Bluegrass poll illicits no new information and no new solutions!
The front page article in the Saturday and Sunday Courier discussed the results of the Bluegrass poll (telephone survey).
It is sad and disappointing that the health of our area is so poor.
Two thirds of respondents viewed the overall health of most Kentuckians as only fair or poor but 72% rated their own health as excellent or good.
Fourteen percent of persons with incomes greater than $50,000 rated their health as fair or poor, but 56 percent with incomes less than $15,000 rated their health as fair or poor.
Thirty eight percent of the $15,000 group admitted to smoking and having other poor health habits compared to only 19 percent smokers in the above $50,000 group.
Compared to other states, Kentucky scored worst for exercise, worst for adults who smoke, worst for teen smoking, 2nd worst for cancer deaths and 7th worst for obesity.
From the survey, it appeared that the working poor were the group that fell between the cracks of what is offered by government or private programs.
None of these numbers are probably surprising. But several respondents agreed that government is not responsible for making sure individuals stay healthy and most agreed that everybody should be responsible for themselves.
So the questions remain:
What should the government’s role be in healthcare? Healthcare is not a right granted by the Constitution or mandated by any other legislative body. It is a service oriented business just like any other business. And like any other business, there remains a multi-tiered system where “the more you have, the more you are able to get”.
But as a democracy that cares about all its people, should we offer a basic medical plan to everyone and allow those who choose and/or can afford more to purchase premium plans?
If you currently are on a government plan, should you continue to receive government benefits if you choose to continue smoking? Certainly this study showed that the poor smoked more, were less healthy, less educated, and struggled more getting their healthcare needs met. If these persons can afford cigarettes, why can they not afford part of their healthcare?
Do we really want socialized medicine and if yes, are we willing to accept everything that comes with it? Since our nation began, there has been and always will be a great divide between the rich and the poor, those who choose to work hard and those who don’t, those who take the opportunities available and excel in life and those who choose to remain in their current situations. Education is available to everyone but not everyone will be educated.
As a great society, we must take care of those who truly cannot take care of themselves, but as a great society, we cannot and should not remove individual choices and the consequences of those choices.
It is sad and disappointing that the health of our area is so poor.
Two thirds of respondents viewed the overall health of most Kentuckians as only fair or poor but 72% rated their own health as excellent or good.
Fourteen percent of persons with incomes greater than $50,000 rated their health as fair or poor, but 56 percent with incomes less than $15,000 rated their health as fair or poor.
Thirty eight percent of the $15,000 group admitted to smoking and having other poor health habits compared to only 19 percent smokers in the above $50,000 group.
Compared to other states, Kentucky scored worst for exercise, worst for adults who smoke, worst for teen smoking, 2nd worst for cancer deaths and 7th worst for obesity.
From the survey, it appeared that the working poor were the group that fell between the cracks of what is offered by government or private programs.
None of these numbers are probably surprising. But several respondents agreed that government is not responsible for making sure individuals stay healthy and most agreed that everybody should be responsible for themselves.
So the questions remain:
What should the government’s role be in healthcare? Healthcare is not a right granted by the Constitution or mandated by any other legislative body. It is a service oriented business just like any other business. And like any other business, there remains a multi-tiered system where “the more you have, the more you are able to get”.
But as a democracy that cares about all its people, should we offer a basic medical plan to everyone and allow those who choose and/or can afford more to purchase premium plans?
If you currently are on a government plan, should you continue to receive government benefits if you choose to continue smoking? Certainly this study showed that the poor smoked more, were less healthy, less educated, and struggled more getting their healthcare needs met. If these persons can afford cigarettes, why can they not afford part of their healthcare?
Do we really want socialized medicine and if yes, are we willing to accept everything that comes with it? Since our nation began, there has been and always will be a great divide between the rich and the poor, those who choose to work hard and those who don’t, those who take the opportunities available and excel in life and those who choose to remain in their current situations. Education is available to everyone but not everyone will be educated.
As a great society, we must take care of those who truly cannot take care of themselves, but as a great society, we cannot and should not remove individual choices and the consequences of those choices.
posted by Anonymous at 6:45 AM
4 Comments:
Just out of curiosity, do you support smoking bans in public places, such as that recently debated and approved (in somewhat compromised form) in Louisville?
What are your feelings on the record of "socialized medicine" in places like Europe?
I am in favor of smoking bans in any facility that people may have to go not out of choice such as hospitals, government buildings etc. I would like to see restaraunts provide no smoking sections with adequate ventilation, but I do not feel it should be mandated. People can choose whether they want to spend their money in those facilities.
I am opposed to socialized medicine in any form. It cannot work unless you choose to limit care and procedures.
In response to Mr. Smith. This is the greatest country in the world with the most opportunities available for success. That is why so many people choose to come here.
My simple answer is yes. Most poor people are that way because of choices. You may want to pass blame, as most people do in this generation, and not taking responsibility for personal choices, but the bottom line is that there are ample opportunities for success.
Yes, there are certainly people in very bad situations, but it is not the governments role to bail each of these people out.
The fundamental difference I see between my worldview and what appears to be yours, is that I believe in people being able to make their own choices and accepting their consequences and you seem to believe that the Government would do better making decisions for these people.
I certainly don't want Mr. Smith to feel pigeon-holed. I have certainly made known my thoughts and since antagonistic criticism is the response rather that defining his worldview, I am left with wondering what he really does advocate in his worldview.
Ceece is right in her interpretation of the comments and I appreciate her commentaries.
Post a Comment
<< Home