A big issue I have with certain forms of socialism

If you are born with a disability or condition, become injured in sport or war or develop something in old age through no fault of your own whilst being a productive, healthy member of society, I completely understand socialised healthcare for such people if they have paid into it.

However, I find something immoral about the idea of someone who has put a lot of money into exercise equipment/gym and healthy food, and time into exercising and preparing healthy meals, to then have to pay for the surgery of someone in their 40s who has just had heart failure as a direct result of going to mcdonalds every day and their only exercise being a couple minute walk to the cinema. Money that he could have put into the healthier man's children, or his hobbies, or into a business.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Penny · 46-50, F

one could say the unhealthy eater was a victim of societal norms or poor upbringing, mental or emotional problems, etc. though. just as if say he had a heart attack from overexerting himself exercising and became disabled or something, the healthcare would still cover him. the poor in society are often the worst eaters. do you want to penalize people for not being able to afford healthier foods? one man who makes himself a glutton of his own volition should not affect everyone else. to begrudge everyone else because of the few seems selfish to me if you want my opinion. no matter how healthy a person is they never know when they might suffer setbacks or catastrophes. the safety net is for everyone. the lucky who never need it should consider themselves fortunate and in an ideal world be gracious to share that good fortune if say for one by their ability to work. not all have that luxury. his money is going to the security of his children in a roundabout way. it's a sacrifice for the greater good.

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny Thank you for the input. However I have to disagree. I was born severely crippled which makes exercise very hard. I do it anyway. Did it for 5 hours today. I also suffered from a severe facial condition that made it look like the tree man at one point (and it's permanently wrecked my face to a large extent), so the emotional stress was there too. I ended up getting fat. But then one day I decided to screw my feelings and fix myself, even though whatever I do, I'll still be crippled. I bought healthier food, despite not even making minimum wage and living on my own paying rent. It also takes me a long time to lose weight, and I put it on easy.

So, I have
Physical disability
Emotional issues
very little money
difficulty losing weight

Yet I still decided that I have no excuse to be overweight.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve well, i dont want to start a fight so i wont say much. (im already in a lousy mood so nothing i say is going to come out nicely) if only everyone could be as lucky as you to have the inner fortitude and perserverance and blah blah blah to have accomplished what you have done. sadly, it's not the case. the solution. genocide of lazy or uncaring people. problem solved.

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny I don't need anybody to tell me I have inner fortitude or any other feel good rubbish. I was dealt a rubbish hand, I never had a choice so had to develop that strength from day one and that's it. But in today's socialist world, because people don't immediately feel the effects of abusing their bodies, they abuse it for years. And then they have even less incentive to look after it, if someone else is going to pay for their treatment. And then even less when they listen to people who tell them that the only reason these more productive people can afford to pay the taxes for that surgery is because they are somehow oppressive, they feel even more justified to mess with their health.
I don't wish to kill anyone. Including the lazy. I just don't think such people should be subsidized by those who do look after their health and who are productive. For reasons stated in my post. Slowly, everyone gets dragged down to the same low level. No matter how well off a member of society may be, there are not unlimited resources.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve humans are complex and healthful habits arent always taught and or encouraged. im sorry but to expect everyone to live up to the standard you keep for yourself is kind of unreasonable given how a lot of people are or were raised. especially with corporations churning out unhealthy foods and advertising heavily brainwashing people into buying their unhealthful products.. there's so many factors that can go into peoples life choices. it's understandable to feel resentful that you have to contribute to a society that may not run to your liking, but sadly we cannot control how other people live their lives and as a society we have to do something for the good of all sometimes even if it's a detriment to us personally. in any case, isnt it nice to know if you lost your job or had some problems that made you unable to work that at least your basic survival needs would be met? you are paying for your own security as well as others. can you think of a solution for this issue that would make things more to your liking?

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny It is not unreasonable in the slightest.
There is no corporate advertisement, technique whatever you wish to call it, that changes what everyone knows to be healthy foods.
" in any case, isnt it nice to know if you lost your job or had some problems that made you unable to work that at least your basic survival needs would be met?" Oh I believe in socialism in certain areas. But if I actively attempted to destroy my job prospects, then no I would deserve some sort of safety net. Same applies if I choose to eat rubbish for years. So many people pretend that it's complicated, but it isn't. You also don't become obese overnight. You slowly see that increase, and when you do, let yourself continue anyway.
" can you think of a solution for this issue that would make things more to your liking?" I dont want a solution for my liking. That's my point. Rather than having socialists try and solve all your problems, which is what puts people into this care free hedonistic state to begin with, the government should stop with all this solution finding. When people have to be responsible, when they have to pay the bill, then all of a sudden people will do wonders, I notice.
It's nothing to do with being resentful that it does not run to my liking. I don't pay taxes (other than the inavoidable tax on products). I dont resent it. I find it unfair that people that look after themselves have to take the bill for hedonists. Similarly, if there were 2 people. One of them spent a lot of their childhood developing a skill and as a result could earn a high income from it as an adult. The other, from the same financial group, spent their childhood just playing videogames and as a result works minimum wage. That first person should not give the second person a single dime. That would just disincentivise being productive. It brings both the whole of society and the individual down.
We think and experience things as individuals. We dont think as groups. prosperity does not come from the top down. it comes from the individual, the smaller unit. If individuals can bring themselves up with their own work, they will then have the means to voluntarily help others. And people do a much better job when it is done voluntarily.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve i'm getting irritated. get rid of government then. everyone for themselves!!! only the strong will survive!!

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny Yes, I agree to a large extent. I am a social darwinist. Government just to protect private property and from violence.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve well, i think socialism sucks personally but I personally am grateful there are things such as social safety nets. social darwinism seems like an interesting and valid theory (which i am just going by the name) not saying all lives dont matter but survival of the fittest is natural and i am all for natural but unfortunately there are many factors i think that would make it very difficult to institute. diminishing taxes and governmental programs would open up more causes for charity and my hopes would be that private charities would take their place. the government probably wouldnt like that though because then those peoples loyalties would be with their caregivers and not the government.

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny I think so many ills of modern society are due to how modern social structures greatly reduce the potential for natural selection to filter out weakness. We have people who are objectively awful and wasteful with their money (whilst complaining about having none) and top up with welfare and then pass that attitude on to their children. One generation of no socialism would destroy that. Same sort of thing with weight, obesity which strains the NHS would be gone and we'd have a healthier population who could create more. The genes for many physical and mental disabilities would fail to be passed on. Any kind of stupid idea would be less likely to pass on, as acting upon these ideas would result in less success and therefor less chance of a partner.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve well, honestly, without being treated in a proactive manner, I think the subject is pretty pointless and can be quite offensive. Obesity can be genetic or a disease or disorder as well as something that people succumb to solely because of poor choices. To fight obesity would mean to fight the large food corporations too. Who is willing to do that? A survival of the fittest approach would surely be their downfall. Besides, some people can live on junk food and be perfectly healthy where others cant too. So its not that simple. And poor financial habits too is a terrible subject to think about from my viewpoint. I find a lot of people just don't care at all. To make them be responsible? Hard job. (Not saying I'm not occasionally guilty of excessive spending.) And no one wants to hear about "culling the weak" That stuff is probably better off left in secret societies and such lol. I am an observer and supplicant in this life. I can only offer my thoughts and I offer them very casually.

pianoplayingsteve · 31-35, M

@Penny I could not care less what is offensive. I'd be open to someone suggesting to to me why people with my own condition should be done away with. "I'm offended" is not an argument.
I dont think the food corps should be fought. They aren't forcing anyone to eat their food. As soon as you give people that excuse, even if we did somehow end fast food companies, the obese would invent a new excuse.
There is a simple solution to both the financially stupid and the obese. End the state support. Simple. It's like someone who still lives with their parents in their 20s in which they dont contribute rent and so feel their min wage job gives them plenty of money so they don't strive for more. Cut that support off. Let natural selection, natural law, do its job. natural selection culls without prejudice.

Penny · 46-50, F

@pianoplayingsteve see the post i just made under everyoneknows comment