4 ms·

Letting people die younger, faster makes sense that it would reduce healthcare spending but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productiv

by robkop 9y ago

Letting people die younger, faster makes sense that it would reduce healthcare spending but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productivity and value that these people create. They say that the costs are barely offset by cigarette tax revenue but that doesn't take into account all future tax revenue that would be generated by letting these people live.

scarface74 9y ago
I hate to sound callous, but on average, how productive are older people? Living longer doesn't necessarily imply working longer. It could just lead to costing more in treating chronic conditions.
- ineedasername 9y ago
  It doesn't matter how productive they are if the savings are being equally cancelled out: the health cost issue is then zero-sum, but that means any productivity that wouldn't have occured without preventative care is a positive gain. And even without economic benefit one way or the other, I figure most people wouldn't mind having a healthier mom around a little longer. You cant narrowly focus on only economic benefits, and then narrowly only on the most obvious and easiest to calculate, and expect to arrive at anything like a coherent and inteligent point of view.
- madengr 9y ago
  Though who says you have to be productive? If I have a few $M in retirement saved up. I could care less about being productive. Productive is all relative. If no one pays you to dig holes and fill them in again, then the productivity is infinite. Building ships in bottles is futile to most, but productive to an old man.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    No one, my parents retired at 55 and haven't been "productive" in the GDP sense for over 20 years. The original post that I replied to said but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productivity and value that these people create.
    - ineedasername 9y ago
      And yet how much may they have indirectly boosted the GDP by being of value to the family and friends around them, subtly adding to the support network that allows others to contribute more directly ti the GDP. And besides, who is insane enough to so narrowly define existential worth solely as a function and GDP contribution? A good healthcare system might greatly help such a person avoid those negative and irrational patterns of thouht.
      - scarface74 9y ago
        That's true. Most of my cousins -- all female - stayed in my home town because it really helps having their parents around so they can work and not have to worry about childcare because they have their parents. When I was growing up, my grandfather or aunts would come pick me up if I was sick, take me to doctors appointments, etc. My dad worked in a factory and it was harder for him to get off of work in the spur of the moment and my mom could not just take time off in the middle of the day as a teacher. I've been married for a little while and have a teenage step son. We never really had extended family that lived around. We had to arrange our lifestyles to give us the maximum flexibility. My wife got a job that would allow here to be on the school system schedule and I have a flexible job that allows me to me work from home, work odd hours if I need to, etc. We also are fortunate enough to have teenage sons. When we really just can't get to our son in time to pick him up or take him somewhere we just tell him to order an Uber. I wouldn't do that if I had a daughter. I do see people in similar situations to ours who aren't so fortunate, when they need to take time off of work to deal with family issues, they have to use vacation or sick time or even worse take unpaid time off. If they had their parents around and healthy, it would make their life easier.
- pavel_lishin 9y ago
  That does sound incredibly callous. Why is "productivity" you go-to measure of worth?
  - scarface74 9y ago
    I was replying to the original post but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productivity and value that these people create.
- ramblenode 9y ago
  It's an interesting question. I think the trap here is that productivity entails the exchange of hard currency. In some societies activities like childcare, household work, shopping, gardening, etc. are uncompensated labor often done by seniors. Historically, they have also been conduits for preserving knowledge and educating new generations. But things are changing. Seniors' productivity as a cohort today will probably diminish with increasing lifespans, decreasing healthspans, and being a larger proportion of society than has historically been the case.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    This triggers me to go on a slightly tangential rant. I hate to hear people who claim they made it all on their own because of their "hard work" without realizing how much support they got from their parents to get there - even when they are grown. They can do well as a two income family without having to choose between a demanding to career and taking care of their kids because a lot of them have their parents close by to help. Even when the wife is pregnant, the husband can still chase after his career without missing a beat because he can count on either his mom or mother in law to move in and help.

by robkop 9y ago

scarface74 9y ago

I hate to sound callous, but on average, how productive are older people? Living longer doesn't necessarily imply working longer. It could just lead to costing more in treating chronic conditions.

ineedasername 9y ago
It doesn't matter how productive they are if the savings are being equally cancelled out: the health cost issue is then zero-sum, but that means any productivity that wouldn't have occured without preventative care is a positive gain. And even without economic benefit one way or the other, I figure most people wouldn't mind having a healthier mom around a little longer. You cant narrowly focus on only economic benefits, and then narrowly only on the most obvious and easiest to calculate, and expect to arrive at anything like a coherent and inteligent point of view.
madengr 9y ago
Though who says you have to be productive? If I have a few $M in retirement saved up. I could care less about being productive. Productive is all relative. If no one pays you to dig holes and fill them in again, then the productivity is infinite. Building ships in bottles is futile to most, but productive to an old man.
- scarface74 9y ago
  No one, my parents retired at 55 and haven't been "productive" in the GDP sense for over 20 years. The original post that I replied to said but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productivity and value that these people create.
  - ineedasername 9y ago
    And yet how much may they have indirectly boosted the GDP by being of value to the family and friends around them, subtly adding to the support network that allows others to contribute more directly ti the GDP. And besides, who is insane enough to so narrowly define existential worth solely as a function and GDP contribution? A good healthcare system might greatly help such a person avoid those negative and irrational patterns of thouht.
    - scarface74 9y ago
      That's true. Most of my cousins -- all female - stayed in my home town because it really helps having their parents around so they can work and not have to worry about childcare because they have their parents. When I was growing up, my grandfather or aunts would come pick me up if I was sick, take me to doctors appointments, etc. My dad worked in a factory and it was harder for him to get off of work in the spur of the moment and my mom could not just take time off in the middle of the day as a teacher. I've been married for a little while and have a teenage step son. We never really had extended family that lived around. We had to arrange our lifestyles to give us the maximum flexibility. My wife got a job that would allow here to be on the school system schedule and I have a flexible job that allows me to me work from home, work odd hours if I need to, etc. We also are fortunate enough to have teenage sons. When we really just can't get to our son in time to pick him up or take him somewhere we just tell him to order an Uber. I wouldn't do that if I had a daughter. I do see people in similar situations to ours who aren't so fortunate, when they need to take time off of work to deal with family issues, they have to use vacation or sick time or even worse take unpaid time off. If they had their parents around and healthy, it would make their life easier.
pavel_lishin 9y ago
That does sound incredibly callous. Why is "productivity" you go-to measure of worth?
- scarface74 9y ago
  I was replying to the original post but what doesn't make sense to me is that you loose all future productivity and value that these people create.
ramblenode 9y ago
It's an interesting question. I think the trap here is that productivity entails the exchange of hard currency. In some societies activities like childcare, household work, shopping, gardening, etc. are uncompensated labor often done by seniors. Historically, they have also been conduits for preserving knowledge and educating new generations. But things are changing. Seniors' productivity as a cohort today will probably diminish with increasing lifespans, decreasing healthspans, and being a larger proportion of society than has historically been the case.
- scarface74 9y ago
  This triggers me to go on a slightly tangential rant. I hate to hear people who claim they made it all on their own because of their "hard work" without realizing how much support they got from their parents to get there - even when they are grown. They can do well as a two income family without having to choose between a demanding to career and taking care of their kids because a lot of them have their parents close by to help. Even when the wife is pregnant, the husband can still chase after his career without missing a beat because he can count on either his mom or mother in law to move in and help.