Skip to main content

View Diary: Obesity - is it political?! (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The answer (not my opinion) is: (6+ / 0-)

    Liberals want it to be political, conservatives do not.

    What makes me say this? Health Care.  

    From a Liberal perspective - Health Care is a right of the people. 3 people need a heart transplant, only 1 heart.. the choice should NOT be made by who has the most money.

    From a Conservative perspective - Health Care is a Good to be purchased.  The price of the Heart is based upon Supply and Demand.

    ... Back to Obesity

    From a Liberal point of view - if the Health Care system was distributed evenly, then it makes complete sense that obesity should be a priority because it increases health care costs.

    From a Conservative point of view - Because individuals purchase their own health care, they decide what shape to keep their bodies in and let the insurance/health care providers determine what it will cost you to recieve their services.

    So ... I didn't answer your pole, because this is the answer - not a generic "yes it is important, no it isn't"  But with the country split down the middle - that means we probably end up with the worst of both extremes.  Costs are through the roof and benefits are through the floor.

    Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton: Out of 295,734,134 (July 2005 est.) Americans, this is the best we can do?

    by Yoshi En Son on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:11:28 AM PDT

    •  Ok, you can say it's my opinion if you want. n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      the littlest gator

      Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton: Out of 295,734,134 (July 2005 est.) Americans, this is the best we can do?

      by Yoshi En Son on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:11:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Markets (7+ / 0-)

      Liberals also see it as political because we believe that government has a role in protecting us from out-of-control markets.

      The obesity epidemic is a consequence of corporations (developers as well as food manufacturers and restaurants) ignoring the demands of public health and the common good.

      "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." Frederick Douglass

      by dcdanny on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 03:37:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

        But Conservatives can easily contend that the reason Health Care is an out-of-control market is because of the huge influxes of Government programs and that if the "false demand" wasn't created by these Government programs then the supply of Health Care would balance with the Demand and an equilibrium would be found.

        The result would be a lot of unhappy people who are told that thier child/parent no longer has Health Care provided by the Government. So we all know that Republicans will not let he government programs die - just suffer and when the population cries enough, offer a subsidy to the pharm and insurance corps to fill the gap.

        It's all political games and until there really is Socialized medicine in one form or another there will be this continuous struggle between making the citizens not angry and making the Pharm/Insurance corps happy.

        Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton: Out of 295,734,134 (July 2005 est.) Americans, this is the best we can do?

        by Yoshi En Son on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:25:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  long past time (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tobendaro, Silent Lurker

          to stop worrying about what the the conservatives will say. even if we try our best to give them no ammunition they will just lie. and beat us with what ever made up stick they come up with.

          Like liberals are going to ban the bible.

          so we might as well stop worrying and do what we think is right.

          Of all the diversions of life, there is none so proper to fill up its empty spaces as the reading of useful and entertaining authors. ~ Joseph Addison

          by the littlest gator on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:35:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  well, if we had veto proof majorities (0+ / 0-)

            with nearly all of them in safe seats - then yes, we could brush aside an administrations attempts: but with the ammount of money which is put into the process from the various sectors, and the vast number of people which are affected - it is far beyond what a small group of activists have any right to accomplish. This is something that affects the entire country in very life changing ways.

            I'm all for it - have been for years and have discussed it with many intelligent people who are very opposed to the idea of socialized medicine.  The best argument that I find which atleast gets them to listen is that we are already paying for it. When an uninsured person gets desperately sick - they go to the Emergency Room, where they will not be turned away.  And that costs a lot more than if they had just gone to a physician.. and likely even less if they had gone prior to it becoming serious.

            But alas, the idea of masive increases in the budget due to socialized medicine is a very large hurdle.  Many do not like the concept of waiting 6 months to see a doctor either.

            But in the End - maybe 100 years from now - Liberals will .. "win" this battle.. it's just a matter of time.

            Conservatives might not even realize it - but they have already given in to Socialized Medicine.. now it's just a matter of time before it happens.  Once they passed the Perscription Medicine bill - that set the precedent of them agreeing that the federal government has a role in health care.

            Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton: Out of 295,734,134 (July 2005 est.) Americans, this is the best we can do?

            by Yoshi En Son on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:47:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  One small add on (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      el dorado gal, tobendaro, langerdang

      This is basically what I wanted to say.  The other political issue is farm and food policy.  If obesity became a big issue, money would have to be reallocated awyay from corn to healthier food.

      Ortiz/Ramírez '08

      by theran on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 04:37:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well.. (0+ / 0-)

        unless the ethynol lobby successfully kept US dollars into the corn and soybean industries... Heck the Ethynol lobby may very well be arguing in favor of a healthier nation as a means of discounting the negative impact the possible use of Ethynol would have on the food supply.

        Bush - Clinton - Bush - Clinton: Out of 295,734,134 (July 2005 est.) Americans, this is the best we can do?

        by Yoshi En Son on Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 01:50:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site