Dear Toni,

I'm afraid you will have to wait for that heroin-article till the cows come home because David is too tame for that.

The bottom line is that the "state" is just a bunch of people who impose themselves on others - and that's no different than any other Mafia, call it by any name you like. While among themselves they may agree to any code of behaviour to suit themselves, they have no right to tell others what to do or not to do, heroin being no exception.

Obviously, if you do not choose to be a member of that bunch, then it is only fair that you should not receive any medical benefits from them and the costs should indeed be either yours alone or of some other bunch which has no rules regarding heroine, of which you ARE, voluntarily, a member.

Karl Marx claimed the "religion is the opium of the masses". Anyone who bans heroin on the grounds that "it's bad for you" could in principle, at the next stroke of their pen, ban religion as well. Perhaps you personally do not care for religion, but anyone has a weak spot, SOMETHING they do very much care about, and in principle, one who forcibly bans heroin might just as well ban whatever is dearest to YOU.

While I hate drugs, I always remember the saying: "When the Nazis came to take the gays, I didn’t stand up and object because I wasn’t gay. When they came to take the Jews, I didn’t object because I wasn’t a Jew. When they came to take the Catholics, I did not object because I wasn’t a Catholic. When they came to take me, there was nobody left to object."

TTb said
‘People 'separate' themselves by their actions. You can't 'personally litigate' because you eat yourself into ill-health. The costs of obesity evaporate because the state doesn't pay for the results of your poor choices: you pay for your own foolishness or you die.’

The state does not pay for your poor choices. But how do you make that work, we have medicare and public hospitals. Do you disallow people that are said to be obese, from entering a hospital or claiming medicare so the public does not pay for your life choices. How do you enforce that.

All good and well , but we are a developed country and we have services. I can see that happening in 3rd world countries because they do not have the services to ban people from.

That will never happen.

Dear Doog,

I see no problem with limiting the choices of those who wish to benefit from Medicare services - but allow the others who are not interested to opt out of Medicare. I refuse to use Medicare and tried to opt out myself, but found that in Australia, without a Medicare number I would be not be allowed to continue having my private medical insurance.

Yuyutsu. That scenario will never happen, and I say you know it. Eliminate obese people from medicare.

If we omit obesity from medicare why not smokers and drug attics and drinkers, where do you stop.

Give people the freedom they want, but disqualify them from injuries caused by that freedom.

The thread is all about Pie’s in skies. With wings.

There are numerous logical fallacies in this argument. Obesity has a huge cost of harm to others _ costs of medical interventions, mental health burden, obesity being passed to children, etc. Claiming that obesity is purely an individual issue is like saying that alcoholism has no social cost. An individual that cannot regulate their health is a huge burden on society

Percival Blake, welcome to olo. You sound like a sensible person.