You raise a good point, that was quite prejudice. However reducing the strain on our healthcare system requires a lot of education. First on what needs doctors visits, what needs hospital visits, and what you should just take a day off work/school for. Second on how to live healthy lifestyles. Maybe taxing obese people extra isn't the way, maybe taxing the hell out of fattening foods(ie processed foods/fast food/frozen dinners) like we do cigarettes.

Well, low income people are more likely to eat unhealthily/be obese, because they don't have time to sit down and eat a meal, and tend to rush around. Therefore they buy fast food on the way to work, or just eat while they're doing stuff, and that's pretty unhealthy. Taxing fast food would just be a regressive tax that makes it tougher on the working class. Also, it costs more to buy a bunch of healthy fresh food than it does to buy some instant frozen meal. Maybe a living wage that doesn't force people to work ungodly hours, longer lunch breaks, etc.
Of course, I have no idea how all of that could be accomplished.

Not to say that personal responsibility doesn't play a part. Some people are just fat because they eat a lot. But penalizing them by making it harder for them to get healthcare seems like the wrong way to go, and some people live off of processed foods/frozen meals out of necessity, not laziness or the desire to live an unhealthy lifestyle. Its just cheaper, and food is already too expensive as it is.
We do have a big obesity problem here in the US though, and something ought to be done about it.

Tim wrote:

I am hurt Yes, we have a working system. It could be better, but paying for the bills isn't one of your biggest worries when you need a new kidney or when you break an arm.

forgive my ignorance.

By the way, we don't have lots of snow, so another myth busted.

Yeah, I wasn't sure which country I was talking about.
Its what happens when you watch the news stoned.

It all comes down to who you want Alienated. It's a tough call to make as the leader of the country. You can put it on the rich, who in turn can move their assets and such over seas, crippling our economy (And coming from a rather well to do family, I can certainly tell you, most of them wouldn't think twice about it) or you can put it on the poor, and alienate the largest voting portion of the country. Middle class will always get screwed no matter what, it's just what happens. And the best way to go, in my humble opinion, is to have a mixture of private and public health care, a strict public health insurance policy would help weed out the leeches, maybe limiting free doctor visits down to so much every year, and walk in clinics at a much higher amount of visits a year, then let those who would like to pay for... less limited health care, keep their policies at the prices they're willing to pay. The private industry will be able to regulate itself via supply and demand.

I pretty much agree with you about public/private insurance system. People who can afford private insurance and want it should go ahead and get it.

But I don't think the private sector has been very successful thus far in regulating itself through supply and demand, because health care isn't a commodity. With things like health care, the free market can be pretty cruel. They're just going to charge as much as they possibly can.

And also

anarchyintheus wrote:

a strict public health insurance policy would help weed out the leeches

I don't think people taking advantage of the system is going to be as big of a problem as you make it out to be.
I mean, of course its going to happen, but health care isn't really like a welfare check. Its not something that you can use for anything other than what its meant for. People aren't going to take their healthiness down the street to buy a 40 oz. Maybe limits on reasons why you go to the doctor.

Yeah, I figure private would have to be quite a bit better than the public one for it to work out that way, and that's not fair, but then again... life really isn't fair, and making it such can lead to rather unpleasant lives. If you strive to make every one equal on every field, you'll end up making the world a dull, pointless place. I believe there was a book about that, forgot what it was called, but it was about hindering the blessed for the sake of the weak. I know that sounds harsh and in the back of our minds you'll probably think, hey that's not right, but if you think about it, don't you value what talents you have rather highly? Aaaand I'm going off on a tangent....

Basically I figure private health care service will have a bit more perks and stuff, maybe get to see special doctors, express lane stuff, not sure, but I know purely private or purely public health care just won't work in this country.

Oh man, I saw a bunch of those protesters with different signs of Obama as Hitler. I got some magazine that one of them was handing out and read it, it was so weird.

Healthcare in the UK isn't completely free to all, but it is massively subsidised by the government.

Yes this does mean there's issues with waiting times in some areas and money is easily wasted, but overall it seems to work reasonably well (not that there isn't room for improvement).

There's plenty of rich folk over here who complain about this (I bet they wouldn't complain if they were poor...), but frankly they can swivel on my mid digit.

I can't be bothered to read through this whole thread so excuse me if this has already been said. But from what I gather, there's a lot of outrage in the states about obama's healthcare plans. I cant see why, to me, 46 million people without healthcare is totally absurd. Especially for a country as rich and resourseful as the united states. Aren't Obama's plans focusing of trying to get healthcare for all? What do people think is wrong with that? Is it the fact that tax money will pay for it? I'd imagine the government funding will be insignificant compared to the amount spent on "defense".