Do overweight people deserve healthcare from the province?

[Wilber]

I'm not sure who the "we" you speak for. Certainly the assumptions I make are the ones I'm prepared to defend. You have been unable to answer what your assumptions have been supported by.

You are just a voice with no substance because you won't say how your position will effect you personally? What does living with the consequences mean to you? Are you independently wealthy or do you just plan to crawl off to die alone like an animal because you won't be able to afford the help you will need? Some society that is. I can't take you seriously because of that and will assume what makes the most sense to me.

[Renegade]

You are just a voice with no substance because you won't say how your position will effect you personally? What does living with the consequences mean to you? Are you independently wealthy or do you just plan to crawl off to die alone like an animal because you won't be able to afford the help you will need? Some society that is. I can't take you seriously because of that and will assume what makes the most sense to me.

Hmm. it sounds like you are saying that you can't disprove my position unless you can mount a personal attack on my motivations.

Funny, I haven't relied on your personal position to show the flaws in your position, I've only relied on the statements and facts and assumptions you've provided.

I can see that you assume what makes sense to you. I can also see that you do it without facts.

[Wilber]

You are just a voice with no substance because you won't say how your position will effect you personally? What does living with the consequences mean to you? Are you independently wealthy or do you just plan to crawl off to die alone like an animal because you won't be able to afford the help you will need? Some society that is. I can't take you seriously because of that and will assume what makes the most sense to me.

Hmm. it sounds like you are saying that you can't disprove my position unless you can mount a personal attack on my motivations.

Funny, I haven't relied on your personal position to show the flaws in your position, I've only relied on the statements and facts and assumptions you've provided.

I can see that you assume what makes sense to you. I can also see that you do it without facts.

You haven't relied on anything other than your own opinon which you will not back up by stating how the consequences of that opinion will effect you personaly. As such they have no weight for me. All I get is that others being a "burden" on the system is wrong but you will have no problem with being one yourself.

[Renegade]

You haven't relied on anything other than your own opinon which you will not back up by stating how the consequences of that opinion will effect you personaly. As such they have no weight for me.

Actually no, you in fact provided the link which showed that people consume more as they age. That's not my opinion, that is supported by the facts you provided.

When something is my opinion, I have clearly identified it as such.

I have made a statement that people pay less into healthcare than they consume, and shown you the calculation by which I came to that conclusion. I have challenged you to dispute any of the underlying facts or assumptions which lead to that consclusion. You have declined to do so.

My personal circumstance is irrelevant.

All I get is that others being a "burden" on the system is wrong but you will have no problem with being one yourself.

You have this slightly wrong. It is "wrong" that others are a burden on the system. It is equally "wrong" that I am a burden on the system. However, I have no problem taking full advantage of being a burden if the system lets me do so.

[jdobbin]

You have this slightly wrong. It is "wrong" that others are a burden on the system. It is equally "wrong" that I am a burden on the system. However, I have no problem taking full advantage of being a burden if the system lets me do so.

This kind of goes back to the thread we talked about when I said people would opt for free whenever they could.

[Renegade]

This kind of goes back to the thread we talked about when I said people would opt for free whenever they could.

I'll respond in that thread.

[Wilber]

I have made a statement that people pay less into healthcare than they consume, and shown you the calculation by which I came to that conclusion. I have challenged you to dispute any of the underlying facts or assumptions which lead to that consclusion. You have declined to do so.

Who are those people and if they are paying less, who is paying the rest? Most health care funding comes out of general revenue, either from provincial taxes or from federal transfers. In some provinces people pay monthly premiums and some they don't. You have no facts, only a dogma, assumptions and opinions.

[Renegade]

I have made a statement that people pay less into healthcare than they consume, and shown you the calculation by which I came to that conclusion. I have challenged you to dispute any of the underlying facts or assumptions which lead to that consclusion. You have declined to do so.

Who are those people and if they are paying less, who is paying the rest? Most health care funding comes out of general revenue, either from provincial taxes or from federal transfers. In some provinces people pay monthly premiums and some they don't. You have no facts, only a dogma, assumptions and opinions.

I've already answered this question. Young workers now make up the difference, and they do so simply because they are much larger in number than those who consume the most (ie those over 65). The health care system would collapse (something you concede you are worried about) if there was not an ever increasing contributing base.

Ironic, that you accuse me of having no facts. You haven't proven any number of conclusion you've jumped to. I'm still waiting for how you've arrived at your half-million estimate of what you've contribued in income taxes to healthcare.

[Wilber]

I've already answered this question. Young workers now make up the difference, and they do so simply because they are much larger in number than those who consume the most (ie those over 65). The health care system would collapse (something you concede you are worried about) if there was not an ever increasing contributing base.

Ironic, that you accuse me of having no facts. You haven't proven any number of conclusion you've jumped to. I'm still waiting for how you've arrived at your half-million estimate of what you've contribued in income taxes to healthcare.

I don't dispute that the contributing base has to keep up with demand, that will be the case whatever system is used if people are not to be denied care. It has always been so. If you are prepared to deny that care to others and go without it yourself, so be it. Somehow I think your opinion will change when you or someone you love is the one in need.

Ironic that you would want this personal information from me when you concede nothing in order to justify your own prejudices. Suffice to say that I have paid a lot of taxes for a lot of years on the understanding that I would one day have access to the services I was providing for others.

[Renegade]

I don't dispute that the contributing base has to keep up with demand, that will be the case whatever system is used if people are not to be denied care. It has always been so. If you are prepared to deny that care to others and go without it yourself, so be it.

If you don't dispute the facts I put forward, what do you dispute? I get that you don't like my proposal. That's fine. I don't care much one way or another. But the facts I put forward are sound and correct.

Somehow I think your opinion will change when you or someone you love is the one in need.

Think that if you like, but I think you don't know me very well or even at all.

Ironic that you would want this personal information from me when you concede nothing in order to justify your own prejudices.

You volunteered the statement, but then refused to back up your claim. Without further evidence, you statement is nothing more than hot air. If you want to make a statement have the courage to defend it.

I'm prepared to defend any statement I made.

Suffice to say that I have paid a lot of taxes for a lot of years on the understanding that I would one day have access to the services I was providing for others.

IMV you are a naive in your expectations. Programs can be unilaterally cut and changed. Witness the EI program. Some people paid for years without collecting. Changes were made in the 90s which made eligibility much harder. When it was time to claim, the tightened rules meant some who were previously eligible were denied benefits despite having paid their whole working lives.

[Posit]

Insurance plans are like that. Some people collect and others never do.

[Wilber]

If you take medicare as an example a quick estimate will show you that this is true. I'm doing some of these numbers by memory, and currently don't have the cite, however if you think any of these numbers are unreasonable please say so.

The average cost of providing medicare to someone over 65 is $10,000/year

The average lifespan is 78 years

The average working individual earns $33000/year

The average worker works for 30 years

The average taxes that individual pays is 25% of income

The provincial government spends approximately 33% of its budget on healthcare.

The provincial government collects 40% of taxes paid

Based upon these you can see that the average senior consumes:

10,000 * 13 = $130,000 of healthcare.

On average they contributed $33000 * .25 * .33 * .4 * 30 = $32,620 toward healthcare

So you can see that even if you don't include the healthcare they consumed in their working lives, they contributed nowhere near what they consume.

Two words. Incredibly simplistic

1. Assuming a worker enters the work force at age 25 and retires at 65 that comes to 40 years by my arithmetic. He also pays taxes on any pension and investment income he has after he retires.

2. You assume that a provincial government's income is derived solely from income taxes

3. You assume that a workers sole contribution to that income is through provincial income taxes.

4. You don't take into account provincial income derived from such things as sales (ex ALTA) and fuel taxes which that worker also pays, corporate taxes and resource revenues. You don't take into account the fact some provinces have MSP premiums. Just under $600 per year for an adult in BC.

5. You don't take into account provincial income from federal transfers which that worker also contributed to through such things as federal income taxes, GST and fuel taxes.

On second thought, laughably simplistic.

[Renegade]

Excellent. You have finally started to address the estimate.

1. Assuming a worker enters the work force at age 25 and retires at 65 that comes to 40 years by my arithmetic. He also pays taxes on any pension and investment income he has after he retires.

True, but many people don't work for 40 years. Some retire early. Some never enter the workforce at all.

So if you can cite a better number than 30 years as an average, I'll use that.

3. You assume that a workers sole contribution to that income is through provincial income taxes.

Not true. I assume that an average individual pays 25% of his income in taxes. This is all taxes not just income taxes. If you have a better average tax rate to cite, I'm happy to use that.

2. You assume that a provincial government's income is derived solely from income taxes

4. You don't take into account provincial income derived from such things as sales (ex ALTA) and fuel taxes which that worker also pays, corporate taxes and resource revenues. You don't take into account the fact some provinces have MSP premiums. Just under $600 per year for an adult in BC.

5. You don't take into account provincial income from federal transfers which that worker also contributed to through such things as federal income taxes, GST and fuel taxes.

All valid criticisims except I wouldn't count corporate taxes and resource revenues as worker contributions. I look forward to you correcting the estimate and including the factors you have indicated have been missed in the estimate. Let's see what you can calculate the new estimate to be.

[White Doors]

Now I know who all the fat people on this board are.

Some people are just firm believers in personal autonomy with no conditions for others' arbitrary, self-righteous provisions.

whatever fattie!

[Catchme]

I hesitate to start taxing people for things. In a sense, once we allowed the state to take over responsibility for our health, we also gave up the freedoms we once had.

What were those freedoms we once had, that you speak of? Besides none?

at least half the folks waiting there are low-lifes who live an intentionally unhealthy lifestyle...nothing irks me more than to see some old turbanned fart get off the boat, produce squat for the country, but hobble down to the nearest clinic to deal with his ailments on my dime.

How do you know they are low lifes?

If some old guy in a turban is in Canada, it is not likely he just came off the boat.

Your racial bigotry is evident, and full of hate.

Your dime? It is doubtful, you sound like a teenager that has never lived away from home until recently.

[ScottSA]

I hesitate to start taxing people for things. In a sense, once we allowed the state to take over responsibility for our health, we also gave up the freedoms we once had.

What were those freedoms we once had, that you speak of? Besides none?

Well, I'll keep it simple for you. The freedom to not wear helmets on motorcycyles. It is unjust of the state to require that we take care of ourselves, UNLESS, the state (or more precisely the taxpayer) is footing the bill for our health. The freedom to smoke without being taxed. The state has no right to require that we pay excess tax on tobacco, unless it is footing the bill for our health. These and a lot of other choices are choices we gave up the moral right to when we accepted the state as our health protector.

[Topaz]

First of all, you have to know why the person is overweight. There are some diseases that do make people overweight, like under active thyroid and most people don't know they have it. There's also DNA of families of being overweight, depression and the medication can put on as much as 50 lbs! Look at Harper, that why he's got the stomach hanging, which he better watch it because he could become diabetic 2. There's already in Ontario, people paying extra tax for healthcare, because they are over a certain income. Just remember overweight people usually don't live as long as thin, so for those that are bothered by overweight people just have patience and hope you never become one of them!

[stjohnrv]

Do people who are fat and overweight deserve universal healthcare coverage? I really think they shouldn't as they always get sick and have health problems.

196700, is that correct what a terrific user name for someone like yourself, a papaya drinking, non-smoking, non fast food devotee who runs whatÉ 50 miles a week. have you ever seen a movie called LOGANS RUN if not go rent it you will love it. its a society that does not tolerate imperfection and goes to great leanght to prevent it. they liquadate everyone upon attaining 30 years of age thus preventing the prils and imperfections of old age. no fast food resturants, smokes or booze in that perfect world you would fit right in. lets ruh forward for carrosel (see the movie you will understand the term)

[PolyNewbie]

Aperson that doesn't have a job and sits around eating potatoe chips and watching soaps all day long needs psychological help not further isolation from the system.

Deviant behaviour has psychological problems that can be undone with the proper amount of therapy. Sometimes deviant behaviour can be caused by medical problems. Sometimes brain injuries cause abberant behaviour.

I lost 25% of my (normal body type) body weight about 6 years ago and thought I was going crazy and several psychological tests revealed that I was sane. It wasn't until I met a really good GP to look at the planters wart in my foot that I learned I had a thyroid disorder. After she diagnosed it the symptoms were very obvious even in my appearance. I had seen doctors prior to this who could not see anything wrong with me even though I knew something was going wrong. I kept hearing that I was OK before this. Its strange how obvious symptoms can be overlooked by doctors.

We need better health care - its one of the best investments a country can make - that and education and this was shown by a nobel prize winning economist in the 60's. It happens to be exactly why services are being cut and the price of education is getting higher. The corporate powers that run the country want to destroy it to make way for a centrally controlled fascist world government that will serve the needs of only the most self described "elite" classes with rest in positions of much greater slavery & control than the present.

[stjohnrv]

How is an individual's control any of your business? You're just trying to force your self-righteous sense of how people should live on other people's lives--a typical conservative in every way.

It's my business because the unhealthy couch potato costs me money by being a bigger burden on the health care system. If it were private care, I'd have no problem with someone being morbidly obese, smoking and drinking everyday. Why? Because they'd sure as hell be paying their share through increased premiums.

Of course that is what this entire thread is about - injustice and tyranny of the majority. They are not interested in fair and equal access to health care. They want money - their money in particular - to be a controlling factor.

Oh boohoo. Fair and equal access to health care? What's fair about me subsidizing other people's laziness? I take steps to prevent myself from being a major burden on the system down the line. I should be compensated for these efforts, or at least those that choose to be a burden on the system should pay for their choices.

Health care like government and education, is an institution. Institutions are not businesses nor should they ever be run like businesses. They are meant to cost us and in return they provide reasonable services.

Sure if that's what you believe, but they should cost more for people who neglect to take approrpriate steps to reduce their cost to the system. There is no justification why I should pay as much as the 300 pound couch potato smoker.

well if you get cancer i hope its a healty one.

[stjohnrv]

First smokers, now the overweight huh?

Okay, if the "bottom-line" is all you see, let me break it down for you like this.....

A healthy person will still cost the system money at the end of their life when they need care, medicine, and perhaps disability. The smoker and the overweight don't have the same life-span.... so essentially, both the healthy and the unhealthy cost the system a fortune inevitably, except that the latter "saves" the taxpayer a fortune in old-age pensions.

Since you're so concerned about cost, you should maybe thank the next smoker or overweight person you see for saving your kids' college-fund.....

(yes, the entire post was tongue-in-cheeck, but I hope the message was understood)

the voting issue states over weight people tax the health car system by visiting their doctors to often... wow what part of the coutry do u live in it takes months to see a doctor here in NB.

[stjohnrv]

First smokers, now the overweight huh?

Okay, if the "bottom-line" is all you see, let me break it down for you like this.....

A healthy person will still cost the system money at the end of their life when they need care, medicine, and perhaps disability. The smoker and the overweight don't have the same life-span.... so essentially, both the healthy and the unhealthy cost the system a fortune inevitably, except that the latter "saves" the taxpayer a fortune in old-age pensions.

Since you're so concerned about cost, you should maybe thank the next smoker or overweight person you see for saving your kids' college-fund.....

(yes, the entire post was tongue-in-cheeck, but I hope the message was understood)

the voting issue states over weight people tax the health car system by visiting their doctors to often... wow what part of the coutry do u live in it takes months to see a doctor here in NB.

PS i guess that is only fair for we EI addicted frauds in Atlantic canada. we have also been identified as being the fatties of the country so as SCROOGE would say let them die and reduce the excess population. maritimes

[geoffrey]

well if you get cancer i hope its a healty one.

Cancer is mostly unpreventable, heart disease on the other hand is almost always preventable. I think that people with cancer, MS, other stuff like that that aren't to blame for themselves, should be treated for free. In fact, I think that people with likely environmental cancers should be able to sue the government for negligence in cleaning up the environment that we live in.

If I fall and break my leg biking, I'd have no problem paying for that as I've assumed the risk in that activity. People should the same when they sit down with their Lays and beer and watch TV all night. Then again, my physical activity should be compensated (or my lack of risk factors should factor into my premium amounts).

Bottom line, higher risk people should pay higher premiums.

[Kapitän Rotbart]

well if you get cancer i hope its a healty one.

Cancer is mostly unpreventable, heart disease on the other hand is almost always preventable. I think that people with cancer, MS, other stuff like that that aren't to blame for themselves, should be treated for free. In fact, I think that people with likely environmental cancers should be able to sue the government for negligence in cleaning up the environment that we live in.

If I fall and break my leg biking, I'd have no problem paying for that as I've assumed the risk in that activity. People should the same when they sit down with their Lays and beer and watch TV all night. Then again, my physical activity should be compensated (or my lack of risk factors should factor into my premium amounts).

Bottom line, higher risk people should pay higher premiums.

That can only work if we privatize health care.

We can semi-privatize it though. The gov't could reimburse those paying into private insurance, (where only the young and healthy would come out ahead).

I think doctors should be allowed to insist that fat people go on weight loss programs and if they refuse, then should be given the same treatment as smokers... they'll have to wait in the longer queue.

[ndp_suck]

If you start charging for one though, you have to start charging for them all. Your rates would increase depending on if you are overweight, a smoker, a drinker, a pothead, a drug user, a speeder, an unnecessary stress inducer, a consumer of artery clogging foods (even if you arent overweight), a thrill seeker, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc... Theoretically possible, but a paperwork nightmare.

Not really, private insurance companies find it cost effective to screen and assess premiums based on these factors. No reason why the government can't as well.

What makes you think the government would assess premiums fairly? I've had the same 250 cc motorcycle since 1985. Never had an accident with my bike and have not had a accident or ticket with my car for over 25 years. I value the motorcycle at $1000 or less. The government wants $800. for me to drive it for our 4 month driving season. If I try to cancel the coverage after the driving season I get nothing back. They say its because I have to pay for the other motorcyle accidents. You know, the guys that drive motorcycles like morons.

So fairness and the government don't work well together. Doesn't matter if its premiums for your health or motorcycles. The government will screw all of us, no matter what.