4 ms·

I think health costs are the bigger issue

by lokar 6mo ago

themaninthedark 6mo ago
Yes, this is one of the reasons there is resistance to socialized health care. People view it as opening the door to the government controlling what they due due to health care costs. Sure, I dislike smoking, I really don't drink that much either. But then it leads to questions such as; What about birth defects? What about extreme sports(risk of permanent injury)? There was a scandal in Canada recently about veterans asking for medical care and being push to assisted suicide: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-maid-rcmp-investigation-1.6663885 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-maid-rcmp-investig... >MacAulay walked the committee through what his department knew, thus far, saying the first case that came to light occurred last summer where the caseworker repeatedly pushed the notion of MAID to an unnamed veteran who had called seeking help with post-traumatic stress.
- lokar 6mo ago
  IMO they should just charge a premium for smoking that about covers the expense overall
  - cucumber3732842 6mo ago
    Solving it with money doesn't really solve it unless there's "real" competition. Look at automotive insurance points systems. People have to buy it so the sellers lean on the legislatures and before you know it a ticket costs the same points and screws you out of just as much money as an actual accident.
    - lokar 6mo ago
      That seems appropriate. A small fraction of people cause most of the losses, they should pay more.
      - cucumber3732842 6mo ago
        >That seems appropriate. A small fraction of people cause most of the losses, they should pay more. Surely that was a satirical comment and was meant to be an illustrative example of exactly the sort of mindset that runs political cover for a system as it pivots from providing enough value to become entrenched to using that entrenched position to behave in an extractive manner. In my state if grandma gets pulled over for an out of date inspection sticker it's the same number of points as actually causing an accident. Someone is being fleeced. I have zero faith that letting the government choose at the behest of industry who ought to pay more for healthcare that it wouldn't devolve into the same exact sort of exercise in finding a reason to charge everyone more.
        lokar 6mo ago
        I’ve never seen having an expired tag be a points violation, that seems very wrong. IME it’s only ever moving violations that impact safety. For that, higher rates are absolutely appropriate.
        cucumber3732842 6mo ago
        Safety inspection. It's a moving violation in this state (of course it wasn't initially, frogs are best boiled slow). That's the magic of it. Frame it as a "safety" issue and everyone who can't think critically about how that sausage might be made will knee jerk approve.
        lokar 6mo ago
        If I was an auto insurer, I would want to know that my policy holders were properly maintaining their vehicles. I would also have a strong interest in ensuring that non-policy holders did the same. And as a driver, I certainly want everyone around me to be required to properly maintain their cars.
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
  - Cytobit 6mo ago
    Cigarettes are usually sold at an increased tax rate already.
mytailorisrich 6mo ago
In the UK taxes on tobacco earn more than the (socialised) healthcare financial cost of smoking. So this argument is a fallacy.
- d1sxeyes 6mo ago
  I don’t think the argument as a whole is a fallacy, it’s true that the exact cost to the NHS is more than covered by tax, but most estimates of wider cost to the economy (e.g. lost productivity, disability benefits, etc) is higher. https://fullfact.org/health/farage-smoking-revenue-nhs/ https://fullfact.org/health/farage-smoking-revenue-nhs/
  - mytailorisrich 6mo ago
    It's equally a fallacious argument to try to fit "cost to the economy", whatever that means, to the healthcare cost (usually this is done to inflate costs to fit the narrative). By that logic, ban everything and allow only what allows individuals to maximise their productive labour... what a nightmare.

I think health costs are the bigger issue

by lokar 6mo ago

I think health costs are the bigger issue

Yes, this is one of the reasons there is resistance to socialized health care. People view it as opening the door to the government controlling what they due due to health care costs. Sure, I dislike smoking, I really don't drink that much either. But then it leads to questions such as; What about birth defects? What about extreme sports(risk of permanent injury)? There was a scandal in Canada recently about veterans asking for medical care and being push to assisted suicide: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-maid-rcmp-investigation-1.6663885 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-maid-rcmp-investig... >MacAulay walked the committee through what his department knew, thus far, saying the first case that came to light occurred last summer where the caseworker repeatedly pushed the notion of MAID to an unnamed veteran who had called seeking help with post-traumatic stress.

lokar 6mo ago
IMO they should just charge a premium for smoking that about covers the expense overall
- cucumber3732842 6mo ago
  Solving it with money doesn't really solve it unless there's "real" competition. Look at automotive insurance points systems. People have to buy it so the sellers lean on the legislatures and before you know it a ticket costs the same points and screws you out of just as much money as an actual accident.
  - lokar 6mo ago
    That seems appropriate. A small fraction of people cause most of the losses, they should pay more.
    - cucumber3732842 6mo ago
      >That seems appropriate. A small fraction of people cause most of the losses, they should pay more. Surely that was a satirical comment and was meant to be an illustrative example of exactly the sort of mindset that runs political cover for a system as it pivots from providing enough value to become entrenched to using that entrenched position to behave in an extractive manner. In my state if grandma gets pulled over for an out of date inspection sticker it's the same number of points as actually causing an accident. Someone is being fleeced. I have zero faith that letting the government choose at the behest of industry who ought to pay more for healthcare that it wouldn't devolve into the same exact sort of exercise in finding a reason to charge everyone more.
      - lokar 6mo ago
        I’ve never seen having an expired tag be a points violation, that seems very wrong. IME it’s only ever moving violations that impact safety. For that, higher rates are absolutely appropriate.
        cucumber3732842 6mo ago
        Safety inspection. It's a moving violation in this state (of course it wasn't initially, frogs are best boiled slow). That's the magic of it. Frame it as a "safety" issue and everyone who can't think critically about how that sausage might be made will knee jerk approve.
        lokar 6mo ago
        If I was an auto insurer, I would want to know that my policy holders were properly maintaining their vehicles. I would also have a strong interest in ensuring that non-policy holders did the same. And as a driver, I certainly want everyone around me to be required to properly maintain their cars.
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
- Cytobit 6mo ago
  Cigarettes are usually sold at an increased tax rate already.

mytailorisrich 6mo ago

In the UK taxes on tobacco earn more than the (socialised) healthcare financial cost of smoking. So this argument is a fallacy.

d1sxeyes 6mo ago
I don’t think the argument as a whole is a fallacy, it’s true that the exact cost to the NHS is more than covered by tax, but most estimates of wider cost to the economy (e.g. lost productivity, disability benefits, etc) is higher. https://fullfact.org/health/farage-smoking-revenue-nhs/ https://fullfact.org/health/farage-smoking-revenue-nhs/
- mytailorisrich 6mo ago
  It's equally a fallacious argument to try to fit "cost to the economy", whatever that means, to the healthcare cost (usually this is done to inflate costs to fit the narrative). By that logic, ban everything and allow only what allows individuals to maximise their productive labour... what a nightmare.