# Some Dutch guy wants to legally change of age



## Noctosphere (Nov 9, 2018)

So yea, you see, there's that 69 years old guy who feels much younger
articulation are fine, mental health is fine, eyes are fine, heart is fine
plus, he doesn't look 69, he looks more like between 40-50

so he said that legally, you can change of sex, you can change of name
Why can't you change your birthday?

Apparently, women on tinder see his pics, looks nice, looks at his age, not nice
Personally, I find it stupid, but I'd like to see comments about this case


----------



## Deleted-379826 (Nov 9, 2018)

Brilliant, simply brilliant. Sounds like an extravagant idea! Never before have I heard something so insanely genius!


----------



## Chary (Nov 9, 2018)

Here’s the source so you, too, can laugh at this mess. No, it’s not April Fools again. 

This is so unbelievably stupid, and a waste of funds and time. Not only that, but this buffoonish creep even tries to equate changing his age with trans people. 

Old Man Yells At Cloud, Claiming He Is Not Old.


----------



## osm70 (Nov 9, 2018)

So, can I say I identify as an old person and demand to get my retirement money now?


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 9, 2018)

Chary said:


> Here’s the source so you, too, can laugh at this mess. No, it’s not April Fools again.
> 
> This is so unbelievably stupid, and a waste of funds and time. Not only that, but this buffoonish creep even tries to equate changing his age with trans people.
> 
> Old Man Yells At Cloud, Claiming He Is Not Old.









--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



osm70 said:


> So, can I say I identify as an old person and demand to get my retirement money now?


I guess a 16 years old boy will ask to change his age to 18/21 so he can buy beer


----------



## x65943 (Nov 9, 2018)

He knows it is a joke

That's the whole reason he is doing it

Basically he is making social commentary and he is incredibly rich so he doesn't care how much time and money he wastes


----------



## Veho (Nov 9, 2018)

I want to legally change my age to 67 so I can retire.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 9, 2018)

Veho said:


> I want to legally change my age to 67 so I can retire.


Since Harper, Canada is considering changing legal age for retirement from 65 to 67


----------



## james50a (Nov 9, 2018)

honestly basically exact same thing as the trans argument. it stopped being about what you are physically to what you are emotionally. the fact that the government let emotions factor into laws is the issue and its why this old man cannot be dismissed as a joke without dismissing the "feelings" of people who identify as trans.


----------



## Veho (Nov 9, 2018)

Noctosphere said:


> Since Harper, Canada is considering changing legal age for retirement from 65 to 67


It's 65 here but they're talking about increasing it to 67 as well. I just want to stay ahead of the game in case they move the goalposts in the meantime.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 9, 2018)

Veho said:


> It's 65 here but they're talking about increasing it to 67 as well. I just want to stay ahead of the game in case they move the goalposts in the meantime.


There isn't the grandfather law in your country?
(you know that law saying that laws that applied to you and are now changed, the old law still applies to you)


----------



## Taleweaver (Nov 10, 2018)

I gotta admit the guy has more arguments than I give him credit for.

Then again: I don't give him credit. The guy is lucky to be in the shape that he is (okay, I assume he worked toward that). How about being grateful for it rather than jumping the shark? I mean...what does he want to prove? That there are exceptions to the general rule of aging?

(note: in our dojo, we've got an 80+ karateka. It's very nice to still be in shape at his age, but he's just about the oldest karateka in Belgium, or even Europe. It's not like every senior can "just pick up the sport").


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

james50a said:


> honestly basically exact same thing as the trans argument. it stopped being about what you are physically to what you are emotionally. the fact that the government let emotions factor into laws is the issue and its why this old man cannot be dismissed as a joke without dismissing the "feelings" of people who identify as trans.


It's not the same argument. He's asking to literally bend time to defy his age, something that has literally no scientific backing in any fields. There's actual medical research to prove and understand how being transgender works and why it's a real thing. These aren't the same thing.
One can draw a line in the sand between this and being trans without invalidating the trans community.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> It's not the same argument. He's asking to literally bend time to defy his age, something that has literally no scientific backing in any fields. There's actual medical research to prove and understand how being transgender works and why it's a real thing. These aren't the same thing.
> One can draw a line in the sand between this and being trans without invalidating the trans community.


And there isn't any research into how and why people age differently?


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> And there isn't any research into how and why people age differently?


There's still a difference between that field of research and what this man is asking and comparing it to. Just become someone ages differently, doesn't mean they can legally change their age based on that rate. One's own age is a measurement of time, not of their health. There's a complete difference here and these things are not comparable in any manner.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> There's still a difference between that field of research and what this man is asking and comparing it to. Just become someone ages differently, doesn't mean they can legally change their age based on that rate. One's own age is a measurement of time, not of their health.


Looks like an arbitrary line being drawn in the sand to me.  One could easily make the converse argument that just because a man has surgery and undergoes hormone therapy doesn't mean they are a woman.


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> And there isn't any research into how and why people age differently?


I mean, I could be way off base here, but it seems like the obvious answer is a mix of diet, exercise, and genetics.  All three often being determined by where you're born and who you're born to.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> Looks like an arbitrary line being drawn in the sand to me.  One could easily make the converse argument that just because a man has surgery and undergoes hormone therapy doesn't mean they are a woman.


Expect it's a line drawn with actual facts. You can't change the year you were born, that's against the universal laws of time and something that can not be changed. Being trans has actual medical backing to prove the validity behind transgender individuals. Your argument is complete garbage and without backing. You are comparing an apple to a shoe with nonsense arguments.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I mean, I could be way off base here, but it seems like the obvious answer is a mix of diet, exercise, and genetics.  All three often being determined by where you're born and who you're born to.


Genetics isn't really an answer, but more of the start of an answer.  What about the genetics causes people to age slower?  Like with sex, you could say it's genetics and stop there, but why does the Y chromosome result in male physiology?  Then you start delving deeper into hormone production and the like to see the actual biological process related to the genetics.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Lilith Valentine said:


> Expect it's a line drawn with actual facts. You can't change the year you were born, that's against the universal laws of time and something that can not be changed. Being trans has actual medical backing to prove the validity behind transgender individuals. Your argument is complete garbage and without backing. You are comparing an apple to a shoe with nonsense arguments.


You are being very dismissive of the other side while asking people to be accepting of your own.  There is some nuance on both sides, but you only accept the nuance for the side that you are on.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> You are being very dismissive of the other side while asking people to be accepting of your own.  There is some nuance on both sides, but you only accept the nuance for the side that you are on.


That's because the other side is based on nothing and doesn't deserve my respect. It's a man trying to "make a point" about the trans community while making a platform on literally garbage logic. This is the same kind of crap that 4chan pulled with "cloversexual," except now it's using age instead of pedophilia. I don't need to accept his side because he's inherently disrespected my existence with his little show.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> It's not the same argument. He's asking to literally bend time to defy his age, something that has literally no scientific backing in any fields. *There's actual medical research to prove and understand how being transgender works and why it's a real thing.* These aren't the same thing.
> One can draw a line in the sand between this and being trans without invalidating the trans community.




Nothing conclusive. If there is, post it. All I've seen are studies that, "suggest that," the brains of transgenders do things like the desired gender, or a genetic trait has been identified that, "could be," etc etc. And its clear that these studies were conducted with the specific purpose of finding such evidence - confirmation bias is an issue. You used the word, "*prove*,"... I don't think we're there, at all. 

I got this from an earlier post of mine, too much trouble to re-type it:

_The idea_ of "sex" and "gender" being different, distinguishable things never existed in Western culture until the 1970's, and then only among radical feminists. Before that a person might be a homosexual male, or a homosexual female, but a person's sex was based on biology and the use of the word gender was mostly confined to Spanish class when you were taught about how to use "las" and "los." Whether you believe in this transgender theory or not, if you discussed this with anyone before 1970 they would think you're fucking nuts. After 1970 until about 10-15 years ago, only 90%+ of the people you spoke to would think you're fucking nuts.

Please read about "Sexologist" John Money and how he invented the modern usage of the word "gender." Until mid-70's sociologists latched onto Money's theory, humans with a penis were males, and humans with vaginas were female, PERIOD. Next, read about how Dr. Money totally fucked up David Reimer in childhood with a sex reassignment attempt in infancy, took photos of Reimer and his twin brother in nude, simulated sex acts as small children, etc., and how Reimer eventually committed suicide because of his life being ruined by the man who came up with this mess of thought. This was the origin of transgender theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money



> Sexologist John Money introduced the terminological distinction between biological sex and gender as a role in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories. However, Money's meaning of the word did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the concept of a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today the distinction is strictly followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences and documents written by the World Health Organization (WHO).




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer



> Reimer said that Money forced the twins to rehearse sexual acts involving "thrusting movements", with David playing the bottom role. Reimer said that, as a child, he had to get "down on all fours" with his brother, Brian Reimer, "up behind his butt" with "his crotch against" his "buttocks". Reimer said that Money forced David, in another sexual position, to have his "legs spread" with Brian on top. Reimer said that Money also forced the children to take their "clothes off" and engage in "genital inspections". On at "least one occasion", Reimer said that Money took a photograph of the two children doing these activities. Money's rationale for these various treatments was his belief that "childhood 'sexual rehearsal play'" was important for a "healthy adult gender identity".


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> What about the genetics causes people to age slower?


Err...in basic terms, I think it'd be a few specific genes: the ones that determine hair loss likelihood/age of occurrence, that determine number/likelihood of wrinkles, and that determine likelihood of sickness/disease.  A big part of why natural deaths can occur anywhere from 50-122 years old (yes there was a guy who died in 1997 that lived to 122).  The two other big factors, as I said, _likely_ being diet and exercise, which are informed by your environment and upbringing.


----------



## KingVamp (Nov 10, 2018)

It is one thing to talk about age discrimination, but this is just disingenuous.

I can see someday people being able to actually change sex. Living 1000 years, is living 1000 years. Even if you feel or look otherwise. Not going to be able to change time itself.
Better off arguing "trans-species" than "trans-age/time".


----------



## Dust2dust (Nov 10, 2018)

Noctosphere said:


> Since Harper, Canada is considering changing legal age for retirement from 65 to 67


I don't think it's just Canada.  It's a worldwide trend.  People are living longer, and there is a high demand for qualified workers, usually not being able to fulfill completely.  So it only makes sense to keep the people working a couple more years.  But I agree it shouldn't be forced by law.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Err...in basic terms, I think it'd be a few specific genes: the ones that determine hair loss likelihood/age of occurrence, that determine number/likelihood of wrinkles, and that determine likelihood of sickness/disease.  A big part of why natural deaths can occur anywhere from 50-122 years old (yes there was a guy who died in 1997 that lived to 122).  The two other big factors, as I said, _likely_ being diet and exercise, which are informed by your environment and upbringing.


My point is that genes don't simply exist and create an end-product.  They affect your biological process.  If you can figure out HOW they affect the biological process, it could potentially be used to create drugs or treatments to mimic those processes to slow the aging of people not blessed by those genes.  That's what I mean when I say 'genetics' is just the start of an answer.


----------



## Xzi (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> My point is that genes don't simply exist and create an end-product.  They affect your biological process.  If you can figure out HOW they affect the biological process, it could potentially be used to create drugs or treatments to mimic those processes to slow the aging of people not blessed by those genes.  That's what I mean when I say 'genetics' is just the start of an answer.


Well, I did say it was just one of three parts that seem to be obvious contributing factors to apparent age.  I don't think we're far off from being able to reliably manipulate/change genes, at least in early infancy, so we'll see how big a role genetics really play at that point.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> That's because the other side is based on nothing and doesn't deserve my respect.


Sounds awfully closed-minded for someone asking others to be open-minded of their own non-standard status.  Don't have to go back very far to see opinions like those expressed in the above quote being the standard in relation to transsexuals.


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

Chary said:


> Here’s the source so you, too, can laugh at this mess. No, it’s not April Fools again.
> 
> This is so unbelievably stupid, and a waste of funds and time. Not only that, but this buffoonish creep even tries to equate changing his age with trans people.
> 
> Old Man Yells At Cloud, Claiming He Is Not Old.


Good job for calling an harmless man that just wants to change his age of 20 years a "creep". I'm sure you know him well enough to use such a strong term.

He isn't one of those 30-something years old that claim to be a kid inside and wants to date other kids. He specifically said that he's limited when he says he's 69, for a good reason too. And all he wants to do is remove 20 years off his legal age.

Do women that undergo surgery to look younger are also "creeps"? He didn't even say a crazy number like wanting to be 18, or 28. He'll still be considered quite old at 49, so what's the real problem here? He even said that he's willing to renounce to his retirement money. And now you're all making fun of him? Calling him a creep? For something that literally affects you in 0 ways? Oh wait, it would mean more money to the Dutch government.

I said I wouldn't have posted in this section anymore but DAMN some of the post people make are just... dumb.


----------



## dimmidice (Nov 10, 2018)

I doubt he really wants to do this. It's probably just a stunt for attention and to try and throw shade at transgenders.



Lilith Valentine said:


> There's still a difference between that field of research and what this man is asking and comparing it to. Just become someone ages differently, doesn't mean they can legally change their age based on that rate. One's own age is a measurement of time, not of their health. There's a complete difference here and these things are not comparable in any manner.


Exactly this. Health might vary between people, but we all age the exact same day. 1 year = 1 year regardless of how healthy you are. The only time someone should be  able to have their age changed officially is if it turns out there was a mix up or something.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> Sounds awfully closed-minded for someone asking others to be open-minded of their own non-standard status.  Don't have to go back very far to see opinions like those expressed in the above quote being the standard in relation to transsexuals.


I understand that you are trying to play Devil's advocate and apply this notion that if one is acceptable, the other is inherently acceptable. But this would also require clumping in medical research to a fabrication. Age as previously stated is a measurement of time and nothing more. This is not an issue of identity, this is an argument against time itself and not comparable to gender. It's a broken argument right out of the gate and still requires actual proof to show how he can change time, without referring to the trans community as an argument.


----------



## Chary (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> Good job for calling an *harmless *man


He did this because women on Tinder aren't interested in 69 year old men. If he's trying to legally change his age, then he's trying to get around admitting his true age to women interested in dating him. That's deceitful. Not harmless.

Also. Lawsuit. That's kinda just wasting everyone's time and money on the matter, really. City now has to focus on a legal battle with a dude who wants his age down a few decades from his actual birth, and now they're going to have to spend resources combating it. That's not harmless either.



> Ratelband says he wants to avoid age discrimination in society - especially on dating websites.





Song of storms said:


> I'm sure you know him well enough to use such a strong term.


And you know him well enough to go out of your way to defend him, then? Hello, opinions can exist.



Song of storms said:


> Do women that undergo surgery to look younger are also "creeps"?


No, unless they directly lie about their physical age when prompted by whoever they're in a relationship with. Which is what this man would ideally want to do.



Song of storms said:


> For something that literally affects you in 0 ways?


Oh I guess now we can't comment on 99% of topics in this forum, since they might not personally affect us! Let's dare not have discussion on a GASP, discussion forum.

If he's facing issues due to age, then he should try to cobble together an actual case--one for discrimination.



> If I'm 49, then I can buy a new house, drive a different car. When I'm 49, with the face I have, I will be in a luxurious position.



This comment seems more like trying to cling onto fading youth, and rather wanting to live it up like a middle age man, rather than a senior citizen. Which he is entirely free to do. He can drive whatever car he likes in his own freedom, no one is stopping him. He can buy all the homes he wants, no one is barring him from buying property at his age. He is free to date any woman who is interested in him as a person.



Song of storms said:


> DAMN some of the post people make are just... dumb.


I'm sure you know me well enough to use such a strong term.


----------



## grossaffe (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> I understand that you are trying to play Devil's advocate and apply this notion that if one is acceptable, the other is inherently acceptable. But this would also require clumping in medical research to a fabrication. Age as previously stated is a measurement of time and nothing more. This is not an issue of identity, this is an argument against time itself and not comparable to gender. It's a broken argument right out of the gate and still requires actual proof to show how he can change time, without referring to the trans community as an argument.


Sex was a qualification of "were you born with a penis or a vagina" and nothing more.

And age is VERY often used in terms that aren't explicitly measures of time.  For example, people talk about how being President ages a person.  They're certainly not talking about how that person moves forward in time over the course of their term, as that is the same amount of time they progress when someone else is president.  Or we talk about how Patrick Stewart stopped aging twenty years ago.  And there's anti-aging cremes and such, and I don't think they'll claim that it causes you to travel back in time.

Now is this person trying to make a point about transgenderism/transsexualism?  Probably.  Take this as an opportunity to show how they are different.  You are making some attempt, but thus far I don't think you have made very convincing arguments.  You need to try to look at both issues with similar levels of skepticism and open-mindedness to be able to make reasonable comparisons and contrastions so that you can formulate an argument that can convince people that aren't already pre-disposed to your position.

I appreciate that you aren't taking this back-and-forth personally.  And yes, there is a strong dose of Devil's advocation on my part.  I like to try to get people to take a deeper look beyond their own viewpoints and perhaps a little introspection into their own.  Or maybe I'm just a contrarian asshole.


----------



## brickmii82 (Nov 10, 2018)

This is amazing! I can change my legal age to 65 and start collecting Social Security!


----------



## DarthDub (Nov 10, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> This is amazing! I can change my legal age to 65 and start collecting Social Security!


Assuming they'll actually give it to you..


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

Chary said:


> He did this because women on Tinder aren't interested in 69 year old men. If he's trying to legally change his age, then he's trying to get around admitting his true age to women interested in dating him. That's deceitful. Not harmless.




False. That's just one of the reasons. He said that he has more freedom, because he faces discrimination for his age even though he looks/acts much younger. It's even written in the article that, although the Dutch law says that employers can't discriminate on age, they still do.
Also, I see no point where someone should care about someone's age unless A) they're trying to hide the fact that they're a minor (and it's clearly not the case here) or B) the women would prefer him if he were 20 years younger because they could have a shot at hooking him up for life. And we're talking about "deceitful" acts on an app like Tinder where people photoshop their asses all the time to look thinner? Come on.


Chary said:


> Also. Lawsuit. That's kinda just wasting everyone's time and money on the matter, really. City now has to focus on a legal battle with a dude who wants his age down a few decades from his actual birth, and now they're going to have to spend resources combating it. That's not harmless either.


Challenging the state whenever a citizen believes it did something wrong it's fair and rightful. Don't like it? Move to North Korea and beg Kim to not reunite with South Korea.





Chary said:


> And you know him well enough to go out of your way to defend him, then? Hello, opinions can exist.


Having an opinion doesn't justify you from calling people names.



Chary said:


> No, unless they directly lie about their physical age when prompted by whoever they're in a relationship with. Which is what this man would ideally want to do.


Again, he never claimed to want a relationship. He wants to find women on Tinder. Do you really not know how Tinder works? He's not going to marry them. And if he does, he has to be honest about it.


Chary said:


> Oh I guess now we can't comment on 99% of topics in this forum, since they might not personally affect us! Let's dare not have discussion on a GASP, discussion forum.


Again, calling people names isn't having an opinion, it's just being an asshole. Don't make an hyperbole just because you can't understand this.



Chary said:


> This comment seems more like trying to cling onto fading youth, and rather wanting to live it up like a middle age man, rather than a senior citizen. Which he is entirely free to do. He can drive whatever car he likes in his own freedom, no one is stopping him. He can buy all the homes he wants, no one is barring him from buying property at his age. He is free to date any woman who is interested in him as a person.


Do you have any idea of how different things work for a senior citizen? He can't drive any car he wants because insurance will have a say to this by increasing their quota (and insurances are BS worldwide, so much so that a guy from Canada legally changed gender from male to female just to save several hundred dollars a year for his). He can't buy a house because no bank will allow a man his age to get a mortgage, even if he's living a healthier life than many other, much younger people. If he's on Tinder, he clearly isn't interested in "dating".



Chary said:


> I'm sure you know me well enough to use such a strong term.


Ignoring the fact that between "dumb" and "creep" there's an abyssal difference, I said that the posts are dumb, not that the people are. I didn't call people names, unlike you. Mine is an actual opinion.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

grossaffe said:


> Sex was a qualification of "were you born with a penis or a vagina" and nothing more.
> 
> And age is VERY often used in terms that aren't explicitly measures of time.  For example, people talk about how being President ages a person.  They're certainly not talking about how that person moves forward in time over the course of their term, as that is the same amount of time they progress when someone else is president.  Or we talk about how Patrick Stewart stopped aging twenty years ago.  And there's anti-aging cremes and such, and I don't think they'll claim that it causes you to travel back in time.
> 
> ...


Yes, sex used to be the defining factor in gender and ultimately that has changed. Science has a tendency to change over time, this including the science of gender, sex, and sexuality. So yes, at one point my style of argument would have been the same ones used. But there's a difference between an argument made out of ignorance and what I am making. I am stating that age, as a measurement of time, can not be changed as it would require changing time itself. Now I understand your argument of appearance and health. I work with a man who's over 66 years and looks like he's in 40's and outworks people in their 20's. I also work with someone who is actually 56 and looks like he's in his 70's and is in horrible health. The years they were born didn't define who they are and doesn't define people in the same manner as gender/sexuality. Their ages are just the measure of time to when they were born, how they turned out was a factor both within and outside of their control, but aren't defined by when they were born.

He actually said in the interview, "We live in a time when you can change your name and change your gender. Why can't I decide my own age?" So this is indeed something he's comparing to being trans and also because he's upset that he can't get girls on Tinder. There's no real deeper argument here, his argument is literally, "They can do that, so I should be able to do this!" If there's an argument, it's that he thinks time and gender are somehow the same. Honestly we've spent more time talking about this than he's spent explaining his stance on the issue.
Personally, I think he should actually talk to tinder about having age be shown as optional. He's a very attractive and younger looking man. If his age being shown is the issue, then he should work with Tinder to see if they can come up with something better. His actions are just needlessly throwing an at-risk community under the bus for the sake of getting girls. His reason is an extreme reaction to not finding dates and something that could have been settled better.


----------



## brickmii82 (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> False. That's just one of the reasons. He said that he has more freedom, because he faces discrimination for his age even though he looks/acts much younger. It's even written in the article that, although the Dutch law says that employers can't discriminate on age, they still do.
> Also, I see no point where someone should care about someone's age unless A) they're trying to hide the fact that they're a minor (and it's clearly not the case here) or B) the women would prefer him if he were 20 years younger because they could have a shot at hooking him up for life. And we're talking about "deceitful" acts on an app like Tinder where people photoshop their asses all the time to look thinner? Come on.
> 
> Challenging the state whenever a citizen believes it did something wrong it's fair and rightful. Don't like it? Move to North Korea and beg Kim to not reunite with South Korea.
> ...


I thought you were conservative leaning. This opinion isn't really a conservative one.


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> I thought you were conservative leaning. This opinion isn't really a conservative one.


Where did you take that?


----------



## brickmii82 (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> Where did you take that?


I think it was one of the Trump posts. Although tbf these days theyre all Trump posts ...


----------



## deinonychus71 (Nov 10, 2018)

Lilith Valentine said:


> I understand that you are trying to play Devil's advocate and apply this notion that if one is acceptable, the other is inherently acceptable. But this would also require clumping in medical research to a fabrication. Age as previously stated is a measurement of time and nothing more. This is not an issue of identity, this is an argument against time itself and not comparable to gender. It's a broken argument right out of the gate and still requires actual proof to show how he can change time, without referring to the trans community as an argument.



Even though I agree with you on the topic, I've had to deal part of the week with people who use nothing but ad hominem whenever you don't agree with them (the game & watch drama). It's annoying because it gets nowhere and nobody ever change their positions.
And actually for gender, the issue lie with the very definition of gender. If for someone gender = sex, then it's also a measurement that cannot be changed. Once you make them realize that gender is more than that, then it becomes easier to process.


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

brickmii82 said:


> I think it was one of the Trump posts. Although tbf these days theyre all Trump posts ...


Just because I don't consider the guy literally Hitler doesn't mean I'm conservative. I fight for gay rights, I fight for trans rights, I fight for end of discrimination, I fight for what's right. You can't go to any politician right now and expect them to think exactly like you. But between Trump and Clinton I'd pick Trump any and every time. It's a no brainer for me.

If Trump would, say, want to ban gay rights (lol), I will call him out like I always do. But in the end, he can't do shit about it because gay rights are important and people against them get a serious backlash.

But when politicians promote discrimination because they believe to be "the right side", that's what I can't stand. Because you can totally be Google and discriminate over males and white people in the hiring process and no one will care.
 You can say on the Internet that women should be believed on anything they say regardless of proof, and you'll have millions agreeing with you, so much so that the law is corrupted by this way of thought. It's as bad as some schools deciding to swift legit rape cases under the rug just because the aggressor is a promising sports player, mind you. But the public goes INSANE when that happens until a proper punishment is given. And rightfully so. But a woman can falsely accuse someone of rape and get a slap on the wrist or a company can openly discriminate on white people and males without any repercussion, and that's fucked up.

This isn't what equality is and I'll call it out everytime I see it. But we're going off-topic here.


----------



## Chary (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> although the Dutch law says that employers *can't discriminate on age, *they *still do*.


Then. Mount. A. Case. For. That. Not age semantics trying to rewrite factual history of his year of birth and age.



Song of storms said:


> Challenging the state whenever a citizen believes it did something wrong it's fair and rightful.


Where was he wronged? When the state told him his birth year, and he happened to be born that year?



Song of storms said:


> Having an opinion doesn't justify you from calling people names.


Having freedom to express my opinion means I can say whatever I want about a given situation within the lines of reason. My opinion is that he's making a mockery of the courts, and being on the fringe of creepy, because one of his facets is to change his age for tinder dating.



Song of storms said:


> Again, he never claimed to want a relationship. He wants to find women on Tinder. Do you really not know how Tinder works? He's not going to marry them. And if he does, he has to be honest about it.


Deceit is deceit. If he thinks he's so young looking, he should try primping that factor to his favor, then. Not say "I don't wanna lie buuuuuut I wanna lie!"



Song of storms said:


> Do you have any idea of how different things work for a senior citizen? He can't drive any car he wants because insurance will have a say to this by increasing their quota (and insurances are BS worldwide, so much so that a guy from Canada legally changed gender from male to female just to save several hundred dollars a year for his).


Legality is legality. Laws exist for a reason, to protect the state, and the citizens. If seniors are at a higher risk, then that's a problem seniors face. It's not ageist, it's statistics. Insurance rates blow regardless, but it's not like it's all unfounded.



Song of storms said:


> He can't buy a house because no bank will allow a man his age to get a mortgage, even if he's living a healthier life than many other, much younger people.


If he's looking for 40, 30, or even 20 year loans when he's 70, yeah. Again, it's like the insurance. Avenues exist, assuming he has a good credit line, income, and ability to provide a down payment. But facts are, taking out loans are dangerous to banks when the lended might not be alive to pay it off fully. He is being deceitful to the ones providing a loan by not giving them his true age.

Life has its ups and downs. Our society has age based restrictions to protect. Kids can't drink because they're prone to making bad decisions at that age. Seniors are likely to become frail, unable to work, likely to become sick, incapable. It's a part of life, and aging. It sucks, but he's going out of his way to not accept facts.



Song of storms said:


> Mine is an actual opinion.


You're not outwardly calling people names, but you've certainly got the tone as if you are.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 10, 2018)

deinonychus71 said:


> Even though I agree with you on the topic, I've had to deal part of the week with people who use nothing but ad hominem whenever you don't agree with them (the game & watch drama). It's annoying because it gets nowhere and nobody ever change their positions.
> And actually for gender, the issue lie with the very definition of gender. If for someone gender = sex, then it's also a measurement that cannot be changed. Once you make them realize that gender is more than that, then it becomes easier to process.


But it's still two completely different topics. A measurement of time is not the same as gender nor sex and thus comparing is onto itself illogical. The man behind this created a strawman by comparing names and gender to time itself. I am not saying I am the best at breaking down the logical fallacies the dude created because honestly, the ones used to create his first argument ultimately end up being the ones used to defend it. 
In other words, I am doing the best I can to break down his initial argument, but limited due to how carefully I have to pick my words. I know just how easily something like this can fall apart with only a few misplaced words and without trying to use the same logical faculties. I will fail at times because as stressed, this is not an easy topic to take apart. He created a simple and easy to argument that's harder to break down, even if it should be obvious where the issues lie.


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

Chary said:


> Then. Mount. A. Case. For. That. Not age semantics trying to rewrite factual history of his year of birth and age.


How out of touch with the real world are you to not see men and senior citizens complaining about this but nothing is ever done? Even in the article you can find links to cases about work discrimination. He knows he can't fight the system so he found a workaround.



Chary said:


> Where was he wronged? When the state told him his birth year, and he happened to be born that year?


The state didn't decide his birth year, his parents did. By his logic, if people can legally change their gender, he can cut off almost 1/4 of his years, even losing the rights with it, like his retirement money. Whether his logic is right or wrong, he feels like he's being wronged and there's no case prior to this, so he has all the power to do so.


Chary said:


> Having freedom to express my opinion means I can say whatever I want about a given situation within the lines of reason. My opinion is that he's making a mockery of the courts, and being on the fringe of creepy, because one of his facets is to change his age for tinder dating.


creepy
/ˈkriːpi/
adjectiveinformal
adjective: creepy; comparative adjective: creepier; superlative adjective: creepiest

    causing an unpleasant feeling of fear or unease.

Please do tell me how can a 69 years old bring "fear and unease" by wanting to legally change his age to 49 and being so "creepy" about it that he talked to journalists in public about it. It's like me going to the thread where people post their photos and calling pedophiles those with a mustache because of some nosense in my brain that goes "mustaches = pedophilia".



Chary said:


> Deceit is deceit. If he thinks he's so young looking, he should try primping that factor to his favor, then. Not say "I don't wanna lie buuuuuut I wanna lie!"


Except that, by legally changing his day of birth, he wouldn't need to be lying. If he didn't put "49" as age on Tinder it means that he's a honest man, because as I said earlier, people in the app lie all the time. From body shape, to age, to relationship status and so on. But he didn't do that, he's trying to do it legally. This behavior is far from any name you've called him in this thread.



Chary said:


> Legality is legality. Laws exist for a reason, to protect the state, and the citizens. If seniors are at a higher risk, then that's a problem seniors face. It's not ageist, it's statistics. Insurance rates blow regardless, but it's not like it's all unfounded.


By this logic, we should let black people pay a premium for life insurance because they commit a huge percent of crimes compared to white people. Or make women pay more car insurance than men because, under the same mileage, they make more carwreck than men. Except that we don't, because discrimination is bad. And by the way, teenagers under 25 commit a lot more car accidents than elder people.


Chary said:


> If he's looking for 40, 30, or even 20 year loans when he's 70, yeah. Again, it's like the insurance. Avenues exist, assuming he has a good credit line, income, and ability to provide a down payment. But facts are, taking out loans are dangerous to banks when the lended might not be alive to pay it off fully. He is being deceitful to the ones providing a loan by not giving them his true age.


Yeah, ok. Good luck finding any bank that will give you a 40 years payment at 49. I'm sure that will work out just fine.

Have you seen his resume? The man is active. He has a better lifestyle than many teenagers. He won't get a 40 years loan like any other guy at 49, but he'd be getting 20 or 30 without issues.


Chary said:


> Life has its ups and downs. Our society has age based restrictions to protect. Kids can't drink because they're prone to making bad decisions at that age. Seniors are likely to become frail, unable to work, likely to become sick, incapable. It's a part of life, and aging. It sucks, but he's going out of his way to not accept facts.


If a 70 years old man can go and complain that not enough women are letting him bang them, I can safely say that, for him, age doesn't seem to matter. We have seniors competing at the olympics, running mile after mile every day, working hard and so on. Not everyone like this, but these people definitely don't deserve to live a life paying taxes and then being treated like a child just because their ID says that they're from a generation that's "too old" to do stuff. If society cares so much about this, maybe we should let men retire at the same age as women, considering that they have shorter life averages because of how stressful their jobs are. But we won't, because society doesn't care. Senior citizens are seen as a burden, because they get "free money" from the government, when people seem to forget that they paid their whole life for someone else's retirement. And those people did the same, and so on.



Chary said:


> You're not outwardly calling people names, but you've certainly got the tone as if you are.


Nope.


----------



## Viri (Nov 10, 2018)

I like how a thread about an old man wanting to change his age, became a thread about transgender people.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

Viri said:


> I like how a thread about an old man wanting to change his age, became a thread about transgender people.


You like?
As in, youd like this specific situation to happen again?
lol


----------



## Viri (Nov 10, 2018)

Noctosphere said:


> You like?
> As in, youd like this specific situation to happen again?
> lol


I just find it amusing.


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2018)

52 year old guy wants to be 6 year old girl



--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Xzi said:


> I mean, I could be way off base here, but it seems like the obvious answer is a mix of diet, exercise, and genetics.  All three often being determined by where you're born and who you're born to.


And go to a different planet since time passes differently then on earth. That’ll be cool when humans can space travel. Mars time moves differently to earth though not a big effect.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Lilith Valentine said:


> Expect it's a line drawn with actual facts. You can't change the year you were born, that's against the universal laws of time and something that can not be changed. Being trans has actual medical backing to prove the validity behind transgender individuals. Your argument is complete garbage and without backing. You are comparing an apple to a shoe with nonsense arguments.


There is science for time and time can change for you, Time Dialation. If you move fast relative to other people then time will tick more slowly.

High level gravity also slows down your time. The higher up and farther away you are away from earths center in reduced gravity then time ticks faster. Einstein’s theory of relativity.


----------



## H1B1Esquire (Nov 10, 2018)

It's a South Park episode for the Christmas Special.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

SG854 said:


> 52 year old guy wants to be 6 year old girl
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Humans can space travel...
...just not far...


----------



## kumikochan (Nov 10, 2018)

Then he will also get his pension money 20 years later and also has to work for another 20 years.


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> By this logic, we should let black people pay a premium for life insurance because they commit a huge percent of crimes compared to white people. Or make women pay more car insurance than men because, under the same mileage, they make more carwreck than men. Except that we don't, because discrimination is bad. And by the way, teenagers under 25 commit a lot more car accidents than elder people.
> people did the same, and so on


It’s the other way around. Males pay for more car insurance because they are more likely to get into accidents. Women don’t drive recklessly and race cars as much as males statistically.


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

SG854 said:


> It’s the other way around. Males pay for more car insurance because they are more likely to get into accidents. Women don’t drunk drive and race cars as much as males statistically.


Are you nuts?


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> Are you nuts?


ikr, women dont need alcool to drive badly

hoho, did i just make a sexist joke?
hehe, yes i did

(dont take it personal please, i respect women )


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> Are you nuts?


No, it’s why car insurance is more expensive for males. On car insurance websites they tell you exactly why males pay more.

This is from the DMV website. I know because there was complaints on I think it was why women pay more medical insurance, or something like that. And the counter argument to that was why men pay more for car insurance. It’s differences in risks based on gender that drives up costs. Which has nothing to do with sexism.

https://www.dmv.org/insurance/how-gender-affects-auto-insurance-rates.php


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

SG854 said:


> No, it’s why car insurance is more expensive for males. On car insurance websites they tell you exactly why males pay more.
> 
> This is from the DMV website. I know because there was complaints on I think it was why women pay more medical insurance, or something like that. And the counter argument to that was why men pay more for car insurance. It’s differences in risks based on gender that drives up costs.
> 
> https://www.dmv.org/insurance/how-gender-affects-auto-insurance-rates.php


women pay more for health insurrence?
lol, is it because 99% of breast cancer are women's case?

luckily, health insurrence is free here in Quebec


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 10, 2018)

SG854 said:


> No, it’s why car insurance is more expensive for males. On car insurance websites they tell you exactly why males pay more.
> 
> This is from the DMV website. I know because there was complaints on I think it was why women pay more medical insurance, or something like that. And the counter argument to that was why men pay more for car insurance. It’s differences in risks based on gender that drives up costs. Which has nothing to do with sexism.
> 
> https://www.dmv.org/insurance/how-gender-affects-auto-insurance-rates.php


Except that the website doesn't count the fact that men drive a lot more miles than women. That's why I specifically said "with the same mileage". It's like saying that the majority of homicides by nurses are done by women. Of course they are: 95% of them are female.


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2018)

Song of storms said:


> Except that the website doesn't count the fact that men drive a lot more miles than women. That's why I specifically said "with the same mileage". It's like saying that the majority of homicides by nurses are done by women. Of course they are: 95% of them are female.


That topic is covered in the link I gave. They also consider that fact that males drive more.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

you guys obviously dont know women in my family
they love driving


----------



## SG854 (Nov 10, 2018)

Noctosphere said:


> women pay more for health insurrence?
> lol, is it because 99% of breast cancer are women's case?
> 
> luckily, health insurrence is free here in Quebec


I forgot if it was health insurance or something else, too lazy to look up right now.



Song of storms said:


> Except that the website doesn't count the fact that men drive a lot more miles than women. That's why I specifically said "with the same mileage". It's like saying that the majority of homicides by nurses are done by women. Of course they are: 95% of them are female.


Women do pay more for insurance when they are younger. Then when they get older and more mature they pay less. Same with men. So it takes different ages into account. And it tends to equalize more as they get older.

They also look at it in an individual case by case. If you are a reckless female driver then you’ll be more of a risk to your insurer and will pay more regardless of gender.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 10, 2018)

SG854 said:


> I forgot if it was health insurance or something else, too lazy to look up right now.
> 
> 
> Women do pay more for insurance when they are younger. *Then when they get older and more mature they pay less*. Same with men. So it takes different ages into account. And it tends to equalize more as they get older.
> ...


I guess they have to change of company
Corporations don't like reducing their price


----------



## DinohScene (Nov 10, 2018)

People like that need to be strung up from a tree.


----------



## The Catboy (Nov 11, 2018)

SG854 said:


> 52 year old guy wants to be 6 year old girl
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's going forward in time, I am talking about bending time to go backwards and then changing a date.
Also the case of the 52 year old has a lot of details and seems more like a case of a serious mental breakdown. They came out as trans before, got seriously rejected by their family, and tried again, attempted suicide, and ended up like this. (TL; RD) Something makes me believe the age reverting in this case is a coping mechanism and something that needs serious therapy to work through.


----------



## barronwaffles (Nov 11, 2018)

DinohScene said:


> People like that need to be strung up from a tree.



Everyone who does something I dislike needs to be strung up from a tree.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Nov 11, 2018)

That is going to suck when his age finally catches up to him and he looks 20 years older than his ID says he is.
And just because he looks younger doesn't mean he's not aging. The various processes in the body that cause aging are still running. There's far more to aging than just appearance.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 11, 2018)

Noctosphere said:


> luckily, health insurrence is free here in Quebec




Nothing is "free." Somebody's paying for it.

As Margaret Thatcher famously said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."


----------



## SonowRaevius (Nov 11, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> Nothing is "free." Somebody's paying for it.
> 
> As Margaret Thatcher famously said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."


Having social programs doesn't make a country a socialist one neither does having taxes.....unless you are calling cops, fire fighters, and the military socialists as well considering they are living off everyone's tax dollars or that anything remotely payed for by taxes s socialist in nature.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 11, 2018)

SonowRaevius said:


> Having social programs doesn't make a country a socialist one neither does having taxes.....unless you are calling cops, fire fighters, and the military socialists as well considering they are living off everyone's tax dollars or that anything remotely payed for by taxes s socialist in nature.




Seems I hit a nerve. Don't worry about it, it's off topic anyway.


----------



## SonowRaevius (Nov 11, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> Seems I hit a nerve. Don't worry about it, it's off topic anyway.


Oh no nerves were struck dude, I am sorry if it came off that way.

Just saying there are some differences between social programs and being totally being a socialist nation, but it seems the lines have been blurred throughout the years.


----------



## Hanafuda (Nov 11, 2018)

SonowRaevius said:


> Oh no nerves were struck dude, I am sorry if it came off that way.
> 
> *Just saying there are some differences between social programs and being totally being a socialist nation*, but it seems the lines have been blurred throughout the years.



I'll acknowledge that, sure. But social welfare programs and entitlements have a tendency for 'mission creep.' Single-payer government administered health insurance isn't called "socialized healthcare" for nothing.


----------



## Noctosphere (Nov 11, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> Nothing is "free." Somebody's paying for it.
> 
> As Margaret Thatcher famously said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."


lol, do you really think I'm not aware we pay it with our taxes?
Everyone in Quebec says "free" instead of "paid with taxes" because it's just shorter
give me a break please, I'm not that stupid...


----------



## Song of storms (Nov 12, 2018)

DinohScene said:


> People like that need to be strung up from a tree.


This call of extreme violence over something this stupid seems very out of place, especially coming out from a moderator. But it's fine, I'm out of here.


----------



## Undi (Nov 12, 2018)

This dude just used the word "transgender" one time on the article, and everyone speak of that, forgetting the principal problem that AGE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE CHANGED.
You are born one day, age is calculated from this born date.
It's fixed, it's like that, for everyone.

That's not a comparison to make so easily, and HE KNOW that would create a fucking shitstorm, he know a lot of people will speak about it. 

Great job. Again society make you fight each other for stupid things.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.


----------



## DBlaze (Nov 12, 2018)

To be honest, nobody takes that guy seriously anymore here since the last ~20 years.
Most people don't understand why they even allowed this to be an actual case in court. His main point is that he is being discriminated based on his age, which in turn is something that's not allowed but happens anyway.
He should've made the case solely on that, instead of taking the hype route and "want to change his age".

There are just some things in life you can not change and will just have to accept, be it age or other things. You were born at a certain date and in a certain way.

We are living in a sick world, and in an incredibly disturbing timeline.


----------



## Ericthegreat (Dec 3, 2018)

Seems he has lost:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46425774

Interestingly it also seems that he only lost because it would affect too many other laws based on age.


----------



## Noctosphere (Dec 3, 2018)

Ericthegreat said:


> Seems he has lost:
> 
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46425774
> 
> Interestingly it also seems that he only lost because it would affect too many other laws based on age.


Yea i heard that this morning


----------



## Xzi (Dec 3, 2018)

Hanafuda said:


> Nothing is "free." Somebody's paying for it.
> 
> As Margaret Thatcher famously said, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."


The thing is that the US' healthcare system is so inefficient that implementing Medicare for all would actually save us money (roughly $2 trillion) in the long term.  And that figure comes from a Koch brothers funded study, so there really are no good arguments against it any more.

What it comes down to is that we have to pay for the people who get sick or use the emergency room regardless of whether they're insured or not.  In fact, taxpayers end up footing a much higher bill for people who aren't insured.


----------



## Ericthegreat (Dec 3, 2018)

Xzi said:


> The thing is that the US' healthcare system is so inefficient that implementing Medicare for all would actually save us money (roughly $2 trillion) in the long term.  And that figure comes from a Koch brothers funded study, so there really are no good arguments against it any more.
> 
> What it comes down to is that we have to pay for the people who get sick or use the emergency room regardless of whether they're insured or not.  In fact, taxpayers end up footing a much higher bill for people who aren't insured.


There's also the whole human decency thing, people should understand health insurance is a necessity, people should also understand if you live in CA or a state that has expanded medicare they are already paying for other peoples insurance. If you look it up, there are already plans to start structuring for universal healthcare in 2020 (also the year someone leaves office).


----------



## SG854 (Dec 3, 2018)

Ericthegreat said:


> There's also the whole human decency thing, people should understand health insurance is a necessity, people should also undeerstan dif you live in CA or a state that has expanded medicare they are already paying for other peoples insurance.


Most people that don’t have health insurance can afford it. They just don’t get it because they feel they don’t need it.

Mostly young people are uninsured and rather use their money on other things.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Our Health Insurance is soo poorly managed it makes things more expensive then they should. 

If we payed directly to doctors it would be a lot cheaper. But we pay doctors and health insurers. More people are involved and more people to pay which adds to the cost.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 3, 2018)

SG854 said:


> Most people that don’t have health insurance can afford it. They just don’t get it because they feel they don’t need it.
> 
> Mostly young people are uninsured and rather use their money on other things.
> 
> ...


Unfortunately the problem isn't just insurance companies, it's also private hospitals (and doctors) overcharging for everything little thing.  A public option is needed to drive down costs, as the government (under Democrats) is the only entity left willing to negotiate lower-priced drug/treatment options.

The Adam Ruins Everything episode on healthcare is quite informative.


----------



## SG854 (Dec 3, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Unfortunately the problem isn't just insurance companies, it's also private hospitals (and doctors) overcharging for everything little thing.  A public option is needed to drive down costs, as the government (under Democrats) is the only entity left willing to negotiate lower-priced drug/treatment options.
> 
> The Adam Ruins Everything episode on healthcare is quite informative.


I’ll check Adams video later.

But from what I know you can’t impose price control, it has a bad track record no matter time period or history.

Keeping prices lower then would be under supply and demand produces shortages, quality deterioration, and black markets whether it’s gas, housing, food, medicine or anything else.

People use more of something and throw it away like it’s nothing, for things they perceive to be cheap or free. This creates longer lines, longer wait times and less for everyone else.

We not  only have to worry about the greed of buisnesss, we also have to worry about the greed of the consumer using too much and leaving less for everyone else. Resources are limited, we don’t live in the garden of eden. So we have to use those resources efficiently.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 4, 2018)

SG854 said:


> I’ll check Adams video later.
> 
> But from what I know you can’t impose price control, it has a bad track record no matter time period or history.
> 
> ...


I'm aware that things cost money.  That doesn't make it okay for hospitals to charge you $50 for something that cost them $5.  Nor does gaining insurance mean a person is going to require more hospital visits than they would have anyway.


----------



## SG854 (Dec 4, 2018)

Xzi said:


> I'm aware that things cost money.  That doesn't make it okay for hospitals to charge you $50 for something that cost them $5.  Nor does gaining insurance mean a person is going to require more hospital visits than they would have anyway.


I saw Adams video. He confirmed the thing I said which was that we use to pay cheaper prices when we payed doctors directly years ago, then it became more expensive when insurance companies got involved.

In order to impose price controls government would have to not set it too low to create the negative consequences I mentioned. The question is can government properly do that? History has shown a bad track record on this. And is it beneficial to give monopoly control to the government?

From what I know we have to pay not only cost of production but also for R&D which is up in the millions. You would have to calculate the cost for that to price the drugs right.

We also have a large amount of Canadians coming to our Country and paying for our health care for something they can get free in Canada, (among them is the premier of Quebec), then the other way around. And many Canadian doctors practice in the U.S. We would have to see what we are doing better then they are while fixing the problems we have.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 4, 2018)

SG854 said:


> In order to impose price controls government would have to not set it too low to create the negative consequences I mentioned. The question is can government properly do that? History has shown a bad track record on this. And is it beneficial to give monopoly control to the government?


They already negotiate lower prices for Medicare/Medicade.  Also they don't have to eliminate private insurance altogether, as private insurance will have to lower their prices to compete  with a public option/guarantee anyway.


----------



## KingVamp (Dec 4, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Unfortunately the problem isn't just insurance companies, it's also private hospitals (and doctors) overcharging for everything little thing.  A public option is needed to drive down costs, as the government (under Democrats) is the only entity left willing to negotiate lower-priced drug/treatment options.


From what I understand, public option isn't enough. We need a NHS like the UK and they still have private services.


----------



## Xzi (Dec 4, 2018)

KingVamp said:


> From what I understand, public option isn't enough. We need a NHS like the UK and they still have private services.


Right.  My preference is guaranteed Medicare if you don't have another provider or can't afford one.


----------



## SG854 (Dec 4, 2018)

Xzi said:


> They already negotiate lower prices for Medicare/Medicade.  Also they don't have to eliminate private insurance altogether, as private insurance will have to lower their prices to compete  with a public option/guarantee anyway.


In Adams video he says after the rise of insurance companies hospital billing got complicated. Private insurance makes things more expensive since more people to pay that are involved.

He also states that the reason for the chargemaster was because they were demanding discounts to begin with which hospitals couldn’t afford. Which will lead to a degrade in medical care. So they came up with something to make them happy and not degrade care.

A chapter in the book applied economics of medical care by Thomas Sowell, he explains also other reasons why it’s expensive which is beyond what Adam mentioned.

Malpractice insurance is expensive in the U.S. so costs are passed on to the payer. Also doctors can sued for little things that are beyond their control, so that leads them to do unessesary precautions like more scans or unneeded c sections which makes it more expensive.

They are also not comparing apples to apples when compared to European countries. Differences in how we collect statistics, excluding certain things in data comparisons, not counting hidden costs makes it seem like U.S. does worse. They are comparing apples to oranges.

http://leeconomics.com/00-Sowell-EconomicsMedicalCare.html


----------



## Noctosphere (Dec 4, 2018)

BTW, the CAQ wants to reduce waitting in urgencies
I hope he will introduce the moderator ticket
that way it won't be free anymore for those who there for no urgency


----------



## Xzi (Dec 5, 2018)

SG854 said:


> He also states that the reason for the chargemaster was because they were demanding discounts to begin with which hospitals couldn’t afford. Which will lead to a degrade in medical care. So they came up with something to make them happy and not degrade care.


I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to make any profit, but if a hospital can't manage decent care at two times the cost of products/services rendered to patients instead of ten times the cost, it's probably not worth artificially propping that hospital up.  They're too inefficient and should be replaced by a competitor at that point.

I also completely disagree with the notion that higher prices automatically equate to better care.  Healthcare in the US is no better than what you receive in Canada or Europe.  In fact I'd say the focus on the profit motive makes doctors and healthcare workers less caring and less attentive overall.  Gauze is gauze and antibiotics are antibiotics, nobody should be charged hundreds or thousands of dollars for basics like these.


----------



## Captain_N (Dec 5, 2018)

I think this Dutch guy identifies as a dumb ass. His pronoun will be daz....


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Dec 5, 2018)

It's a case of how one identifies vs reality. Nothing really new, so in a way I hope he gets his way to make his point and show how ridiculous the system has become.

There was a man in the news who identified as a child so this isn't as bad. lol


----------

