<p>“You had to be seriously dense not to realize that a program that subsidized poor people was wealth transfer.”</p>
<p>Are you talking about President Obama? No one was going to lose his plan or pay less.</p>
<p>I don’t think the middle class was told about this wealth transfer. I wonder why?</p>
<p>More personal barbs?
We’ve been over that. And over and over.<br>
Admit it, several here have a fixed idea this is about robbing the rich to pay those fat, candy-buying, unemployed, freebie-seeking poor people.</p>
<p>“We’ve been over that. And over and over.”</p>
<p>Hopefully, we can address it one more time in Nov of 2014.</p>
<p>Nah, I remember the selling point as it was going to cut costs and save the average family serious money, rather than formalizing subsidization. I’ll admit, I missed the campaign rhetoric being brought forth as after the fact evidence of what was the intention all along - should have tuned in to the stations the rest of you frequent.</p>
<p>The cold hard fact, CF, is that the calorie laden carts being pushed through the checkout aisles are going to have to go. Sympathy’s great but, along with the narrowing of networks to point where you’re going to have to wonder if that aspirin is what you really needed after all, a lot of these sometimes elective conditions - diabetes, lung cancer, cirrhosis, etc. - are probably going to be fashionably phased out of the sympathy pool. Just economics.</p>
<p>Truth be told, I’m more likely a trendsetter than a hater, LF.</p>
<p>Someone already complained the poor are more likely to vote. You may be in trouble. Last time I heard, you didn’t exercise your right to complain to the folks who could do something. Not sure you believe in “the system.” I suspect someone will say, “not this one, sister!” It’s coming through, not just from you, GP, as disdain and scorn for “Them.” CF is right: values. </p>
<p>I would be in favor of anti-obesity plans if I knew of any that worked. As we can clearly see, denying fat people health insurance is in no way an anti-obesity program, in the sense that it does nothing to combat obesity.</p>
<p>Obesity is rampant among some segments of the poor. But it also occurs among the wealthier classes. where do we draw the lines? </p>
<p>So cata, when we apply for insurance, should we have to provide our last few grocery receipts? And BTW, plenty of skinny people also eat more crappy food than they should, myself included. I don’t get much exercise either. Should I be fashionably phased out of the insurance pool?</p>
<p>One very easy place to draw the lines is government money. The other day I happened to find myself in a smoke shop next to a WalMart with an EBT cash machine and a sign advertising medical marijuana prescriptions along with an assortments of pipes. paraphernalia, and munchies. The cashier had purple hair, btw. She was not fat, though.</p>
<p>What’s your point, here? I’m pretty sure that the ACA doesn’t cover “medical marijuana” prescriptions. </p>
<p>Yeah sorry. My point is about food programs. They could require people to purchase food. And, then maybe healthy food only. Just an idea.</p>
<p>Flossy, purple hair has exactly what to do with any of this? </p>
<p>And BTW, marijuana is very helpful for a variety of health problems, including glaucoma, MS, chemo side effects, pain management, among others. But Fang is probably right; I doubt it’s covered (yet).</p>
<p>A smoke shop? </p>
<p>It’s a cigarette store. They are cashing in EBT benefits to buy cigarettes. The purple hair and pot stuff was for flavor. But, food stamps is an easy place to start regulating food. Or at least requiring it to be food, let alone healthy food. Baby steps, I guess. </p>
<p>The lines used to be drawn on whether you could pay for your poor choices, LF. That waving sayonara to that is now considered the progressively compassionate stance just strikes me as kind of vacantly permissive, with predictable results. Expensive, until the compassion evaporates.</p>
<p>Cat, every day we pay for the needs of others. Why is it ok to put a fat rich person in an insurance pool? </p>
<p>But why is Flossy in a smoke shop? Is she going to throw off a pool, too? </p>
<p>USDA is still saying you cannot use SNAP/EBT for cigarettes or alcohol. Right now, that’s not my concern, it’s another sidetrack. </p>
<p>What is “throw off a pool”? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Medicare was introduced in 1966. That was a long time ago. Maybe you think that seniors should be paying for their own health insurance, but if you looked into it, you’d discover that the percentage of seniors that could afford insurance-market rates for their health care would be close to zero percent.</p>
<p>It’s putting a person who takes risks with their health into the insurance risk pool, which is only allowed to contain healthy people.</p>
<p>cata, what about fat people who don’t use government aid to buy their food? Are they allowed to get insurance?</p>
<p>(x-posted LF)</p>
<p>Umm… because prior to the ACA it was the choice of the insurer? And whether the rich fat guy’s bank account could take the hit?</p>
<p>The compassionate take on this self-inflicted condition…
… would be what?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/29/231842/a-form-of-liver-disease-has-quickly.html?sp=/99/200/328/”>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/29/231842/a-form-of-liver-disease-has-quickly.html?sp=/99/200/328/</a></p>