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

How can offering help be forcing somebody? They have the choice to accept or reject your help.

There is no law in any UHC country that I have ever heard of that insists that people must receive treatment that they do not want.

In this country, I have always had the choice to either use the Health Service or pay a private insurer. If I had chosen to go private, I would have received a tax rebate, effectively subsidising my premiums, as Ziggy has already explained.

How have I been forced?

 

In the industialized democratic countries with universal healthcare, they don't have laws that enforce eating habits.

 

GREAT IDEA. I think people who are overweight should not get free education, the rest should - this would ecourage me to lose some weight... also obviously those who use illegal drugs should be dropped like crap from free health care. and addicts (to tobacco, alcohol or any other) should be given an option to be extradited for one year where any drug dealers would be exterminated - so they can recover drug free. this is my dream to create such a world, Im starting with PVIS.net - hope people help me.

 

Why? Why does a good idea have to be taken to such an extreme that it becomes a bad idea? Why don't we just use the good idea and avoid the bad idea?

 

So people are not forced via taxes to subsidise the health care of others?

How so?

And you feel this is the responsibility of society? Why?

Why is it impracticle? Can you legally purchase unpasturized milk? There are already many banned foods....why is it not practical?

This already occurs. Private farms are raided all the time for selling "unsafe" foods.

How is it not? Let's say I live in a society and I do not want my tax dollars paying for someone else's healthcare. Is that not being forced upon me?

All of these things are paid for with money taken by threat of jail time for non-payment. That is forced.

Or you can just not pay taxes. That is about as much of an option as not going to the doctor.

Why can't people make their own decisions regarding food preparation?

Can you smoke freely wherever you choose?

How so?

It's very easy to not have socialised healthcare in the US. The US taxpayer has simply got to refuse to pay.

But I do not have the choice to offer it or not via taxes.
.

But people MUST pay for it.

Which was paid for by money taken with the threat of jail for non-payment.

Did you have a choice in paying for it?

Why can't a woman be just a little bit pregnant?

Or why can't people only have a little bit of cancer?

 

Not only should the govt regulate what you eat, but they should mandate exercise regimens and regulate sleep habits as well.

 

No?

Would you like to make a small wager?

True there are no such laws at the federal level. But various provincial governments have used the tax system, placing higher consumer taxes on food with higher sugar content for example...not strictly banning, but "social engineering" all the same.

And, a number of cities have very strict bans on food that can be sold on city property, like street vendors and restaurants in parks etc.

That's legislating what people eat.

 

What about regulating when I take a dump as well, there's a loophole for ya.

 

I have never been forced to pay taxes. I chose to pay them when I elected to remain and work in this country. If I am not content to pay, then there are several courses of action open to me.
1. I can leave.
2. I can fight to have the taxation laws changed.
3. I can protest if I am not happy with the way my taxes are being used.
4. I can refuse to pay them and risk some form of punishment.

You may not like some, or any of the available choices, but they remain valid choices despite your dislike. If you pay it is because you have chosen to do so.

There is only one rule for civilized behaviour: Treat everyone as you would expect to be treated if you were in the same situation.

Because it is better for me if the people that I live amongst and work with are healthy and happy and properly cared for. Otherwise they might infect me, rob me or otherwise abuse me.

Because if people want something enough, they will go to great lengths to obtain it. Outright bans never work for any product that is in demand. Legislating to ban something is easy. Enforcing the ban is a much more difficult and costly task.

Yes, and the farms are usually raided because the food they are selling is acutely detrimental to health, not because the food is detrimental if consumed to excess over a number of years.

 

So, to avoid paying taxes you would have to either flee the land where you were born or face some sort of punishment and you don't think that you are being forced to pay taxes???

That's like saying that an armed mugger wasn't forcing you to give him your wallet because in addition to handing over your wallet you also had the choices of either abandoning your home and family or getting shot.

 

It is not productive to force-feed your population healthy foods.

Most of them are better off dead anyway. Unless they are contributing something to the treasure chests of the wealthy.

One needs keep only as many of them alive as is useful.

MacDonalds was invented to ensure the unfit faded fast.

And, in their tiny minds, happily.

 

Not quite. The government doesn't offer instant death as punishment for refusing to pay taxes.

I have never been forced to pay taxes. I am content to pay, because that is one way that I can contribute to this great country that has given me so much. I might complain bitterly at times about how some of those taxes are used and I might sometimes wish that taxes were lower, but I have never felt victimised by being required to pay.

 

No, they offer instant kidnapping and locking into a cage for refusing to pay taxes. If you resist such treatment then instant death could very well be your punishment.

But I'll play along, just change the previous scenario from a mugger threatening to shoot you on the spot to a mugger threatening to bind your hands behind your back, throw you in his car, and then lock you into a metal and concrete cage. So your choices become

1. Hand over your wallet
2. Abandon your home and family
3. Be kidnapped
4. Be shot on the spot

The issue isn't whether you like paying taxes or how subservient you are. Your personal feelings are irrelevant, the facts of the matter are all that apply. The issue is "What is the compelling force behind taxes?" The threat of government force against non-compliers is the ONLY thing that ensures taxes are paid. If it wasn't forced then it would be voluntary...which it isn't. Simple stuff, really.

 

No. How i personally feel about it is all that matters. I could choose to whine and worry and rail against the injustice of it all. I could spend a lot of time trying to avoid or minimise the taxes. Instead I choose to get on with my life and be glad that the country is benefitting from my contribution. Of course, I am benefitting too and that's a bonus.

Take health care, which is where this all started. I know that whatever happens to me, I will be looked after and I will not be out of pocket. I don't have to worry about insurance premiums or co-pays or anything like that. The peace of mind alone is worth all the taxes I have paid in my life.

 

yes everyone should suffer the same and be forced to eat vegetables.

the US has a private system which allows rich fat people to eat macdonalds but never die because they have the best health care in the world.

this is bad for the poor americans because they have macdonalds but terrible healthcare.

 

In nations with socialized medicine should the government dictate what the people eat?

In nations that dictate what people eat should the government seize control over all farms and food production/distribution?

.......

.......

.......

.......

In nations with communist ideologies should the government put up walls and armed guards so its most productive and most intelligent citizens cannot flee to superior societies?

 

It doesn't change the FACT that you are being forced. I understand that you love it, but you can still understand the FACT that you don't have any real choice in the matter, right?

 

He is not being forced. He has laid out clearly and concisely the circumstances under which he pays his taxes, which are very little different from the circumstances under which you pay taxes. Anyone with an understanding of the English language can see that.

If one chooses to live in a society (and few do otherwise) one accepts the conditions - one of which being taxation - of doing so. It is not rocket science.

 

Which goes back to my original analogy:

Round and round we go...

So, yes, there is a choice. The choice is between paying up, being exiled from the land where you were born, or violence...Sounds like a choice made freely to me...

The discussion isn't whether you agree with forcible taxation or not. It is simply recognizing what it is. Taxation is enforced by the threat of violence and force, plain and simple. I don't know what kind of mental walls the two of you have created but that is the plain and simple truth. It is true for people who hate taxes as well as for those who absolutely love to pay taxes.

 

Taxation is a necessary FACT of life. I understand that and I pay my taxes. How am I being forced?
It is an undeniable FACT that we do have choices. And they are 'real' choices. The FACT that we might not like any of them does not render them any less 'real'.

 

agreed it is like they want their cake and eat it too, if they can afford to eat unhealthy then they should be taxed more in a universal system.

presently here they can run up the health costs of everyone with obesity related illnesses through the private insurance system

 

Because you'll be kidnapped if you don't. If a shop owner understands that paying mafia protection money is a FACT of life and pays them, that doesn't mean that they weren't forced, even if they feel that they derive some benefit from paying. If there are violent consequences for failing to comply then it is not a voluntary act and is therefore forced.

Right, just like the shop owner has a choice. He could abandon his shop or risk physical violence against his person.

Basically, you're argument is that people aren't forced to pay taxes because everyone is free to build a boat and live the rest of their days on the open sea.

 

No mental walls are necessary. In fact I agree that taxation, like most other conditions of living in an organised society, is enforced. So are the laws of that society - and so what?

Both the laws and taxation serve a useful purpose, and both Theodolite and I are capable of seeing that. We are also capable of seeing what sort of society would result from the absence of laws, and the absence of taxation funded infrastructure, so we are happy to obey the laws, and to pay our taxes. The fact that there are penalties for not doing so, is relevant only if you don't want to obey the laws, or to pay tax. That is the equally plain and simple truth.

 

Exactly Leo.

Those who have no wish to break the law aren't being forced to do anything they are not content to do.

 

And you agree that taxation is backed by the threat of force? If so, then why are you arguing with me? That is the only thing that I have asserted here. Whether you, Theo, or I think such measures are useful or morally right is irrelevant to the assertion that I've been making all along. I was simply stating the simple truth, people are forced to pay taxes. They have no real choice (and, no, leaving country for some mysterious land or the open sea where there is no taxation is not a viable choice for 99.9% of people), and violence against one's person only counts as an option to tyrants and thugs.

Whether one claims to like paying taxes or not is neither here nor there, the fact remains that taxes rely on the threat or the actual use of force.