Labour Health spokesperson Ruth Dyson says this "The Government apparently thinks people will simply be able to change their diet and exercise without any assistance or form of nutrition education"
I'm astonished. Changing your diet is impossible without the government. The carefully hidden knowledge that eating mostly vegetables, fruit, lean meat, fish and cereals, and avoiding high fat and high sugar foods helps you lose weight is something that almost nobody knows surely. In addition, without the government how COULD people go to the gym, or go for a walk or swim?
Does anything more clearly show the patronising and condescending attitude the Labour Party, and indeed many statists have for the general public than that? The idea that without the government, people can't look after themselves, don't know any better and wont change.
Ms. Dyson might wonder if one of the reasons Labour became far less popular is that people are sick of being treated as imbeciles, and sick of being forced to pay for bureaucrats to hand hold people.
If people get obese and do nothing about it, then it isn't anyone else's business. If you want to address rationing the health system, then maybe linking its provision to what people pay for it, might make a difference. Imagine, for example, if most people had health insurance and paid more every year if they were deemed to be obese. How much of a better incentive would it be if you paid more for healthcare because of your risk factors, than for some patronising do-gooder to give you nutrition education and tell you to exercise more?
Why is it that so many politicians prefer telling people what they should do than have them face the costs of their actions?
I'm astonished. Changing your diet is impossible without the government. The carefully hidden knowledge that eating mostly vegetables, fruit, lean meat, fish and cereals, and avoiding high fat and high sugar foods helps you lose weight is something that almost nobody knows surely. In addition, without the government how COULD people go to the gym, or go for a walk or swim?
Does anything more clearly show the patronising and condescending attitude the Labour Party, and indeed many statists have for the general public than that? The idea that without the government, people can't look after themselves, don't know any better and wont change.
Ms. Dyson might wonder if one of the reasons Labour became far less popular is that people are sick of being treated as imbeciles, and sick of being forced to pay for bureaucrats to hand hold people.
If people get obese and do nothing about it, then it isn't anyone else's business. If you want to address rationing the health system, then maybe linking its provision to what people pay for it, might make a difference. Imagine, for example, if most people had health insurance and paid more every year if they were deemed to be obese. How much of a better incentive would it be if you paid more for healthcare because of your risk factors, than for some patronising do-gooder to give you nutrition education and tell you to exercise more?
Why is it that so many politicians prefer telling people what they should do than have them face the costs of their actions?
3 comments:
If Gerry Brownlee can lose weight anyone can. Wait, it appears that Gerry can't.
No mention of the fat food industry spending huge amounts to get people to buy its inherently fatty, sugary and ultimately unhealthy products.
We can see from previous posts that if anyone should attempt to get people to think about what they eat, well, you simply brand them as Nazis. Ian
Ian, so why do thousands of people every year do exactly what Dyson says people can't do without the state?
Yes, the food industry spends money advertising its products. It is its own money, and people are free to choose whether or not to buy them. Dyson insults the entire population by claiming they need state aid to make better choices, like a parent scolding an errant child. Is that how you see obese people?
You're made another vacuous assertion. I wouldn't call you a Nazi if you spent your own money (heaven forbid) to contribute to a campaign to encourage healthy eating. Far from it, you'd simply be an interested person exercising your freedom of speech, and good for you. In fact there are plenty of suppliers of relatively healthy food that promote their products.
What I object to is the idea that without the state, people can't lose weight which is what Dyson said. It's completely absurd and makes everyone who is obese seem like a useless idiot who without Mother Dyson, can't figure out how to eat better or ways to exercise.
If you want a campaign to eat better then who is stopping you setting one up, funding it and seeking funds from those who would support you?
Being a libertarian actually means getting off your arse and doing yourself what you want to force others to do, rather than sitting back and lobbying for the lumbering state to do it.
Hi Liberty,
Top stuff. I've just blogged another aspect of this story here and would be interested in your comments:
http://thenzhomeoffice.blogspot.com/2010/01/racist-labour.html
XChequer
Post a Comment