Xo's apparently confusing consistent criticism of inane leftist ideals & proclaimations with being eternally negative. I guess from as far left as his rhetoric comes from, it could seem that way.
===================================================================================
What far left? I only have expressed the thought that the society is composed of individuals and some are much less healthy than others, quite often through no fault of their own. Secondly, life is unfair, and gives some a much healthier and vigorous life than others. I don't see where anyone can argue with these observations.
Many aspects of life are unfair, unequal and basically, they suck.
When transportation across the rivers is difficult, we as a society, build bridges. When the land turns into a muddy morass several months of the year, we build cement and macadam highways, and these benefit everyone.
But somehow, if I suggest that it is in the interests of all of us, or perhaps most of us in this society, that we strive to equalize the unfairness of disease and such things as birth defects, Sirs, who I am guessing enjoys great health (and not entirely because of his healthy lifestyle alone) refuses to admit that a national system for sharing the risks of ill health is acceptable as a function of government (unlike the roads and bridges are, for example).
And my advocating that we do share these risks is a violent intrusion upon his well-deserved lifestyle. Why should he pay for the neighbor's kids' autism, my grandmother's hypertension and even his cousin Floyd's heartbreak of psoriasis?
The answer is that this is so his kid's autism, his hypertension, and his own itchy scaly psoriasis will not devour his income or his savings. The health of the many is the health of the one.
That said, I am all for programs to encourage people to live healthier lifestyles by eating healthier foods and exercising more. That is for the benefit of all as well.
