What are your thoughts on this, /fit/?

>>38567621
"""free""" healthcare is shit and should be abolished

Bmi is a shit measure for manlets with muscle

>>38567651
>people should be allowed to die because muh taxes

>>38567712
T. Jelly skeleton

>>38567774
in theory yeah, fuck the gypsies and other plebs

But they die anyway because of the long as fuck waiting lines and shit conditions, it's simply not functional

Good, I smoke, but this is incentive to quit [spoiler]at some point[/spoiler].

>nearly ALL

I thought was just for elective procedures?

>>38567774
>we should keep sickly and poor people alive as long as possible.

You're literally fighting thousands of years of evolution and also don't understand how fucking retarded that is.

>>38567621
Makes me a little hard.

>>38567774
Dole-scum detected

>>38567621
MD in a few months here. Operating on fat people is a fucking nightmare. You have multiple inches of fat to cut through, it's hard to keep it retracted out of the way, they start to have problems if you lower them into the Trendelenburg position, they're harder intubate, etc. For many procedures that can be done on an elective basis, surgeons make fatties lose weight before they let them into the OR.

Unhealthy people are cheaper for the NHS than ""healthy"" people who live to be 100, and pay the same (actually more) taxes.

>>38567975
>You're literally fighting thousands of years of evolution
That's what medicine is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

>>38568036
>access to medicine is a fundamental human right

kys

good. They're subhumans anyways.

The obese should be burned alive for energy, this is still much nicer treatment than they deserve

>>38567975
You're the one who doesn't understand how fucking retarded your argument is.
Why are you on a computer on the internet? Shouldn't you be out there chasing a rabbit to exhaustion? That's what you evolved to do you faggot

Beautiful. Just when I'm about to lose all hope in humanity, we get some good news. Brings a tear to my eye.

>>38567774
>we should spend money on people who don't contribute to the system/use more resources than the average person

>>38567621
good, more fat people need to die

>>38568272
>use more resources than the average person

hurrr you realize there will always some someone above the average right

>>38567774
><People can't afford healthcare!
>Let's fine them for not having healthcare!

>>38568272
This >>38568305, plus it's not even true that smokers and fatties cost more money to the system in the long term. As said above, healthy people cost A LOT to society after retirement, at least in 1st world countries unlike the US or Somalia.

>>38567621
Best option given budgetary constraints, but really goes on to show why non-privatized healthcare is (unfortunately) bound to fail. A better policy would be somewhere in between the overpriced but effective healthcare system in the States and the European system of nationalized healthcare.

That being said, this is unfortunate for people who knew the risks of their lifestyles but didn't quit their vices. This is one of the reasons why I always lie and tell my doctors that I'm a nonsmoking teetotaler. There will come a point when that information won't be confidential, even in the States. When that day comes, I will be seen as healthy, despite my vices, and my healthcare will be prioritized.

Always lie to people who work in bureaucracies of any sort about your vices and potentially criminal activities. Cops, Government workers, HR departments, doctors, the list goes on and on. They will stereotype you based on superficial characteristics/ behaviors, and you might pay with your life if you're too honest.

>>38567774
This. We're better than letting people go without medical care. We should take care of one another. I'll spend another grand in taxes if it means my neighbor doesn't go without preventative care for financial reasons.

Also, it makes economic sense. Eventually people without healthcare end up in county hospitals with serious illnesses they've let go on too long. Then major surgery or treatment is required and we as tax payers pick up an even larger bill.

>>38568526
>effective healthcare system in the United States
>always lie to your doctors

You're a different level of dumb.

>>38567621
Great, make healthcare even more inaccessible to people. As if it weren't already expensive, private and shit enough.

>>38567948
It is. Media m8

>>38567621
>What are your thoughts on this, /fit/?
Call it evolution in action.

>>38568526
>people who knew the risks of their lifestyles but didn't quit their vices
If anything, you deserve to be discriminated all the more

>>38568574
>NHS
>private
wat

>>38568574
Smoker/fat bastard detected

>>38568778
I'm neither.

>>38568758
I know what the NHS and public healthcare is, but monetised healthcare is already inaccessible to a lot of people that you might as well make it private.

>>38567621

Survival of the fittest, finally!

>>38568831
>only the fittest people get to have healthcare

Yeah, let's give healthcare only to the healthiest people out there :^)!

>>38567621
The NHS only makes sense if people are responsible enough to take steps to maintain a reasonable level of health.

Fatties, smokers and those abusing alcohol and drugs fuck it up for the rest of us.

>>38568477
Do you have a single source to back that up?

>>38568851
Why is that :^) worthy? Do you really think fit people don't get sick?

>>38568851
>force people to take care of their bodies so the shared pot of money meant for healthcare is distributed only to those who truly need it without choice

sounds pretty sound to me. no more need for constant E.R. trips for cardiac arrest because people couldn't say no to a donut.

>>38568851
No sympathy for people who brought that upon themselves. That leaves more money for people who were genuinely unlucky.

>>38568991
>>38569001
If you're not going to make healthcare available to the sickest people out there (obese people, diabetic people, depressed people, smokers etc.) then what's the fucking point of it in the first place. Why not just run it as an expensive, private system? This isn't only bad news for fat people and smokers, this is bad news for everybody. The more they keep making it exclusive, the more it's gonna be harder to get healthcare.

>>38567774
Why tf am I paying for someone that I don't even know? If it's my money, I should spend it how I please.

>>38569081
Because someone else is also paying for you.

>>38569029
Obese people and smokers put themselves in a shitty position because of their own self indulgence. These conditions do NOT fucking appear out of thin air, they're a byproduct of destructive lifestyle choices.

I'm from north Yorkshire and i think its a great idea. That's coming from someone who smokes (cut down like fuck, I'll have to quit) and has a fat mother, she needs to sort it out. Si thee.

>>38569157
Most illnesses aren't going to appear out of thin air either.

>>38569114
I am paying for the people in poverty. The people in poverty aren't paying anything.
Again, everyone should have the option to do what they want with their money.

>>38568526
>overpriced but effective healthcare system in the States

You mean the country that spends the most on healthcare for the worst outcomes among industrialized nations?

>>38567621
It's not true. Obese people and smokers will be refused elective surgery (until they lose weight/quit smoking). So they won't get liposuction on national health, but they'll still get care for injury or illness.

>>38567621
If they're gonna do that then they have to make the free medical system and opt-in system. You can't take someones money through taxes to spend on programs that they are ineligible for. That is straight up theft.

In theory yes, people who don't fix the underlying cause of their illness shouldn't have the government pay tax money repeatedly to put a plaster over a problem that will continue. You wouldn't give an alcoholic a liver transplant without curing his alcoholism first. That being said, BMI is a shit measure of a person's healthiness, especially beefed up manlets. Also, it's worrying to set a precedent that an injury that is 'self-inflicted' is somehow not worth treating, I'd hate to see people being discouraged from sports because they wouldn't be eligible for treatment if they fucked a ligament up

>>38570619
See
>>38570498
It's because a lot of surgeries that fat people have for serious obesity require them to lose substantial amounts of weight first, or there will be major complications.

File: 1469864131585.png (391KB, 600x399px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 600x399px

>>38567975
>spot the freshmen

>>38567998
this

>>38567621
Source?

>>38567712
This is nothing but a paranoid lanklet conspiracy theory

t. manlet defense league spokesman

>>38567998
Fat fucks typically don't even work, they are on benefits.

>>38567991
Even if the NHS started charging for services people on the dole would still get it for free, like they can get free education.

>>38567621
Simple. Make them pay more.

File: 1464648883805.jpg (50KB, 625x420px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 625x420px

>>38571369
>make them pay more
What a typical jewish answer.

>>38570647
>You wouldn't give an alcoholic a liver transplant without curing his alcoholism first.

actually...they do..a lot.

>>38569157
what is mass manipulation?
consumption is caused by psychological warfare to make people WANT products.

yeah sure willpower..but nobody has lessons on healthy eating at school etc.

>>38569114

HOW ABOUT WE ALL JUST PAY FOR OURSELVES CRAZY IDEA LMAO

>>38567621
My mummy smokes and I think she has brain tumour.

I hope this is bait..

>>38568477
>healthy people cost a lot to society after they develop health problems
No shit

Can't fat people and smokers just pay higher taxes? I mean, they should be offered a reliable and free weight loss or stop smoking program and if they dont make any change they should be given a fat/smoker tax (smokers pretty much already do with the cost of cigarettes)

>>38568851
That's not what they're saying you retard, smokers and fat cunts bring their own health ricks upon themselves despite countless warnings and scientific evidence to back it up.

>>38571739
Here in Australia a packet of cigarettes is 27.50 for a shitty brand (JPS) and we do actually cover what we cost to the health system, in fact we contribute more than what we cost through cigarette taxes.

>>38571698
My medications for genetic conditions utterly beyond my control to affect a difference cost USD 48,000 a year. Without the ability to get insurance, I die. It's that simple.

Who has a half-million banked to cover their health care after getting broadsided by a drunk driver?

>>38567621
>no operations on fat fucks and smokers
>no help for those who self-destruct
Very very cruel, but on a strict logic basis, I can't disagree.

>>38567621
I think a fat tax would be a better idea, those over 30BMI who aren't enrolled in some sort of fat loss program get fined; or something on those lines.

That and increase the tax on cigs.

>>38567621
Welfare problems.
If a person can afford to pay for their medical care they should be allowed any coverage there is.
If a person doesn't have a full time job or make a basic number that could afford some form of healthcare, yes they should be barred from any health benefits if they lead lifestyles that increase risk.
Also full drug screening.

File: 1443820671368.jpg (8KB, 213x255px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 213x255px

>>38567712

>5'9
>very thin (wide shoulders, dense bones)
>175 lbs
>tfw BMI says overweight

>>38567651
>>38567975
>>38568126
>>38568272
>>38568153
>>38568704
>>38568831
>>38569081
>>38570006

Feels extremely Ayn Rand in here. What happened to her? Oh wait...

>>38567774
>you should pay for jamal's wife to have a gastric bypass and diabetes medication

>>38572543
OP image says cutoff is 30BMI

you're okay... for now

also lol how are you "very thin" at 175. I'm 6'2 and 170 and I'm skinnyfat

>>38567621
>paying taxes so that obese people and smokers can keep killing theirself with my money

>>38567774
>implying charities wouldn't help provide a safety net for those people.

>>38567621
Could you britbongs use the money you save on smokers and fats to insure Americans?

>>38573449

ya this isn't true or it would already be the case for currently uninsured people

this argument is just so fucking lazy. absolutely no basis in reality where you can literally see charities not pick up the slack in any social welfare context.

what's funny is the alt-right virgins on here all literally live off their parents in some form. youd think they'd love welfare

>>38573497
>what is st jude childrens hospital
>what is childrens miracle network
There are healthcare systems that do operate on charitable basis. Granted it's kind of a chicken or the egg situation, and it's obviously not big enough at this point to support all or even most of the healthcare cost issues that exist. But to say that there is no charitable safety net for healthcare coverage is nonsense

>>38573588
> and it's obviously not big enough at this point to support all or even most of the healthcare cost issues

which is my entire point

>>38573605
No, your point was that the concept of charity use covering healthcare costs has no basis in reality. Just because you're not happy about the extent of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or isn't realistic.

>>38573617

>let me go ahead and tell you what your point was

fix your autism please

>>38573645
>ignore what i literally typed as i move this goal post

>>38568526
>not Australia's based private/public system

>>38573605
regardless, I don't think forcing some inefficient government run program is a good solution either.

would be nice if they extended this to anyone who drinks alcohol as well;for consistency sake.

It's pretty cruel that the people who would need health services the most would effectively be neglected, but thinking of things from the perspective of a doctor I understand that these conditions carry a lot more complications and risks in major surgeries/procedures. I think it's more of a protective measures for doctors regarding malpractice than anything since ppl in america are so sue happy these days.

>>38573652

pretty sure my point is sound and you're just retarded

feel free to reread though

>>38567621
I bet the surgeons working there are greatful that they don't have to have as many patients die on the table because of obesity-related health issues.

>>38573779
>absolutely no basis in reality where you can literally see charities not pick up the slack in any social welfare context
Your argument is because charities don't do enough, they can't do enough. That's not sound, that's myopic

>>38567874
>>38571190
Are you guys actually idiots or just pretending to be retarded?

It is a known fact that bmi sucks for people, especially shorter people, that have muscles.

>>38573918

if charities cant handle the current burden they aren't going to be able to handle an increased burden caused by govt giving less people free healthcare

>>38567651
This

Free health care means you pay 5% of your gross earning your entire life and when you need healthcare they tell you it will be a 6 month wait.

Oh you have a cancerous organ that could spread at any moment? Ok, only a one month wait for you.

>>38574626
Charities already handle a large burden in the first place. Those two programs I mentioned raise hundreds of millions of dollars a year to reduce the cost burden of patients' families, and there are numerous charities on all levels for all causes that contribute to reduction of burden. People already donate to charity willingly, so reducing their tax burden creates more opportunity for them to donate higher amounts.

And arguably the government involvement drives up healthcare costs due to the bloated inefficiency of their systems. A charity bureaucracy is miles different than a government one.

>lift, run, train martial arts, almost never need healthcare
>get good money with degree
>get cucked out my wage by government to pay for healthcare of fat unemployed Chad's

>>38571698

t. healthy young person who likely has never been in hospital.

hit me up in 15 years when you have a kid or some shit who has an illness and you need to spend hundreds of thousands a year to support it.

then we can talk about how

> every1 juz pay for dem selvz okk uhh my dad pays taxes and dats not fair.

in b4

> if its sick let it die

again, hit me up in 15 years when you have a kid about the idea of letting your kid die because its sick.

>>38574560

realistically, you aren't ever going to derange your bmi more than slightly into 'overweight' if you're under 20% bodyfat and natural.

if you think you can reach obese rating and that

> it's just muscle bruh

you're deluded.

>>38574560
if your bmi is over 30 it's not because you're solid muscle, Gimli

>>38575060
Paying for your own healthcare != paying out of pocket for procedures/medications at market value. Half of what insurance companies do is negotiate with pharmaceutical companies and medical groups to reduce what they pay all at once which reduces what the consumer pays.

t. someone who was diagnosed with a chronic illness at 6 months of age, has had both public and private insurance, and is in the hospital at least twice a year

Part of the reason I'm attending college is so I can get a job that provides or allows me to afford private insurance since public insurance in Murrica is fucking dog shit.

>183cm
>95kg

I'm okay with this.tga

>>38575060
I would let that kid die

In fact, I'd burn him myself

>>38570619
and here we have all the explanation you need to hate welfare.

If are elligible for it, you can't pay into it. If you are intelligible, you are capable.

Guess how many people I, an anti-social white boy, have met, in a single apartment complex of about 32 individual homes, in a white neighborhood, who got a crazy check but were obviously capable of working. Guess how many laughed about lying to the shrink to get the monthly check.

>>38567975
>No medicine allowed
>No glasses allowed
>No food unless you manage to catch it yourself
>No laws and government to enforce them to protect your from other people who want to bash your head in and steal your girl
If we stopped "fighting evolution" the entire population of this board would probably have been dead before 10 including you, you spastic

>>38571534
>make people who are a bigger burden, pay more
>jewish idea
hoho

>>38574990

>Charities already handle a large burden in the first place. Those two programs I mentioned raise hundreds of millions of dollars a year to reduce the cost burden of patients' families, and there are numerous charities on all levels for all causes that contribute to reduction of burden.

they handle a microscopic amount

>People already donate to charity willingly, so reducing their tax burden creates more opportunity for them to donate higher amounts.

LOL. use some basic logic please. how inefficient would a govt program have to be for the .00001% of the money that makes it back to charities as the result of a tax break to actually break even with whatever got cut? what a fucking absurd argument

>>38574770
You have obviously never experienced the goodness that is universal healthcare

They should be charged a fee if they want weight-related surgery and have not changed their lifestyle/diet...or smoking related surgery and have not quit etc. etc.

Makes sense, the only significant bad thing about universal healthcare is the lack of incentives for being healthy.

In a private system if you treat your body like shit you face higher insurance or medical bills; in the UK the tax-payer faces those consequences for you.

File: US_spends_much_more_on_health_than_what_might_be_expected_1_slideshow.jpg (102KB, 718x529px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 718x529px

>>38573449
Just like they do in the US, right? :^)

>>38575170

intrinsically your statement

> pay for yourself

implies a removal of socialized/public healthcare, and only allowing self-paid private healthcare.

this leaves anybody without private healthcare in the lurch.

this is how people file bankruptcy due to the price of healthcare.

this is how people get locked out of purchasing the medication they need to not die.

ALTERNATIVELY, you do what countries that have significantly better health outcomes than the USA do and you socialize your healthcare completely or provide public/private.

that way we all pay a bit to ensure nobody gets left out, and this makes sense because its literally the foundation of what a society is & how a society is suppose to work.

>>38575334
>Universal healthcare is socialism hurrr
>US govt. spends more per capita on healthcare than several countries that have universal care

you can't make this shit up

>>38575314
And then you have Japan, who have clearly stated "if you are fat, fuck you and fuck your employer."

File: 13901513_1222663317767548_7978653784703656560_n.jpg (20KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 320x320px

>https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/aug/11/inheritance-tax-why-the-new-duke-of-westminster-will-not-pay-billions
>we need to cut our expenses on health care :^)

>>38575367
Good.

>>38575370
>inheritance tax
kek what's next? Pass the controller bro tax?

>>38571680
You do not understand how advertising works. It can't change an attitude you already have. It can only change your behaviour.

It's much easier for me to convince you to eat a big mac than it is for me to convince you that doing so is a good idea, or healthy. It's much easier for me to convince you to skip an assignment to go pick up sloots at the club than it is to convince you that's a strong long term decision.

Advertising doesn't make people want stuff they don't want. That's nearly impossible. Advertising just introduces people to things they're already inclined to want, makes it clear it's available, and /persuades/.

Reminder that the USA doesn't have truly private market healthcare, as the government doesn't enforce numerous anti-monopoly laws (aka anti-trust laws) against the medical industry allowing them to form ridiculously broken monopolies that then make healthcare less affordable than it should be.

Before this was the case, private healthcare was very affordable for almost everyone in America. The problem is literally bought and paid for politicians altering laws just for corrupt insurance and hospital Jews.

Fat people treated for diabetes/cardio issues? no
Smokers treated for lunch/throat cancer etc? no
Alcoholics treated for liver cancer? no

Smoker got hit by a car and broken leg? Sure, treat it
Fat person got mugged and has a knife wound? treat it
Alcoholic gets a hereditary disease unrelated to alcohol? treat it

Pretty obvious that if you bring something on yourself by doing things that are a net negative to your health you shouldn't be helped.

>>38575341
>this leaves anybody without private healthcare in the lurch
>this is how people file bankruptcy due to the price of healthcare
Part of the rise of healthcare cost over the past several decades is tied to government involvement. Government mandates on insurance and involvement in multiple aspects of healthcare (e.g. drug company laws put forth by the FDA) have contributed to inflating costs of healthcare, and reduction of government presence allows for more natural leveling off of costs.

If the current US medical field operated as it did now without government involvement, the system would collapse in on itself from an economic standpoint, so natural market tendencies would bring down costs to the consumer.

>ALTERNATIVELY, you do what countries that have significantly better health outcomes than the USA do and you socialize your healthcare completely or provide public/private.
The US health system and health consciousness has several differences in how it operates, though, to the point where comparison to much smaller countries.

Between differences in number of doctors per population density (too lazy to look it up, but I remember reading a figure about the US having only 2.4 doctors per 1,000 people or something compared to Sweden which had closer to 4 doctors), different degrees of health crises (the cost of socialized and standardized care for a population that has well over 115 million people classified as obese would itself be insanely high), and an overall different mindset in regards to health, the US is on a level that causes comparison to get extremely murky.

>that way we all pay a bit to ensure nobody gets left out, and this makes sense because its literally the foundation of what a society is & how a society is suppose to work.
Pretty debatable statement that comes loaded with implications

>>38575421

lmao at young hitler here

what about those people with big noses tho?

>>38575507
*to the point where comparison to much smaller countries gets pretty skewed
Sorry it's 5 AM here, and I need to sleep

>>38575511
Godwin's law is in full effect I see.

>>38575511

That's genetics so if it causes any issues then they get healthcare for it, like a deviated septum or some shit,

>>38575370
>inheritance tax
You first tax a guy's earnings, then tax him when he spends them, pile on a bunch of othet taxes and obligatory payments, and when the guy is dying and jusy wants to forward whatever he has to his son, you tax it again? Fucking britcucks

>>38572543
I'm 5'11 at 158 and even I'm not "very thin".

You are probably American or something and don't have a proper reference on what is "thin".

And yes, I actually converted the metric units for amerilard units myself just to make this point.

>>38572543
Post body. You're either close to your natty limit or don't have visible abs and are certainly not "very thin".

>>38575507

> Part of the rise of healthcare cost over the past several decades is tied to government involvement.

this doesn't really make sense given USA health care system is one of the most unregulated in the world.

furthermore, the usa has been spending more money on healthcare for worse outcomes for the last almost 40 years?

I'm also confused by this

> increased government involvement

but also simultaneously in the next sentence.

> decreased government involvement.

seems your argument is confused.

> The US health system and health consciousness has several differences in how it operates, though, to the point where comparison to much smaller countries.

maybe, but is it a coincidence every country in the world that has socialized medicine is superior to the USAs despite them spending the most on healthcare in the world?

matter for interpretation i guess. you can defuse it into

> well doctors per capita ..

but USA healthcare is generally regarded as abysmal worldwide for its citzens.

> Pretty debatable statement that comes loaded with implications

not really unless you're extremely libertarian.

the role of society has always been (i.e. since the inception of our species) collaboration and sharing of resources.

part of living in a society is contributing to that society, and a concession of that contribution is access to resources.

this hasn't really changed for thousands of years.

>>38575861

re: Pretty debatable statement that comes loaded with implications

i would also add i find it extremely humorous somebody would argue against collaboration in society while likely

1. using the internet of said society
2. relying on the road infrastructure
3. relying on the electrical infrastructure
4. relying on the water intrastructure
5. relying on the industry

of a society

sorta like freemen of the land who argue to be exempt from all laws while also demanding the freedoms provided by said laws.

>>38575861
>but also simultaneously in the next sentence.
>> decreased government involvement.
I never said that. I said
>and reduction of government presence allows for more natural leveling off of costs.
in order to point out the outcome of going in the opposite direction of how the current setup is.

>but USA healthcare is generally regarded as abysmal worldwide for its citzens.
It's ranked lowest in comparison to other developed nations, yes, but you have to look at why it's bad and where the good parts lie. It's bad because the bureaucracy is woefully inefficient (government problem), care is often uncoordinated (admittedly anecdotal, but when I had to go to public insurance, my doctor networks were often completely disconnected from each other), and obviously it's expensive as hell (again, due to government involvement).

The positives of it were that it was ranked fairly well in preventative care and in speed of receipt of specialty care, both of which are tied to relative ease and speed in which private networks operate.

>the role of society has always been (i.e. since the inception of our species) collaboration and sharing of resources.
When I say debatable, I mean you have to consider the ends in this statement. Are the ends of social collaboration merely survival or is there some other collective goal in mind? It can't be simply survival because the complexities of resource management as they exist now go well beyond that. And what are the cut-offs for society in this case? You said "so nobody gets left out," but is being left out a denial of only rights or of privileges as well?

It wasn't some libertarian view, it was a question of why societies function, not how they function.

>>38573321
This guy knows. That bitch got what she deserved.

>>38575572
>letting fortunes grow exponentially
Have fun living in a country where >90% of wealth belongs to the 10% and 70% to the 1%.
Prepare the lube, so the super rich can ram you like a good sissy you are.

>>38567774
the thing that you don't seem to understand is that obese people and smokers are exceptionally high risk. these people have compromised cardiovascular, respiratory and immune systems. they are walking health risks. in the case of obese people, if you've seen one on an operating table or even just lying down normally, you'd see that their fat compresses their airways and causes undue pressure on their internal organs. as much as i believe everyone is entitled to care, i and a lot of other health care professionals like me are personally getting sick of dealing with people who literally make our jobs harder through their own idiotic lifestyle choices and put such an unnecessary burden on already struggling health care systems

File: image.jpg (468KB, 1666x2149px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 1666x2149px

>>38567712
This

>tfw 25.8 bmi
>tfw had to pay more for health insurance than my skinnyfat manlet weeb coworker who sits in a chair and eats michelinas and plays dota 10+ hours a day after sitting in a chair at work for 8 hours
>tfw this is 'overweight'

File: image.gif (2MB, 273x302px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 273x302px

>>38577006
You have Jerma mouth.

>>38575226
yep before 1940, when modern medicine was invented, everyone died pretty much days out of the womb. rare people like aristotle made it to about 15 or 20

>>38573321

Dude yeah.

Guy on my facebook is a super big libertarian Ayn Rand retard. Goes on about fuck poor people and abolish health care, "earn it yourself" etc.

He was just diagnosed with cancer. His treatment costs hundreds of thousands and he can't afford it.

Suddenly everything is "oh but I'm special I deserve help because I'm really special".

Everyone thinks that nothing will happen to them until a disaster actually hits, and then surprisingly they never seem to stick to their beliefs.

I'm earn a high salary and I'm no socialist but I feel like health and education are so important for a strong society.

I think it's a dystopian joke and it's all the fucking immigrants fault wether that's a cliche or not.

The nanny state could have been a utopia if they'd just controlled the fucking borders. Now it's breaking point.

Had a testicular cancer scare 4 months ago and I got a letter with my appointment for a followup ultrasound appointment last fucking week.


These fat fucks and smokers almost certainly paid into the NHS their whole working lives. They shouldn't have to jump through hoops to avail of it.

>>38571767
You're guaranteed to get some form of cancer if you're a person that smokes.

The measly $10 of tax (including gst) the government makes from the sale in no way is ever going to cover the cost of your hundreds of thousand dollar hospital visits.

>>38577116
Ayn rand types are really smart retards. I'm a libertarian but health care needs to be subsidized.


Also, your facebook guy's treatment woudl still be covered by NHS. htis policy affects only elective procedures, which is still troubling since things like mastectomies or hernia repairs, whiel considered electives, are pretty fucking important.

I'[m surprised the NHS policy didn't include any drug or alcohol use.

>>38577116
>I'm earn a high salary and I'm no socialist but I feel like health and education are so important for a strong society.

Absolutely brother.

Imagine what would have happened if we offed Stephen Hawking. Or if we were a spartan society that simply killed off the weaklings and disfigured.

>>38577204
>Implying the taxes don't also discourage smoking you fuking mong

>>38567774
>people who throw their lives away by doing extremely unheathy stuff contributing nothing should be first priority over a person who has worked and contributed to the system
And that's why socialized healthcare is in hge debt.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xPmtBg4wPH0

>>38577164
>These fat fucks and smokers almost certainly paid into the NHS their whole working lives. They shouldn't have to jump through hoops to avail of it

I agree with this. You pay, you play. Also consider the ethical implications in turnign down a patient. Are you really goign to deny treatment ot a fat person or smoker but still treat someone in prison for murder?

>>38577248
We should kill retards.

>>38577204
>You're guaranteed to get some form of cancer if you're a person that smokes.
Not really, the incidence of lung cancer in pack a day lifetime smokers is like <2%.
The taxes more than make up for the burden and this isn't even getting into the fact that people beyond retirement age tend to cost a lot of money so what appears to be an expensive to treat medical condition can wind up saving money with the years it shaves off of someone's post-retirement life.

>>38577248
>"Imagine what would have happened if we offed Stephen Hawking"
>the majority of the people who leech off the system have contributed just like Stephen Hawking
Way to take an extreme example and outlier then apply it to everyone.

>>38577259
When did he ever imply that it discouraged his smoking habits. He stated and I quote;

"we do actually cover what we cost to the health system, in fact we contribute more than what we cost through cigarette taxes."
>>38571767

>Implying that this Australian's smoking habits is in any way affected by the price of said cigarettes.

>Implying said Australian is a poorfag.

>Implying that said Australian was implying the above.

>Implying that even if said Australian was affected by the increased price, thus reducing demand would have an exponential affect on the smokers health.

Yeah, sure smoking half a pack a day is probably twice as good for you than a whole pack.

But not smoking at all is exponentially better for you than smoking half a pack a day.

Answer me this, what's the best health return;
A. Drinking a vial of poison and dieing in 20 minutes?
B. Drinking half a vial of poison and dieing in an hour or at the very least being in agony for a couple of hours and surviving?
C. Not drinking any poison and potentially living for a couple of decades longer.

>>38577366
>Implying that this Australian's smoking habits is in any way affected by the price of said cigarettes.
Over the entire population increased cost leads to reduced consumption.
>Implying said Australian is a poorfag.
Smoking strongly correlates with being a poorfag and other undesirable traits.

>>38577436
>Smoking strongly correlates with being a poorfag and other undesirable traits
Truth.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22092035
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/disparities/low-ses/index.htm
http://m.eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/3/262

>>38577290
Yeah, no arguments there. But CRISP-CAS can supposedly reverse down-syndrome.

>>38577331
>Implying that lung cancer is the only cancer you can get from smoking.

>Implying cancer is the only negative affect smoking has on health.

What is google?
http://www.cancer.gov/types/common-cancers

>>38577331
>Implying Stephen Hawking is the only genius with physical disabilities or some one who has benefited from national health systems regardless of wealth or social status.

>>38577436
"Over the entire population increased cost leads to reduced consumption."
But does not directly correlate to improved health among these individuals.

The point he made was that his tax payments compensated the cost his ill health would have on the Australian economy. Which is an absolute fallacy, in so many different areas and on so many levels. I've already gone through some of them. Need I say more?

>Smoking strongly correlates with being a poorfag and other undesirable traits.
Yes, generally smokers tend to be of lower socio-economic backgrounds with lower levels of education. But i state again.

>Implying said Australian is a poorfag.

You're implying that this Australian is indeed a poorfag. I suspect you're trying to distract me from my original point that

>The point he made was that his tax payments compensated the cost his ill health would have on the Australian economy. Which is an absolute fallacy, in so many different areas and on so many levels. I've already gone through some of them. Need I say more?

>>38567651
Someone always pays

GM spent more on healthcare insurance for it's employees than it spent on steel

Also the us spends more money per patient and achieves a lower standard of care than the uk

>>38569181
also from NY

have to move to surrey for uni though, might die

>>38577522
>Implying that lung cancer is the only cancer you can get from smoking.
>implying that was implied
Post your source that states a smoker has a greater than 50% chance of getting a smoking related cancer
>But does not directly correlate to improved health among these individuals.
Citation required
>The point he made was that his tax payments compensated the cost his ill health would have on the Australian economy. Which is an absolute fallacy, in so many different areas and on so many levels. I've already gone through some of them. Need I say more?
Yes, as yet you've provided nothing of substance to support your claim. "stating something i don't believe is true" is not a fallacy, kiddo.
>You're implying that this Australian is indeed a poorfag. I suspect you're trying to distract me from my original point that
He very well could be, your point is lost on me.

>>38577718
>Implying implications were made

>>38577331
>Not really, the incidence of lung cancer in pack a day lifetime smokers is like <2%.

You totally discounted all the other cancers you can get from smoking.

>Citation required
Whose to say that a smoker with a decreased amount of cigarette purchasing power doesn't just buy tobacco and roll their own cigarettes.

Whose to say said smoker doesn't just buy tobacco seeds and grow their own?

Whose to say that the smoker doesn't start cutting their tobacco with pot or oregano?

Whose to say the smoker is going to quit smoking simply because they can't smoke as much and have to ration their smokes?

>>38577862
>You totally discounted all the other cancers you can get from smoking.
Post where i my post i said "lung cancer is the only form of cancer caused by smoking" please. The point was if lung cancer has an incidence rate of only 2% than 48% of smokers getting mouth cancer probably isn't likely.
>Whose to say that a smoker with a decreased amount of cigarette purchasing power doesn't just buy tobacco and roll their own cigarettes.
Tobacco is the taxed product
>Whose to say said smoker doesn't just buy tobacco seeds and grow their own?
Think of the work that goes into making a cigarette's worth of smokable marijuana and then times that by 20 a day each day and realise it's not really a viable solution and speaking anecdotally it's not something I've ever known anyone to do.
>Whose to say that the smoker doesn't start cutting their tobacco with pot or oregano?
Cutting with an illicit costly substance in order to save cost ehh? You've clearly thought this through.
>Whose to say the smoker is going to quit smoking simply because they can't smoke as much and have to ration their smokes?
http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/13-5-impact-of-price-increases-on-tobacco-consumpt

File: 1472091425068.jpg (78KB, 564x797px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 564x797px

>people who claim to be nationalists are actually ok with their fellow citizens dying in the streets from lack of medical care or becoming homeless from the debts of treatment
>not only are they ok with it, but they applaud it and call it "evolution"

Jesus fucking christ, youn/pol/ shitposter could at least be consistent with your meme politics. What kind of pathetic, inhuman piece of shit is fine with his countrymen being denied something as basic as Healthcare just so he pays a little less in taxes? You're the real degenerates you moraless fucks.

>>38567712
BS, 30 bmi at 5'7 is 191.5 lb

>>38575355
Both systems are bad. Governments basically grant monopolies to pharmaceutical companies and allow price gouging. If there was competition in the field of medicine, I suspect many would reduce their prices to cost. The only reason single player appears cheaper is because the companies who sell the drugs can't argue with the government like they do with private companies. Learn some economics.

>>38575572
Holy fucking kek, take a history class m8. Not taxing inheritance is a terrible fucking idea, and that poor multimillionaire family would be fine paying the tax. This isn't taxing a mom's 50 k life insurance plan to her orphaned children, the kid is set for life and they just wanted more.

File: 1472831125451.png (123KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 785x757px

>>38578112
I think you're confusing nationalism with communism you gigantic cum guzzling nu male retarded piece of putrid shite stained excuse for a partially functioning human bean.

"We do not say to the rich people, "Please, give something to the poor! Instead we say, "German people, help yourselves!"
-Adolf Hitler

>>38578112
this ťbh
utilitarian egoistic librul mindset is what's killing the West right now

>>38578199
And you seem to not understand your own fucking beliefs you hypocritical cunt.

>>38567621
>>38567651
Type 1 Diabetic here, get all my insulin and needles for free thanks to public health care, it should never be abolished for the simple reason that if I had to pay privately, I'd be dead because I couldn't afford to pay for it. A lot of people in the US have to make the decision to pay for food and rent or pay for insulin.

The NHS should be ran for people who earn the right to use it. Those who go to the doctors for health problems which are from their own excessive lifestyle choices should be warned by the doctor of the danger their lifestyle poses for their health. They should be given a form to sign which indicates if they make no effort to lose weight and live a more healthy lifestyle (which is much cheaper than an unhealthy one) they will have to pay for their medications and hospital bills should they need long term treatment for Type 2 diabetes or other disease which come as a result of being overweight. Their weight could be checked at a weight loss centre (The NHS pays for fat people to go to these anyway) and kept on record should they visit the doctor again with any problems, if they do not lose weight and get diagnosed with a long term illness, they're charged the cost of the medication such as Metformin in the case of T2D, and have to pay a base amount for any operation they receive as a result.

File: 1472811242393.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>38578320
>I believe nationalism means using a government to forcibly extort funds from taxpayers to assist in a welfare state

He's right. You're thinking of communism.

>>38578320
A nation is beset by enemies without and therefore removing the weakness within(or allowing them to remove themselves as the case may be) is necessary.

>>38569157
If they deny obese people on the basis of BMI only, half this board is fucked. The people you see who actually look like whales and eat 8000kcal a day are MORBIDLY obese.

>>38578371
You're not a nationalist, you're a baby libertarian in denial. The fact that you call taxes forcible extortion gives it away.

>>38578386
Except even healthy, productive people get sick and injured. It's in a nations best interest to have the populace healthy and strong through proper preventative care and treatment. The same goes for the naturally "weak" ie cripples and tards, who can still be used for less important or more dangerous duties. This frees up naturally healthy people for more critical work.

No matter how you slice it, public healthcare is good for the nation.

>>38578455
>Except even healthy, productive people get sick and injured.
Health conscious and productive people can afford to pay for their treatment.
>The same goes for the naturally "weak" ie cripples and tards, who can still be used for less important or more dangerous duties.
Or aborted/killed and replaced with a better person for minimal cost.

>>38567774
I've been eating and training healthy to live a good citizen life. Why the fuck can't these lazy fuckers do the same? Why the fuck are they allowed to be lazy while I'm working hard and dieting hard??

File: IMG_0108.jpg (125KB, 604x451px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 604x451px

>>38578455
I never said I was a nationalist. I never said all taxes are forcible extortion.
>autism

I'm just letting you know you're wrong if you think nationalism means the same thing that communism means. The Nazi's went to war with Russia because they hated communism as much as any other sane sensible human being.

Nationalism does not mean, in terms of healthcare, using the government to force good health habits on its citizens and force them to pay for them. That would be communism.

Nationalism means encouraging its citizens to make this decisions themselves, or not. (>>38578386)

It's a sure sign that the NHS is beginning to collapse under its own weight, literally

>>38578487
Kek you're straight up delusional m8. Good luck with your randian wet dream.

>>38578564
Well I was specifically referring to nationalists in my first post so why did you even respond? I assumed you were a nationalist since you responded.

>that would be communism

You have no idea what you're talking about.

No taxpayer should be barred from using the health services they fund trough their taxes. If the individual isn't a tax payer, but a welfare monkey, then they should be barred.

File: 1472759049338.png (87KB, 268x325px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 268x325px

>>38578640

na•tion•al•ism (năshˈə-nə-lĭzˌəm, năshˈnə-)
n. Devotion to the interests or culture of one's nation.
n. The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.
n. Aspirations for national independence in a country under foreign domination.

com•mu•nism (kŏmˈyə-nĭzˌəm)
n. A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
n. A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
n. The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

Your point here >>38578112 has everything to do with a communistic idea not a nationalistic idea your gigantic retard.

File: 1471989746232.png (339KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 680x680px

>>38578707
>government run healthcare is communism
>implying government run healthcare means you can't buy your own if you really feel so inclined to not have the same as everyone else
>keeping your people healthy somehow isn't in the best interests of a nation

Holy fucking kek, you guys are straight up mentally ill.

>>38577331
Hah.
Yeah, both my grandparents on my mothers side were heavy smokers and both died hard of emphysema.

File: hatred exaltation.jpg (169KB, 808x1147px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 808x1147px

>>38578564
No, Nazi Germany went to war with the USSR because Hitler went insane.
The vast majority of Germans did not want war with the USSR. Hell, they weren't eager for war with France until it got a 3 week Rommelectomy, and the USSR made France look like a potato in a dress.

Shame, really, /fa/scism is so effay, and the Nazi fashion was the best.
...
And send the fats and smokers to reeducation camps to fix them. One way or another.

>>38577290
But then you would die. And we would need to shut down /pol/

>>38579298
Nazi Germany went to war against Russia because there were no other way. Even if Stalin wouldn't want to attack them they still had severe lack of oil and their economy was on a verge of collapse. Brits could literally just wait them out, dropping bombs every now and landing a few years later after the whole Reich collapsed under its own weight.

>>38580611
No, they could have gotten oil and other resources from N.Afrika and the Mid East. Cue Rommel's Afrika Korps. Conveniently, the Brits owned that region and Rommel spent two years there making the Brits look like jackasses.

>>38579190

I feel like healthcare reform and having government run healthcare as an option in the US would be great. But promoting preventative healthcare and having your populace live overall longer lives in average actually costs more money in the long run. I'm not trying to justify the actions of the greedy nor am I saying that saving money should be the sole deciding factor when dictating healthcare policy but having your citizens die off young from obesity and cancer, etc saves the government money. I don't have a source to plug but you should be able to find something on google fairly easily.

>>38581247
>But promoting preventative healthcare and having your populace live overall longer lives in average actually costs more money in the long run.

This is only true if you entertain the outdated standards for retirement. If retirement ages were adjusted to reflect actual human lifetimes in the modern world, the cost is no longer a factor. The 55 year old retirement is retarded, and even 65 doesn't go far enough. Imo 70 should be the cut off at least. Also you'd obviously need some way to mitigate wasting money on people who willingly make themselves sick through smoking, drugs, and being fat. Maybe give them a chance to improve, then cut then off if they continue or relapse.

Longer and more productive lives means workers who do more for longer. That's a net positive with the above changes implemented.

>>38567621
>all people in the uk pay national insurance

>fatties and smokers demand a cut in their national insurance as they are being denied nhs treatment

>>38567774
government bids up prices by subsidizing care, same with student loans and why college is so expensive. Let the market work with competition between hospitals to produce innovation and lower prices like the technology market is treated. Just leave it alone, get government to stop their intervention in the market and you will see the same type of improvements made each year the same as technology has gotten better and cheaper. Ask yourself (besides the obvious technological differences), how did we treat the poor in the past? Doctors worked for free on their own free will to help those that couldn't afford it, charities used to be relied on to care for the poor (lower taxes means more voluntary charitable donations were made), etc.

This is a tiny example that barely scratches the surface of what is possible when you let the market work

https://reason.com/reasontv/2012/11/15/the-obamacare-revolt-oklahoma-doctors-fi

>>38567998
How do you figure? I'm healthy and never go to the hospital. I know people who are there almost every month. How am I costing more than them?

>>38582388
>Let the market work with competition between hospitals to produce innovation and lower prices like the technology market is treated

Holy fucking kek, you cant be serious.

>>38575189
watch out, you might cut yourself on that edge m8

>>38567774
They're killing themselves so what difference does it make?

>>38578171

> both is bad argument

one is clearly a lot worse. pragmatism over idealism

>>38567975
>In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessings. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence.

>>38568305
He probably doesn't know what average is.

>>38577343

ya i dont htink thats the point bud

>if they can afford to pay for the healthcare they have a right to be treated. Nuff said. No piggybacking on society. No harsh "NO" from the docs. Just good old fashion experience of consequences either fiscally or physically.

>>38567651
the US spends 9xs more per patient on its "public healthcare" than Australia does. The only waiting times that are shithouse in public health in Australia are elective surgeries for hip and knee replacements and other "non life threatening" complaints. Get cancer here? Fuck mate see you at outpatients next week

>>38582953
yes i am. do you have a counter argument?

>>38588548
USA, maybe?

File: absolutely not culturally enriched.jpg (364KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

364KB, 1920x1080px

>USA
>Mostly private system for healthcare
>Still brought to its knees by fatties
you can't shit on yurop while you are failing this hard

File: images.jpg (6KB, 223x226px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 223x226px

>>38575226
This is an eat what you kill world. If you didn't kill something you don't just go eat what he killed

>>38567651
Too be fair if you made it so it was free for all, but fat people and smokers it could probably work.