[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

... ummmmm ... unfair assumption?

Yes, in exactly the same way that OAW made an assumption.

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Or is it a known constant that all people working 9-5 are automatically pissing away all their money?

Most people piss away most of their money.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

OAW doesn't understand that spiking the capital gains tax to make it appear "fair" to him would take all the incentive to risk capital in investments and destroy tons of wealth, does he?

No, and neither does Karl (or the rest of the usual suspects).

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

It's fundamentally unfair that a married couple who pissed all their money away on wine, iPads, Playstations, vacations and bouncy castles aren't in the same boat as a married couple who scrimped, saved and invested for their future? Boo hoo!

Your right because while they both will get access and use entitlement programs in retirement, the ones that pissed away their money are not going to be living very well, maybe at the poverty line while the ones that saved money and invested are going to live very well in retirement with their savings adding to what they get in entitlements. I totally agree with you thats unfair.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Your right because while they both will get access and use entitlement programs in retirement, the ones that pissed away their money are not going to be living very well, maybe at the poverty line while the ones that saved money and invested are going to live very well in retirement with their savings adding to what they get in entitlements. I totally agree with you thats unfair.

My two cents: it's counter-productive to look at these sorts of things from the whole moral angle.

There will always be case study x and case study y that invoke different sets of emotions, murky moral areas, and differences in moral philosophy.

You can also look at this from a cold, hard, Spock-like, purely logical and mathematical fashion. I think that perhaps conversations best at least start there and evolve from there, because otherwise it is easy to let one's morals dictate the best policy despite it being fiscally unsustainable or impractical.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Your right because while they both will get access and use entitlement programs in retirement, the ones that pissed away their money are not going to be living very well, maybe at the poverty line while the ones that saved money and invested are going to live very well in retirement with their savings adding to what they get in entitlements. I totally agree with you thats unfair.

Yes, the ones who saved and invested should get a bonus as a "thank you" from society for being responsible.

[Athens]

Our entire economy and system is setup on waste. If every one stopped being wasteful the US 15 Trillion dollar economy would crash to 2 Trillion or less over night.... We encourage this life style. We advertise for this life style. We breed it into our young from the moment they start knowing what money is. Advertisement, product placement, and all the rest are a fine tuned science to manipulate people. Older generations have not been as exposed to it, as well as immigrants from other cultures. Its why our young generations are failing to badly. The Rich wouldn't be rich in a frugal society. The family spending all its money is paying the bonus to the rich by buying there products.

[Athens]

If you really want debt to go away, a total revamp of our food system and advertisement system needs to be done so we can stop making people sick. But of course the medical community will suffer from profit loss if that was to happen. Food is designed to make people sick, drug companies design pills to treat this and the cycle continues and with it uncontrollable medical expenses and loss productivity from people being sick. Entitlement programs where viable in the 70s because the general population was healthier. What we are seeing is a system unable to keep up with a sick population.

[Big Mac]

Nice ranting paragraph, bro, but I don't see any evidence to backup those claims. Most people are cutting back on many of their purchases and reducing their debt right now.

[Athens]

Well tell me what evidence you would accept.

[Athens]

Oh and one more question for you, do you deny any of the following?

Food is getting worse.
People are getting really unhealthy.
Younger Generations are spending way to much.
Drug companies have a invested interest in treating not curing.
The Sky is Blue.

Oh forgot to answer this

"Nice ranting paragraph, bro, but I don't see any evidence to backup those claims. Most people are cutting back on many of their purchases and reducing their debt right now."

And look at the shape of the economy for it. As people reduce spending and debt, the economy tanks.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Nice ranting paragraph, bro, but I don't see any evidence to backup those claims. Most people are cutting back on many of their purchases and reducing their debt right now.

Go watch Food, Inc. Seriously. It's on Netflix streaming, and is non-partisan (as well it should be, what Athens is talking about has absolutely nothing to do with party politics)...

[Athens]

Food Inc is just the tip of it. The BBC did a excellent series called the Truth about Food, it is also worth watching. While it has nothing to do with party politics directly, politics does play a important roll in our food disaster. The failing of our support systems can really be traced right back down to the most basic's of our lives the food we eat.

Doctors spend 90% of their time on conditions that they shouldn't have to. A lot of these conditions are treated with expensive drugs which shouldn't be needed. Many cases a lot of these conditions reverse themselves once the diet has been addressed. Our social security networks are failing because our health in general are failing beyond what it can cope with. Its why costs are going so dam high and over such a short period of time.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

what Athens is talking about has absolutely nothing to do with party politics...

That's fine. So how about a separate thread about it ?

And Athen's assertion that the debt would go away with bad food is illogical.
Those two have low correlation.

-t

[Athens]

Your telling me that a lot of the debt isnt from Medical costs? What about the farming subsidies?
United States Corn Subsidies || EWG Farm Subsidy Database

75 Billion to subsidize food that is making people sick. Sick people hurt the economy. Sick people make higher demands of social programs. Medical costs go up. And what is the largest portions of the debt, social programs and medical.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

OAW doesn't understand that spiking the capital gains tax to make it appear "fair" to him would take all the incentive to risk capital in investments and destroy tons of wealth, does he?

I see that burger that Big Mac is eating has a big ASSUMPTION between the buns instead of two all beef patties. All I said was that it was unfair to tax wage income higher than capital gains income. I NEVER said the capital gains tax rate should be RAISED. in fact earlier I talked about how tax rates could be LOWERED if loopholes and deductions were eliminated or significantly reduced. If the tax rate for wage income were reduced to 15% to match rhe capital gains rate that would "take all the incentive to risk capital in investments" how exactly?

OAW

[Uncle Skeleton]

Bad diet does cause medical problems, that's true. But it's not like we wouldn't have any medical problems if we all just ate right. Diet is no magic bullet for medical inflation.

[Athens]

Complications of hypertension - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Complications of diabetes mellitus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Most of our medical resources deal with just the complications of these 2 conditions, both directly related to food.

If you take out most of these conditions by fixing our food systems. People will be more productive at work. Medical costs would come down for the individual, the business and the social safety net. Just on the cost savings a lone, people will have more money to spend on stuff. Businesses will save money on costs of providing medical coverage and the state saves on the cost of medical. What has been one of the biggest changes in the last 30 years. Well the food is a big change. And with it the obesity rate and degrading health of people along with it. The drug industry is making a killing though treating people to raise quality of life back to normal or near normal.

Its the price we pay to eat cheap. Massive subsidies for the corn industry. Everything is re engineered from corn to make food that tastes and looks and feels like whole food but at a faction of the cost plus addictiveness and stuff added to ensure over eating creates a very rich food industry and a very poor health population. If half the chemicals used in food now was banned. And all the subsidies removed from corn and applied to whole food's, in 20 years we could correct a lot of the damage done and be saving a ton of money.

CDC - DHDSP - High Blood Pressure FAQs
How much does high blood pressure cost the United States?
In 2010, high blood pressure will cost the United States $76.6 billion in health care services, medications, and missed days of work.2

Diabetes costs USA more than wars, disasters, study says - USATODAY.com
A new study shows that the nation's unchecked diabetes epidemic exacts a heavy financial toll as well: $174 billion a year.

Just those 2 conditions alone is valued at $250 Billion a year out of dozens that are preventable based on diet. Over a decade that's 2.5 Trillion dollars. Add another 100 billion a year if you factor in smoking.

[turtle777]

Your mistake is to think that the money saved by healthy food wouldn't be blown on other things.

Trust me, they would. Hookers, booze, cars, whatever.

-t

[Athens]

So?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

That's fine. So how about a separate thread about it ?

And Athen's assertion that the debt would go away with bad food is illogical.
Those two have low correlation.

-t

I agree, that wasn't my claim, for the record.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Just those 2 conditions alone is valued at $250 Billion a year

Or about 10% of health care costs. I think that supports what I said.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Athens 

So?

It's irrelevant for this thread / topic.

A.k.a. derail or strawman.

-t

[Athens]

Add another 150 Billion for obesity, yes yes some of that will overlap with the other 2 I listed...

Health care costs have been rising for several years. Expenditures in the United States on health care surpassed $2.3 trillion in 2008, more than three times the $714 billion spent in 1990, and over eight times the $253 billion spent in 1980. Stemming this growth has become a major policy priority, as the government, employers, and consumers increasingly struggle to keep up with health care costs.

U.S. Health Care Costs: Background Brief - KaiserEDU.org, Health Policy Education from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

Ok lets look at it this way

The obesity epidemic is one of the country's most serious health problems. Adult obesity rates have doubled since 1980, from 15 to 30 percent, while childhood obesity rates have more than tripled. Rising obesity rates have significant health consequences, contributing to increased rates of more than 30 serious diseases. These conditions create a major strain on the health care system. More than one-quarter of health care costs are now related to obesity.

Over the last 30 years as medical costs have gone up so has obesity. From 15% to 30% in Adults. According to this site a entire quarter of medical costs in the US is related to just Obesity. Obesity Information - Trust for America's Health

What was another major change 30 years ago, high fructose corn syrup started getting put into everything. There is direct evidence between high fructose corn syrup and obesity. It causes the high blood pressure, it suppresses are natural systems for being full and its processed only in the liver. This one product ALONE is responsible for a ton of health problems.

Another big change int he 80s, the fat free crazy, replacing fats in products with sugars. For ever gram of fat removed a few grams of sugar was added. The high fructose corn syrup kind.

So what is the trend over the least 30 years. Fat free crazy, addition of high fructose corn syrup into everything, obesity rates doubled and medical costs are out of control..... Seems like it all goes together to me. The medical costs are LARGE part of the debt problem. No matter which way you look at it, it plays a role.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

It's irrelevant for this thread / topic.

A.k.a. derail or strawman.

-t

BS, large part of the debt problem is medical costs and uncontrollable spending. So far discussion has been about raising Taxes and cutting programs. This is just looking at a different problem related to the high spending in one area. It is totally relevant to the topic. Since no one can agree on raising taxes and cutting money, curing causes of the spending is totally valid.

[turtle777]

Are you dumb ? I just explained it to you, and you shrugged off my explanation with "So ?", and now you start re-debating it ?
Go back, read again, and please, try to understand.


-t

[Athens]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Are you dumb ? I just explained it to you, and you shrugged off my explanation with "So ?", and now you start re-debating it ?
Go back, read again, and please, try to understand.


-t

So your saying government and business will buy hookers and booze with the savings from the medical costs... Is that correct? Did I understand that right.

[turtle777]

PEOPLE. Or does government eat unhealthy food ?

-t

[besson3c]

The main point that Athens was making, that our food system is contributing to our medical costs, is quite accurate.

In fact, I'm surprised there isn't more right wing complaining about the government corn subsidies, cause this seems like something that would be up their alley...

[Athens]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

PEOPLE. Or does government eat unhealthy food ?

-t

People get sick from food, Business and Government pay for it.... what is so hard to understand? What do you think Medicare, Medicad and business Medical insurance play for? Government lack of regulations, FDA's pro business stance and government subsidies have created this mess. Governments left hand is paying out subsidies and its right hand is paying the medical costs.....

[Athens]

My point to be as blunt as possible, instead of looking to CUT medicare and other social programs, perhaps FIXING the causes of why they are costing so much would be a better approach.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

perhaps FIXING the causes of why they are costing so much would be a better approach.

Medical inflation is due to the lack of a free market. The people deciding what to buy are divorced from the people paying for it. And we keep inventing more and more expensive treatments. No amount of preventative care is going to change this.

blunt as possible

Here's my solution to the economy. Tax narcotics. Seriously. We're totally failing to stop them, and we're wasting a fortune trying. Meanwhile gangs and warlords are collecting the profits that ought to be fueling our next great bubble economy.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Athens 

People get sick from food, Business and Government pay for it.... what is so hard to understand?

Are you THAT dense ?

Even IF people only ate healthy food, and the governments would NOT have to pay for health care, people (and governments) would STILL go into debt, just spending money on something else.

The point is: debt problems are NOT caused by (un)healthy foods.
(They might be correlated, but that's irrelevant in the context of this discussion.)

-t

[Uncle Skeleton]

What other country has the best diet? Japan? That didn't save them from having debt. Or medical costs.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

What other country has the best diet? Japan? That didn't save them from having debt. Or medical costs.

Japan developed HFCS in the 60's. Japan has been switching to American food for the last few years and and like the US the exact same trend is showing up with more and more Japanese going obese. They just happen to be 20 years behind North America, And Japan pays a LOT less in medical, has universal coverage, a single payer model.



I think you proved my point accidentally. The fattest and unhealthiest people on the planet are paying the MOST for medical costs. You want to talk about a drain on the economy, how much do employees pay in medical insurance. How much do individuals pay for medical insurance. Prices which would be lower for both if not as many people where sick. Lower prices means they can spend the money on hiring more people. For the person means more money to spend on other stuff which directly relates to economic activity. Government saves on medical budgets.


BTW its not what country has the best diet. Its not even about what we eat but what is in the food now that was not in the food 30 years ago. Its what the diet was 30+ years ago compared to now. The poison in our food is being used in food all over the world. The US is just ahead of every one.

[Athens]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Are you THAT dense ?

Even IF people only ate healthy food, and the governments would NOT have to pay for health care, people (and governments) would STILL go into debt, just spending money on something else.

The point is: debt problems are NOT caused by (un)healthy foods.
(They might be correlated, but that's irrelevant in the context of this discussion.)

-t

Who said the Debt is "CAUSED" by unhealthy Foods"

The Debt is "CAUSED" by a lot of factors. Tax cuts, military spend increases, 2 wars, recession, increase demand on social security, increase demand on medicare. Im just tossing in one item that can help reduce some of the debt spending. Fixing the food problem will reduce (ONE AREA) of the debt problem. Reducing Military spending will reduce (ANOTHER AREA) of the debt problem. Ending the Bush Tax cuts will fix (ANOTHER AREA) of the debt problem. No one thing will fix the debt problem. And just yapping about cut spending cut spending does nothing either. At least this targets one area of the spending with a cause and solution. Lets see you do better then just yapping about CUT SPENDING CUT SPENDING.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

I think you proved my point accidentally.

And you proved turtle's point, they just spend it on something else instead

For the person means more money to spend on other stuff which directly relates to economic activity.

As if health care spending wasn't economic activity

what is in the food now that was not in the food 30 years ago.

People didn't get sick 30 years ago? The real problem is we have more expensive (more effective) options now, and the reason that is a problem is because rationing is broken. We don't self-ration (free market) and we refuse to let others ration us (death panels), so there is simply no rationing and we pay more and more and more.

[Athens]

No dude your wrong. Food is a science, everything in it today is designed to screw your natural eating habits up. Food is designed to cause over eating, addiction, its not about self ration.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

People didn't get sick 30 years ago? The real problem is we have more expensive (more effective) options now, and the reason that is a problem is because rationing is broken. We don't self-ration (free market) and we refuse to let others ration us (death panels), so there is simply no rationing and we pay more and more and more.

Rationing is a part of the problem, but there are other factors...

Another big one is the fact that we realized that we can drive the costs down on various food products by stuffing them full of corn which is used as filler and substitutes for other stuff, so the government has been subsidizing farmers to harvest corn. This is why people have been losing their grease over high fructose corn syrup. Something as simple as a coke tastes much different in, say, the UK than it does here because high fructose corn syrup is not listed as an ingredient, at least when I was there. Soda alone accounts for a great amount of high fructose corn syrup.

It's not just food products that are being stuffed full of corn, but also the animals that are slaughtered - the corn is used as a substitute for grass, even with animals that weren't meant to digest corn.

America can produce a paint load of corn, so our food system is setup to take advantage of that.

Other variables:

- the rise of factory farming, the Monsato (sp?!) corp
- poverty and the lack of an increase in middle class wages. Look at your grocery store and what you would have to buy on a budget, the vast majority of it is corn, corn, and more corn.
- the rise of sumo wrestling

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Who said the Debt is "CAUSED" by unhealthy Foods"

You implied so multiple times.
And before you claim you didn't, then WTF did you even bring it up in a thread about DEBT ?
Of course, you're now going to weasel out and say you always only implied correlation. If so, pack your f*cking strawmen and go play somewhere else. It has nothing to do with the DEBT (by your own admission).

Seriously, discussing with you is a drain, you don't make any sense.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Seriously, discussing with you is a drain, you don't make any sense.

So why not dial down your intensity so that you don't allow yourself to get revved up?

If we want to rev you up we could just Google "government ****ing up" and post some articles...

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

Food is designed to cause over eating, addiction, its not about self ration.

I meant rationing of healthcare

No dude your wrong. Food is a science, everything in it today is designed to screw your natural eating habits up.

While this is true, there would still be illness with or without it. There was plenty of illness before the science of modern food, and there will still be illness after the backlash against it.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Rationing is a part of the problem, but there are other factors...

Another big one is the fact that we realized that we can drive the costs down on various food products by stuffing them full of corn which is used as filler and substitutes for other stuff, so the government has been subsidizing farmers to harvest corn. This is why people have been losing their grease over high fructose corn syrup. Something as simple as a coke tastes much different in, say, the UK than it does here because high fructose corn syrup is not listed as an ingredient, at least when I was there. Soda alone accounts for a great amount of high fructose corn syrup.

It's not just food products that are being stuffed full of corn, but also the animals that are slaughtered - the corn is used as a substitute for grass, even with animals that weren't meant to digest corn.

America can produce a paint load of corn, so our food system is setup to take advantage of that.

I make my own food, for the most part. Almost no HFCS (plenty of corn though). I'm still going to get sick when I'm old, I guarantee it. This is all a red herring. Old people get sick, it's their thing. The only way to avoid it is to die first.

Also corn fed beef tastes better than grass fed. Don't try to feed me that bullgrease

- poverty and the lack of an increase in middle class wages. Look at your grocery store and what you would have to buy on a budget, the vast majority of it is corn, corn, and more corn.

This is a pile of lies. The base of the pile is costs. The cheapest food is the food you cook yourself, from flour, sugar, eggs, etc, and no HFCS. This is also healthier. (You have to have a kitchen though, so sucks for the homeless). The next lie in the pile is that corn is the devil. Corn is great. Corn SYRUP isn't great, but then neither is sucrose syrup (duh). You shouldn't be drinking so much coke in the first place. The third lie is one of omission, salt. Salt is a real problem, a natural one (sucks for the orgo police), that piles up in all kinds of preserved foods, which makes sense as it was one of our earliest preservatives. So again, cook for yourself and you'll mostly be fine. You don't need nearly as much salt (or corn syrup, or sugar for that matter) when you're cooking fresh.

Anyway, this is all off topic...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I make my own food, for the most part. Almost no HFCS (plenty of corn though). I'm still going to get sick when I'm old, I guarantee it. This is all a red herring. Old people get sick, it's their thing. The only way to avoid it is to die first.

I'm not making arguments about a heavy corn diet making you sick, just being overly fattening which of course leads to health problems.

Also corn fed beef tastes better than grass fed. Don't try to feed me that bullgrease

I haven't really compared the two...

This is a pile of lies. The base of the pile is costs. The cheapest food is the food you cook yourself, from flour, sugar, eggs, etc, and no HFCS. This is also healthier. (You have to have a kitchen though, so sucks for the homeless).

This wasn't a quote from Food, Inc. so technically this is not a lie, just my bull crap, but okay... Still, there is a ton of really crappy convenience food out there. It's remarkable how much of this exists in a grocery store.

The next lie in the pile is that corn is the devil. Corn is great. Corn SYRUP isn't great, but then neither is sucrose syrup (duh). You shouldn't be drinking so much coke in the first place.

I was just using "corn" as a shorthand to mean high fructose corn syrup... I thought this was kind of obvious, but okay, my fault for not being more specific.

The third lie is one of omission, salt. Salt is a real problem, a natural one (sucks for the orgo police), that piles up in all kinds of preserved foods, which makes sense as it was one of our earliest preservatives. So again, cook for yourself and you'll mostly be fine. You don't need nearly as much salt (or corn syrup, or sugar for that matter) when you're cooking fresh.

Paging Salty...

[Athens]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

You implied so multiple times.
And before you claim you didn't, then WTF did you even bring it up in a thread about DEBT ?
Of course, you're now going to weasel out and say you always only implied correlation. If so, pack your f*cking strawmen and go play somewhere else. It has nothing to do with the DEBT (by your own admission).

Seriously, discussing with you is a drain, you don't make any sense.

-t

Are you for real....

"before you claim you didn't, then WTF did you even bring it up in a thread about DEBT " YES it does have something to do with Debt, the unhealthy food industry + the subsidy plays a part in the debt.

"Of course, you're now going to weasel out and say you always only implied correlation" I think your the only person in the entire PLANET that some how read that FOOD was the only cause for debt. I think every one else understood and some even posted to that effect to clarify it for you.

"It has nothing to do with the DEBT (by your own admission)." I never said it had nothing to do with DEBT it does, I said its not the ONLY cause for debt. How do you translate not the only cause as nothing to do with debt....

[Athens]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I meant rationing of healthcare


While this is true, there would still be illness with or without it. There was plenty of illness before the science of modern food, and there will still be illness after the backlash against it.

I don't see how rationing healthcare is a good option. Whats the point of spending 10k on some one to let them die later of a 5k problem because they hit the limit. Its like using half a bandaid on a cut allowing part of it to bleed vs fixing whatever needed to be fixed that caused the cut in the first place.

Of course there would still be illness, always will be. But when 90% of what hospitals and doctors treat today are preventable conditions and of that a most of them related to conditions with Food, you should be able to see that what makes up the rest will not cost so much. If you group all the broken legs, crash victims, very old together and took out all the blood pressure related problems, all the obese related problems, the amount spent on healthcare would go from 2.5 Trillion collectively to what 500 billion? Thats a major difference. 800 Billion is medicares budget now, even a 400 billion a year saving is big. Add to that military cut backs, fixing the problems in social security a deficit becomes a surplus. Reduce the demand on the service by fixing what leads to the demand vs just cutting service itself. Modern food is just one major element of health care costs.

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I make my own food, for the most part. Almost no HFCS (plenty of corn though). I'm still going to get sick when I'm old, I guarantee it. This is all a red herring. Old people get sick, it's their thing. The only way to avoid it is to die first.

Also corn fed beef tastes better than grass fed. Don't try to feed me that bullgrease



This is a pile of lies. The base of the pile is costs. The cheapest food is the food you cook yourself, from flour, sugar, eggs, etc, and no HFCS. This is also healthier. (You have to have a kitchen though, so sucks for the homeless). The next lie in the pile is that corn is the devil. Corn is great. Corn SYRUP isn't great, but then neither is sucrose syrup (duh). You shouldn't be drinking so much coke in the first place. The third lie is one of omission, salt. Salt is a real problem, a natural one (sucks for the orgo police), that piles up in all kinds of preserved foods, which makes sense as it was one of our earliest preservatives. So again, cook for yourself and you'll mostly be fine. You don't need nearly as much salt (or corn syrup, or sugar for that matter) when you're cooking fresh.

Anyway, this is all off topic...

Ya you will get sick when your old. Now how about the 25 year old already on 4 medications, by the time hes 35 is on 10 medications and has already cost the medical systems in 35 years what you would have cost it your entire life. Now multiply that by 150 Million Americans, you see the problem yet. This is why Insurance rates are SO HIGH, and why so much Tax payer money ends up being used for medical. Its also why rates for employers are so high to offer medical coverage. Its no longer old people getting sick, its every age group and at alarming numbers. The medical system as a whole never had to deal with this kind of strain 30+ years ago. 18 year olds are developing heart problems now.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I'm not making arguments about a heavy corn diet making you sick, just being overly fattening which of course leads to health problems.

I was just using "corn" as a shorthand to mean high fructose corn syrup... I thought this was kind of obvious, but okay, my fault for not being more specific.

I think corn is getting a bad rap here. I mean, do you really think that using cane sugar instead of HFCS is going to make coca-cola healthy? Let's be realistic. Junk food is fattening because of the amount of sweetener, not the type of sweetener.

This wasn't a quote from Food, Inc. so technically this is not a lie, just my bull crap, but okay... Still, there is a ton of really crappy convenience food out there. It's remarkable how much of this exists in a grocery store.

You're not off base though, this is a common sentiment. The error is that you and everyone else confuses convenience for savings ($). In truth it's the opposite. Take a look at the price per pound of junk food some time, and compare it to the price per pound of flour, sugar, eggs, milk and fresh veggies. Simple ingredients are waaaay cheaper, and you get to dilute them with water for free (depending on what you're cooking). Eating healthy is cheaper, as long as you make it yourself. It's only if you insist on having someone else prepare your food, that healthy costs more than junk.

Paging Salty...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

I think corn is getting a bad rap here. I mean, do you really think that using cane sugar instead of HFCS is going to make coca-cola healthy? Let's be realistic. Junk food is fattening because of the amount of sweetener, not the type of sweetener.

This is true for junk food, but what about all of the other food that is disguised to not be junk food that is filled with corn syrup?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Athens 

snip - same old bla bla

Seriously, Athens, did you even read my posts ?
Go and investigate correlation != causation.

You really make a fool out of yourself.

-t

[Athens]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

This is true for junk food, but what about all of the other food that is disguised to not be junk food that is filled with corn syrup?

100 Calories of Sucrose does not have the same effect on the body as a 100 Calories of HFCS.

HFCS can only be processed by the liver. It interferes with appetite signals which tells the brain your full. It causes high blood pressure on its own. Most of it gets turned into body fat and the small cell fat cells which are the ones that stick to artery walls.

Fructose and Methanol both sugars that are very similar. The only difference between Fructose and Methanol is that Methanol's by product when processed by the liver is also metablised by the brain causing you to have the drunk effect. They both result in beer guts and the same kind of liver damage. Sucrose (sugar cain sugar) is 50% fructose and 50% glucose resulting in a much lower exposure to fructose which is a poison to the body. Totally off topic, just had to put that in there.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Athens 

I don't see how rationing healthcare is a good option. Whats the point of spending 10k on some one to let them die later of a 5k problem because they hit the limit. Its like using half a bandaid on a cut allowing part of it to bleed vs fixing whatever needed to be fixed that caused the cut in the first place.

That would be fine if band-aids were the cutting edge of medical science. But we keep inventing new and marginally better treatments, and like all early-adopter technologies the prices are outrageous. Would you spend $2MM for a stem-cell therapy for a cut, if it would heal in 2 hours instead of 2 days (like the band-aid)? What if it was covered by insurance?

Basically we have 3 options. 1) Ration care; only the super mega ultra rich who have more money than sense should get the $2MM finger-cut treatment. 2) Prevent expensive treatments from being invented in the first place, so no one can benefit from them. 3) We pay $2MM for everyone, obscure the costs through insurance, and then stand around wondering why insurance costs are so high.

I vote for option 1. What about you?

90% of what hospitals and doctors treat today are preventable conditions and of that a most of them related to conditions with Food

Wat?

Ya you will get sick when your old. Now how about the 25 year old already on 4 medications, by the time hes 35 is on 10 medications and has already cost the medical systems in 35 years what you would have cost it your entire life.
...
18 year olds are developing heart problems now.

Hey no offense man, but knowing you I smell an irrelevant anecdote. Do you want to share it?