THE DOCTOR IS IN
_________________
LAS VEGAS- Hello America, and how the the world treating you?
Here we go again. The Washington lawmakers are salivating at the idea of taxing soft drinks, juices, teas and other sweet tasting beverages. They also are considering expanding the tax to candies and other sweet products.
I hate to say I told you so but I did, years ago. When the nannies in California and New York began raising taxes on cigarettes I told my readers and patients and anyone who wanted to listen that" what goes around comes around." So for all of you who thought it was okay to punitively tax and ban the cigarette smoker from the social scene it looks like it is your turn now.
The first move by government will be to raise taxes on your bottle sodas, teas, juices, etc., then the second phase will be to ban the products from schools, parks, sport facilities and their game areas and the ban may even encroach on your favorite eating places. This is the format that all of the nannies used to control a persons smoking behavior and now it will eventually happen to the people that thought it okay to restrict and ban products that people CHOSE to ingest in their own bodies. Like the saying says, -"be careful what you wish for."
These nanny states and the wanna be goodie two shoes tell you that they are looking out after your health and that they are going to take care of you. They tell you that they know what is best for you and that you should not doubt them.
New York, New Jersey and a host of other states now see another tax jackpot gleaming in their eyes . And yes,once again, the excuse and reason they say they are taxing your colas, juices,teas, sweet flavored waters and all of those other sweet tasting products is because they want to prevent you from acquiring diabetes, heart problems and other health issues. These wanna be doctors, who are nothing but tax collecting politicians arrogantly argue that since they raised prices and taxed cigarettes to new heights, people stopped smoking, and if it worked for smoking it will work for candy, juices,teas, soft drinks and other tasty items.
Now for all those people that said it was okay for the government to tax cigarettes: I would wonder how you feel now when the government steps into"your" household and tell you that if you and your family drink soft drinks, bottled teas and fruit juice and enjoy other sweet items it is going to cost you, big time.
The government is going to tax you under the guise of "it's for your own good." Do you really believe that? How far can these nanny groups and government beat that dead horse?
I submit that drinking coffee can cause you health problems? Eating bacon, ham and sausage can cause health problems? Eating any type of processed foods can cause health problems? Eating butter can cause you health problems? Fast food, ice cream or puddings (whoops, those are sweet ones) , sorry,the tax will cover those too.
I could go on and on about what can cause a health problem in an individual but I am telling you that just about anything you ingest into your body can cause a health problem. So, where will it stop. The government saddled us taxpayers with an income tax, then state and county taxes, cigarette taxes and now they want to initiate a body tax on all of us saying what we choose to put into our body should be taxed.
But hey! The government is going to tell you what's good for you. Right? Example, the feds and a number of activist groups have already pressured many schools and soft drink companies across the nation to remove soft drinks, candy and chips from the schools.I don't agree with those actions but it appears the people refuse to fight these moves.
Do you really believe that one soda or one candy bar or a small single bag of chips is the reason a person puts on weight? Sure, if the child or adult eats a dozen candy bars or drinks a dozen cans of soda at one sitting they are going to "get fat." But an occasional snack like a candy bar,chips , or soda is not the root cause.
I would suggest the schools revise their lunch programs to include the proper nutritious food combination rather than blame the child's weight increase on the occasional candy bar, chips, or soda that may be eaten during a break at school. Further,the schools should provide a proper "physical education" plan at each school and make it mandatory that each student take part in the physical education class. There is nothing like a small amount of exercise, fresh air, sunshine, and walking and/or swimming to maintain a healthy, physically fit body. I would guess it is easier for these activist groups and the Feds to point the finger and play a blame game and say that the can of soda is the problem while at the same time they are cutting out physical eduction from their curriculum saying they do not have the money to support the program.
What would be more important to you for your child? Would you rather have the child be required to get exercise and play time and have their physical fitness improved or have the school save money by cutting out such a program? It is easier for the legislators to blame soft drink manufacturers and blame the student for drinking an occasional soda or eating an occasional candy bar instead of addressing the real problem.
Not every child, college student or adult drinks dozens of cans of soda a day nor do they eat dozens of candy bars or bags of chips a day. For that child in school who is gaining weight I would say that it is the parents job to oversee their diet, exercise and health care. Why place penalties on the soft drink manufacturer and all of the other students in the school who does eat and exercise in moderation and does in fact enjoy an occasional soft drink, chips or candy bar?
Using the governments logic: Why not tell each politician in Washington that all alcoholic beverages will be removed from all restaurants and bars in and about the Capitol where they congregate because a small percentage of the lawmakers are abusing alcohol and acting unbecoming, and/or receiving DUI's, and most of all, it is bad for their health and they should be looked out after. Do you think they would go for that? They would be the first group of people to squeal to high heaven, "you can't do that." But in reality, that is what they are actually doing to the rest of us when they regulate what people put in their bodies.
I suggest that each and every person's health care should be looked at individually. What foods and drinks one puts into their body may affect one person differently than it does another. No two people are the same.
Each person's metabolism is different and handles food and drink intake differently "but" these government bureaucrats will take punitive action against you for no other reason that dinging more taxes out of you and using the excuse that 'IT'S GOOD FOR YOU."
The government says that they want to stop you from getting diabetes, heart disease, strokes, obesity, cancer,and a list of other ailments etc., but the scientific and medical community cannot say with a "medical certainty" what specific product and/or item actually may have caused the disease to rear its ugly head.
Was it the high cholesterol that cause a person to have a heart attack? Was it stress on the job that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Was it anxiety that the person felt because of financial problems in the marriage that was the sole cause of that heart attack? Or,was it the poor air quality in the city,the town or state where the person lives or was it the pollution from the automobile exhaust being spewed into the air each day? No doctor can say with medical certainty which of those separate things actually caused the person to suffer heart disease.
Another example, the doctor cannot say with" medical certainty" that smoking cigarettes and/or second hand smoke was the sole cause of anyone acquiring cancer or any other disease for that matter.
Just the few examples mentioned here in this article could be a combination of things that may include but not limited to: a person being obese, suffering diabetes, heart problems, cancer, and most any other disease.
Besides any environmental pollution, a persons food and diet and their nutritional habits and their lifestyle choices along with pesticides, chemical additives in such things as plastic water bottles and containers, cosmetics, their intake of alcohol and their ingestion of medications will all contribute to any one persons health and well being.
The list could go on, and on. There are literally thousands of products like foods, chemicals and environmental factors being used around the world that can contribute any and all illnesses a person can imagine.
What will be next and taxed? Is the government going to raise taxes on all cosmetics, soaps and other hygiene products used by everyone? They'll tell you it's for your own good. Are they going to tax everyone for driving a motor vehicle, a boat, a recreational vehicle? Are these tax hungry nannies going to raise taxes on bottled water or anything in a plastic container? They will tell you its for health reasons. Raise taxes on household products used everyday in your kitchen or bathroom? Are they going to raise taxes on your air conditioning units in your house or business because of the chemical pollution caused by the unit?
Believe it or not some lawmakers and legislators across the country have already tried to put a tax on some of the items just mentioned in the paragraph above and you can bet they will continue their misguided attempts.
People, the lawmakers can use any excuse to raise taxes on us taxpayers but their rationalization for the taxes stink. The lame argument they continually make for the tax doesn't track. This argument "it's for your own good." or, another favorite argument is "It's for the kids," are worn out phrases. They are old and tired.
Every time lawmakers, groups, and organizations who usually have an agenda for their own benefit pass an initiative or a law they usually tell the public it's only a suggestion or it's only voluntary or it will only be a temporary fix.
When the lawmakers offer those reasons I would be suspect. Why? Those taxes, laws,rules and regulations that were said to be voluntary or temporary always wind up to be a mandate.
The government clearly ignores and selectively forgets the constitution and they trample on Americans "freedom of choice."
For example:(Smoking), if there were restaurants, bars and taverns across the country that clearly posted signs indicating that they were or were not a "friendly smoking" establishment any prudent person could make an informed choice as to which place they wanted to patronize. Nonsmokers could and would go to nonsmoking establishments and smokers would go into the smoking establishments. Result: {CHOICE), the person made their own decision. Everyone would be happy and satisfied. They would have their own place to go to.
For example: (Alcohol) Each person and/or group can make up their own mind whether they want to go into an establishment such as a restaurant that serves alcohol.Result: {CHOICE), the person makes their own decision. Nonalcoholics can use restaurant that do not serve alcohol.
For example: (Fast Food) Each and every person can make the decision whether they want to drive into the drive-in for that hamburger, fried chicken, taco, etc. Result: (CHOICE), the person chooses to either go into or walk away from the establishment.
The same goes for a person eating a piece of pie, cake, ice cream, candy bar, chips, etc.,-- Result: (CHOICE). It is that persons right and clearly their "freedom of choice" to either eat that piece of pie, and whether the pie should be regular, fat free, or ala mode and making a choice without being told they have to drink a diet soda, or they can't have a milkshake unless they choose the non-fat shake which will be offered at a cheaper price.
Side Note: These tax crazy lawmakers always claim that they can raise "sin taxes" which are defined by them as tobacco, (cigarettes and cigars)and alcohol, but if you notice, these lawmakers keep alcohol off limits and have chosen to only pick on the smoking public.
Lawmakers refuse to raise taxes on beer, wine and hard booze. Why? That's easy. Many of our politicians really love their alcohol. Many may be closet alcoholics while still others are treated in rehab for their alcohol abuse. Another reason is that people across the country would raise hell.
Raising taxes on any type of alcohol is like social security's third rail in politics for the lawmaker. So, what do they do? They are going to include soft drinks, juices, teas bottled waters and sweets into the web of "sin taxes." They want to deprive every man, woman and child of the right and "free choice" to drink and eat what they want.
I would say that what a family eats either at home or out in public, is a decision that should be made by the parents of the family. It is their choice. The parents can educate their children on what should be eaten and what foods should be restricted or avoided. From my point of view, it's a family matter. The government should stay out of the business of dictating what I and my family choose to put in our body and without adding additional taxes or punitive penalties if we chose to eat or drink something the government said was "bad" for us.
There are people around the world that will always acquire diabetes, heart problems, strokes,obesity, etc., and many of those people will suffer those diseases for reasons that cannot explained.
People will live and they will all die. I have always told my patients and friends, relatives and associates that: "I believe and have always believed that a person begins to die from the moment of birth." Folks, we all are on deaths path from the moment we are born. We can't get around that fact.
I would suggest that these lawmakers who pretend that they want to "look out for our best interests" leave the train at the next station. We, the people can look out for ourselves as long as we have choices.
If a person becomes obese because they eat a full whole 12 inch pie at one sitting instead of one slice of that pie that person can make the choice and decision to stop the bad behavior and/or seek help to assist them in doing so. If a woman wants to get an abortion for reasons only known to her, that's her choice and she should be able to seek advice and assistance to help her come to her own decision. Again,"freedom of choice."
I would like to say that under the shallow and lame benign rationale of " it's best for you," or "I know best" or "protecting us" our government know-it-alls that say they represent us are very quickly usurping all rights we have as it applies to our own bodies. It's insanity. These looney tunes are the one's running our country? As the saying goes, I think it's time for the inmates to take back the asylum. Stand up folks, and say enough is enough. - And, that's my opinion. People, draw your own conclusions. You decide.
Bradley W. Kuhns, Ph.D., O.M.D.
_______________________________
Dr. Kuhns can be reached by e-mail at:
bradleykuhns@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment