter and joy.

It should be obvious to most that I have met my match in this debate.

PS A sincere thanks to Mr Rowen for providing the space for this conversation.; January 6, 2009 at 8:29 AM
James Rowen said...: My pleasure.; January 6, 2009 at 8:45 AM