9 ms·

You have the same issue with smokers and cancer, obese people and heart attack, drunk/tired/hurried drivers and accidents, drug users and depression, sugar cons

You have the same issue with smokers and cancer, obese people and heart attack, drunk/tired/hurried drivers and accidents, drug users and depression, sugar consummers and diabetes, extreme sport hobbyists and traumas, etc. At some point, half of the population fall under some risk factor that they could avoid, but instead, make society pay for it. That's the game of universal healthcare. As a vaccinated French citizen, I'm ok with it. The pros beat the cons.

kkfx 4y ago
Interesting point: how can you say "The pros beat the cons"? So far, and more important from the history (one scandal per WHO pandemic declaration, same plot before and ongoing) we have see only evidence of the very contrary: 2021 total mortality was far higher than 2020 one, 2020 with covid, without "vaccines", 2021 with "vaccines". What evidence you know of the contrary? The À la une of some journal stating that or something more solid? Beside that, speaking about France did you read the official report https://www.atih.sante.fr/sites/default/files/public/content/4144/aah_2020_analyse_covid.pdf https://www.atih.sante.fr/sites/default/files/public/content... ? Did you read constants articles about medical deserts due to neoliberals reforms ? Long story short: try to compare USA health costs (the highest in the western world) with the lowest mean quality with classic EU PUBLIC and UNIVERSAL health systems the cheapest and the best in mean quality. Than try to draw where the costs came from and more important: from witch pocked money depart to end up in witch other pockets.
Beltalowda 4y ago
In the specific case of smokers, it doesn't actually increase health costs. Smokers die younger and often have a relatively short illness before they die. Compare this to someone who lives 95 and requires care in a care-home it's "cheap". You also save on things like pension costs because you don't pay them to dead folk, and income from taxes. I'm not entirely sure about the numbers on things like obesity, drug use, etc. off-hand. I agree with you as a matter of principle, so not that it really matters, but people sometimes say "smokers should pay the cost they inflict on society themselves!" and turns out they're not actually inflicting the huge costs people imagine they do.
mdp2021 4y ago
> That's the game of universal healthcare You have only shown arguments to revise implementations of universal healthcare - not any reasonable stance to regulate behaviour (which by the way, is not a novel topic - see seatbelts etc. - and not a trivial one with easy answers).
- BiteCode_dev 4y ago
  If you start putting more rule, you get healthcare, but not universal. That's what the universal stands for. It's for everybody, no matter the person. If you are not ok with that, they you don't want universal healthcare, you want something else. I personnally love universal healthcare, and I'm happy to pay for it. I don't want to have to play a game of chess to live my life in the most likely way to be reimbursed by the system.

kkfx 4y ago

Interesting point: how can you say "The pros beat the cons"? So far, and more important from the history (one scandal per WHO pandemic declaration, same plot before and ongoing) we have see only evidence of the very contrary: 2021 total mortality was far higher than 2020 one, 2020 with covid, without "vaccines", 2021 with "vaccines". What evidence you know of the contrary? The À la une of some journal stating that or something more solid? Beside that, speaking about France did you read the official report https://www.atih.sante.fr/sites/default/files/public/content/4144/aah_2020_analyse_covid.pdf https://www.atih.sante.fr/sites/default/files/public/content... ? Did you read constants articles about medical deserts due to neoliberals reforms ? Long story short: try to compare USA health costs (the highest in the western world) with the lowest mean quality with classic EU PUBLIC and UNIVERSAL health systems the cheapest and the best in mean quality. Than try to draw where the costs came from and more important: from witch pocked money depart to end up in witch other pockets.

Beltalowda 4y ago

In the specific case of smokers, it doesn't actually increase health costs. Smokers die younger and often have a relatively short illness before they die. Compare this to someone who lives 95 and requires care in a care-home it's "cheap". You also save on things like pension costs because you don't pay them to dead folk, and income from taxes. I'm not entirely sure about the numbers on things like obesity, drug use, etc. off-hand. I agree with you as a matter of principle, so not that it really matters, but people sometimes say "smokers should pay the cost they inflict on society themselves!" and turns out they're not actually inflicting the huge costs people imagine they do.

mdp2021 4y ago

> That's the game of universal healthcare You have only shown arguments to revise implementations of universal healthcare - not any reasonable stance to regulate behaviour (which by the way, is not a novel topic - see seatbelts etc. - and not a trivial one with easy answers).

BiteCode_dev 4y ago
If you start putting more rule, you get healthcare, but not universal. That's what the universal stands for. It's for everybody, no matter the person. If you are not ok with that, they you don't want universal healthcare, you want something else. I personnally love universal healthcare, and I'm happy to pay for it. I don't want to have to play a game of chess to live my life in the most likely way to be reimbursed by the system.