In countries with Socialized Medicine, should Government legislate what people eat?

Aren't the European Socialists similar to their American counter-parts?

They want 3 months of vacation and to retire at age 50 with a full pension.

unrealistic and unsustainable.

 

Know what the difference is? Europeans are willing to pay much higher tax rates in exchange for their entitlements - Americans want them for free.

 

Yes, it are imaginary tales to be quite honest. With the exception of Greece.

​

Surprised?

Never heard or read anything about it in your American media?

Look harder my friend, it's all around to be quite honest.

Just a day or two ago, an article appeared that "the USA is more likely to default on her debt than Indonesia" -- just so you get an idea in what big of a mess you are in.

Even the Financial Times -- or was in the WSJ -- just a week ago ran an article that "The [American] Dollar is in way more trouble than the Euro".

 

Oh Jan, I'm half tempted to fly to Antwerp and rent a flat near ya so we can laugh at America together.

 

So KILLING innocent people over a tiny reduction in benefits DUE TO A TOTAL FINANCIAL CRISIS is just a healthy passionate involvement of its citizens?

WOW!

Probably not so much for the dead tho???

 

I'd rather they rioted than didn't vote as many Americans are wont to do.

And the superiority of the European model is rapidly becoming more evident.

 

you can move to Antwerp...but you'll NEVER rid America from your life!

lol...<evil laughter>

 

Doubt it considering how much of my domestic product is either produced in Europe or Asia.

 

as I said...

you'll NEVER rid America from your life!

lol...<evil laughter>

 

Mind leaving the thread if you have nothing valuable to say?

 

Most americans dont even really understand that socialism is....they just equate it with communism......

 

sorry, I started the thread and am still waiting on a coherent answer to my question...

• If it would greatly lower the collective health care costs of Society as a whole, why shouldn't Government have the power to legislate what people must eat?

 

The government should not have the authority to tell someone what they are allowed to eat........and the people who eat unheathy foods just to prove that they don't have to listen to the government when they say they should not should have no right to any aid from the government when those foods make them unhealthy later in life.....

 

Hello?!

Many people have already answered your question. You just didn't liked what they said.

Government shouldn't legistlate what people eat since it just isn't the government's job to force someone what, or what not, to eat. Not to mention it wouldn't work either.

Food and drink are pleasures of life -- and should be consumed with careness and a certain "finesse".

However, the government can -- and should continue to -- promote a healthy lifestyle and diet, e.g. promote playing football, promote membership of youth organizations, promote the eating of "real" (artisanal) cheese (instead of the industrial ones), promote the eating of "real" bread (not from the supermarket but from "the baker on the corner), etc.

 

Oh, and as Warspite already said -- but maybe some of you missed his argument -- it would mean an open war on the poor.

Numerous studies have shown that poor people eat far unhealthier than people who are better of in a financial sense, 'cuz unhealthy foods are cheaper to buy.

 

Even if that means higher health care costs and a more unhealthy Society?

What about the greater good?

Doesn't that trump an individual's freedoms?

Shouldn't it be the Government's decision to decide what people spend their money on when it relates to keeping the collective health care costs down??

 

There is no greater good.,....the greater good means what helps the people in power......Not what is best for everyone.....

 

Then why doesn't the govt stop food stamps and SUPPLY the"poor" with healthy foods? They supply them with housing and clothing, why not food too?

 

sorry, could you please explain this in more detail...thanks.

I asked: "Shouldn't it be the Government's decision to decide what people spend their money on when it relates to keeping the collective health care costs down??"

 

Actually, the question you asked in the thread title was, "In countries with socialized medicine, should government legislate what people eat?"

The answer you'll get is, generally, no.

The somewhat separate question of why shouldn't government have the power to legislate what people must eat is that it infringes too much on individual liberty, regardless of the costs to society.

 

The greater good is a made up phrase with no real meaning......who ever is in charge decides what the greater good was.....

For example, in the 50's, the commie witchhunts were held to protect the "greater good"

 

"Shouldn't it be the Government's decision to decide what people spend their money on when it relates to keeping the collective health care costs down??"

 

There...is a line which even some Socialists won't cross when it comes to giving up individual freedoms??

that's surprising to me...considering they're willing to give the Government this power already...and then hope it doesn't get abused.

 

I've already adressed this a few pages ago!

That is the price of freedom, literally.

But the fact remains still that Europeans eat better (not only healthier but just actual, better-tasting, food), consume more alcohol and smoke more cigarettes -- yet, we live longer than Americans.

I know this sounds so unfair too you, but that is the way it is.

 

Are you just playing -- or are you actually surprised?