Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
But more importantly to me, how is this fair? How is it fair that half the country subsidizes care for the rest of the country?

What kills me regarding this issue of fairness is the uneven distribution of wealth in this country: the bottom 80% of americans own just 7% of the wealth in the USA. To me, I got no problem having my taxes go to those who can't afford health care, but I really dislike that we have slashed corporate tax and given tax cuts to the wealthy. How is that fair?
 
Not a pure libertarian. Perfectly happy to entertain the idea that there are limited areas the government should operate where private enterprise or state-led programs would be impossible or otherwise very problematic. I think the other poster has, and probably could continue to argue in favor of that applying to healthcare. Of course, we've had private health coverage in the US for approaching a century, so it clearly can and has worked.
Ye
What kills me regarding this issue of fairness is the uneven distribution of wealth in this country: the bottom 80% of americans own just 7% of the wealth in the USA. To me, I got no problem having my taxes go to those who can't afford health care, but I really dislike that we have slashed corporate tax and given tax cuts to the wealthy. How is that fair?
also 80% of the wealth in America is inherited.
 
It's societies fault that people eat too much, drink heavily and don't get enough exercise?

I'm going to say yes and no.

Health literacy in the US is abysmal and low health literacy has direct ties to poor health outcomes.
However we got here, society is at fault if nothing changes to improve health literacy. That is the only way our health outcomes will improve.
 
I'm going to say yes and no.

Health literacy in the US is abysmal and low health literacy has direct ties to poor health outcomes.
However we got here, society is at fault if nothing changes to improve health literacy. That is the only way our health outcomes will improve.

Cant Mericans just eat less?
 
Cant Mericans just eat less?

Of course, but quite honestly many don't truly understand consequences of overeating/obesity or even how to change their diet in a helpful way. Low health literacy is an issue for both.

I have patients whose entire family has type 2 diabetes and has for generations. They don't have a clue that it could be avoided. It's just the way it is...like growing old.
 
Cant Mericans just eat less?
yea, it's mad tho. It took a while for me to get used to the health and education system here. As Rafuh says, it's about health literacy. Most schools here are funded by local taxes. It's not uncommon for the average joe soap to pay about $8k a year in property tax to live in a half decent neighborhood. Alot of those taxes go to fund the local school which then gets alot of funding and becomes a better school which drives up property prices which drives up tax coffers and there is a spiral upwards, for every neighborhood with an upward spiral there's another neighborhood with a downward spiral with crappy schools. The fast-food chains move in to these areas and the tax starved councils are keen to have them. You end up with poor/unhealthy neighborhoods, many of whom, before the ACA, relied on the ER for care. There are whole communities rotting away because some people don't see the point in spreading the wealth more evenly.
 
Cant Mericans just eat less?

It can be much more difficult to access healthy food there than you'd think

10 American Food Deserts Where It Is Impossible To Eat Healthily
http://www.businessinsider.com/food-deserts-urban-2011-10?op=1&IR=T

Over 23 million
Americans — including 6.5 million children — live in food deserts: areas without ready access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. That means there isn't a supermarket within a mile.

These are usually low-income areas, dominated by minorities. In fact, just 8 percent of African Americans live in a census tract with a supermarket.

The effects of food deserts are devastating: they contribute to obesity and other diet-related illnesses, they force families living in these areas to use valuable time traveling to neighboring areas, and they usually lack the resources to improve their situation.

The cure? Seattle is seeing an increase in "pop-up" grocery stores, while New Orleans has slowly been cultivating an urban agriculture scene. Other possible initiatives include mobile groceries and vegetable prescriptions.

Using the USDA food desert locator, we pinpointed the exact areas affected by this blight.

"...outside downtown Seattle, the citizens of Washington are having a hard time finding a supermarket. The areas lining the Duwamish River are particularly deserted of food access -- citizens of the town of South Park have taken to fishing the polluted river for subsistence. Life expectancy is five years lower here compared to the rest of the county."

"A combination of natural disaster (Hurricane Katrina) and poor government planning and response has really hurt the low-income sections of New Orleans, in particular the Lower Ninth Ward. Since 2005, there have been virtually zero markets in the area, with no place to buy healthy food -- the convenience stores that stayed open have plenty of beer and candy but no produce."

"An estimated half a million Chicago residents -- the vast majority of whom are black -- live in food deserts, including much of the South Side of the city. And the food options that are available are self-defeating: in a typical African-American block, the nearest grocery store is roughly twice the distance as the nearest fast food restaurant. Because of the huge food imbalance in the city, diseases like diabetes and cancer run rampant through the poor communities. It'll take more community gardening initiatives and a curbing of unhealthy fast food joints to reverse this trend."

"In 2006, Minneapolis was almost 50 percent food desert, as was a third of St. Paul. Making matters worse is the fact that one of five Twin City residents don't have cars, making it difficult to get to the areas that do have supermarket and food stores. The Twin Cities area is fighting hard against the food desert issue, which has helped the obesity level of current residents balloon to 25 percent."

"Food deserts in San Francisco include the neighborhoods of Bayview, Visitacion Valley and Hunters Point, where residents finally got their first taste of a grocery store in more than 20 years. Before this, numerous supermarket chains refused to open a location in the historically poor and black neighborhood. Other areas like Oakland and Richmond are still waiting for help."

"Poor Detroit. As if crippling unemployment and a depressing housing market weren't enough, more than 550,000 Detroit residents -- over half the city -- live in food deserts. The result? Detroit has become the world's number one consumer of potato chips. Part of the problem is that fringe retailers -- like gas stations and dollar stores -- are mostly the only ones to accept EBT and food stamps, not "mainstream retailers" like chain supermarkets."

And on and on and on. It really strains credulity to still consider the United States part of the developed world.

 
yea, it's mad tho. It took a while for me to get used to the health and education system here. As Rafuh says, it's about health literacy. Most schools here are funded by local taxes. It's not uncommon for the average joe soap to pay about $8k a year in property tax to live in a half decent neighborhood. Alot of those taxes go to fund the local school which then gets alot of funding and becomes a better school which drives up property prices which drives up tax coffers and there is a spiral upwards, for every neighborhood with an upward spiral there's another neighborhood with a downward spiral with crappy schools. The fast-food chains move in to these areas and the tax starved councils are keen to have them. You end up with poor/unhealthy neighborhoods, many of whom, before the ACA, relied on the ER for care. There are whole communities rotting away because some people don't see the point in spreading the wealth more evenly.

Many of these communities are food deserts. Grocery stores don't build in financially depressed areas.
The options end up being fast food and convenience stores.
 
It can be much more difficult to access healthy food there than you'd think

10 American Food Deserts Where It Is Impossible To Eat Healthily
http://www.businessinsider.com/food-deserts-urban-2011-10?op=1&IR=T

Over 23 million
Americans — including 6.5 million children — live in food deserts: areas without ready access to fresh, healthy, and affordable food. That means there isn't a supermarket within a mile.

These are usually low-income areas, dominated by minorities. In fact, just 8 percent of African Americans live in a census tract with a supermarket.

The effects of food deserts are devastating: they contribute to obesity and other diet-related illnesses, they force families living in these areas to use valuable time traveling to neighboring areas, and they usually lack the resources to improve their situation.

The cure? Seattle is seeing an increase in "pop-up" grocery stores, while New Orleans has slowly been cultivating an urban agriculture scene. Other possible initiatives include mobile groceries and vegetable prescriptions.

Using the USDA food desert locator, we pinpointed the exact areas affected by this blight.

"...outside downtown Seattle, the citizens of Washington are having a hard time finding a supermarket. The areas lining the Duwamish River are particularly deserted of food access -- citizens of the town of South Park have taken to fishing the polluted river for subsistence. Life expectancy is five years lower here compared to the rest of the county."

"A combination of natural disaster (Hurricane Katrina) and poor government planning and response has really hurt the low-income sections of New Orleans, in particular the Lower Ninth Ward. Since 2005, there have been virtually zero markets in the area, with no place to buy healthy food -- the convenience stores that stayed open have plenty of beer and candy but no produce."

"An estimated half a million Chicago residents -- the vast majority of whom are black -- live in food deserts, including much of the South Side of the city. And the food options that are available are self-defeating: in a typical African-American block, the nearest grocery store is roughly twice the distance as the nearest fast food restaurant. Because of the huge food imbalance in the city, diseases like diabetes and cancer run rampant through the poor communities. It'll take more community gardening initiatives and a curbing of unhealthy fast food joints to reverse this trend."

"In 2006, Minneapolis was almost 50 percent food desert, as was a third of St. Paul. Making matters worse is the fact that one of five Twin City residents don't have cars, making it difficult to get to the areas that do have supermarket and food stores. The Twin Cities area is fighting hard against the food desert issue, which has helped the obesity level of current residents balloon to 25 percent."

"Food deserts in San Francisco include the neighborhoods of Bayview, Visitacion Valley and Hunters Point, where residents finally got their first taste of a grocery store in more than 20 years. Before this, numerous supermarket chains refused to open a location in the historically poor and black neighborhood. Other areas like Oakland and Richmond are still waiting for help."

"Poor Detroit. As if crippling unemployment and a depressing housing market weren't enough, more than 550,000 Detroit residents -- over half the city -- live in food deserts. The result? Detroit has become the world's number one consumer of potato chips. Part of the problem is that fringe retailers -- like gas stations and dollar stores -- are mostly the only ones to accept EBT and food stamps, not "mainstream retailers" like chain supermarkets."

And on and on and on. It really strains credulity to still consider the United States part of the developed world.

Ah...beat me to it
 
It's probably easier to define what isn't fair/just/equitable. I don't think a taxation system whereby half of households don't pay taxes is under that tent. I think similarly about expanding a system whereby tens of millions receive their health coverage at the expense of others, or have that coverage increasingly subsidized.

As I've stated, I believe in safety nets, which is why I'm not giving you some hard tax bracket or coverage proposal that I think equates to the "fair" answer. But I hesitate to endorse the expansion of safety nets, especially when accompanied ever-decreasing interest in ensuring those are not being abused.
Half of US households don't pay taxes? Come on now...

I'm am pleased to read you believe in safety nets. Providing quality health care to all is in the best interest of all and there is absolutely no reason (other than political/financial interest) that a nation as wealthy as the United States cannot (or should not) do so.

The conversation should not be "can the US afford this" or "is it fair or unfair" or any other diversion. It should be how can the resources already dedicated to health care be directed in such a way that maximizes positive, sustainable healthy outcomes for the most number of citizens possible. Private, for-profit health care systems can be a part of that discussion but we must acknowledge first and foremost that the fundamental interest (access to health care) is never going to be best served using such systems.

Avoiding doing what is right or best for all due to a concern over abuse of the system is, with all respect, a cop out. First things first. Work to find a solution that is best for all and then build in safeguards to protect it. When human nature inevitably mucks up the safeguards, revisit the safeguards and implement new ones while punishing those who abuse the system.
 
It's probably easier to define what isn't fair/just/equitable. I don't think a taxation system whereby half of households don't pay taxes is under that tent. I think similarly about expanding a system whereby tens of millions receive their health coverage at the expense of others, or have that coverage increasingly subsidized.

As I've stated, I believe in safety nets, which is why I'm not giving you some hard tax bracket or coverage proposal that I think equates to the "fair" answer. But I hesitate to endorse the expansion of safety nets, especially when accompanied ever-decreasing interest in ensuring those are not being abused.

I just hate these simplistic arguments. Here's a question for you, if it's so great to be in the buckets you describe, would you switch places with those people?

I'm being serious

Sometimes the cost of being successful in a civilized society is to provide for those without. Firstly, it's humane. Secondly it will help benefit society in the long run. Thirdly, it'll keep me from getting stood up against the wall at the time of reckoning.

As for the safety nets argument, well, I just hope i'm dead before the proletariat finally comes to its senses decades from now and burns everything to the ground.

I just look around and see this ever-rising income inequality is not sustainable.

Sorry, I"m super jaded right now after getting out of about 8 hours of audit committee and Board meetings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top