> 1) In countries where health costs are at least partly absorbed by everyone, then it does have a right. I worry that this sort of thinking might end up like

> 1) In countries where health costs are at least partly absorbed by everyone, then it does have a right. I worry that this sort of thinking might end up like the Commerce Clause[1]. Just as there are many actions that affect interstate commerce, there are many behaviors that affect life expectancy. Using that justification to allow the government to imprison or tax people seems (to me, at least) a recipe for disaster. Let me be more concrete: If you're going to use that argument to tax soda, you should also be in favor of taxing things that cause more harm to public health than soda. Should we tax people for being sedentary? Should we tax people for being old? Should we tax obesity? These are the major costs for health care. Soda is a rounding error. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause