A Population's Health: which is more important?

Originally posted by Eladar
He believes in a government that dominates society. He believes that the government should provide jobs for everyone, but the pay for those jobs should be minimal. Everyone has a job and everyone can survive. This is the model that Kaz endorses. He is a big believer in the Manor State.

Might you be able to come up with citations supporting the claim that I said or implied these things?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Might you be able to come up with citations supporting the claim that I said or implied these things?

Sorry, but I don't keep your posts in some sort of 'favorites file'. You said that governments should provide low paying jobs for the masses so that they don't have to simply receive money.

Originally posted by Eladar
Sorry, but I don't keep your posts in some sort of 'favorites file'. You said that governments should provide low paying jobs for the masses so that they don't have to simply receive money.

No, the government should provide jobs that are useful and serve a purpose to society.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
No, the government should provide jobs that are useful and serve a purpose to society.

Yes, just like a Manor.

Originally posted by Eladar
Yes, just like a Manor.

You think the jobs provided by a government ought to be useless?

Originally posted by Eladar
Yes, just like a Manor.

Manors are private property.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Manors are private property.

No, Manors are owned by the government. In and Aristocratic society, the Lords, Barons and such are the government.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
You think the jobs provided by a government ought to be useless?

I don't think the government has the responsibility of providing jobs.

Originally posted by Eladar
I don't think the government has the responsibility of providing jobs.

That's not what I said. I said the government should hire people to do useful things. This is what every non-anarchist agrees upon.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
That's not what I said. I said the government should hire people to do useful things. This is what every non-anarchist agrees upon.

You said that there should be no unemployment because the government should provide useful jobs to society to everyone at minimal pay.

Originally posted by Eladar
You said that there should be no unemployment because the government should provide useful jobs to society to everyone at minimal pay.

No, I said the government should guarantee a minimum income. A combination of hiring people for useful jobs the market cannot provide (efficiently) and fiscal tools to encourage private sector employment will then guarantee full employment.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Are you trying to tell me that the reason for the low life expectancy in Zambia as compared to the US is largely a result of personal choices in diet and exercise?
I beg to differ.

You see where this is going, and don't want it to go there. It isn't a matter of comparing Zambia to the US, or the US to Finland. Each has its own culture and differing health and safety concerns.

The choices might have been made clearer, as stay healthy, or cure disease and illness later.

Medical care involves interventions or medicine or surgery, when we become ill or injured. Would it not be preferable not to get ill or injured? That involves different choices in Zambia or in Detroit.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Yeah, I bet the reason people lived to age 30 in the 1800s was due to eating too many Big Macs.

I've known people who lived to near 100 who smoked heavily, and drank enough whiskey to kill most people.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, obviously I am not.
You on the other hand are claiming that those in the US eat healthier diets and practice healthier lifestyles than those in Zambia by quite a big margin. this is simply not true, rendering your OP's claim quite obviously false.

As Duchess64 pointed out, Zambia and the US isn't a valid comparison. How much individual choices can make in both places is. For instance, sleeping without mosquito netting in Zambia is likely foolish, but unnecessary in the US.

In parts of Zambia a Lion may stalk into a camp and choose a human as his next meal. In the US we worry more about human predators.

Still in either place individual choices can improve our health prospects considerably, probably more than corrective medical intervention.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
No, the government should provide jobs that are useful and serve a purpose to society.

Why would the government fill that roll? Jobs that are useful, people will pay to have done. Having them done is useful to society. This is the basic function of a market economy.