4 ms·

I am also in favor of health care for all, but I'm not necessarily in favor of subsidizing all kinds of reckless behaviors by having the public pick up the hosp

by lutorm 6y ago

I am also in favor of health care for all, but I'm not necessarily in favor of subsidizing all kinds of reckless behaviors by having the public pick up the hospital bills either. Like, if you want to go, say, base jumping (just picking a risky recreational activity here), I'd be OK with saying "you need a separate insurance for that, if you hurt yourself the government isn't picking up your tab." That seems like a more straightforward way of handling the problem than to try to somehow tax base jumping. The trouble is, of course, where to draw the line. It's possible that the cost of these voluntary risks is just negligible compared to general health care.

hayst4ck 6y ago
Why is a passion for base jumping more/less of a condition/affliction than doing heroin or getting cancer? What about people who take dangerous jobs, what if the job isn't so much dangerous, but the person did something stupid/against regulation on the job? What about teenagers doing reckless shit because they are too inexperienced to know better? What about STD's, those are more or less a choice to get. Kids are elective, why don't we tax pregnancy? Should we have drug insurance you need for doing illegal drugs? How would you feel if you had kids and one of your kids took up base jumping? What if they took up high school football? Once you've carved out exceptions, you've now changed the frame to something horrible. Systemic problems (obesity, drug use, mental health) probably deserve government meddling, but your first sentence is exactly the problem with conservative points of view. Conservatives can't put themselves in the position of doing something reckless and therefore feel they deserve to be better off (more money in their pocket) than the other person, until something bad happens to them. "Fuck you I got mine" is the liberal characterization of this attitude.
arethuza 6y ago
"cost of these voluntary risks is just negligible" I was hospitalised for a few days because my cat bit me - is keeping a cat reckless behaviour? I think it would be supremely silly, and more importantly hugely expensive, to try and monitor behaviour and track down what people were doing that caused an injury in order to decide whether their health care costs should be covered.

by lutorm 6y ago

hayst4ck 6y ago

Why is a passion for base jumping more/less of a condition/affliction than doing heroin or getting cancer? What about people who take dangerous jobs, what if the job isn't so much dangerous, but the person did something stupid/against regulation on the job? What about teenagers doing reckless shit because they are too inexperienced to know better? What about STD's, those are more or less a choice to get. Kids are elective, why don't we tax pregnancy? Should we have drug insurance you need for doing illegal drugs? How would you feel if you had kids and one of your kids took up base jumping? What if they took up high school football? Once you've carved out exceptions, you've now changed the frame to something horrible. Systemic problems (obesity, drug use, mental health) probably deserve government meddling, but your first sentence is exactly the problem with conservative points of view. Conservatives can't put themselves in the position of doing something reckless and therefore feel they deserve to be better off (more money in their pocket) than the other person, until something bad happens to them. "Fuck you I got mine" is the liberal characterization of this attitude.

arethuza 6y ago

"cost of these voluntary risks is just negligible" I was hospitalised for a few days because my cat bit me - is keeping a cat reckless behaviour? I think it would be supremely silly, and more importantly hugely expensive, to try and monitor behaviour and track down what people were doing that caused an injury in order to decide whether their health care costs should be covered.