3 ms·

Pooling risk disincentivizes people from making the changes they need to be healthier. And people not bearing the full cost of their decisions makes it easier f

Pooling risk disincentivizes people from making the changes they need to be healthier. And people not bearing the full cost of their decisions makes it easier for them to displace the negative consequences of their choices on others. I bust my hump in the gym a few days every week because I want to age well - I make an effort to eat healthy food and now I gotta pay for an cookie addict who would rather slurp down medication than make lifestyle changes? Screw that. I made my choices, I can live with them. Others make their choices, they get to live with their choices. If they get to take good stuff from me to support their bad choices, I expect some reciprocation.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
JamesBarney 8y ago
How much do you think pooling risk disincentivizes people from exercising or eating healthy? It's probably not a lot because the U.S. is one of the most unhealthy and least insured places in the West. That cookie addict will be paying for your medicare and social security for 30 years, while you pay for their medicare and social security for 5. Everyone dies, and healthy people live a long time, and can die very die slowly and expensively. He'll pay for your full time assisted living while you die from Alzheimer's at 95, you'll pay for some critical care after his heart attack at 65.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- crowdpleaser 8y ago
  >That cookie addict will be paying for your medicare and social security for 30 years, while you pay for their medicare and social security for 5. Why can't we just pay for our own if we have the means and give those without means basic, cost-effective care for things that can't be solved with lifestyle changes? And why do I have to be forced into this? Why can't I just chose my relations and affiliations for myself? Besides, bold of you to assume that social security will be there for me when I'm able to retire. That money is gone, I'm not going to see a dime of it - it's just an extra 15% tax on my first 110k.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

JamesBarney 8y ago

How much do you think pooling risk disincentivizes people from exercising or eating healthy? It's probably not a lot because the U.S. is one of the most unhealthy and least insured places in the West. That cookie addict will be paying for your medicare and social security for 30 years, while you pay for their medicare and social security for 5. Everyone dies, and healthy people live a long time, and can die very die slowly and expensively. He'll pay for your full time assisted living while you die from Alzheimer's at 95, you'll pay for some critical care after his heart attack at 65.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
crowdpleaser 8y ago
>That cookie addict will be paying for your medicare and social security for 30 years, while you pay for their medicare and social security for 5. Why can't we just pay for our own if we have the means and give those without means basic, cost-effective care for things that can't be solved with lifestyle changes? And why do I have to be forced into this? Why can't I just chose my relations and affiliations for myself? Besides, bold of you to assume that social security will be there for me when I'm able to retire. That money is gone, I'm not going to see a dime of it - it's just an extra 15% tax on my first 110k.