Control Freaks at it again

Like hell it is. Note that two MILLION Scots (out of a population of FIVE million) are already donors, but that's never enough for the control freaks. Here's the real reason for lack of available organs, not public "apathy"-
"Surgeons have less than two hours to transplant organs before they are starved of oxygen and become unviable."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-22099414
And that's assuming paramedics reach the victims in enough time to prevent brain death. So how will forcing everyone to comply and become state property "solve" the problem, unless they're also going to ban being further away from a paramedic base than five minute's driving time?
Be careful what you wish for.

The group concerned is the British Medical Association- a TRADE UNION -

http://bma.org.uk/about-the-bma/what-we-do
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Medical_Association

Feel free to explain when we timewarped back to 1976 and allowed UNIONS to dictate policy to democratically-elected governments?! I grew up when that BS was considered "normal". If we're heading back that way, I'll emigrate.

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/health/doctors-urge-move-to-opt-out-organ-donor-system-in-scotland-1.69148

 

Many states in the US have raised the tax rates on cigarettes repeatedly over the years. They even have a pretty good idea just how much each raise will decrease the sale of tobacco products. One problem is that the tax varries from state to state so if one state raises the tax rate too high people will smuggle them in from other states which is very easy to do in the US. Then there are still a couple of states where tobacco is one of the main cash crops which gives them considerable political clout in those states making it hard to raise the taxes there.

A lot of that wouldn't apply to Australia though from what I can see.

 

The price is set to rise over next 4 years at 12.5% each year. That being said a minority would merely see this as raising funds but the majority not in the slightest. If the government was all about profits and not caring about the public health the we would have no universal health care in Oz.

Its not some big black and white conspiracy theory with the government looking out for them selves, More often then not they do what the people wish. The people wanted this and as such the took it on board.

 

They are no 'Forcing' anyone, It isnt a zero choice system. They give you the right to opt out should you choose to so stop making it sound like a dictator ship when it is not. You have so far managed to lob the organ donation debate into the same circle as taking away US high capacity guns turning Washington into a dictator ship... Its all based off of zero facts and completely on hysteria.

If you dont want to donate your organs then opt out Historian, Simple as that.

This system would not make you any government asset but rather a beacon of hope for the wider community as could lead to saving the life of another, If isnt so the politicians can live longer but rather so the average Joe can.

 

No it wouldn't. Problem with the US compared to many nations is there is no true level playing field or consistency. One item banned in one state can be purchased legally a half hour across the border, Another item more expensive can be purchased cheaper for a short drive.

For the most part in Oz everything is the same price baring slight price decreases by the company. One universal tax system across the board with the same laws and regulations. makes it easier to enforce and harder for any particular group or company to lobby support for their cause (Which causes mountains of drama in the US if im correct).

 

Umm when and where did they ask for this? more than 2 thirds smoked before this came in...The majority dont care NOW because its only a third, a minority that still smoke. Part of caring about the bottom line is taking into account the health costs and loss of work...Universal health ensures many things...a healthy, working, tax paying public is one of them. If its not merely rainsing funds then why not raise it 50-100%? Theres no conspiracy...thats government since the beggining, its other people who see the government as more.

 

You clearly have no idea how the "socialist" mindset in Scotland works. Don't quite see how making organ donation compulsory isn't forcing people, unless there are two different versions of the Oxford English Dictionary in circulation.

"This system would not make you any government asset but rather a beacon of hope for the wider community as could lead to saving the life of another, If isnt so the politicians can live longer but rather so the average Joe can."

Again, you have NO idea how the kid-on socialist mindset in Scotland works.
First they banned smoking in pubs, and now they want to ban it in public parks too-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9957914/Scotland-to-ban-smoking-in-parks.html
And private cars-
http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/smoking-in-your-car-with-children-to-be-outlawed-1-2945984
And at home-
http://www.bmj.com/content/335/7619/553
You'll notice these ideas are ALWAYS backed by charities trying to justify their existence. I refuse to have my lifestyle choices dictated by unelected, unaccountable and unrepresentative charities/pressure groups/trade unions full of control freaks.

Edit: Bad time of year, but no need for bad language.

 

Some-one pissed off a scotsman...braver man than me...

 

It is scary watching those Tea Party nut-jobs on YouTube and its salutary to be reminded we have our own home grown versions who see 'socialist' plotters hiding behind every bush. Welcome to planet Paranoid

 

The biggest problem i have with organ donation is that suddenly keeping people alive no longer is central to the doctors and nurses thinking...if they have people on one end of the hospital that are in desperate need, especially children..then perhaps they wont "fight" as hard or for as long for my life as they otherwise would...Many people have been given zero chance of survival and lived regardless...would these people still be given that opportunity? Or would they "harvest" as soon as possible to save little Johhny down the hall whos only got days to live...?

 

Think you hit the nail on the head, CAC. It's all about Brownie points, not actually helping people.

 

And given past experience of how chattering class minds work, how long would it be before the right to opt out was quietly shelved?

 

Sorry, but I just couldn't resist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aclS1pGHp8o

 

HA! Haven't seen that for a while!

 

Looks to me like it's Scotts pissing each other off. An old and honorable tradition. Of course the wise tend to avoid getting caught between the them.

 

It's not pretty... :S!

 

Come gentlemen use your common sense. Many of our states are near equal in GNP/population/size to many nations and as such have economy's that are unique to their location. Tax laws are often crafted to take this into account. In Texas there is no state income tax, in part because energy revenue takes its place. California gets alot of income from tech, imports and media and so on.

Most people like having the option to fashion their laws locally rather than have people a thousand miles away deciding every little thing when, except for two senators and maybe a dozen representatives, those same people don't have to live in the same place. The Federal government sets certain basic requirements, but allow the locals to choose the details.

For a country of 300 million plus over 6 time zones it is more practical than problem.

 

And the next instalment of BS. That calendar on my kitchen wall must be wrong; it's clearly 1974 and not 2014, because why else would a UNION be allowed to dictate to a democratically-elected government?!
The idiot who made this quote needs to get out more-
'Humanity has never developed anything more deadly than the cigarette,' said Tim Crocker-Buqué, a registrar working in Tower Hamlets."
"Medical experts have called for a permanent ban on selling cigarettes to anyone born in this century in a bid to eradicate smoking from Britain entirely.
The radical plan would see the age limit for buying tobacco - currently set at 18 - rise every year until the last cigarette smokers died out, at which point smoking would be illegal for everyone.
Doctors have asked the powerful British Medical Association to lobby the Government for a ban on tobacco sales to people born after the year 2000.
Smoking kills more than 100,000 people a year in the UK by causing diseases such as lung cancer and emphesyma, according to the NHS."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2589712/Doctors-call-total-ban-sale-cigarettes-born-2000.html#ixzz2x4ynS6rX
And here's the proof that the BMA is only a union with ideas above its station-
http://bma.org.uk/about-the-bma/what-we-do/bma-as-a-trade-union