• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Japan makes it illegal to be too wide

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
So your saying it's not governments place to go round making laws...?
Not ones concerning what consenting adults can or can't intake and what they can or can't do as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else physically.

You can't be THIS dumb.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
26,987
4,072
126
Not ones concerning what consenting adults can or can't intake and what they can or can't do as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else physically.

You can't be THIS dumb.
I'm not sure how else to put this.

It is governments place to make those laws, that's what government is for. If you don't like those laws campaign to get them changed.

The fact YOU don't like a law doesn't make it wrong.

You can't be that naive.
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
I'm not sure how else to put this.

It is governments place to make those laws, that's what government is for. If you don't like those laws campaign to get them changed.

The fact YOU don't like a law doesn't make it wrong.

You can't be that naive.
No, it is not. I guess you've never heard this saying:

"Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD."

It's you being willfully naive. Yeah, they can do it; doesn't mean it's their place to or, in other words, that they should.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,877
4,209
126
I'm not sure how else to put this.

It is governments place to make those laws, that's what government is for. If you don't like those laws campaign to get them changed.

The fact YOU don't like a law doesn't make it wrong.

You can't be that naive.
Supposed to be different here. Government was not given a free hand to own your life. Your situation may be otherwise, but having a master is seen as an ever more desirable thing.
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
26,987
4,072
126
... Yeah, they can do it; doesn't mean it's their place to or, in other words, that they should.
It's governments job to make laws and decisions about these things, that's what they are there for. The fact that you don't like the decisions doesn't mean that they shouldn't make them.

Who do you think should make those decisions then? You?
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,464
2
0
In which case they can simply deny service to anyone above a certain weight/size if they want to take advantage of "government healthcare/free healthcare". Making it illegal is completely unnecessary. BTW, it's not free: the money to run government programs is funded by taxpayers.
Funded by taxpayers . . . so yes, if you're getting it free or subsidized you should fit certain requirements of health.
Of course, if they do this for overweight people, this opens up another issue and for the "protection" of citizens they'd also need to deny healthcare to people that smoke, drink alcohol, take drugs, and whatever else they deem "unsafe".
just like any other insurance company, if you're deemed too much of a risk for reason X, Y or Z, you're not covered.
It's just stupid BS. The government is there to protect peoples' rights, not to take them away. Who's the government to say that it's illegal for x person to eat cheeseburgers, to drink beer or rum, or to smoke cigarettes? Reeks of authoritarianism, and it's flat-out wrong.
They shouldn't have the right to say it's illegal to eat cheesburgers or smoke cigarettes, but they should be allowed to deny health coverage based on that. I wouldn't be so much against government health-insurance if they mandated healthy lifestyles before coverage. That way Your and My tax dollars are spent "better"
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
It's governments job to make laws and decisions about these things, that's what they are there for. The fact that you don't like the decisions doesn't mean that they shouldn't make them.

Who do you think should make those decisions then? You?
It's not the place of the government to take away rights regarding consenting adults and what they can or can't do as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else physically or tangibly. Do I need to repeat myself over and over again or are you really this dumb?

Since it's the first time I said it perhaps you didn't get it:

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD.
If you still don't get it then there's no point in trying to keep arguing with you.
 
Last edited:

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
It's not the place of the government to take away rights regarding consenting adults and what they can or can't do as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else physically. Do I need to repeat myself over and over again or are you really this dumb?
So you are saying that adults should be able to smoke/drink/become obese and then force others to pay for the consequences of those actions?

By that logic should I be able to steal someone's car? I mean as I long no one is physically hurt right?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,877
4,209
126
Since when? You obviously have different history books to me.
Prohibition?
They did away with it too. Now what Constitutional authority grants the government the right to tell people how much food they can eat? How about what you wear? That you read the Right books? Even if they could why would you want government dictating every day activities?
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
Funded by taxpayers . . . so yes, if you're getting it free or subsidized you should fit certain requirements of health.

just like any other insurance company, if you're deemed too much of a risk for reason X, Y or Z, you're not covered.


They shouldn't have the right to say it's illegal to eat cheesburgers or smoke cigarettes, but they should be allowed to deny health coverage based on that. I wouldn't be so much against government health-insurance if they mandated healthy lifestyles before coverage. That way Your and My tax dollars are spent "better"
I never said otherwise. I was arguing over making it illegal. But if they DO deny coverage, then it opens up a Pandora's Box to a whole slew of subjective opinions on what's good for you, neutral, or bad. If they make eating fatty foods illegal, they also need to make smoking, drinking alcohol and taking drugs illegal as well. That, and all the other things the government would have to classify, which opens up the door for the requirements to be based on some occasions on something subjective.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
I never said otherwise. I was arguing over making it illegal. But if they DO deny coverage, then it opens up a Pandora's Box to a whole slew of subjective opinions on what's good for you, neutral, or bad. If they make eating fatty foods illegal, they also need to make smoking, drinking alcohol and taking drugs illegal as well. That, and all the other things the government would have to classify, which opens up the door for the requirements to be based on some occasions on something subjective.
This is why the government shouldn't be operating healthcare, with free market healthcare people make their own choices because they have to pay for it
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
So you are saying that adults should be able to smoke/drink/become obese and then force others to pay for the consequences of those actions?

By that logic should I be able to steal someone's car? I mean as I long no one is physically hurt right?
How does it being legal to do these things force ANYONE else to have to pay for it, especially if the government can restrict who can take advantage of public/"free" healthcare?

Your whole sentence about stealing cars is borderline retarded. I guess you forgot that the person who's car is being stolen didn't consent to it.

This is exactly why I barely visit P&N. There are incredibly stupid and insane people here, much more than in all the other sub-forums.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
They did away with it too. Now what Constitutional authority grants the government the right to tell people how much food they can eat? How about what you wear? That you read the Right books? Even if they could why would you want government dictating every day activities?
What constitutional authority grants the government to pay for people's healthcare?

If you demand that the government treats people like children by providing for them then logically it should also treat them like children by making rules about their behavior.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
How does it being legal to do these things force ANYONE else to have to pay for it, especially if the government can restrict who can take advantage of public/"free" healthcare?

Your whole sentence about stealing cars is borderline retarded. I guess you forgot that the person who's car is being stolen didn't consent to it.

This is exactly why I barely visit P&N. There are incredibly stupid and insane people here, much more than in all the other sub-forums.
If the government says if you participate in xxxx activities you do not get government health care then fine.

Somehow I think Liberals would throw a fit, since they want EVERYONE covered regardless of their life choices.

Now, I dont consent to covering health care for people who are making poor health choices. Nor do I consent to have my car stolen.

But if the government can force me to pay for people's poor health choice while having no right to regulate them then....
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
What constitutional authority grants the government to pay for people's healthcare?

If you demand that the government treats people like children by providing for them then logically it should also treat them like children by making rules about their behavior.
There is no authority in the Constitution, it was brought in by progressives/socialists to pander to the entitlement mentality of people
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
If the government says if you participate in xxxx activities you do not get government health care then fine.

Somehow I think Liberals would throw a fit, since they want EVERYONE covered regardless of their life choices.

Now, I dont consent to covering health care for people who are making poor health choices. Nor do I consent to have my car stolen.

But if the government can force me to pay for people's poor health choice while having no right to regulate them then....
You realize how stupid this sounds? You CAN'T consent to have your car stolen. If you consent that means your car was borrowed.

That's as stupid as saying "she consented to be raped". Newsflash: if you consented that means you had sex.

Also, this may come across as a surprise to you, but there's different types of Liberals with different types of beliefs and different types of opinions.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0
You realize how stupid this sounds? You CAN'T consent to have your car stolen. If you consent that means your car was borrowed.

That's as stupid as saying "she consented to be raped". Newsflash: if you consented that means you had sex.

Also, this may come across as a surprise to you, but there's different types of Liberals with different types of beliefs and different types of opinions.
The whole concept of using the term consenting adults to refer to an individual activity such as drug use or over eating is the problem.

Taking my money to bailout people poor health choices is just as much stealing as taking my car.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
The whole concept of using the term consenting adults to refer to an individual activity such as drug use or over eating is the problem.

Taking my money to bailout people poor health choices is just as much stealing as taking my car
.
I agree, people have to be responsible for their choices and it wont happen with socialized medicine
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,908
44
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Stupid BS, if you ask me.

It's not the government's place to be mandating people have a certain weight, just like it's not their place to determine if they can't smoke or take alcohol for that matter.

Never knew Japan was such an authoritarian nation.
If Japan has Universal Healthcare then citizens are under the care of the Government and must adhere to the guidelines.
 

LOL_Wut_Axel

Diamond Member
Mar 26, 2011
4,310
8
81
The whole concept of using the term consenting adults to refer to an individual activity such as drug use or over eating is the problem.

Taking my money to bailout people poor health choices is just as much stealing as taking my car.



In what way does any of this have to do with making "poor health choices" illegal?

Just so you know, it's possible to make "poor health choices" legal while having the government restrict those people "making poor health choices" from qualifying for receiving "government/"free" healthcare.

Dear gawd, the stupidity here is never-ending.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,908
44
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
If Japan has Universal Healthcare then citizens are under the care of the Government and must adhere to the guidelines.

Sounds like a good argument against it here.
Sounds like much more of an argument for it.

Healthcare costs would drop like a rock.

Obesity, diabetes etc and all the ailments that go along with them would virtually be eliminated overnight.

Certainly a win-win for Country and citizens.

Anything less would be Un-Patriotic and hateful.

Why do you hate Americans?
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,670
6
0


In what way does any of this have to do with making "poor health choices" illegal?

Just so you know, it's possible to make "poor health choices" legal while having the government restrict those people "making poor health choices" from qualifying for receiving "government/"free" healthcare.

Dear gawd, the stupidity here is never-ending.
Except if you believe the government should deny coverage to people making poor health choices you would not be a liberal (unless you have been drinking :sneaky:)

See this recent thread
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2240765

which references this study:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/04/20/five-ways-to-turn-a-liberal-into-a-conservative-at-least-until-the-hangover-sets-in/

"In one study, for instance, liberal and conservative subjects were asked whether government health care should be extended to a hypothetical group of AIDS victims who were responsible for their own fates (they’d contracted the disease while knowing the risks, and having unprotected sex anyway). Liberals who were not under load—not distracted—wanted to help such people, despite the fact that they were personally responsible for their plight. But liberals under load were much more like conservatives, appearing to reason that this group of AIDS victims had gotten what they deserved. (Cognitive load did not appear to change the view of conservatives in the study.)"
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY