View Single Post
Old 03-31-2010, 02:31 PM   #56 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414 View Post
Well, is your life yours to do with as you please or not?

If it is, then why can't the government/private services draw a line on "If you do these few pre-determined, gallactically-stupid things, we aren't going to save your ass when you get sick from them." That avoids the taxation and expense of services outright. Just don't save them. They knew what they were doing.
Well, it depends on your position on how the tax money is used and why. We can view most of these things as a disease, addiction, or a habit formed based on a disease, etc., and so it would make sense to have programs in place to help people kick the habit or find healing. If it's tax dollars purely for treatment of "end game" diseases, then wouldn't it be better to have funds for treatment rather than having families go bankrupt?

I think the best would be to find a balance.

Also, I think it would be difficult to decide whether specific diseases were caused by certain behaviours. A smoker's lung cancer isn't necessarily caused by smoking; there could have been other factors that actually caused it. In many ways, these taxes are merely a way of hedging the bets.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot
Baraka_Guru is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57