No, this is not how it works. Otherwise larger US health insurance pools wouldn't have lower cost healthcare as they do now. This happens in the US (and everywhere else) because the costs are spread out over more people. You believe this. You offer nothing to quantify it, and nothing to the quantify the impact. This just comes off as you saying "I don't want to believe it, so I don't." This is why I get frustrated and short when discussing things with you. Though I'll try to do better about that. Here, let me help. Pretty much your whole argument can be summed up in your belief that American's are incredibly fat compared to Canadians. While we're higher on the index, it's not as drastic as you would expect. The us has 7% higher obesity rate than Canada. A quick google search shows that obesity costs the US an additional $170 billion per year. That seems like a lot of money. That works out to about $472 per capita, per year. But we're only 7% higher than Canada, so it would actually only work out to a difference of about $35 per capita. Or less than $3 per month, per person. By about 7% So US public spending is $8950 per capita and Canada's whole healthcare system is $4975 per capita. Let's add the cost of fat people to Canada's cost so we get a total of $5,447 per capita. So with Canada's healthcare system US public spending on healthcare would drop from $8,950 per capita to $5,447. A savings of $3,503, plus an additional private savings of $1639 per capita to spend elsewhere in the economy. That's over $1.5 trillion (T) per year. So not moot. It's not even close.
So you are against any form of health insurance, including the current employer-based system? Because that's what insurance is - the healthy bearing part of the cost of the sick. That's a pretty extreme position. barfo
were all entitled to our own opinions. Mine being i dont want to pay for other peoples unhealthy habits is by far not isolated and is indeed a widespread consensus among many. I could also say that anyones stance that tbinks i should have to pay for someone else who wants to eat potato chips and ice ream all day is complete bullshit too. Who actually thinks they have the right or is in the dight demanding one person to lay for another persons consequences when making open conscious decisions that hinder their health? thats complete bullshit to think i should have to do that.
When people don’t have healthcare we all DO pay for it. ER still takes you in, ambulance still comes, when that person can’t pay guess where those costs go? The insured. It’s not as simple as “well let them eat fast food and die”, they are humans first of all, but they end up costing the healthcare system anyway. And people who seek preventative healthcare end up being healthier, so giving them access to this would help lift many of them out of being so sick. And not as expensive.
oh come on. You know we all take a survey and health insurance premiums are based upon our risks. A smoker pays more than a nonsmoker. nice try.
Who do you think currently pays for uninsured diabetic care? How do you think the diabetic epidemic affects your insurance premium. Sounds like you need to opt out of the whole system.
Okay too many hopping on the band wagon. Im not for paying more into a health are system that doesn't hold high riskers due to lifestyle, responsible. Period. Hate me for it or think I'm a bad person, idgaf.
Well, besides that it's not just people who "eat potato chips and ice cream" all day, it's also people who don't have jobs that offer them decent health care options, or as with a friend of mine, has to spend 700 a month because of her health issues (that aren't related to ice cream and potato chip consumption). But mostly, as CN said, it's actually cheaper to pay for everyone, instead of having to cover the costs of the uninsured/underinsured.
But i never said all people. I just said i dont want to pay for those peoples choices. Health care should be individualist based on an individuals needs vs risks they take. If we all pay into it im fine but those with higher risks need to pay more into it. When i say higher risks, i mean choices. Not dissabilities.
so should someone who was born with diabetes, did nothing to cause it and their only behavior that created the situation was simply being born, be forced to pay more?
Why are we talking about health insurance costs without talking about the benefits as well? The most important resource of a modern economy is the human capital. A healthy work force is good for the economy, even if it cost more for universal health care (it would not) - it would still be worth it for the economy at large. Arguing against investing in the most important resource for the economy would be like shouting against investing in machinery for a factory or vehicles for a transportation company. It's grade A idiotic.
yes. Its unfortunate but its reality. Read. Above though it might explain a bit more of my opinion on this.
so idiotic no one has figured it out in this country yet. Every person in this country is an idiot then.
did you read above? Did you catch my opinion on health risks being a choice not a disability? So on your instance yes they should be covered. Its not a choice to have diabetes. But they still need to pay in.
Another logic failure. Only the people that do not understand that you need to invest in the resources required for a strong economy to rip the benefits are the idiots.
You're advocating spending twice as much so you can punish fat people and keep them fat. Just like you advocate spending 4 times as much to punish homeless people and keep them homeless. While this is effective at making the problem worse it is not good public policy. This is why we need more investment in education rather than less. In response to McDonald's introducing the Quarter Pounder A&W introduced a 1/3 lb burger at a lower price to compete. Unfortunately too many Americans thought the 1/4 was larger than 1/3, and hence thought the Quarter Pounder was a better deal, so A&W dropped it...
