14 ms·

It's insurance, not a payment plan. Anyone at any time can get sick, get hit by a car, etc. That's why everyone needs it. Technically, the utility of health i

It's insurance, not a payment plan. Anyone at any time can get sick, get hit by a car, etc. That's why everyone needs it. Technically, the utility of health insurance is greatest when you are youngest and least when you are oldest. Saving an 8-year-olds life could mean allowing them to live to 80. A 72-year-old that can't get medical care will have at least lived to 72. The U.S. health care system has it backwards. We should at least be giving heath insurance to the young. You could argue that it is moral to provide for health insurance for retirees, even if they spend way more on health insurance than everyone else and won't get much additional utility from it, but the idea that you would only give guaranteed health insurance to the oldest (and wealthiest age bracket) makes no sense.

cm2012 8y ago
Yeah, but laws are made by older folks, who vote at 3-4 times the rate of younger folks in midterm elections.
- wallflower 8y ago
  This is slightly off topic but I really rile up some of my more passionately Democrat friends when I point out that one senator from CT is responsible for not having a public option in Obamacare. Why? Because the senator was beholden to the donations of the insurance companies. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescriptions/2009/10/did_lieberman_just_kill_the_public_option.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescription...
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    Insurance is big business in CT. It's his job to represent his constituents interests and a booming insurance business is certainly in their (they = the people in CT who control who gets elected) interest even if it screws the rest of us. It's a classic case of doing what the people who decide whether or not you get to keep your job want you to do even when it's not ideal for the big picture. Edit: Down-voted because this isn't how things work or just because it's uncomfortably true? If you think CA representatives won't side with the tech industry over the good of the nation then you're probably going to be proven wrong in the next few years.
    - pmiller2 8y ago
      It’s also his job to do what’s best for the people of this country. We have a lot of people in Washington who aren’t doing their jobs who continue to get elected because their constituents are either satisfied or apathetic.
    - zasz 8y ago
      No, you're being downvoted for amorality.
      - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
        Where did I imply that I liked it or thought it was good and/or moral? I'm just saying that the incentives are not to vote for what's good for the nation when the alternative will make a lot of money for a lot of people in your state, some of whom will bankroll your election campaign.
  - humanrebar 8y ago
    It's not clear the supreme court decisions would have all played out the same way if a different bill passed.
    - wallflower 8y ago
      This is a very good point. Thank you.
thatcat 8y ago
Getting hit by a car is covered by the auto insurance of the person hitting you.
- bdamm 8y ago
  That's just not true in many cases; such as in hit-and-runs, or if the motorist that strikes you has no insurance. Or perhaps you're involved in a car accident from inside the car, such as a simple loss of control, and your parents have no insurance.
- solotronics 8y ago
  You are assuming the other person has insurance. The only accidents I have been in I had to use my uninsured motorist policy to cover an accident that was someone elses fault!
  - howard941 8y ago
    Good on you for electing it. Uninsured coverage should almost always be taken at the max policy limit offered.
- HarryHirsch 8y ago
  In theory yes. But the minimum required coverage is around 25000 USD, and whoever carries just that is very likely uncollectible anyway. Besides, in states like Florida and Mississippi 25 % are uninsured. It's quite third-world-like, in fact.
maxxxxx 8y ago
Are you serious? Everyone regardless of age should get medical care. It's as simple as that.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > Everyone regardless of age should get medical care. It's as simple as that. This is debatable. Most of one’s healthcare expenses will be incurred in the final months of life. The population to whom this statistic doesn’t apply is doctors—they know when the marginal benefit of treatment isn’t worth it. If I had a choice between burning my kids’ estate to sneak out a year in agony or die with dignity, I know which I’d choose. The compassionate response isn’t always the right one.
  - ddalex 8y ago
    The dichotomy you present is false. Only in the absolutely insane US system one needs to burn through savings to get paleative care. Health, just like fire fighting, should not be a for-profit business.
    - syshum 8y ago
      Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Why do you believe non-profit means it has to be provided by government? Why do you believe profit is bad?
      - artimaeis 8y ago
        > Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Because fires pose an undue risk to entire regions, not individuals. Because the pricing mechanism is excessively unfair to individuals. Because no one's life should be at risk because they don't have access to financial resources. Individuals should be (and are, generally) free to start for-profit fire fighting businesses, but these should not seek to displace existing infrastructure. > Why do you believe non-profit means it has to be provided by government? That wasn't said or implied in the parent post, but the government _is_ our collective resource. By the people, for the people. It is we, the people, whose lives and property are put in danger by fires. The most effective way of grouping people's interest collectively in history has been through governance. Non-profit fire fighting may be viable, but it's better that we collectively work to keep our collection safe. > Why do you believe profit is bad? It depends entirely on the context. When people's lives are at stake profits incentivize cruel and unusual behavior from those incentivized to reap the reward.
izacus 8y ago
> It's insurance, not a payment plan. It's the whole point of insurance that most people who don't need payouts cover ruinious expenses for those who need it.
- mjevans 8y ago
  That's the problem with healthcare. At some point everyone will need it. The proper way of handling the cost of health care is at a nation or world level of single payer. Fight a war on disease, not drugs.
- humanrebar 8y ago
  What about life insurance?

cm2012 8y ago

Yeah, but laws are made by older folks, who vote at 3-4 times the rate of younger folks in midterm elections.

wallflower 8y ago
This is slightly off topic but I really rile up some of my more passionately Democrat friends when I point out that one senator from CT is responsible for not having a public option in Obamacare. Why? Because the senator was beholden to the donations of the insurance companies. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescriptions/2009/10/did_lieberman_just_kill_the_public_option.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/prescription...
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  Insurance is big business in CT. It's his job to represent his constituents interests and a booming insurance business is certainly in their (they = the people in CT who control who gets elected) interest even if it screws the rest of us. It's a classic case of doing what the people who decide whether or not you get to keep your job want you to do even when it's not ideal for the big picture. Edit: Down-voted because this isn't how things work or just because it's uncomfortably true? If you think CA representatives won't side with the tech industry over the good of the nation then you're probably going to be proven wrong in the next few years.
  - pmiller2 8y ago
    It’s also his job to do what’s best for the people of this country. We have a lot of people in Washington who aren’t doing their jobs who continue to get elected because their constituents are either satisfied or apathetic.
  - zasz 8y ago
    No, you're being downvoted for amorality.
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      Where did I imply that I liked it or thought it was good and/or moral? I'm just saying that the incentives are not to vote for what's good for the nation when the alternative will make a lot of money for a lot of people in your state, some of whom will bankroll your election campaign.
- humanrebar 8y ago
  It's not clear the supreme court decisions would have all played out the same way if a different bill passed.
  - wallflower 8y ago
    This is a very good point. Thank you.

thatcat 8y ago

Getting hit by a car is covered by the auto insurance of the person hitting you.

bdamm 8y ago
That's just not true in many cases; such as in hit-and-runs, or if the motorist that strikes you has no insurance. Or perhaps you're involved in a car accident from inside the car, such as a simple loss of control, and your parents have no insurance.
solotronics 8y ago
You are assuming the other person has insurance. The only accidents I have been in I had to use my uninsured motorist policy to cover an accident that was someone elses fault!
- howard941 8y ago
  Good on you for electing it. Uninsured coverage should almost always be taken at the max policy limit offered.
HarryHirsch 8y ago
In theory yes. But the minimum required coverage is around 25000 USD, and whoever carries just that is very likely uncollectible anyway. Besides, in states like Florida and Mississippi 25 % are uninsured. It's quite third-world-like, in fact.

maxxxxx 8y ago

Are you serious? Everyone regardless of age should get medical care. It's as simple as that.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> Everyone regardless of age should get medical care. It's as simple as that. This is debatable. Most of one’s healthcare expenses will be incurred in the final months of life. The population to whom this statistic doesn’t apply is doctors—they know when the marginal benefit of treatment isn’t worth it. If I had a choice between burning my kids’ estate to sneak out a year in agony or die with dignity, I know which I’d choose. The compassionate response isn’t always the right one.
- ddalex 8y ago
  The dichotomy you present is false. Only in the absolutely insane US system one needs to burn through savings to get paleative care. Health, just like fire fighting, should not be a for-profit business.
  - syshum 8y ago
    Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Why do you believe non-profit means it has to be provided by government? Why do you believe profit is bad?
    - artimaeis 8y ago
      > Why shouldnt fire fighting be for-profit Because fires pose an undue risk to entire regions, not individuals. Because the pricing mechanism is excessively unfair to individuals. Because no one's life should be at risk because they don't have access to financial resources. Individuals should be (and are, generally) free to start for-profit fire fighting businesses, but these should not seek to displace existing infrastructure. > Why do you believe non-profit means it has to be provided by government? That wasn't said or implied in the parent post, but the government _is_ our collective resource. By the people, for the people. It is we, the people, whose lives and property are put in danger by fires. The most effective way of grouping people's interest collectively in history has been through governance. Non-profit fire fighting may be viable, but it's better that we collectively work to keep our collection safe. > Why do you believe profit is bad? It depends entirely on the context. When people's lives are at stake profits incentivize cruel and unusual behavior from those incentivized to reap the reward.

izacus 8y ago

> It's insurance, not a payment plan. It's the whole point of insurance that most people who don't need payouts cover ruinious expenses for those who need it.

mjevans 8y ago
That's the problem with healthcare. At some point everyone will need it. The proper way of handling the cost of health care is at a nation or world level of single payer. Fight a war on disease, not drugs.
humanrebar 8y ago
What about life insurance?