Why is America turning into a big fat slob?

DV · Post by DV » Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:26 am

R0cke113 wrote:The calorie thing is primarily a big ploy. Calories are nothing more than a total count of all ingredients. 1 g of fat is 9 cal. and 1 g of protein and carbs are each 4 cal. The significance of this information is that while you have been led to believe calories are bad they are very indifferent.

That burger has 765 grams of calories from fat.

Gixxer · Post by **Gixxer** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 1:33 pm

UOD wrote:What reasons do you have to put on weight....and then to lose it?

depends on the weight class of wrestlers i am training at the time.

R0cke113 · Post by **R0cke113** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 2:33 pm

I'm very pleased to see people going organic and getting on the health kick I just fear that our laziness will get the best of us and people will get bored with the healthy living and go on to the next cool thing. The one thing I would truly like to see in my life is the opposite of the pharmaceutical corps. dream, which is for no one to ever need to take a pill. Also I would love to see some of these BS syndromes debunked for the lack of movement and exercise they are ie. restless leg syndrome.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Mon Nov 17, 2008 5:08 pm

Gixxer wrote:depends on the wieght class of wrestlers i am training at the time.

Midgets?

Gixxer · Post by **Gixxer** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 am

UOD wrote:Midgets?

should i whine now that you have called me a midget like when i called you sunshine?

you would be awful embarassed when this midget rolled you up and put you in a hurt lock.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:01 am

Gixxer wrote:should i whine now that you have called me a midget like when i called you sunshine?

you would be awful embarassed when this midget rolled you up and put you in a hurt lock.

Midget wrestlers....as in kids league.

And no, you'd be the one embarrassed. I'm a Raven trained in combatives which I also instruct in the military.

Don't assume that you know my capabilities.

Gixxer · Post by **Gixxer** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:11 am

UOD wrote:Midget wrestlers....as in kids league.

And no, you'd be the one embarrassed. I'm a Raven trained in combatives which I also instruct in the military.

Don't assume that you know my capabilities.

kids league? High School. (yea, kids)

i have been up against some of the best in the US (even military), not sure you would impress me.

as far as assuming your capabilities, it looks as though you assumed as well.

wth is a raven (besides a bird)

Gixxer · Post by **Gixxer** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:12 am

UOD wrote:Midget wrestlers....as in kids league.

And no, you'd be the one embarrassed. I'm a Raven trained in combatives which I also instruct in the military.

Don't assume that you know my capabilities.

not sure that midgets = H.S.

Dan · Post by **Dan** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:21 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4Wm4DXkcj0

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:25 am

Gixxer wrote:not sure that midgets = H.S.

That's why I asked....midgets?

Midgets translates into a weight class in most areas....just like you have mini-cheerleaders, Babe-Ruth leagues, Farm leagues, etc....most adolescent sports are differentiated by age/and or weight class.

R0cke113 · Post by **R0cke113** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:19 pm

Ravens thats sp? Right? I hear they get into some awesome stuff with rangers and Spec. Forces and what not.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:25 pm

R0cke113 wrote:Ravens thats sp? Right? I hear they get into some awesome stuff with rangers and Spec. Forces and what not.

That's correct.

R0cke113 · Post by **R0cke113** » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:45 pm

With the principles your signature holds and taking into consideration our difference in perspectives I'm still very surprised at the disagreements we hold on some key issues. BTW your revolution-rising link isn't quite working.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:04 am

R0cke113 wrote:With the principles your signature holds and taking into consideration our difference in perspectives I'm still very surprised at the disagreements we hold on some key issues. BTW your revolution-rising link isn't quite working.

I'm not a big fan of government. I love freedom. But I also believe that freedom brings with it the responsibility to help your fellow man. When our capitalistic appetite for greed overwhelms that sense of individual responsibility to our fellow man...when we become selfish at the expense of him, then we are in effect, killing freedom.

What are the key issues we disagree on?

R0cke113 · Post by **R0cke113** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:07 am

I disagree on a universal health care system and It would appear as though you are in support of that. In that issue I believe the government should allocate a small amount of money toward non-profit organizations that work toward health care for the poor. A non-profit is exactly that and it must be watched closely so as to avoid ceo's of the org.'s getting paid tons of money.

As it stands anyone can get government aid for a non-profit org and this program would not be much different other than it would require COMPLETE transparency, which is not currently pursued in all orgs.

I can't really think of anything off the top of my head.

R0cke113 · Post by **R0cke113** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:13 am

Also a major problem I have with universal health care is the fact that I a person who takes pride in keeping myself healthy then is required to pay through taxes for another individual who simply has no desire of keeping them self healthy. This ties right into this thread.

If I as an American tax paying citizen am going to be paying for everyone's health care then I want results for my money. Meaning I want everyone recipient fulfilling a required amount of weekly exercise. Also on top of that I want true nutrition knowledge being spread instead of the garbage the pharmaceutical companies push into the media.

The level of corruption in out government would turn any healt care system into a paycheck for these drug companies to give every American a half dozen pills everyday from birth to death.

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:29 am

R0cke113 wrote:Also a major problem I have with universal health care is the fact that I a person who takes pride in keeping myself healthy then is required to pay through taxes for another individual who simply has no desire of keeping them self healthy.

Good point. Would the gov't, if it were to handle health insurance, have higher rates for those who smoke, and thus, lower rates for those who don't?

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:54 pm

R0cke113 wrote:Also a major problem I have with universal health care is the fact that I a person who takes pride in keeping myself healthy then is required to pay through taxes for another individual who simply has no desire of keeping them self healthy. This ties right into this thread.

If I as an American tax paying citizen am going to be paying for everyone's health care then I want results for my money. Meaning I want everyone recipient fulfilling a required amount of weekly exercise. Also on top of that I want true nutrition knowledge being spread instead of the garbage the pharmaceutical companies push into the media.

The level of corruption in out government would turn any healt care system into a paycheck for these drug companies to give every American a half dozen pills everyday from birth to death.

YeOldeStonecat wrote:Good point. Would the gov't, if it were to handle health insurance, have higher rates for those who smoke, and thus, lower rates for those who don't?

How could it be a fact if there is no universal health care system in place? That is simply and purely conjecture.

What is a fact is that you ALREADY pay for those folks that don't give a rat's ass about their health and you do it willingly lol.

Make no mistake about it....if I were in charge of creating or REFORMING a program, you can bet your sweet ass that I would tie in MANDATORY fitness standards....even for private insurance.

This is why most so called conservatives don't want to change anything with the healthcare system. They want to abuse themselves and then use the system for the medical fix at the expense of everyone else in the same insurance pool/plan.

So when Republicans cry about reform....as soon as somebody says..."fitness standards"....they shudder in fear because they know that it will be hell for them to comply.

For example, I say...if you want health insurance or coverage of any kind....you have to prove that you are tobacco free.

Now how many Republicans are going to screw over big tobacco in order to REFORM the current health care system?

So who is looking out for your best interests?

Post by **YeOldeStonecat** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:55 pm

UOD wrote: What is a fact is that you ALREADY pay for those folks that don't give a rat's ass about their health and you do it willingly lol.

Make no mistake about it....if I were in charge of creating or REFORMING a program, you can bet your sweet ass that I would tie in MANDATORY fitness standards....even for private insurance.

So who is looking out for your best interests?

A- Why would you "lol" at his so called willing paying for those folks? To laugh at him paying, implies you don't pay and you get away with it, esp if you make the claim of "If I were in charge...." that you would mandate tests/standards.

B- So you appear to support health tests to dictate the insurance rate? What does this have to do with either political party? This point being...different rates for people of different health..IE smokers?

BTW, I AM a smoker...and, as you might be able to tell, I do not support everyone paying/getting ripped off by the gov't at equal rates for some shoved down the throat health insurance. I think health insurance should be like many other types of insurance...the better fit you prove to be, the lower risk you prove to be, the lower the rates. Not unlike car insurance. No accidents, no tickets, typical car...low rates. Some accidents, a bunch of tickets, and a performance oriented car..high rates.

Post by **Philip** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:08 pm

There is nothing "Universal" in excluding inconvenient people in a higher risk group. I support higher rates to encourage better physical fitness if dependent on personal habits, but that's about it.

The biggest problem with the current healthcare system in my opinion is the middle man (insurance companies) making higher profits when cutting your coverage, while dictating/approving treatment (doctors have to prescribe drugs and procedures approved by insurance companies) ?! Combined with pharmaceutical companies aimed at your money, the system becomes even murkier.

If the government steps in with "universal" health care, the big question in my mind is will they cut or feed the middle man, will they tackle common practices of insurance and pharmaceutical companies for maximizing profits while minimizing coverage on your expense ? I don't see it happening, but only time will tell.

JawZ · Post by **JawZ** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 2:42 pm

YeOldeStonecat wrote:A- Why would you "lol" at his so called willing paying for those folks? To laugh at him paying, implies you don't pay and you get away with it, esp if you make the claim of "If I were in charge...." that you would mandate tests/standards.

B- So you appear to support health tests to dictate the insurance rate? What does this have to do with either political party? This point being...different rates for people of different health..IE smokers?

BTW, I AM a smoker...and, as you might be able to tell, I do not support everyone paying/getting ripped off by the gov't at equal rates for some shoved down the throat health insurance. I think health insurance should be like many other types of insurance...the better fit you prove to be, the lower risk you prove to be, the lower the rates. Not unlike car insurance. No accidents, no tickets, typical car...low rates. Some accidents, a bunch of tickets, and a performance oriented car..high rates.

No, I'm LOL'ing at the obvious selectivity. He's complaining about something that is still....very much NOT a reality...all the while, NOT speaking out about the CURRENT system.

How many Republicans have started threads on this site calling for health care reform?

The answer is zero.

That is what it has to do with politics and the two party system....which by the way...just so happens to bring me to my next point.

What is the GOP solution to health care? Funny you should ask....I can sum it up in one small web page.

Don't blink, you might miss it.

http://healthcare.gop.com/GroupPage.aspx?

And if you want to see the Bush details from 2007....again, don't blink...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheuni ... hcare.html

Here is the beautiful kicker, most people don't understand that in the GOP plan, the ideology is to tax EVERYBODY....and then to give EVERYBODY a tax credit. Right now there is a huge disparity in how employer provided health insurance is taxed vs privately funded.

It is also outlined that the GOP wished to fund, through taxes, state provided health care solutions. So instead of a national standard or system, the GOP's position was to just give the money to the states directly. How slippery lol.

The GOP doesn't want to give the conservative voting public the perception that they wish to fund a national health care system....instead, they wish to keep it transparent by giving funds to the states instead.

As for my support of fitness standards...leverage. The problem is that in a test or standards based system...it can be used to DENY you anything for any reason....such as genetic predispositions. Heart disease can be hereditary. Do we punish people because of their DNA? How far do you want to go down the slippery slope?

What really needs to be done is what Republican ideology goes against....government oversight in the business sector. Health care is a big business...and they exploit the health and well being of American citizens in order to maximize profits.