BRUTE wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:50 pm
this is actually part of the reason why brute favors individual, privatized health care, instead of single payer.
The problem with such a system is that insurance companies would not insure high risk people at all, and many low risk people would opt to not have insurance. Then we are back to square one, unhealthy people showing up in the ER with no means to pay and young, healthy people having accidents and showing up in the ER with no means to pay. Who bears the cost? or do we deny service? Although, I see your concern with popular opinion beginning to sway government to outlaw an unhealthy and unpopular vise. Unhealthy and popular would likely remain just fine.
In the current environment I would argue no purely private health care insurance model will work, even a libertarian will except the need for government when private organizations are unable or unwilling to provide a needed service effectively. The hybridized system we have now is not working, I would be open to other suggestions. At least with single payer there will be clear lines in the sand for all, basic coverage with tax credits for good behavior. You want more, go to the (totally, not half assed) private market. Yes, some will subsidize others as with any government tax.
Crazylemon wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:31 am
@ classical_Liberal Some private health insurance does that here already.
Yes, and many employer sponsored plans have options to pay for gym memberships, etc. The amount of compensation is low, because the vested interest is low. If an insurer knows with 100 percent certainty they will have to insure a smoker from age 20 - death, they have more reason to get that smoker to quit at age 20, rather than have a 70% chance of paying for a very expensive disease process decades down the road.
BRUTE wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:17 am
if "not weighing 500lbs" and "not going blind" and "not getting feet amputated" doesn't motivate some humans, neither will "nudging". this is a cultural problem, not a health care (system) problem.
... But, limb amputations and dialysis are a decade away. A tax credit for losing weight can buy you a new TV now! Yes, I see the irony of that statement.
Ego wrote: ↑
Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:52 pm
We've learned a lot from trying to get people to quit smoking.
From a public health standpoint, this has been an amazing achievement unparalleled in it's efficacy. This approached could be studied and then modeled. However, a large portion of this approach was to essentially make smoking illegal in almost all venues, which makes my more libertarian bones ache. Another large portion was to stigmatize the smoker. For some reason millennials and the younger Gen Z(?) think smoking is a choice and being fat is not. So it's uncouth to walk by a fat person and shake your head in disgust. Advertising and Hollywood already effectively portray skinny as "cool", I'm not sure how to change opinions on this subject.