WARNING: Government Healthcare is Leading to Government Regulation of Food

[VoluntaryAmerican]

So I've been noticing the media is ramping up it's campaign against obesity. The problem is the only solution they offer is more government intervention in our lives. No doub't they are preparing the masses for Obamacare, observe some of the examples I've seen recently:

HBO Documentary Weight of the Nation Premieres


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wwwVOcOZOc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wwwVOcOZOc

"Obesity will crush the United States in to oblivion"

Here's an article I just read recently:

Should government intervene in obesity epidemic?

Close your eyes and picture 110 million obese people waddling around America's sidewalks. You'll probably want to keep your eyes closed.

Such is the scenario suggested by a new study projecting that 42 percent of American adults will be obese by 2030. That's 32 million more than today's 78 million. Of course, they probably won't be waddling. They'll be in their cars in the fast-food lane, as they are now. Recall that independent filmmaker Morgan Spurlock ("Super Size Me") gained 24.5 pounds after one month of eating exclusively at McDonald's.

Something no less than a "major public health intervention" is needed, according to Eric Finkelstein, a health economist with the Duke University Global Health Institute and lead author of the study.

What this means is anyone's guess, but it isn't far-fetched to infer that a government-mandated health care system eventually would necessitate a government-mandated diet to control costs. In another study, Finkelstein and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that obesity costs about $147 billion per year, accounting for about 9 percent of all medical expenses. An obese person, defined as carrying an extra 30 pounds, costs about $1,400 more in medical expenses per year than a person of healthy weight.

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/opinion/commentary/kathleen-parker-should-government-intervene-in-obesity-epidemic/article_4e8e1da7-d3b1-5b92-8d04-be8aa5fe4566.html

And Lastly:

Google: obesity loses custody

and witness all the parents who are losing their children due to this.

Mom loses custody of 200-pound obese child

The case of an 8-year-old boy taken from his family because he weighs more than 200 pounds (90 kilograms) has renewed a US debate on whether parents should lose custody if a child is severely obese.

The boy was removed from his family and was placed in foster care in October after county case workers in Ohio said his mother wasn't doing enough to control his weight. The boy, at his weight, is considered at risk for developing such diseases as diabetes and high blood pressure. Government growth charts say most boys his age weigh about 60 pounds (27 kilograms).

Roughly 2 million US children are extremely obese -- weighing significantly more than what's considered healthy.

Cuyahoga County removed the boy because case workers considered the mother's inability to get his weight down a form of medical neglect. The county's Children and Family Services agency said Monday it stood by its custody move, which was approved by a judge.

“We have worked very hard with this family for 20 months before it got to this point”, said agency administrator Patricia Rideout.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/mom-loses-custody-of-200pound-obese-child/882010/

[Anti Federalist]

The system cannot impose military hegemony around the world with a bunch of fat asses.


Obesity and National Security: The Battle to Reduce the Nation's Waistline

EVENT DETAILS:
WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2012, 8 A.M.-10:30 A.M.
COLUMBUS CLUB AT UNION STATION, 50 MASSACHUSETTS AVE., NW

http://www.nationaljournal.com/events/event/93/

Obesity is not just an individual health concern. As the leading medical disqualifier for young adults denied entry into the armed forces, obesity is also a major national security risk. What role can government, communities and health professionals play to reverse this troubling trend and guarantee the nation is able to recruit and sustain a healthy set of armed forces? Join National Journal as we gathe r experts from the military, leading academics, advocacy groups, and health professionals to provide insight into this critical topic.

[Anti Federalist]

And yes, of course that's where would all lead.

Before long you will have to swipe your government ID card before buying anything, even with cash, and that will all be linked into a massive database, tracking and monitoring everything you buy.

Certain items will be prohibited or restricted based on your government profile, either for medical, criminal or family reasons.

It'll all be in the cloud and there will be no getting around it.

SWAT teams with military hardware will be standing by to "take out" anybody that dares try to operate outside the system.

You'll see this within the next ten years, maybe less.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

And yes, of course that's where would all lead.

Before long you will have to swipe your government ID card before buying anything, even with cash, and that will all be linked into a massive database, tracking and monitoring everything you buy.

Certain items will be prohibited or restricted based on your government profile, either for medical, criminal or family reasons.

It'll all be in the cloud and there will be no getting around it.

SWAT teams with military hardware will be standing by to "take out" anybody that dares try to operate outside the system.

You'll see this within the next ten years, maybe less.

No doub't that a cashless society would make this transition much smoother.

Guy walks in to a store, swipes card to buy a twinkie:

ACCESS DENIED:

Your calorie count exceeds today's limit.

[tttppp]

There's a way to reduce bad food without regulations. You can eliminate most regulations and make income taxes for businesses contingent based on how well a company treats society. In this example, companies that sell bad food would pay higher taxes than companies that sell good food. This would motivate companies to design food based on healthier, more natural ingredients instead of stuffing food with the most cheap chemicals they can find.

[Anti Federalist]

No doub't that a cashless society would make this transition much smoother.

Guy walks in to a store, swipes card to buy a twinkie:

ACCESS DENIED:

Your calorie count exceeds today's limit.

We are pretty much at that point now, all of our own doing.

You have no idea how hard I have to control my violent urges when I watch some asshole pay for a cup of coffee with a credit card.

Give it another 20 years for cash to be banned, maybe less.

'Course, a false flag terror attack could get it done overnight:

"The terrorists were able to evade federal scrutiny by paying cash for their implements of death and destruction that took so many innocent lives."

[Acala]

There's a way to reduce bad food without regulations. You can eliminate most regulations and make income taxes for businesses contingent based on how well a company treats society. In this example, companies that sell bad food would pay higher taxes than companies that sell good food. This would motivate companies to design food based on healthier, more natural ingredients instead of stuffing food with the most cheap chemicals they can find.

And presumably they enforce YOUR ideas about what people should eat? No thanks. I think more FREEDOM will work just fine.

[Acala]

And yes, of course that's where would all lead.

Before long you will have to swipe your government ID card before buying anything, even with cash, and that will all be linked into a massive database, tracking and monitoring everything you buy.

Certain items will be prohibited or restricted based on your government profile, either for medical, criminal or family reasons.

It'll all be in the cloud and there will be no getting around it.

SWAT teams with military hardware will be standing by to "take out" anybody that dares try to operate outside the system.

You'll see this within the next ten years, maybe less.

You could give Alex Jones a run for his money. Government concerned about obesity>SWAT teams murdering you for trying to use cash.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Wouldn't eliminating subsidies on meat production drive the prices of meat up to a more normal level and therefore stop the eating of it? Wouldn't this work for corn and other unhealthy foods as well?

The government creates these fucking problems so they can step in and use it to take more power later.


You could give Alex Jones a run for his money. Government concerned about obesity>SWAT teams murdering you for trying to use cash.

I'm sure he'll take that as a compliment :D

But I'm sure it would have sounded far-fetched that children would be molested at airports and predator drones would be roaming the sky just 4-5 years ago too. And now that's a reality.

[awake]

"Government healthcare" is simply one domino in a series - of bad to worse. Each new regulation takes a regulator(s) to enforce...its a jobs, jobs, jobs program. They should just set up the Department of Permissions where no matter what it is you want, you will need a permit. You will have a choice only in which particular parasite gets to feed on you.

I think in the bible this department is called the No buying and selling with out the mark department.

[Romulus]

If the govt can force you to buy healthcare, its owns you. Period.

[Acala]

Wouldn't eliminating subsidies on meat production drive the prices of meat up to a more normal level and therefore stop the eating of it? Wouldn't this work for corn and other unhealthy foods as well?
.

Yes. Get government out of it. Entirely. At every level. In every way. And the situation would be improved. Not fixed, but improved. Also, get government out of health care so the market, and personal costs and consequences, could help shape healthier lifestyles. The rest would be up to the people themselves to take responsibility for their own diet and health.

[Acala]

I'm sure he'll take that as a compliment :D.

Good. I was not trying to insult him. Just trying to post a counterpoint to "the sky is falling and reptilians are behind it".


But I'm sure it would have sounded far-fetched that children would be molested at airports and predator drones would be roaming the sky just 4-5 years ago too. And now that's a reality.

Perhaps. But hindsight is demonstrably poor at informing foresight. And there are PLENTY of things to be concerned about that are actually happening right now out in the open. It is hardly necessary to engage in speculation in order to fully occupy yourself.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Good. I was not trying to insult him. Just trying to post a counterpoint to "the sky is falling and reptilians are behind it".



Perhaps. But hindsight is demonstrably poor at informing foresight. And there are PLENTY of things to be concerned about that are actually happening right now out in the open. It is hardly necessary to engage in speculation in order to fully occupy yourself.

Yeah, I tend to agree with you.

But I don't see any harm in speculation, either.

[Anti Federalist]

You could give Alex Jones a run for his money. Government concerned about obesity>SWAT teams murdering you for trying to use cash.

Were those SWAT raids on Amish farmers last year my imagination?

I know it takes a little out of the box thinking, but follow along with me:

A - Government has fully inserted itself into the health care system. Now, for all practical purposes, the system is socialized.

B - Since a socialized system spreads it costs to everybody, it now makes perfectly logical sense that each person's life and diet choices impact the care costs of everybody else.

C - In an effort to monitor and control diet and personal habits, the national cashless grid goes into place. (Its already there, through the CC debit card system. In fact, in some states in have to swipe a driver's license into a database to buy booze or smokes).

D - Once the monitoring is in place, then it will only be short matter of time until the restrictions and prohibitions come into place. All the databases will link through to your healthcare, criminal, job and family records, and items will be prohibited based on what is in those files.

E - Any effort at subverting, bartering or black marketing the system will be dealt with harshly. Like a SWAT raid.

Scoffing is not needed, although I understand your nervousness and unease, thus your desire to "whistle past the graveyard" and deny that will ever happen, even though you know, deep down, that I'm more than likely right.

I was mocked in the same fashion when, 25 years ago, I told people that minor, unobtrusive, minimal fine seat belt laws would end up with police roadblocks checking randomly for seat belt use, huge fines and people getting arrested for non compliance.

It's OK, really: embrace the horror and decide what you're going to do about it.

[Anti Federalist]

Perhaps. But hindsight is demonstrably poor at informing foresight. And there are PLENTY of things to be concerned about that are actually happening right now out in the open. It is hardly necessary to engage in speculation in order to fully occupy yourself.

That is one of the most remarkably shortsighted things I have ever read here.

So, we should just chuck everything in human history, because, after all, it can't teach us any lessons about future events or human behavior?

[tttppp]

And presumably they enforce YOUR ideas about what people should eat? No thanks. I think more FREEDOM will work just fine.

Yeah, it works just fine with having a MCDonalds on every street. Every supermarket sells nothing but fake food, loaded with fake ingredients. Almost every restaurant sells garbage food. Even if you want healthy food, its very hard to find it. So yeah, the current system is working just fine.

[Acala]

Yeah, it works just fine with having a MCDonalds on every street. Every supermarket sells nothing but fake food, loaded with fake ingredients. Almost every restaurant sells garbage food. Even if you want healthy food, its very hard to find it. So yeah, the current system is working just fine.

I'm healthy as a horse, thank you. Without your intervention. Stay out.

[Anti Federalist]

Consider, for those who scoff at the idea of "conspiracy theories" about coming despotism; our nation was founded on a "conspiracy theory".

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism

"Evinces a design".

Let me ask the forum, what does that phrase actually mean?

[NewRightLibertarian]

Yeah, it works just fine with having a MCDonalds on every street. Every supermarket sells nothing but fake food, loaded with fake ingredients. Almost every restaurant sells garbage food. Even if you want healthy food, its very hard to find it. So yeah, the current system is working just fine.

Yeah but your crud idea would make for even more complications similar to the soda taxes that interventionist liberals are always trying to push that would hurt the consumers who need the extra cash the most



Yes. Get government out of it. Entirely. At every level. In every way. And the situation would be improved. Not fixed, but improved. Also, get government out of health care so the market, and personal costs and consequences, could help shape healthier lifestyles. The rest would be up to the people themselves to take responsibility for their own diet and health.

Yep, eliminating the subsidies would be a good step in reducing incentive for consuming harmful foods but ultimately this issue comes down to personal responsibility. People have to choose to live healthier lifestyles. It's really not that difficult for most people. The obesity epidemic is probably overstated anyhow

[tttppp]

I'm healthy as a horse, thank you. Without your intervention. Stay out.

If you eat the food most people eat, you are not healthy as a horse. And most people are not healthy. Something should be done about it. If you don't like my idea, so be it. But using the current system is a complete mistake.

My system would reduce regulations far more than anyone else would (except for anarchists), and would make the markets far more free than you would expect. I don't see anything wrong with that. Additionally, my system doesn't prevent you from eating garbage food, if thats what you want. It just makes it more profitable for companies to sell more good food than bad food. The goal being for most food sold to be good food.

[Acala]

That is one of the most remarkably shortsighted things I have ever read here.

So, we should just chuck everything in human history, because, after all, it can't teach us any lessons about future events or human behavior?

Read Black Swan and come talk to me. The FACT is that human beings are hard wired to try and rewrite history to make it seem like it was predictable. But it generally remains very unpredictable anyway. We just fool oursleves as to its predictability. Additionally, there are built in biasing mechanisms operating when people make statements concerning what was predicted and what came to pass because, among other things, all of the things that were predicted and DIDN'T come to pass are forgotten. Anyway, too much to cover in a post, but when I said "hindsight is demonstrably poor at informing foresight" I really meant "demonstrably". It has been studied extensively in the field of epistemology. People generally suck at predicting the future and think they are much better at it than they really are.

I wouldn't say to give up trying to learn anything from history. But don't overestimate your ability to predict the future from what has happened in the past. We are not nearly as good at it as we think we are and the course of history is not nearly as susceptible to prediction as we would like to think it is. And there is plenty to be concerned about right now without speculating wildly about the future.

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, I tend to agree with you.

But I don't see any harm in speculation, either.

Just once, before I die, I would like to see the "opposition" that we are all part of, take a proactive stand, and shoot some of this stuff down before it becomes a giant monstrosity that cannot be dealt with.

Like electronic databasing and logging of all foodstuffs and health related items that you buy.

[Acala]

If you eat the food most people eat, you are not healthy as a horse. And most people are not healthy. Something should be done about it. If you don't like my idea, so be it. But using the current system is a complete mistake.

My system would reduce regulations far more than anyone else would (except for anarchists), and would make the markets far more free than you would expect. I don't see anything wrong with that. Additionally, my system doesn't prevent you from eating garbage food, if thats what you want. It just makes it more profitable for companies to sell more good food than bad food. The goal being for most food sold to be good food.

My goal is to have people like you rendered totally impotent to say anything whatsoever about how I live my life.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

If you eat the food most people eat, you are not healthy as a horse. And most people are not healthy. Something should be done about it. If you don't like my idea, so be it. But using the current system is a complete mistake.

My system would reduce regulations far more than anyone else would (except for anarchists), and would make the markets far more free than you would expect. I don't see anything wrong with that. Additionally, my system doesn't prevent you from eating garbage food, if thats what you want. It just makes it more profitable for companies to sell more good food than bad food. The goal being for most food sold to be good food.

Who determines what good food and bad food is?

I don't know - seems like in that one decision... there is potential for massive corruption.

[tttppp]

Yeah but your crud idea would make for even more complications similar to the soda taxes that interventionist liberals are always trying to push that would hurt the consumers who need the extra cash the most




How is my idea crude? If you sell good food, you don't pay taxes. Lower taxes, lower regulations... I thought thats what we want. Isn't it?

To top it off, better food would be sold. People would eat healthier food. People would be healthier. Go to the doctor less. Take less medication. Use their insurance less. Aren't these good things?

Everyone wins. Whats wrong with that?

[Acala]

Just once, before I die, I would like to see the "opposition" that we are all part of, take a proactive stand, and shoot some of this stuff down before it becomes a giant monstrosity that cannot be dealt with.

Like electronic databasing and logging of all foodstuffs and health related items that you buy.

I buy most of my food at the farmers market and the CSA. The rest comes from Trader Joes or Sunflower and I pay cash.

But I agree with you that the above-ground market is going to become untenable and the future will be in the underground. But I think it will be mostly for tax avoidance.

[Acala]

How is my idea crude? If you sell good food, you don't pay taxes. Lower taxes, lower regulations... I thought thats what we want. Isn't it?

To top it off, better food would be sold. People would eat healthier food. People would be healthier. Go to the doctor less. Take less medication. Use their insurance less. Aren't these good things?

Everyone wins. Whats wrong with that?

I reject your values with respect to food so there is a fundamental problem at the outset.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Just once, before I die, I would like to see the "opposition" that we are all part of, take a proactive stand, and shoot some of this stuff down before it becomes a giant monstrosity that cannot be dealt with.

Like electronic databasing and logging of all foodstuffs and health related items that you buy.

I am right there with you. I'm still young, I can only imagine if I had to deal with this shit for 25 years like you, how pissed off I would be.

But with that said; I am still very pissed off and ready for revolution.

[tttppp]

Who determines what good food and bad food is?

I don't know - seems like in that one decision... there is potential for massive corruption.

If you eliminate campaign contributions, lobbyists wouldn't be able to bribe the government into doing stupid things like classifying pizza as a vegetable.

Also, if the president is held accountable, which is another thing I suggest, he wouldn't survive office if he was very corrupt.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

How is my idea crude? If you sell good food, you don't pay taxes. Lower taxes, lower regulations... I thought thats what we want. Isn't it?


It seems like you're making the same mistake most statists make.

Government will always lead to corruption, despite your good intentions, therefore we must limit it as far as possible.

Government dictating food consumption - IS NOT - limited in nature.

Let people live free, if they wish to die fat, so be it. It's their life.

[NewRightLibertarian]

How is my idea crude? If you sell good food, you don't pay taxes. Lower taxes, lower regulations... I thought thats what we want. Isn't it?

To top it off, better food would be sold. People would eat healthier food. People would be healthier. Go to the doctor less. Take less medication. Use their insurance less. Aren't these good things?

Everyone wins. Whats wrong with that?

There's always unintended consequences of schemes that are proposed like yours. Who decides what food is good? Who polices these new taxes? Are the costs passed on to the consumer? Will they even work? These are questions that you obviously haven't asked yourself.

[Anti Federalist]

But don't overestimate your ability to predict the future from what has happened in the past.

General social trends? Who will win the 2021 World Series? What will be considered "attractive" in women's clothing?

I have no clue whatsoever.

I am very, very, very, very confident in what government will do in the future.

It will merge into the private sector to an even greater degree, and it will use the exponentially increasing levels of information technology that is swirling all around us to increase its power, control and surveillance of people everywhere.

Bet the kid's college funds and the family home deed on that.

Unless we stop it.

Which will not happen if one half the "freedom fighters" like you and me, fail to even acknowledge that there is a problem.

[tttppp]

My goal is to have people like you rendered totally impotent to say anything whatsoever about how I live my life.

You may not realize it, but everybody determines how you live your life. If other people determine its ok to eat bad food, companies are going to sell nothing but bad food. So even though we are technically free, your choices are limited because of stupid decisions by other people.

Whats wrong with an expert in food to craft a system designed to make more food healthy?

[NewRightLibertarian]

General social trends? Who will win the 2021 World Series? What will be considered "attractive" in women's clothing?

I have no clue whatsoever.

I am very, very, very, very confident in what government will do in the future.

It will merge into the private sector to an even greater degree, and it will use the exponentially increasing levels of information technology that is swirling all around us to increase its power, control and surveillance of people everywhere.

Bet the kid's college funds and the family home deed on that.

Unless we stop it.

Which will not happen if one half the "freedom fighters" like you and me, fail to even acknowledge that there is a problem.

Yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that tyranny is coming. In fact, it's already here. To think that it will somehow improve is being naive. Hopefully it won't be as bad as Alex Jones says it will be, but my guess is that it will be much worse than he says unless some drastic turn of events stops the government's plans.



You may not realize it, but everybody determines how you live your life. If other people determine its ok to eat bad food, companies are going to sell nothing but bad food. So even though we are technically free, your choices are limited because of stupid decisions by other people.

Whats wrong with an expert in food to craft a system designed to make more food healthy?

'What's wrong with an expert in the global economy crafting a system to make the monetary supply more stable?'
'What's wrong with an expert in foreign policy crafting a system to ensure global stability and national security?'

The answer to those questions along with the one you posed is: Plenty.

[DamianTV]

When Governmnet controls EVERYTHING, it will leave you with NOTHING.

[Acala]

I am right there with you. I'm still young, I can only imagine if I had to deal with this shit for 25 years like you, how pissed off I would be.



Hehehe. I voted for Ed Clark for President in 1980 and never looked back. But I'm not pissed off. It's bad for your health.

[tttppp]

There's always unintended consequences of schemes that are proposed like yours. Who decides what food is good? Who polices these new taxes? Are the costs passed on to the consumer? Will they even work? These are questions that you obviously haven't asked yourself.

I have asked myself these questions. Its my system, so if I was president, I would decide what foods are good along with an expert. People working for me would rank companies from best performing to worst. The best pay no taxes, the worst pay more taxes. Its not complicated. Its a way to get companies to do what you want without regulating them. They are allowed to do almost anything they want, any way they want. But it will be more profitable for them to do the right things.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

You may not realize it, but everybody determines how you live your life. If other people determine its ok to eat bad food, companies are going to sell nothing but bad food. So even though we are technically free, your choices are limited because of stupid decisions by other people.

Whats wrong with an expert in food to craft a system designed to make more food healthy?

We already have one of those:

Michael Taylor,

this again proves your statements incorrect.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/youre-appointing-who-plea_b_243810.html

[NewRightLibertarian]

I have asked myself these questions. Its my system, so if I was president, I would decide what foods are good along with an expert. People working for me would rank companies from best performing to worst. The best pay no taxes, the worst pay more taxes. Its not complicated. Its a way to get companies to do what you want without regulating them. They are allowed to do almost anything they want, any way they want. But it will be more profitable for them to do the right things.

Your system is terrible, it would fail miserably. We should all thank our lucky stars that you won't be elected President ever.

[Acala]

General social trends? Who will win the 2021 World Series? What will be considered "attractive" in women's clothing?

I have no clue whatsoever.

I am very, very, very, very confident in what government will do in the future.

It will merge into the private sector to an even greater degree, and it will use the exponentially increasing levels of information technology that is swirling all around us to increase its power, control and surveillance of people everywhere.

Bet the kid's college funds and the family home deed on that.

Unless we stop it.

Which will not happen if one half the "freedom fighters" like you and me, fail to even acknowledge that there is a problem.

Oh, there is a problem. But the way in which matters will resolve very likely depends on events that we cannot predict. There is good news in that because you know who else can't predict it? Whoever it is you think is trying to crush us. And that is to OUR advantage.

[Acala]

Your system is terrible, it would fail miserably. We should all thank our lucky stars that you won't be elected President ever.

This.^ The level of arrogance this joker exudes is amazing. I am pretty damn sure I know what healthy eating looks like. But I am not SO sure that I would try to force it on others. Really amazing.

[Anti Federalist]

Yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that tyranny is coming. In fact, it's already here. To think that it will somehow improve is being naive. Hopefully it won't be as bad as Alex Jones says it will be, but my guess is that it will be much worse than he says unless some drastic turn of events stops the government's plans.

Everybody gives Jones grief, but, keep in mind, I've been in this for a long time now. Jones is merely repeating what others have already said many times.

Most of the people on this board are in their early 20s or so, I'm guessing.

When I was in my early 20s, there was no internet, and a 64k Commodore was considered a hot shit home computer.

And you know who filled me in and broke down what was to come?

JBS members. My best friend growing up, his dad was a JBS member, I knew a few others that were shipmates of mine.

They told me 25 to 30 years ago what was going to happen, the loss of the dollar's value, the loss of manufacturing to the far east and resulting middle class job losses, the technology intensive police state, the total surveillance grid. (ECHELON was already in place, listening in and monitoring people, and, of course, at the time, you got mocked if you mentioned it) militarized local police, the list is just about endless.

And they were right about damn near all of it.

And now all of these men are dead, and here I am, a middle aged Cassandra, trying to impress upon people the same warnings they impressed upon me, and where the next phase of all this is going.

[Acala]

You may not realize it, but everybody determines how you live your life. If other people determine its ok to eat bad food, companies are going to sell nothing but bad food. So even though we are technically free, your choices are limited because of stupid decisions by other people.

Whats wrong with an expert in food to craft a system designed to make more food healthy?

Let's try this one more time. I REJECT YOUR NOTION OF WHAT IS HEALTHY. So your plan is a failure from the start. Not that I would support it if it adopted MY values. It just isn't a proper function of government.

[NewRightLibertarian]

And they were right about damn near all of it.

They sure were, and they're still ridiculed as being paranoid and insane to this very day even after virtually all of their predictions have come to pass. It really just shows how mentally feeble and easily manipulated the masses are. Absolutely disgusting.

[tttppp]

It seems like you're making the same mistake most statists make.

Government will always lead to corruption, despite your good intentions, therefore we must limit it as far as possible.

Government dictating food consumption - IS NOT - limited in nature.

Let people live free, if they wish to die fat, so be it. It's their life.

My system limits the amount of money spent on regulations and other government bullshit. It just happens to get better results.

If you put the correct system in place, corruption will be limited. If you eliminated campaign contributions/bribes, eliminated bullshit government spending, and had a system that actually held the president accountable...we wouldn't be worried about corruption.

Your feelings are shortsighted. Your the one paying for peoples medications because of their bad eating habits whether you like it or not.

[tttppp]

Let's try this one more time. I REJECT YOUR NOTION OF WHAT IS HEALTHY. So your plan is a failure from the start. Not that I would support it if it adopted MY values. It just isn't a proper function of government.

And regulation is?

[LibForestPaul]

Quote Originally Posted by Acala View Post
You could give Alex Jones a run for his money. Government concerned about obesity>SWAT teams murdering you for trying to use cash.


Were those SWAT raids on Amish farmers last year my imagination?
I know it takes a little out of the box thinking, but follow along with me:


Thinking outside the box. How about thinking outside of one's ahole? CAPPS II. People denying now will deny until the dreadful end.

[LibForestPaul]

sponsored by Kaiser Permanente, nice vid...no bias, no agenda at all

[tttppp]

Your system is terrible, it would fail miserably. We should all thank our lucky stars that you won't be elected President ever.

How does it fail then? Is reducing regulations more than anyone else would a failure? Is getting a higher percentage of food healthy a failure? Is getting people healthier a failure? Is it a failure that unhealthy people would place less of a burden on our medical system? Is it a failure that people would still be able to choose whatever food they want?

[tttppp]

Your system is terrible, it would fail miserably. We should all thank our lucky stars that you won't be elected President ever.

BY the way, whats your plan? Its easy to bash someone else, but do you have plan in place?

[Acala]

And regulation is?

And regulation is:

Unconstitutional at the Federal level and bad policy at every level. Government has no business telling me what I can and cannot put in my body. Period. Nor does it have any business telling business what it can and cannot produce and sell, so long as they are honest about what the product contains.

[Acala]

BY the way, whats your plan? Its easy to bash someone else, but do you have plan in place?

You aren't listening to posters on this site or to Ron Paul. The plan is to get government out of the business of telling people how to live their lives.

[LibForestPaul]

Your the one paying for peoples medications because of their bad eating habits whether you like it or not.
Congrats, now you understand what needs to change, what needs to be the centre of reform, and whatever else may brought up is just so much fluff.

[dannno]

My system limits the amount of money spent on regulations and other government bullshit. It just happens to get better results.

If you put the correct system in place, corruption will be limited. If you eliminated campaign contributions/bribes, eliminated bullshit government spending, and had a system that actually held the president accountable...we wouldn't be worried about corruption.

Your feelings are shortsighted. Your the one paying for peoples medications because of their bad eating habits whether you like it or not.

I think both you and Acala can agree that pizza is unhealthy.

I think both you and Acala can agree that organic veggies and fruit are healthy.

Everything else is going to be a slight, moderate or heavy disagreement.

But let's work with that. Let's say you guys setup a system where organic fruits and veggies have no taxes, and everything else has some low tax, and then everything you guys both agree that is unhealthy like highly processed foods get a much higher tax.

Then in the next election, the companies that sell the shitty food help get a President who elects some people to head your new FDA and they suddenly change a few words here and there and now their companies get the low tax breaks and healthy food gets the shaft again.

Now imagine a free market where people get to choose and nothing is taxed. We also have a free market system for health care. The people who eat the healthiest food are the healthiest, produce the most and spend the least amount on health care. Over time, healthy food becomes less expensive and the people going out and paying more for shitty food that they think tastes better end up paying more in hospital bills and then there is eventually less and less demand for shitty food.

My point is, in the long-run, embracing the free market is better than putting in place a system that you believe is best, because that system can easily be changed by changing just a few words because it is the same philosophy.. whereas the freedom philosophy takes a lot more to change.

[tttppp]

I think both you and Acala can agree that pizza is unhealthy.

I think both you and Acala can agree that organic veggies and fruit are healthy.

Everything else is going to be a slight, moderate or heavy disagreement.

But let's work with that. Let's say you guys setup a system where organic fruits and veggies have no taxes, and everything else has some low tax, and then everything you guys both agree that is unhealthy like highly processed foods get a much higher tax.

Then in the next election, the companies that sell the shitty food help get a President who elects some people to head your new FDA and they suddenly change a few words here and there and now their companies get the low tax breaks and healthy food gets the shaft again.

Now imagine a free market where people get to choose and nothing is taxed. We also have a free market system for health care. The people who eat the healthiest food are the healthiest, produce the most and spend the least amount on health care. Over time, healthy food becomes less expensive and the people going out and paying more for shitty food that they think tastes better end up paying more in hospital bills and then there is eventually less and less demand for shitty food.

My point is, in the long-run, embracing the free market is better than putting in place a system that you believe is best, because that system can easily be changed by changing just a few words because it is the same philosophy.. whereas the freedom philosophy takes a lot more to change.

My system is not set in stone. If someone gives me a compelling argument for a food to be classified as healthy or unhealthy, it can be changed.

I'm sure we can agree that fruits and vegetables are healthy. I'm sure we can agree that artificial foods and chemicals are not good for you. I'm sure we can agree that supermarkets and restaurants should be giving proper disclosure as to what is in their food...that way they can't add a bunch of junk in it without you knowing. I would think that most rational people would agree that eating foods with lots of fat are not good for you either. So the bulk of this can be largely agreed on.

Its not like we are in a major disagreement as to what foods are good or bad. Its not like I would be telling you what foods you can or can't eat. What my system does is reverse things so that the majority of food thats available is healthy.

In my system, there are no campaign contributions, so its not easy to elect a corrupt president. There are also controls in place in case we do elect a crappy president.

You have to realize when companies sell you products that end up hurting you in the long run, those companies should have to pay for the consequences. If companies had to pay for people's healthy when they sell them bad food, don't you think they'd switch to healthy food? If companies had to pay to clean up their pollution, don't you think they'd change their policy and not pollute?

[tttppp]

You aren't listening to posters on this site or to Ron Paul. The plan is to get government out of the business of telling people how to live their lives.

In what way am I telling you what you can and cannot eat? Unhealthy food has unintended consequences. Morally you should pay for them damages of selling bad food.

How is reducing regulations to close to zero not getting government out of your life?

[tttppp]

And regulation is:

Unconstitutional at the Federal level and bad policy at every level. Government has no business telling me what I can and cannot put in my body. Period. Nor does it have any business telling business what it can and cannot produce and sell, so long as they are honest about what the product contains.

My system has nothing to do with regulation. You tell me you don't want regulation, then you bash me for attempting to eliminate regulations. My system does not tell you what you can or can't eat. All it does is make companies pay for the damages their products cause. Period. Thats completely fair.

[pcgame]

...

[The Gold Standard]

In my system, there are no campaign contributions, so its not easy to elect a corrupt president. There are also controls in place in case we do elect a crappy president.

Do you think campaign contributions are the way politicians are bought? They don't care about that. They can't keep that money. Politicians are bought with $3 million speeches and positions in a company and cash in a briefcase. Unless your new centrally planned food industry is accompanied by fixing the price of lectures and regulations on who a company can hire, then you will fail to make a dent in cronyism.

The fact of the matter is that there is always cronyism and corruption when the government has the authority to grant someone a favor.

[Anti Federalist]

Check out the book: Surviving Global Slavery: Living Under the new world order by robert k spear. The best Nwo book I have ever read.

Thanks, I'll check it out.


Also one of you're longer posts in this thread mentioned the government is taking over health care. will the corporations let them? If the government tries to control what you eat, mcdonalds, pizzahut and bk won't be able to make more money?

Eh, one would have thought so, but all you have to do is look at the tobacco companies and what happened to them.

They fought tooth and nail for a little while, but now have pretty much given up.

Transnationals don't give a shit what happens here anymore, we're a small market in the great scheme of things.

They'd shut up shop and haul ass to China or India or Africa.

[tttppp]

Do you think campaign contributions are the way politicians are bought? They don't care about that. They can't keep that money. Politicians are bought with $3 million speeches and positions in a company and cash in a briefcase. Unless your new centrally planned food industry is accompanied by fixing the price of lectures and regulations on who a company can hire, then you will fail to make a dent in cronyism.

The fact of the matter is that there is always cronyism and corruption when the government has the authority to grant someone a favor.

In my system, the president is held accountable for everything. Instead of a legislative branch, there is a branch who's sole responsibility is to hold the president accountable for everything, including his promises. So nice try.

How is my system any more corrupt than the current system? How is my system more corrupt than your system? For that matter, what is your system?

[The Gold Standard]

In my system, the president is held accountable for everything. Instead of a legislative branch, there is a branch who's sole responsibility is to hold the president accountable for everything, including his promises. So nice try.

How is my system any more corrupt than the current system? How is my system more corrupt than your system? For that matter, what is your system?

So your president is the dictator as long as the legislative branch approves of what he is doing? Who is holding the legislative branch accountable? Who is going to regulate the amount of money they can get paid for speeches or what kind of jobs they can get?

And I didn't say your system was more corrupt than the cesspool we have now. That doesn't mean anything though. And I don't have a "system". I have no desire to tell other people how they should live, nor do I have a right to seize their property to run a system if I wanted one.

[tttppp]

So your president is the dictator as long as the legislative branch approves of what he is doing? Who is holding the legislative branch accountable? Who is going to regulate the amount of money they can get paid for speeches or what kind of jobs they can get?

And I didn't say your system was more corrupt than the cesspool we have now. That doesn't mean anything though. And I don't have a "system". I have no desire to tell other people how they should live, nor do I have a right to seize their property to run a system if I wanted one.

I don't have every detail complete yet, but at least I'm not running for president yet...unlike these moron candidates we have now who are running and still don't have any system. Everything you have brought up is a detail which can be fixed. It in no way compromises my system.

I would call my president the CEO instead of dictator. People always assume that dictator means an authoritarian who wants to control every aspect of our lives. A CEO is someone who is held accountable for everything, but is capable of creating a system where people make decisions for themselves.

[Anti Federalist]

bump for another thread.

[Pauling]

I'm new here, but tttppp seems like a masterful troll.