What's government for?

I actually think you're onto something blindboy. Universal healthcare has just become way too expensive in the modern context, increasing costs, inproving technology, increased opportunities for intervention.

While I think its the basis of a civil and equal society, what's available to those with private insurance is world's away from what someone on medicare is entitled to. This argument falls apart if someone is seriously injured as everyonee ends up in the public system as private hospitals don't have the infrastructure. That aside, in terms of equality, and equality of opportunity, the horse has already well and truly bolted.

Therefore, maybe we should be looking at those who want to opt in for the nanny state full health cover scenario, and those that want 'freedom of choice'. Giving up some of their 'entitlements' to medical assistance.

This would get rather ugly and confronting for those of us born into the western bubble, and probably end up like indonesia where people literally die in the corridors while people debate who is going to pay, but I see it as somewhat inevitable as the system becomes more and more unsustainable.

As I pointed out before, this system is already struggling to supply the services people expect. And people are already flying to thailand and the like for not just plastic surgery, but relatively neccesary elective surgery. I believe this failing system is definitely feeding into this anti immigration and anti refugee sentiment that is rife at the moment in many western countries, and there literally is no solution, or even mild amelioration in sight to address the failing services.

You, loving an (increasingly dubious) academic argument and all, will be happy to know an expert recently pointed out in a guardian article that research shows we would decrease brain injuries by a much larger significant margin by making people wear bike helmets inside vehicles than what we are making people wear bike helmets on bicycles. Research says so...

As sheepdog says

" Where does this end?"

"My remark about about dying if you couldn't pay was a sarcastic reference to the ultimate consequences of libertarian philosophies."

prrrrrrrrretty sure the world was spinning around before gath and bike helmets......

The money "saved" from 1 in 10000 bike riders not braining themselves gets spent on continuous administering of the law..... Just another thing for police to look out for and do... The process.... the fine.... The paperwork....
But you haven't ansered the question re' surfing helmets/nose cones... Where does one draw the line in cotton wool?

Yep, yep sheepdog.

And I'll add, the same guardian article also pointed out how bike helmets were contributing to....wait for it....obesity, As people would rather take the car than don a bike helmet.

Obesity, climate change, 160 million (skinny) japanese, 1 billion (skinny) chimese, millions of bike prone europeans not feeling the need.

I'm all in...

BAN THE BIKE HELMET!!!!

"Universal healthcare has just become way too expensive in the modern context, increasing costs, inproving technology, increased opportunities for intervention."

well.... I think the main problem is successive governements have let it fall apart..... Which sort of brings us to a loop back to the original question.... What are governments for?
There are 2 historic types of medicine for social tribes...... One is the tribe has a medicine man, and the whole tribe admires, feeds, and cares for the medicine man..... Like the Aussie medicare..
Then there's the other way... The medicine man lives slightly separate from the tribe.... To be treated, you must bring him 6 chickens.... That's the american way..... If you don't have 6 chickens, bad luck....

I prefer the former to the latter.....

Now, looking through the comments again, there seems to be an underlying theme/s to the question "what is governemnt for".... Perhaps go back and look at ones own comments.
It seems the majority here want CONTROL, more TAXES, and more JUDGEMENTALISM on their fellow citizens.... It's amazing what 15 years of constant media and governemnt bombardment of the senses can do to a society.

Sorry to disagree sypkan but my own experience with our system is very different. This includes open heart surgery on my grand-daughter at 3 months, cancer treatment for my wife and several minor surgeries of my own. All on Medicare, all of the highest standard. A lot of the complaints about the system come down to unrealistic expectations. As the admissions nurse explained when giving me a date for hand surgery " Of course if a melanoma comes in you will be dropped from the list."

Well sheepdog I did surf with both nose guard and helmet for a few years after copping the nose of my board about 1cm from my eye socket. Beyond that I think you will find brain injuries from surfing are much rarer than those from cycling and so represent an insignificant increase in overall health costs. I wonder if any of you fierce defenders of bare headedness have ever had a chat with a trauma surgeon or an Emergency nurse. They can be pretty persuasive.

You think I've gotten through life injury free, BB?
What if cycling makes up 25% of all head injuries and surfing only 10% (yeah Im making up numbers) It's still a cost to the bottomline, just like skin cancer which most dodged and weaved.....
Yeah , so what? So i'll ask again... Where is the cotton wool line?

BTW, BB, I wear a bike helmet.... My choice.... But i shouldn't be fined if I dont, just as beach goers shouldn't be fined for not wearing sunscreen..... Education is the key.

one can draw the line where'ever the cost/benefit analysis wins a positive result. cotton wool has nothing to do with it.

Sheepdog that is the same logic smokers use to complain that they shouldn't have to pay $25 or whatever it is a packet. Look if people passionately oppose helmet legislation there are a number of things they can do. Take part in the political process for one or simply pay the fines for two. In my observation most cyclists riding slowly around their local area are ignored by the police anyway. The amateur Lycra clad peletons are where the real risks are and where they focus their efforts.

hangon. so you wear a helmet yourself. but then you whinge about fines for not wearing helmets.

i passionately oppose lycra. which member of parliament will help me in my crusade.

Elective surgery blindboy

Reasonably urgent elective surgery, 8 months to see an ear specialist to be put on another 8 month waiting list

Getting the run around from snowed under GPs for 4 months to get another wait for more than 6 months to see an orthopedic specialist, to be put on an 18 month surgery list.

Not life threatening; but geez that ear thing was annoying, and my joint problem had me looking like a clipper crab, after finally getting to see the specialist there was no way I was waiting another 18 months, 'muscle wastage' ain't a good thing

Emergency is still good, but to say there's any equality left in our once egalitarian system is an insult

Also several nurses said to me several times on different occasions " gee you've been waiting a while, that should'nt really happen for this"

And even though I'd already had significant waits, things only got moving when you get a good doctor (fluke a good doctor( that's willing to speed things up.

Time and a place for helmets happyas, I wear one too, but cruising along a bike parh 20 metres from the nearest car, not real inspiring or enjoyable

sure sypkan, i agree. but can you work out how to administer a law that only applies to long bike rides as opposed to short bike rides. or a bicyclist who is on the footpath but will cross the road at some point? how does the cop know whats what?

I really don't think its that hard happyas, discretion, not blanket rules.

Or speed zones, lanes of traffic, suburban versus city. At least on a fucking bike track FFS. Or a 3 times being dumb and your done or something...but this is half the problem with the nanny state...its making people dumber!!

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/01/finland-introduces-basic-income-un...

Ffs, happy..... It's called freedom of choice.... What part of that concept cant you grasp? If I'm simply riding down the back street to the shop, I wont wear it.... If I'm riding up the main road, i will.... So if a cop in a bad mood see's me riding without it, I get a fine? Get fucked.... That's what I reckon....

BB - "n my observation most cyclists riding slowly around their local area are ignored by the police anyway."

That's just pure heresay...... Leave that sort of stuff to Blowin, mate.... Maybe in your "area" cops ignore people breaking the law, maybe not in an aboriginal or western suburb "area"..... Capiche?

Look... you and happy want to rule everyones life within an inch..... i get that..... "For their own good"..... you'll throw in some emotive "speak to a surgeon" shock jock like stuff to make your point.... But just like terrorism, the vast majority of pushbike riders scrape their leg at best.... Not one person at my primary school, OR high school ended up brain dead from a bike accident..... Of course it happens..... Accidents fucking happen..... A helmet didnt save the truck driver in sydney..... A freekn kevlar suit wouldn't save him.... Shit happens..... But if you want to punish people for risky behaviour, look into your own behaviours before you start barking at others, and start pushing for a sun tax, make surf helmets mandatory, nose cones, no legrope a criminal offence, have sunscreen inspectors fining anyone not protected, because the indoor jazzercise folk are sick of their taxes being spent on you...

Doggo, you're off the cancer sticks aren't you?

Sheepdog, let it go mate! It's a first world problem and it's not healthy, this vicious resentment against a reasonable law. Learn to love your helmet, you will become a happier man! If you are concerned about injustice, look for something a bit more consequential

Fong, you've nailed it. Read back through the 'to & fro' on this thread, and then wonder about Oz and it's 'politics'. Meanwhile in Finland...

well. its only being trialled in Finland and im guessing that lots of Europe will be pissed off about it. so lets not get ahead of ourselves yet bashing AUS. but granted, it seems a step in the right direction to allow people to actually engage in finding suitable work.

personal freedoms? I get what your saying SD. and without wishing to start an new argument, consider that your choice to ride a bike on a footpath shared by other users is a choice that only exists become someone has built and maintained that footpath for you. so is it really your freedom? or did society provide you with a freedom of quick and efficient transport from point A to point B and simply ask that you put a cap on your head.

btw. out of interest. what do you think about mandatory voting? thats a loss of freedom right. but look at the US. what a terrible place to live - unless your rich. i read somewhere that non-compulsory voting is the quickest way towards a society of haves and have nots.

I think compulsory voting goes against the whole idea of democracy, if you don't vote we will fine you, to me that's a contradiction in a true democracy people should have just as much right to not have a say as having a say.

But that said i can understand why we have it.

BB writes "Sheepdog, let it go mate! It's a first world problem and it's not healthy, this vicious resentment against a reasonable law. Learn to love your helmet, you will become a happier man! If you are concerned about injustice, look for something a bit more consequential"

An absolute twist of the conversation..... As i said earlier, I am playing devils advocate on nanny state laws, comparing bike helmet or smoking laws or fat taxes to dangerous health cost within surfing..... And no one wants to front up..... That's fine.... Go the strawman...

BTW, if you are interested in this "first world problem", here's a map of the world... The countries and states in red are those that have mandatory laws for bike helmets, and fine those not wearing one....... A picture paints a thousand words.....

Happy..... Once again, comparing voting, a group participation of the whole tribe electing a new tribal leader is miles apart from individual personal everyday behaviours... Would you compare how you wipe your arse to voting?.... oh... Hang on...... I do...... bahahahahaha
But seriously, some things just can't be compared.... Even though we're living in an ever increasing black and white charade, grey still exists..... When indivuality and personal freedom is dumbed down to a black and white answer, we're one step closer to an Orwellian existence...
Indo, "democracy"...... It's a feel good word..... it's an ideology that means different things to different people..... Looking at your gripe on compulsory voting, do you have the same gripe on compulsory tax? Do you consider being MADE to pay tax undemocratic?

a picture does paint a thousand words....Australia is leading the world in mandatory bike helmets !

ok ok. im joking. dont get riled up.

i guess this one wont impress you either....

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/01/07/summernats-death-sparks-ba...

Hey SD, N.T. bike laws are only for under 17 years of age. Over 17yo, not law.

Now there's a stroke of...dare I say it....common sense

Oz! Stroking helmets! Yeeeeeeew!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-15/helmet-free-cycling-considered-und...

so sheepdog might get his way in the end. though for unrelated reasons.

Dont know Sheepdog, i don't have any real view either way, i don't feel very strongly about the voting thing either, like i said i understand why it's compulsory, but i still think its a contradiction.

On the helmet thing when i was young and it came in i hated it and after a few warnings by the cops it caused me to ditch the bike and use my skatey to get around, these days i dont really care, i think it would feel even a bit weird without it, but I'm sure i could adapt quickly again.

I dont mind paying tax so much and i don't pay much because i don't earn much, but i hate paying council rates for the amount i pay i just don't get a good return.

i would feel highly confident that even though its compulsory, very few people are getting fined anyhow.

ive never been fined and i ride past a police station several times a week.

even once I had a 6 pack in one hand.

just saying.

Sheepdog, it is hard to find definitive statistics on cycling and surfing injuries but what is clear from the available material is that there are many more serious injuries from cycling than from surfing. An order of magnitude at least from what I can find. So even if the risk per person was equivalent, which I doubt, cycling injuries add significantly to health care costs in a way surfing injuries do not. As for your concerns about sun exposure, the various advertising and educational programs continue to have a massive impact. Watch on a summer day and see if you can spot a surfer who doesn't use sunscreen. Then count up the percentage in a rashie or wetsuit. People used to laugh at me for using long arm rashies, now they are standard. No need to legislate for sun protection, it has become part of our culture. The resistance of cyclists to bike helmets is probably the best explanation for the legislation.

Oh and why do I hate the phrase "nanny state"? Because it is designed to make us think that governments care about our welfare when the clear trend over several decades is that people count for nothing. The real nanny state is the way corporations are protected from strike action, permitted to avoid tax, allowed to lie to and cheat the public as well as to avoid responsibility for injuries to their workers, evade environmental responsibility etc etc.

Hear, hear

BB, there is no doubt here in Aus, there is a 'nanny state' mentality. The bike laws is just one example. Im sure we all could provide more examples. Dealing with Councils will expose more. Yes, there is no doubt the morality and culture of large corporations has changed. But this is slowly being addressed with better whistleblower laws and protection. Lets not treat 'government' as some strange foreign entity. It is us, the people. We can participate, we can vote and we can complain. But we should not allow a minority to dictate the terms.
Im with you on the large corporations ... All countries are suffering and Im confident it will change.

Fitzy writes "Hey SD, N.T. bike laws are only for under 17 years of age. Over 17yo, not law."

Mate, hope you are well..... I think you best double check your statement... Everything I've just looked at indicates all ages.

Happy writes to sheepy; " hangon. so you wear a helmet yourself. but then you whinge about fines for not wearing helmets."....

But he then goes on to write the following day ;
"ive never been fined and i ride past a police station several times a week."

Well..... Fuck me....... So YOU'RE NOT wearing a helmet, but defending having laws for wearing helmets...

I've slipped into bizarro world.......

Blind boy.... How many drownings occur from being knocked out? It's not just death from blunt force trauma re' board to the head..
You're trying to be slippery with vague assumptions.

No fines were ever needed in regards to sun screen... Great education and advertising.. I still remember the slip slop slap ads.... So instead of this NSW lead nanny state bullshit, the same could've been done with helmets.... Simple as that......
But no.... More laws..... More laws....... Please give us more laws....

63 drownings at beaches in Australia last financial year. 14% involving watercraft. Assuming they were all surfboards that would be 9 surfers drowning in a year. Bicycle deaths 45 but over 5000 hospitalisations. It is a reasonable inference then that the cost to the community from cycling accidents is far greater than from surfing accidents.

More interestingly what are the other nanny state issues? My own view is that most of the time the phrase is used it is an attempt to place the rights of one group above the rights of another, usually more deserving, group. So what have we got? Compulsory seatbelts, smoking restrictions, lock out laws?

To be fair, I think it's more likely most of those would swimmers on cheap little body boards, people without swim fins playing around in the shore breaks, next minute they are out of water deeper than they can touch the bottom and off they go.

Not sure if they would classify as surfers?

Maybe the odd surfer knocked out by their board.

To be fair, I think it's more likely most of those would be swimmers on cheap little body boards, people without swim fins playing around in the shore break, next minute they are out of water deeper than they can touch the bottom and off they go.

Not sure if they would classify as surfers?

Maybe the odd surfer knocked out by their board.

yeah. id thought you'd like that one SD. thats why I waited a day. your welcome to punch me if we were to ever meet.

but seriously. i speed in my car too AND fully defend speeding laws. the two need not be mutually exclusive.

whats important is not "new laws" but whether the laws are just. if the govt does the cost benefit equation of helmet laws and comes up positive then im ok with it. but if there is no net benefit then ditch the laws. there is no need to compare to surfing. if a surfing helmet law is just then lets do it. otherwise not. tbh Id hate to see it implemented. tried an old gath once....couldnt stand it. i was accidently dropping in blokes left right and centre. didnt know where i was...couldnt hear and thing.

Hey SD, been well thanks mate. Hope you and yours are well also.

See link below. 2016.

https://nt.gov.au/driving/safety/bicycle-safety

BB - Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiology conference in Sydney 2012, chaired by Royal North Shore Hospital specialist Dr Simon Dimmick , found head and neck damage accounts for about 25 to 37 per cent of surfing injuries.

What's the old saying? If one life can be saved? If one person not paralysed? blah blah blah?

I have been bike riding all my life..... I have also been surfing all my life.... Never witnessed a bike head trauma, not a serious one..... But gee...... Have I seen some carnage in the surf....
I dont need stats for that.. i've seen it with my own eyes..... And I bet everyone here has too....
But it's interesting how defensive some have gotten, being the target of a devils advocate hypothetical mandatory law on surfing with a helmet, even though if implemented, WOULD save lives, curb many injuries, and save peoples precious taxes....

Fitzy... Check your link.....
"If you're over 17, you are not required to wear a helmet on a public place or footpath unless riding on the road."

UNLESS RIDING ON THE ROAD...

So, if on the footpath, ok..... But if over 17 and on the road?

Further to that dog of sheep, I'd go out on a limb and say there's a hell of a lot more people riding a bike everyday than what there are people surfing on even the best of days

And yes the narrative we are nauseatingly forcefed is ...if it saves just one...blah blah blah

And blindboys deaths probably aren't neccesarily head injuries, but hey we're splitting hairs now, and it seems governments are finally listening, or at least having to...begrudgingly...

why is no-one complaining about seatbelts? if im just going down to the local store and its 50kmph the whole way and I plan on driving only 35kmph cause I like to be a prick. then do I really need a seatbelt? i mean the chance of having an accident at that speed is so small its not funny. and even if I do crash my modern car is full of crumple zones. i'll hardly feel a thing.

do you think they could relax that law for me? shouldnt it be my right to decide if I need a seatbelt for the speed im driving and the safety features of my car?

Don't get me started happas!!

Actually, I'm fine with seatbelts...BUT....if canberra is dumb/nanny enough to make the whole city 40kms you've got a point...ban fucking seatbelts

Happyas, it takes two to have a decent car smash, usually. What about the other bloke. What is he/she doing ? Hence its easier to just have seat belts for all. It's seems your saying that if you are doing 35 then your the prick. Hang on, 60 or 50 is a max not a minimum.