5 ms·
> Who are we to dictate the life priorities of our neighbours? When my tax dollars go towards a health care system that pays for some medication, medical consu
by colmvp 6y ago
> Who are we to dictate the life priorities of our neighbours?
When my tax dollars go towards a health care system that pays for some medication, medical consultations, and surgeries, I think it's fair to say the choice of what one eats affects everyone. It's one thing to get an unforeseeable disease, it's another to live a particular lifecycle that we know is conducive to long term health problems.
As you touched upon in your closing paragraph, I would prefer taxing these items or subsidizing healthier options.
- aidenn0 6y agoThat's probably the single best argument against universal health care.
- nmfisher 6y agoElaborate? I'm not sure what your point is.
- aidenn0 6y agoIf we think it odious to control all personal choices that result in long term health effects, then we either have to agree as a society to pay for other people's bad choices or not have universal health care.
- nmfisher 6y agoI don't think the two are mutually exclusive. There's nothing preventing a universal healthcare system, partially funded by higher taxes on "unhealthier" behaviours that cause a disproportionate burden on the system. Obviously there will always be some proportion of people who draw from the system without ever paying anything in taxes (i.e. long-term unemployed). That's the case with any form of welfare, though. If you're philosophically opposed to non-net-taxpayers deriving any form of government benefit, then I'm assuming you're a priori opposed to universal healthcare.
- JimTheMan 6y agoYou only have to look at places with universal health care to see if they have issues with "Moral Hazard". Do people in the UK, Aus, Canada, France etc engage in more unhealthy activities because they have access to good healthcare? And I would say the observed answer is no, the population doesn't engage in more risky behaviour. And you pay for healthcare anyway to cover emergency rooms that have to serve everyone so hospitals don't all go bankrupt. And then that cost gets put back on the insured... who have their employer pick a plan for them... who then have insurance middle men nickle and dime doctors to give imperfect, but cheap treatments. Or doctors just try to do lots of tests/imaging because they know the insurance will cover it. Not having universal healthcare is truly the worst of all worlds. There's no benefit to it unless you are an investor, in the insurance industry or are rich enough to not care about the public at large.
- JamesBarney 6y agoBeing healthy is soo much more expensive. If you're really healthy you live to 95 after retiring at 65, taking out social security and medicare for 30 years. And spending the last 10 with alzheimer's basically in full time care. If you eat like shit you have a heart attack at 57 and die before taking a dime out of medicare or social security.