4 ms·

I suspect one could go a long way towards solving this by announcing that unvaccinated covid cases will get zero health insurance coverage. Make exceptions for

I suspect one could go a long way towards solving this by announcing that unvaccinated covid cases will get zero health insurance coverage. Make exceptions for those that truly cannot be vaccinated but to hell with everyone else. Going further, make society difficult to navigate for people unwilling to be vaccinated or wear masks and our frontline workers will have much better lives. Why are we compromising our quality of life, national security, and economic well-being to cater to these sorts? Just the economic damage alone from an indefinite pandemic seems like more than enough of a free market incentive to eliminate their negative impact on everything around them.

adolph 5y ago
Also smokers? Also drunk drivers who wreck? Also people who abuse drugs? Also people without documentation? Also those who don't accept blood letting? Also people who make bad decisions?
- varelse 5y ago
  Your freedom stops at others immune systems. Think of this as a choose your own adventure. And if you don't wish to be vaccinated or wear a mask you are opting into the road less traveled. What's with all this negativity? But smoke all you want, they already factor that into health insurance costs. Drive drunk all you want, but don't whine if you get caught and they throw you in jail and take away your car and license. WTF undocumented sorts? You're all over the map IMO.
  - adolph 5y ago
    > Drive drunk all you want, but don't whine if you get caught and they throw you in jail and take away your car and license. Do you think a person who sustained an injury while they were intoxicated and needs medical treatment "get zero health insurance coverage?" Would it matter if they were at fault? Do you think a person who made a poor life decision "get zero health insurance coverage?" > What's with all this negativity? My questions aren't negative or positive. Their purpose is to think through the idea you proffered. If you didn't wish for people to think through this, why would one enter a comment?
    - varelse 5y ago
      1.I think they should get medical coverage if they have insurance and then they should be thrown in jail losing both their licence and their car. And then criminally charged if anyone else was harmed through their actions. 2. Does their poor life decision harm others or just themselves? If the former (say a mass shooting), yes. But I support your right to self harm though I'd hope someone cared enough about you to dissuade you. You asked. I'm not against people refusing masks and vaccination if they're willing to isolate themselves, I'm against them imposing their poor decisions on everything else or it's a tragedy of the commons IMO. I don't expect anyone to share my views, they're mine.
      - adolph 5y ago
        > they should get medical coverage if they have insurance Do you think hospitals should refuse the uninsured? > if they're willing to isolate themselves On what basis do you think people who refuse masks and vaccination isolate themselves instead of other people? To what lengths would you advocate for compliance verification with regards to vaccination and masking?
yobbo 5y ago
> unvaccinated covid cases will get zero health insurance coverage Most unvaccinated are probably already without health insurance. Vaccination essentially follows socio-economic status, and has the lowest density in blacks and hispanics. Going door-to-door, or "vaccination buses", or things of the line might help.
- Jtsummers 5y ago
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-americans.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-ame... Some interesting statistics on the situation.
- varelse 5y ago
  We have a terrible national heritage here and I understand the reluctance. But this isn't how we handled smallpox or polio. There really isn't any other option than vaccination given that coronaviruses can reach up to 35% fatality (1). We are extremely lucky right now that the current fatality rate (IFR) is hovering around 1%. That could change. Or if there is another option, what is it? We are a year and a half into this thing with no end in sight. And it has already demonstrated it can mutate past herd immunity for those who have already had it or who have been vaccinated. But it's also pretty clear that those who have been vaccinated are more likely to survive by a huge margin. I'm a huge believer in letting people destroy themselves. But I don't believe in letting them destroy everyone else. I'm weird I guess. 1. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1007566/S1335_Long_term_evolution_of_SARS-CoV-2.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
  - iammisc 5y ago
    this is fear mongering. The fatality rate of COVID, even at the beginning of the pandemic when we didn't even have proper metrics, was never measured to be more than about 7-8%, which is very high, but not 35%. The paper you cite is about a hypothetical. Stop with the fear mongering.
    - 5y ago
motohagiography 5y ago
Why on earth do we tolerate these tedious outgroup-blame posts? If only our problems could be solved by blaming them on scapegoats and pariahs. It's like intelligent and competent people engage in political talk because it's relaxing to not be held to the same standards and rigour of their actual field of expertise, and it's somehow satisfying to have the attention of people who can't tell the difference.
- varelse 5y ago
  Because this is an out group constantly endangering the well-being of others? It really is one. Or if it isn't, then what exactly is it? Your body, your choices, your consequences, but not mine or anyone else's. Why is the right to dodge vaccination and masks so important, so absolutely vital, so incredibly on target that we risk the destruction of the Republic itself if we mandate them? Do you also support my right to throw hand grenades into rooms full of people I don't like? This nation was founded during a smallpox and variola academic where our founding father George Washington forced vaccination upon his soldiers (1). But mandating vaccination against the current pandemic is unamerican? How does that work? https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html
  - h2odragon 5y ago
    COVID is not smallpox. Equating the two is the basis of your argument? And yet anyone disagreeing is spreading disinformation and must be silenced? (Not accusing you of the latter personally, but others who sound like you have continued thus)
    - DataGata 5y ago
      A person yelling "fire" in a crowded theater gets in trouble, but a person yelling "there is no fire" in a crowded theater in a theater definitely on fire is... being silenced?
  - motohagiography 5y ago
    I sincerely believe this hesitancy issue is designed to identify people as offside and as a wedge issue or scissor statement, and not as discourse to derive facts about the topic. Blaming the hesitant and making histrionic claims is like trying to convince me of some eugenic racist theory, where it's just a fast filter that repels everyone intelligent enough to disagree with you and leaves you with a remainder of easily fooled people you can exploit for political ends. Facts in this context are meaningless other than as signals of what side you're on. If someone wants to take the risk of volunteering for the vaccine control group in a global pandemic, I wish them luck. Scapegoating turns it into a political problem where everyone thinks they have a meaningful opinion, which I can see the appeal of. But appeal and truth are very different things.
iammisc 5y ago
In a socialized medicine country, I'd understand this argument. However, in a private medical system, there's no reason for this. If an unvaccinated person can pay, they ought to be treated. It's their money.
- varelse 5y ago
  And private insurance has a long history of denying claims. How is this any different? https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Forms-Reports-and-Other-Resources/preexisting https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Forms-Reports-and-Other-...
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Because the denied claims are the responsibility of the individual, not the government.
    - varelse 5y ago
      A company's responsibility is solely to its shareholders, not to its customers. If those two goals align, win/win. Denying expensive claims increases profitability right up to the point they lose enough customers to offset those gains. Am I missing something fundamental about capitalism here? I'm not saying that's particularly ethical behavior and they wouldn't get my business if I could help it, but if they choose to behave otherwise, they risk delivering suboptimal shareholder value, no?
      - iammisc 5y ago
        > Denying expensive claims increases profitability right up to the point they lose enough customers to offset those gains. Am I missing something fundamental about capitalism here? Yes... the ultimate responsible party is the patient, not the insurance company. It makes no sense to deny Americans the right to use the hospital because the hospitals are private entities contracting with their patients, not a government service. Insurance is an ancillary concern and of concern only to two private parties, not the government.
WalterSear 5y ago
This is about to happen: once the FDA approve the vaccine, it will be legal for health insurance companies to give preferential treatment to the vaccinated and for employers to mandate vaccines.
- varelse 5y ago
  My wife's employer is not mandating vaccines and they are on the verge of mandating a return to work with everyone wearing masks all day long to accommodate their anti-vaccine employees. She may not stay there much longer. Life is too short.

adolph 5y ago

Also smokers? Also drunk drivers who wreck? Also people who abuse drugs? Also people without documentation? Also those who don't accept blood letting? Also people who make bad decisions?

varelse 5y ago
Your freedom stops at others immune systems. Think of this as a choose your own adventure. And if you don't wish to be vaccinated or wear a mask you are opting into the road less traveled. What's with all this negativity? But smoke all you want, they already factor that into health insurance costs. Drive drunk all you want, but don't whine if you get caught and they throw you in jail and take away your car and license. WTF undocumented sorts? You're all over the map IMO.
- adolph 5y ago
  > Drive drunk all you want, but don't whine if you get caught and they throw you in jail and take away your car and license. Do you think a person who sustained an injury while they were intoxicated and needs medical treatment "get zero health insurance coverage?" Would it matter if they were at fault? Do you think a person who made a poor life decision "get zero health insurance coverage?" > What's with all this negativity? My questions aren't negative or positive. Their purpose is to think through the idea you proffered. If you didn't wish for people to think through this, why would one enter a comment?
  - varelse 5y ago
    1.I think they should get medical coverage if they have insurance and then they should be thrown in jail losing both their licence and their car. And then criminally charged if anyone else was harmed through their actions. 2. Does their poor life decision harm others or just themselves? If the former (say a mass shooting), yes. But I support your right to self harm though I'd hope someone cared enough about you to dissuade you. You asked. I'm not against people refusing masks and vaccination if they're willing to isolate themselves, I'm against them imposing their poor decisions on everything else or it's a tragedy of the commons IMO. I don't expect anyone to share my views, they're mine.
    - adolph 5y ago
      > they should get medical coverage if they have insurance Do you think hospitals should refuse the uninsured? > if they're willing to isolate themselves On what basis do you think people who refuse masks and vaccination isolate themselves instead of other people? To what lengths would you advocate for compliance verification with regards to vaccination and masking?

yobbo 5y ago

> unvaccinated covid cases will get zero health insurance coverage Most unvaccinated are probably already without health insurance. Vaccination essentially follows socio-economic status, and has the lowest density in blacks and hispanics. Going door-to-door, or "vaccination buses", or things of the line might help.

Jtsummers 5y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-americans.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/us/virus-unvaccinated-ame... Some interesting statistics on the situation.
varelse 5y ago
We have a terrible national heritage here and I understand the reluctance. But this isn't how we handled smallpox or polio. There really isn't any other option than vaccination given that coronaviruses can reach up to 35% fatality (1). We are extremely lucky right now that the current fatality rate (IFR) is hovering around 1%. That could change. Or if there is another option, what is it? We are a year and a half into this thing with no end in sight. And it has already demonstrated it can mutate past herd immunity for those who have already had it or who have been vaccinated. But it's also pretty clear that those who have been vaccinated are more likely to survive by a huge margin. I'm a huge believer in letting people destroy themselves. But I don't believe in letting them destroy everyone else. I'm weird I guess. 1. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1007566/S1335_Long_term_evolution_of_SARS-CoV-2.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
- iammisc 5y ago
  this is fear mongering. The fatality rate of COVID, even at the beginning of the pandemic when we didn't even have proper metrics, was never measured to be more than about 7-8%, which is very high, but not 35%. The paper you cite is about a hypothetical. Stop with the fear mongering.
  - 5y ago

motohagiography 5y ago

Why on earth do we tolerate these tedious outgroup-blame posts? If only our problems could be solved by blaming them on scapegoats and pariahs. It's like intelligent and competent people engage in political talk because it's relaxing to not be held to the same standards and rigour of their actual field of expertise, and it's somehow satisfying to have the attention of people who can't tell the difference.

varelse 5y ago
Because this is an out group constantly endangering the well-being of others? It really is one. Or if it isn't, then what exactly is it? Your body, your choices, your consequences, but not mine or anyone else's. Why is the right to dodge vaccination and masks so important, so absolutely vital, so incredibly on target that we risk the destruction of the Republic itself if we mandate them? Do you also support my right to throw hand grenades into rooms full of people I don't like? This nation was founded during a smallpox and variola academic where our founding father George Washington forced vaccination upon his soldiers (1). But mandating vaccination against the current pandemic is unamerican? How does that work? https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html
- h2odragon 5y ago
  COVID is not smallpox. Equating the two is the basis of your argument? And yet anyone disagreeing is spreading disinformation and must be silenced? (Not accusing you of the latter personally, but others who sound like you have continued thus)
  - DataGata 5y ago
    A person yelling "fire" in a crowded theater gets in trouble, but a person yelling "there is no fire" in a crowded theater in a theater definitely on fire is... being silenced?
- motohagiography 5y ago
  I sincerely believe this hesitancy issue is designed to identify people as offside and as a wedge issue or scissor statement, and not as discourse to derive facts about the topic. Blaming the hesitant and making histrionic claims is like trying to convince me of some eugenic racist theory, where it's just a fast filter that repels everyone intelligent enough to disagree with you and leaves you with a remainder of easily fooled people you can exploit for political ends. Facts in this context are meaningless other than as signals of what side you're on. If someone wants to take the risk of volunteering for the vaccine control group in a global pandemic, I wish them luck. Scapegoating turns it into a political problem where everyone thinks they have a meaningful opinion, which I can see the appeal of. But appeal and truth are very different things.

iammisc 5y ago

In a socialized medicine country, I'd understand this argument. However, in a private medical system, there's no reason for this. If an unvaccinated person can pay, they ought to be treated. It's their money.

varelse 5y ago
And private insurance has a long history of denying claims. How is this any different? https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Forms-Reports-and-Other-Resources/preexisting https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Forms-Reports-and-Other-...
- iammisc 5y ago
  Because the denied claims are the responsibility of the individual, not the government.
  - varelse 5y ago
    A company's responsibility is solely to its shareholders, not to its customers. If those two goals align, win/win. Denying expensive claims increases profitability right up to the point they lose enough customers to offset those gains. Am I missing something fundamental about capitalism here? I'm not saying that's particularly ethical behavior and they wouldn't get my business if I could help it, but if they choose to behave otherwise, they risk delivering suboptimal shareholder value, no?
    - iammisc 5y ago
      > Denying expensive claims increases profitability right up to the point they lose enough customers to offset those gains. Am I missing something fundamental about capitalism here? Yes... the ultimate responsible party is the patient, not the insurance company. It makes no sense to deny Americans the right to use the hospital because the hospitals are private entities contracting with their patients, not a government service. Insurance is an ancillary concern and of concern only to two private parties, not the government.

WalterSear 5y ago

This is about to happen: once the FDA approve the vaccine, it will be legal for health insurance companies to give preferential treatment to the vaccinated and for employers to mandate vaccines.

varelse 5y ago
My wife's employer is not mandating vaccines and they are on the verge of mandating a return to work with everyone wearing masks all day long to accommodate their anti-vaccine employees. She may not stay there much longer. Life is too short.