I agree with this. I will go in the woman's restroom if some dude is camping out in the men's for 15 minutes. What does it matter? It is a single toilet with a door? Just make them both gender neutral. They are single occupancy anyway.
Have you heard of anyone dying of obesity or cancer? Heart disease and cancer kill over 600,000 people per year each. Guns kill about 45,000 (including suicides). Gun homicides are around 10,000. Thus, obesity and cancer are each more than 10 times as great a threat to health as guns. Opiod overdose deaths were around 80 or 90 thousand last year, about twice as much as all gun deaths. Members of neither party were great at this (COVID way underestimated by Republicans), but the red team was much more in line with the correct numbers than the blue team.
Let me know the next time someone force feeds someone else to death over a period of years. Tell me what can be done about cancer. People choose to take opiods. Now I'm not getting into how they became addicted etc. I'm not saying we can't do something about opiods. However, all things you listed started with choices made by the deceased. Except cancer. Gun deaths? That's a little different. Your gun homicides are a little off. There are twice as many as you stated. In 2020, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (24,292), while 43% were murders (19,384), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were unintentional (535), involved law enforcement (611) or had undetermined circumstances (400). Also, addiction is the problem. Not opiods a d fentanyl. You fix the addiction issue and there would not be an opiod/fentanyl problem because people would not buy them. The GOP likes to scream about fentanyl coming across the border and killing people, but I have never seen a fentanyl pill spontaneously jump in someone's mouth. Hmmm sounds familiar. Kinda like the GOP and guns. Anyway, the GOP doesn't give a damn about the root cause of opiod deaths, addiction. They don't want to fund any research on what causes addiction. They don't want to help addicts get clean. They don't want to help prevent them from becoming addicts in the first place. They just want to scream "The Democrats are letting these illegals bring over fentanyl and it is killing our people!" They don't realize 89% of fentanyl smuggling arrests are of US Citizens bringing it across the border. Just like that idiot that was in the Charlottesville tiki torch brigade who just killed himself because he got busted bringing over 400 grams of fentanyl and they paid his stupid MAGA ass 216 bucks to do it.
I agree with this that yes opioid addiction, cancer and obesity are bigger problems. That doesn’t mean that 45,000 people dying from firearms is insignificant. That said what has the red team done to address the opioid addiction problem as there were still many dying from opioids when they controlled Congress and opioids are also major problems in red states? Also is the red team doing anything about obesity or cancer?
Does something being self-inflicted or unavoidable make it not a public health risk? That was the question asked, what is the current greatest threat to public health, not what can someone else do to you. Options to combat public health risks were far outside the scope of the question. Certainly it is irrelevant to the question who is smuggling fentanyl and for how much. As for the number of firearm homicides, some years have high numbers near 20,000, but from 2001 to 2016 it was around 10,000, and I expect it will probably return to those levels. At this point, an average year since 2000 is far more like 10,000 than 20,000 firearm homicides per year. I disagree with the statement that it is simply addiction that is the problem. People are addicted to caffeine and working out, but that doesn't mean those are public health risks on the level of cancer or COVID. Opiods are specifically dangerous because limited use (such as in pain management under a doctor's care) can result in addiction, and chances of death by overdose are very high in comparison to other drugs. There is no epidemic of overdose deaths for prescription stimulants or even meth, despite high addiction levels. Something like 75% of overdose deaths are opiod related and almost 20% were cocaine. Polysubstance abuse was also high in overdose deaths, almost always involving opiods/fentanyl. Death Rate Maps & Graphs | Drug Overdose | CDC Injury Center It does mean that the 35% of respondents that said access to firearms was the biggest public health issue were way off doesn't it? As to what is being done, as I said to Xopher, that is beyond the scope of the question. I don't even agree with the premise of the question that the Federal government should address the issue.
As stated I agree that firearms are behind opioids and cancer in regards to public health threat. Given that these are public health threats one would expect shot the political leaders you support would do something about it otherwise what is the point of tying this poll to political affiliation?
From those results one would assume the party with the red bars in the graphs is the side that wants universal healthcare coverage. That's correct right? It wouldn't make sense if we're the other side if this poll has any meaning behind it.
But the crazy is democrats are winning left and right everywhere. Democrats have never won this much during special and midterm elections. Biden has refused austerity and cutting budget yet democrats keep winning left and right. There's been tons of progressives nominated all throughout the nation. Michigan is about repeal right to work. Minnesota just passed abortion rights and universal voting. American public has gotten tired of GOPs bullshit and its fascinating. The crazy thing is the midterms had a +3 Republican base and they voted for democrats. Republicans are tired of their own leaders. The nation is definitely moving leftwards and it's thanks to trump.
So my analysis was correct and you agree with me. Got it. I don't care what the pollsters were attempting to prove. I don't want the federal government butting into people's lives to try to save them from heart disease or cancer or guns. That is far beyond the powers granted to them. The only takeaway from the poll for me was that Democrats are even more clueless than Republicans about the relative severity of these specific public health issues.
Since the midterms Michigan and Minnesota are passing massive democratic bills. I'm saying democratic policies are being implemented nationwide right now. This never happens on a state level when you have a democrat in white house.
The Democratic Party on Clutchfans is clearly the party of non contributing members @J.R. @Os Trigonum
America’s Shadow Self Ruinous policies have transformed California from a symbol of progress to a cautionary tale for the nation. https://www.city-journal.org/california-americas-shadow-self excerpt: The reasons progressives give for California’s problems stopped making sense long ago. Since the 1970s, they have attributed much of the state’s difficulties to Republicans’ unwillingness to fund social programs. The cause of homelessness, they alleged, was Ronald Reagan’s decision to close mental institutions and tighten civil-commitment standards as governor and his refusal, as president, to fund “community-based” alternatives. But progressives have been unable to make that argument credibly for decades. For 12 years, Democrats have held a supermajority of the California legislature and controlled the governor’s mansion. California spends much more than other states on homelessness and mental illness, yet has worse outcomes. Without Republicans to blame, Democrats have turned to the state’s housing shortage as a catch-all explanation. A lack of housing does cause problems in California, as Christopher Elmendorf explains in this issue. Los Angeles and the Bay Area struggle even to build apartments near mass-transit stations. Insufficient housing, massively driving up the cost of keeping a roof overhead, contributed to the state’s population drop-off since 2014, as well as to the loss of many tech companies and jobs to more affordable locales in Texas and Florida. And it’s not just housing that is missing—the inability of California’s local governments to build hospitals, group homes, and shelters has undermined cities’ ability to solve the homelessness problem. But expensive housing is not the main driver of street disorder. Advocates of development, such as progressive state senator Scott Wiener, cynically insist in public that expensive rent causes thousands of people to wind up living and dying on city sidewalks, yet freely admit in other contexts that leaders’ refusal to mandate psychiatric or addiction treatment is the true culprit. If California were to deal with homeless addicts and untreated mental illness on a statewide level, as in Massachusetts, and not locally, then the street population could get treatment in drug-recovery communities, hospitals, and group homes in cheaper parts of the state, such as the Central Valley. more at the link
If tying the polls to political leanings should be expressing the priorities of where the political parties are. In that case since the red team isn’t really doing anything about what they consider to be public health threats then it’s largely meaningless. Also to add I’m not sure what your interest is in this debate since you don’t think the government should be doing anything anyway. So why even be raising what the different political parties view of it.
Polling is nearly always meaningless. You shouldn't based any serious decision what some random collection of people say. I like facts, talking about facts, and talking about misperceptions of facts commonly held.
