3 ms·
> For example, if someone on a motorcycle chooses not to wear a helmet and not to have health insurance, they could incur millions of dollars of costs that thei
by zer8k 3y ago
> For example, if someone on a motorcycle chooses not to wear a helmet and not to have health insurance, they could incur millions of dollars of costs that their other people have to pay for. It's reasonable, then, to force people to wear motorcycle helmets.
As a long time rider and have lost friends and other riders I can tell you one thing: not wearing a helmet is the easiest way to save everyone money. You're guaranteed to die in all but the least serious of accidents (dropping your bike at a stop), clean up fees are cheap, funerals can be made cheap, the only variable is the cost of therapy for the person who has to mop you up. Of all the people I know who've survived accidents their gear was the reason they were able to pay for a doctor's kid's schooling (and probably a bonus ferrari).You'd think we'd encourage no-helmet laws!
I know you're making a larger point here and I am being sarcastic. I just think it's funny you chose this example when it's likely the cheapest way a motorcyclist can die.
- version_five 3y agoI know there are similar findings about e.g. smoking - you die younger and more quickly and so spare socialized healthcare lots of spending. Probably true for obesity, drinking, drug use, etc. From a purely economic standpoint, living to be 100 with various chronic conditions of the kind that come with age (plus drawing social security) is probably the most draining way to live. I don't mean to say it's bad, just that it shows how dumb the thinly veiled telling people how to live in the name of their burden on the healthcare system argument is. If that was really what we cared about the government should be encouraging us all to live fast and die young. But it's about control, not anything else.
- smt88 3y agoThis comment is just so ignorant of actual public health that it doesn't feel worthwhile to respond to. When people die young, they don't pay back the enormous amounts of money that was spent on raising and educating them. Smoking is an absolutely perfect example of something that costs society absolutely staggering amounts of money. Do you know how much it costs to treat someone who gets cancer from smoking? Or to treat someone with diabetes who was obese? Or to send someone to rehab for drug use? Any one of these things can easily cost society (government, insurance company, family, the individual themselves) millions of dollars. And the majority of the cost is almost never borne by the individual. If you give yourself cancer and have health insurance, all the other people with health insurance pay for your treatment. > just that it shows how dumb the thinly veiled telling people how to live in the name of their burden on the healthcare system argument is Instead of saying it's dumb, how about you actually explain it or provide examples? There is nothing anywhere that will tell you that letting people smoke would save society money. That's so unbelievably backwards that I can't believe I even read it.
- smt88 3y agoDeath is extremely expensive. Investigations, medical care, funeral costs, unpaid debts, psychological care for loved ones, children who are left without parents, etc. etc. Sure, I could have chosen a different example, but my example was still good because motorcyclists not wearing helmets costs society $1.5B every year[1]. And either way, you understood my point. 1. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812867 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...