BuffaloBill Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Why don't we charge more for medical care for smokers? Lung cancer, breathing apparatus, and the use of hospital facilities for smokers is very significant. Why not charge more for diabetics? A lot of diabetics don't follow medical advice regarding diet and exercise? Why not charge pregnant mothers who drink more than mothers who take care of themselves? We could easily charge alchoholics who are duffering dt's much more than we do... Wait a minute..I think we are onto a way of dealing with the health care crisis! There is an element of truth in what you say. The problem is putting the conceptual idea of unhealthy lifestyle = more cost to you personally is hard to enact. What if you have only smoked for a week but then have a heart attack should you pay more for your care? While the issue is subject to debate and full of land mines I do think we should find ways to give people incentives to live healthier lives and shift cost to those who do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 There is an element of truth in what you say. The problem is putting the conceptual idea of unhealthy lifestyle = more cost to you personally is hard to enact. What if you have only smoked for a week but then have a heart attack should you pay more for your care? While the issue is subject to debate and full of land mines I do think we should find ways to give people incentives to live healthier lives and shift cost to those who do not. Truth? Why would someone pay more for the care they are there to receive based on their issue? A smoker who has heart and lung issues pays for that service when they go to the doctor for lung cancer or heart attacks. If there are complications in birth for a mother who drinks, they will pay the costs that are associated with it. (we'll leave the insurance/government arguments about who's actually paying to the many other threads) Half ton people need to pay for the forklift, flatbed and extra personnel it takes to move their asses from point A to point B. If maybe they are a sprite 500 lbs and need a bigger ambulance, extra support on their beds, and additional personnel to pick them up off the ground, then they need to pay for that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I do think we should find ways to give people incentives to live healthier lives and shift cost to those who do not. What about people who drive too fast and get into frequent accidents? More accidents = higher health costs. I don't want to pay for that. And what about motorcycle riders? That's far more dangerous than driving a car. So that's living a less healthy lifestyle, so they should pay more medical too. But those are "hard" to quantify. It's easy to pick a magic number out of the air and say, "If you weigh more than X pounds, you pay twice as much!" Seriously, is a 350 pound guy that much more expensive to care for than a 349 pound guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frit0 Bandit0 Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 The United States has some of the highest obesity rates in the developed world. From 1980 to 2002, obesity rates have doubled, reaching the current rate of 32% of the adult population. Rates of obesity vary by ethnicity and gender. In the US, as of 2007, 33% of men and 35% of women are obese. Which leads me to wonder with all that g-d dam flatulence coming from America we may lose carbon credits in the future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts