4 ms·

I'm definitely pro-vaccine, but I'm also concerned about the long-term impact of alienating whole swaths of the country with policies like these. Perhaps there

I'm definitely pro-vaccine, but I'm also concerned about the long-term impact of alienating whole swaths of the country with policies like these. Perhaps there are less onerous policies that would be similarly effective? To address the risk of transmission for in-person employees, would a combination of masking and testing be similarly effective at minimizing office outbreaks? As for the increase in a company's health insurance costs it seems like we could simply let health insurance companies consider vaccination status when calculating an individual's health insurance premiums (like they currently do with smokers). It seems like the reasonable free-market approach to ask people to pay for any increase in risk they willingly choose to take on.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
devmunchies 5y ago
> let health insurance companies consider vaccination status when calculating an individual's health insurance premiums If I'm in my late 20s or early 30s and in great shape and eat healthy, a vaccine is not going to make a difference in personal risk. If anything, vaccine rates should be used by a company when getting health insurance benefits for the org as a whole.
- asoneth 5y ago
  > If I'm in my late 20s or early 30s and in great shape and eat healthy, a vaccine is not going to make a difference in personal risk. Assuming that's true then I'd expect your health insurance premiums to remain similar regardless of your vaccination status. I didn't mean to argue that people who are unvaccinated should be charged more, I meant to argue that vaccination status should be added as a sixth factor that health insurance companies are legally allowed to use to set premiums. (The ACA already allows them to consider things like tobacco use and age.) > If anything, vaccine rates should be used by a company when getting health insurance benefits for the org as a whole. Seems reasonable. If it results in cost increases for the company it would be up to the company to decide how to pass that on to employees. (I.e. should everyone pay a little more, just the unvaccinated, or should the company eat the cost?)

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

devmunchies 5y ago

> let health insurance companies consider vaccination status when calculating an individual's health insurance premiums If I'm in my late 20s or early 30s and in great shape and eat healthy, a vaccine is not going to make a difference in personal risk. If anything, vaccine rates should be used by a company when getting health insurance benefits for the org as a whole.

asoneth 5y ago
> If I'm in my late 20s or early 30s and in great shape and eat healthy, a vaccine is not going to make a difference in personal risk. Assuming that's true then I'd expect your health insurance premiums to remain similar regardless of your vaccination status. I didn't mean to argue that people who are unvaccinated should be charged more, I meant to argue that vaccination status should be added as a sixth factor that health insurance companies are legally allowed to use to set premiums. (The ACA already allows them to consider things like tobacco use and age.) > If anything, vaccine rates should be used by a company when getting health insurance benefits for the org as a whole. Seems reasonable. If it results in cost increases for the company it would be up to the company to decide how to pass that on to employees. (I.e. should everyone pay a little more, just the unvaccinated, or should the company eat the cost?)