7 ms·

How does it feel to subsidise those who make poor health choices?

by sonthonax 4y ago

swagasaurus-rex 4y ago
how does it feel to subsidize greedy health insurance companies?
- e1g 4y ago
  There is plenty of obscene profit generated in the US healthcare industry, but not within the insurance segment. Currently, health insurers are the only segment where profits (and “admin costs”) are directly capped via the ACA's MLR rules. The blame game should aim at the rest of the industry (e.g. hospitals, device manufacturers, pharmaceuticals).
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > Currently, health insurers are the only segment where profits (and “admin costs”) are directly capped via the ACA's MLR rules. Capped at a percent of premium revenue, which gives them the perverse incentive to raise healthcare costs so their 20% maximum cut gets bigger.
ceejayoz 4y ago
Everyone on the planet, basically without exception (pedants: I'm not counting people in vegetative states, babies, etc.), makes poor health choices. You'd be like The Good Place's Doug Forcett, otherwise.
- sonthonax 4y ago
  You know very well that healthy people live differently and end up subsidising the habits of others. Don’t be so lazy as to argue that a marathon runner makes comparable choices to an overweight layabout. It’s just not true that people’s lifestyles are in aggregate equal. Health insurance companies know this and are legally forbidden to charge obese people more under the ACA. It’s cold hard actuarial fact. Rather than trying to falsify reality to fit your moral viewpoint, try to argue why he should subsidise.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    > Don’t be so lazy as to argue that a marathon runner makes comparable choices to an overweight layabout. Marathon running is quite hard on joints, with an increased incidence of osteoarthritis. (There are also overweight marathoners, smoking marathoners, etc.) > It’s just not true that people’s lifestyles are in aggregate equal. Certainly, but there's an infinite number of combinations, and there's a serious risk to over-dividing the risk group. Pre-ACA, some folks found themselves shoved off into "high risk pools", which often made them functionally unable to access healthcare. Making folks uninsurable pushes them into more expensive (back to subsidizing!) emergency care, and causes them to delay treatment in ways that often exacerbate a treatable condition. I suspect the folks here would riot if "sitting in a chair all day" wound up with a massive insurance penalty. Should eating meat come with an insurance penalty? Living in a smoggy city? Overindulging in beer?
    - sonthonax 4y ago
      > Marathon running is quite hard on joints, with an increased incidence of osteoarthritis. Most marathon runners are terrible athletes who have terrible training goals and usually stop running due to self-inflicted soft tissue injury. This isn't expensive to treat since normally it's only rest is required to heal from ITB-syndrome or even shin splints. So they're rarely able to turn it into a lifestyle. Those who are able to continue probably are at a higher risk of osteoarthritis. I still stand by these people just cost less to provide healthcare for in old age (and I don't think there's selection bias at play here). > Pre-ACA, some folks found themselves shoved off into "high risk pools", which often made them functionally unable to access healthcare. Like I completely agree with this, that it solves this problem. I was more so trying to raise the moral point about socialised healthcare (and I mean socialised in that loose sense) demanding a sacrifice from those who do take care of themselves. People are willing to suspend notions of natural inequalities to a point because most people still feel they live in a society. But there is a limit to this where people feel their burden is so disproportionate that they seek to emancipate themselves from it. The bonds of society are only so strong.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
swayvil 4y ago
You are pointing at a mosquito while Dracula sucks gallons from your neck. The aristocrats take the feast while we squabble over crumbs.
giaour 4y ago
You mean like those fools who choose to be born with the genetic marker for type I diabetes? How dare they!

How does it feel to subsidise those who make poor health choices?

swagasaurus-rex 4y ago

how does it feel to subsidize greedy health insurance companies?

e1g 4y ago
There is plenty of obscene profit generated in the US healthcare industry, but not within the insurance segment. Currently, health insurers are the only segment where profits (and “admin costs”) are directly capped via the ACA's MLR rules. The blame game should aim at the rest of the industry (e.g. hospitals, device manufacturers, pharmaceuticals).
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > Currently, health insurers are the only segment where profits (and “admin costs”) are directly capped via the ACA's MLR rules. Capped at a percent of premium revenue, which gives them the perverse incentive to raise healthcare costs so their 20% maximum cut gets bigger.

ceejayoz 4y ago

Everyone on the planet, basically without exception (pedants: I'm not counting people in vegetative states, babies, etc.), makes poor health choices. You'd be like The Good Place's Doug Forcett, otherwise.

sonthonax 4y ago
You know very well that healthy people live differently and end up subsidising the habits of others. Don’t be so lazy as to argue that a marathon runner makes comparable choices to an overweight layabout. It’s just not true that people’s lifestyles are in aggregate equal. Health insurance companies know this and are legally forbidden to charge obese people more under the ACA. It’s cold hard actuarial fact. Rather than trying to falsify reality to fit your moral viewpoint, try to argue why he should subsidise.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > Don’t be so lazy as to argue that a marathon runner makes comparable choices to an overweight layabout. Marathon running is quite hard on joints, with an increased incidence of osteoarthritis. (There are also overweight marathoners, smoking marathoners, etc.) > It’s just not true that people’s lifestyles are in aggregate equal. Certainly, but there's an infinite number of combinations, and there's a serious risk to over-dividing the risk group. Pre-ACA, some folks found themselves shoved off into "high risk pools", which often made them functionally unable to access healthcare. Making folks uninsurable pushes them into more expensive (back to subsidizing!) emergency care, and causes them to delay treatment in ways that often exacerbate a treatable condition. I suspect the folks here would riot if "sitting in a chair all day" wound up with a massive insurance penalty. Should eating meat come with an insurance penalty? Living in a smoggy city? Overindulging in beer?
  - sonthonax 4y ago
    > Marathon running is quite hard on joints, with an increased incidence of osteoarthritis. Most marathon runners are terrible athletes who have terrible training goals and usually stop running due to self-inflicted soft tissue injury. This isn't expensive to treat since normally it's only rest is required to heal from ITB-syndrome or even shin splints. So they're rarely able to turn it into a lifestyle. Those who are able to continue probably are at a higher risk of osteoarthritis. I still stand by these people just cost less to provide healthcare for in old age (and I don't think there's selection bias at play here). > Pre-ACA, some folks found themselves shoved off into "high risk pools", which often made them functionally unable to access healthcare. Like I completely agree with this, that it solves this problem. I was more so trying to raise the moral point about socialised healthcare (and I mean socialised in that loose sense) demanding a sacrifice from those who do take care of themselves. People are willing to suspend notions of natural inequalities to a point because most people still feel they live in a society. But there is a limit to this where people feel their burden is so disproportionate that they seek to emancipate themselves from it. The bonds of society are only so strong.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago

swayvil 4y ago

You are pointing at a mosquito while Dracula sucks gallons from your neck. The aristocrats take the feast while we squabble over crumbs.

giaour 4y ago

You mean like those fools who choose to be born with the genetic marker for type I diabetes? How dare they!