that doesn't change the fact that the gov't spends money on health insurance for some. And it sucks that we have people w/o health insurance, but to me it doesn't have much of a bearing on banning trans fats.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
that doesn't change the fact that the gov't spends money on health insurance for some. And it sucks that we have people w/o health insurance, but to me it doesn't have much of a bearing on banning trans fats.
i won't lie, i really don't have a problem with the gov't doing this. i just think it's ironic that the government won't provide health care for all, yet they will tell us what can and cannot go into our bodies.
I'm really fighting with this one. I dont think im ready to have the government tell me what I can or cant eat. although this stuff kills 50,000 people a year. I hope they ban it but this better not turn into "give an inch, take a foot" we will be in trouble. we will all be eating our pre-package meals that the military sends out in air drops every other day.
i won't lie, i really don't have a problem with the gov't doing this. i just think it's ironic that the government won't provide health care for all, yet they will tell us what can and cannot go into our bodies.
oh i agree there is a sense of irony in this. But the gov't already limits what can and can't go into our bodies by means of the FDA. I guess technically it regulates what can be sold and the condition the food must be in.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
So does the government have the responsibility to tell us that engine oil is not a food, or that new food products being manufactured daily from toxic by-products should not be ingested, do we the people who are represented by the government have a say in what is edible depending on how quickly it will kill you or the quality of life it will leave you with in the years to come and how much you will end up paying out to the pharmasueticals who perhaps are creating the toxic food stuffs to begin with?!
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I have to admit that I try to eat healthy so if I'm in a restaurant I try to stick with soup and salad, or steak and salad. I figure they can't fuck either of those combos up to much. Except if I'm drinking, then bring on the nachos with chicken platter.
quote]
funny stuff....how many times I've chosed something off the menu based on ability for restaurant to fk it up.....and the drinking part....yep again.
The government controls cigarettes and alcohol, since they carry heavy social costs.
We, as citizens, foot the bill for medical care for people with black lungs or drink-ravaged livers.
As "big brother" as it may seem, the govt should have some say in food products....we have the FDA to approve certain foods.
Since it seems as if many Americans can't manage their eating habits, the govt will eventually have to pay for their impending medcial care.
Its sort of like when your HMO offers flu shots or nutrition counseling....its preventive medicine.
I don't think they should ban trans-fat, but they should press the industry to produce healthier substitutes.
This is not true. Governments, USA and Canada tax the sale of alcohol and cigarettes to cover the additional health costs. 10 years ago the cost of a package of cigarettes in Canada was $3.25/pack, 2 years ago it was $5/$6 per pack and now it is close to $10/pack. All adjustments were done in the name of covering health costs arrising from the use of tobacco.
Additionally this year our government applied an addition $0.30 tax to every bottle of alcohol to cover the health costs from alcohol abuse and the decrease in GST, which was also covered by the increase in Income Tax.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
This is not true. Governments, USA and Canada tax the sale of alcohol and cigarettes to cover the additional health costs. 10 years ago the cost of a package of cigarettes in Canada was $3.25/pack, 2 years ago it was $5/$6 per pack and now it is close to $10/pack. All adjustments were done in the name of covering health costs arrising from the use of tobacco.
Additionally this year our government applied an addition $0.30 tax to every bottle of alcohol to cover the health costs from alcohol abuse and the decrease in GST, which was also covered by the increase in Income Tax.
What isn't true about my post.......when I said "WE" foot the bill, I meant taxpayers who fund the govt.
What isn't true about my post.......when I said "WE" foot the bill, I meant taxpayers who fund the govt.
Sorry, you were implying that non-smokers and non-alcoholics have to pay for the additional medical costs. While in fact, it is the actual smokers and drinkers that pay for it through additional taxing of cigarettes and alcohol.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Sorry, you were implying that non-smokers and non-alcoholics have to pay for the additional medical costs. While in fact, it is the actual smokers and drinkers that pay for it through additional taxing of cigarettes and alcohol.
true, the tax covers some expenses, but i find it hard to believe that it covers all of the monetary and social costs caused by smoking/drinking.
Does the alcohol tax cover the medical care for an uninsured person who is injured by a drunk driver?
Does the tax cover the cost of jailing a habitual drunk driver?
Does the cigarette tax cover the cost of fighting fires caused by lit cigarettes left unattended?
true, the tax covers some expenses, but i find it hard to believe that it covers all of the monetary and social costs caused by smoking/drinking.
Does the alcohol tax cover the medical care for an uninsured person who is injured by a drunk driver?
Does the tax cover the cost of jailing a habitual drunk driver?
Does the cigarette tax cover the cost of fighting fires caused by lit cigarettes left unattended?
In Canada? Probably. The tax is so high on cigarettes and alcohol it pays for more than just that.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Comments
It should have been done years ago.
First PJ Show: March 20, 1994 | Ann Arbor | Crisler Arena
yah well i'm one of the 40+ million without.
that doesn't change the fact that the gov't spends money on health insurance for some. And it sucks that we have people w/o health insurance, but to me it doesn't have much of a bearing on banning trans fats.
i won't lie, i really don't have a problem with the gov't doing this. i just think it's ironic that the government won't provide health care for all, yet they will tell us what can and cannot go into our bodies.
oh i agree there is a sense of irony in this. But the gov't already limits what can and can't go into our bodies by means of the FDA. I guess technically it regulates what can be sold and the condition the food must be in.
Saturated/satures 1.5g
+ Trans/trans 2.0g [size=+1]18%[/size]
We, as citizens, foot the bill for medical care for people with black lungs or drink-ravaged livers.
As "big brother" as it may seem, the govt should have some say in food products....we have the FDA to approve certain foods.
Since it seems as if many Americans can't manage their eating habits, the govt will eventually have to pay for their impending medcial care.
Its sort of like when your HMO offers flu shots or nutrition counseling....its preventive medicine.
I don't think they should ban trans-fat, but they should press the industry to produce healthier substitutes.
This is not true. Governments, USA and Canada tax the sale of alcohol and cigarettes to cover the additional health costs. 10 years ago the cost of a package of cigarettes in Canada was $3.25/pack, 2 years ago it was $5/$6 per pack and now it is close to $10/pack. All adjustments were done in the name of covering health costs arrising from the use of tobacco.
Additionally this year our government applied an addition $0.30 tax to every bottle of alcohol to cover the health costs from alcohol abuse and the decrease in GST, which was also covered by the increase in Income Tax.
What isn't true about my post.......when I said "WE" foot the bill, I meant taxpayers who fund the govt.
Sorry, you were implying that non-smokers and non-alcoholics have to pay for the additional medical costs. While in fact, it is the actual smokers and drinkers that pay for it through additional taxing of cigarettes and alcohol.
true, the tax covers some expenses, but i find it hard to believe that it covers all of the monetary and social costs caused by smoking/drinking.
Does the alcohol tax cover the medical care for an uninsured person who is injured by a drunk driver?
Does the tax cover the cost of jailing a habitual drunk driver?
Does the cigarette tax cover the cost of fighting fires caused by lit cigarettes left unattended?
In Canada? Probably. The tax is so high on cigarettes and alcohol it pays for more than just that.