We Don't Have a Spending Problem. We Have an Aging Problem.

Rocket River · Jan 5, 2013

Classic said: ↑

The govt is subsidizing the wrong food making junk food & garbage artificially cheaper than the market would bear. Go into a corner store in a poor and predominately minority area and all they have access to is junk food....or watch this clip from the documentary "Weight of the Nation" from HBO to see what our government is allowing in poor neighborhoods:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7MJnm5X9NN0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It's predatory & fueling a crisis. Don't forget, FDA regulates both food & drugs. Food fuels disease---->healthcare needed....conflict of interest?
Click to expand...

It was being a bit sarcastic . . .you and this documentary are spot on correct
IT is like our government has a vested interest in keeping us unhealthy and sick

Rocket River

Rocket River · Jan 5, 2013

Cohete Rojo said: ↑

That's rad. How are those old people going to pay for the stuff when they have no jobs and no more manias?
Click to expand...

Young people need not b**** about support old people
Those ole people put together this fine country we live in
they made your roads. . your internets . .. your satelites
taking care of them . . as Pouhe would say . . is the least we could do

How f***ing TRIFLING, UNGRATEFUL and DISRESPECTFUL
for the young to begrudge the old for trying to enjoy some of what they built.

and the young won't be young forever . .. when they get old
they will want [and more than likely *WILL* recieve] the same courtesy
[That is unless they raise ungrateful hatefilled kids with no sense of responsibility beyond themselves]

Rocket River

Classic · Jan 5, 2013

Rocket River said: ↑

IT is like our government has a vested interest in keeping us unhealthy and sick

Rocket River
Click to expand...

It's a form of oppression. Big healthcare, insurance & big ag are all winners. Losers are poor & uneducated at expense of middle class through healthcare costs passed down through insurance premiums accelerated even moreso through recent legislation.

To answer your question: Yes, a long healthy life is a luxury of the rich as it stands now.

Commodore · Jan 5, 2013

Classic said: ↑

The govt is subsidizing food
Click to expand...

fixed

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/A8fTGsTt-cU#t=0m12s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

False · Jan 5, 2013

Commodore said: ↑

fixed

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/A8fTGsTt-cU#t=0m12s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Click to expand...

I realize you consume a lot of your information in video form, but could you also provide a transcript? I'm sure it's an interesting interview, but 10 minutes is just way too long to spend understanding and responding. Another problem with videos is that they are much harder to skip back and forth to re-listen to specific sections.

Commodore · Jan 5, 2013

False said: ↑

I realize you consume a lot of your information in video form, but could you also provide a transcript? I'm sure it's an interesting interview, but 10 minutes is just way too long to spend understanding and responding. Another problem with videos is that they are much harder to skip back and forth to re-listen to specific sections.
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswe...p-america-s-obesity-crisis-keeps-failing.html

Finally, the anti-obesity establishment embraces the idea that what are really missing from our diet are fresh fruits and vegetables—that these are the sine qua non of a healthy diet—and that meat, red meat in particular, is a likely cause of obesity. Since the mid-1970s, health agencies have waged a campaign to reduce our meat consumption, for a host of reasons: it causes colon cancer or heart disease (because of the saturated fat) and now because it supposedly makes us fat as well. The lowly cheeseburger is consistently targeted as a contributor to both obesity and diabetes.

But when David Wallinga of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy tells us in The Weight of the Nation that the USDA has established the cause of the obesity epidemic and it’s “an increase in our calorie consumption over the last 30, 35 years,” he also tells us where those calories come from: a quarter come from added sugars, a quarter from added fats (“most of which are from soy”), and “almost half is from refined grains, mainly corn starches, wheat, and the like.” What Wallinga doesn’t say is that the same USDA data clearly shows that red-meat consumption peaked in this country in the mid-1970s, before the obesity epidemic started. It’s been dropping ever since, consistent with a nation that has been doing exactly what health authorities have been telling it to do.

At the moment, the government efforts to curb obesity and diabetes avoid the all-too-apparent fact, as Hilde Bruch pointed out more than half a century ago, that exhorting obese people to eat less and exercise more doesn’t work, and that this shouldn’t be an indictment of their character but of the value of the advice. By institutionalizing this advice as public-health policy, we waste enormous amounts of money and effort on programs that might make communities nicer places to live—building parks and making green markets available—but that we have little reason to believe will make anyone thinner. When I asked CDC Director Thomas Frieden about this, he pointed to two recent reports, from Massachusetts and New York, documenting small but real decreases in childhood-obesity levels. He then admitted that they had no idea why this had happened. “I’m doing everything I can do,” he said, “to assure that we rigorously monitor the efforts underway so we can try to understand what works and what doesn’t.”

If the latest research is any indication, sugar may have been the primary problem all along. Back in the 1980s, the FDA gave sugar a free pass based on the idea that the evidence wasn’t conclusive. While the government spent hundreds of millions trying to prove that salt and saturated fat are bad for our health, it spent virtually nothing on sugar. Had it targeted sugar then, instead of waiting for an obesity and diabetes epidemic for motivation, our entire food culture and the options that go with it might have changed as they did with low-fat and low-salt foods.
Click to expand...

Deckard · Jan 5, 2013

Just wait until you kids get older. You'll have a different view of this stuff.

Cohete Rojo · Jan 5, 2013

Rocket River said: ↑

Young people need not b**** about support old people
Those ole people put together this fine country we live in
they made your roads. . your internets . .. your satelites
taking care of them . . as Pouhe would say . . is the least we could do

How f***ing TRIFLING, UNGRATEFUL and DISRESPECTFUL
for the young to begrudge the old for trying to enjoy some of what they built.

and the young won't be young forever . .. when they get old
they will want [and more than likely *WILL* recieve] the same courtesy
[That is unless they raise ungrateful hatefilled kids with no sense of responsibility beyond themselves]

Rocket River
Click to expand...

LOL. Did they run out of soma at the retirement village? The least we can do is preserve and make better what was given to us. Young children now have a higher chance of living in poverty than old people; this wasn't so when such large transfer payments began. Besides, old people have had their entire lives to get their act together.

Mathloom · Jan 6, 2013

Next step? Ship your old people off to less expensive countries.

German pensioners are being sent to care homes in Eastern Europe and Asia in what has been described as an ‘inhumane deportation’.

Rising numbers of the elderly and sick are moved overseas for long-term care because of sky-high costs at home.

Some private healthcare providers are even building homes overseas, while state insurers are also investigating whether they can care for their clients abroad.

Experts describe a time bomb’ of increasing numbers unable to afford the growing costs of retirement homes.

[More at link]
Click to expand...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Asia-Eastern-Europe-sky-high-care-costs.html

Of course they say it's voluntary, but mismanagement of their future leading to 2 choices (crappy care or foreign care) is hardly a real choice.

Rocket River · Jan 6, 2013

Mathloom said: ↑

Next step? Ship your old people off to less expensive countries.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Asia-Eastern-Europe-sky-high-care-costs.html

Of course they say it's voluntary, but mismanagement of their future leading to 2 choices (crappy care or foreign care) is hardly a real choice.
Click to expand...

. .. just as long as you give them 'a choice'
Then it will be acceptable

Rocket River

Forums

We Don't Have a Spending Problem. We Have an Aging Problem.

Rocket River Member

Rocket River Member

Classic Member

Commodore Member

False Member

Commodore Member

Deckard Blade Runner
Supporting Member

Cohete Rojo Member

Mathloom Shameless Optimist

Rocket River Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

We Don't Have a Spending Problem. We Have an Aging Problem.

Rocket River Member

Rocket River Member

Classic Member

Commodore Member

False Member

Commodore Member

Deckard Blade Runner Supporting Member

Cohete Rojo Member

Mathloom Shameless Optimist

Rocket River Member

Share This Page

Deckard Blade Runner
Supporting Member