All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Real Opinions? Who Do You Vote For And Why?
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
10/30/2012 5:14 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 5:05:00 PM (view original):
If the act is irresponsible, the consequences of it are irresponsible.


I'd continue this but I'm on my way to the gym.  Because I don't want to be part of the problem.
Going to the doctor is not the consequence. It's an act.

Unhealthy eating, smoking, binge drinking, and playing with knives are all acts, along with choosing to go or not go to the doctor.

The consequences vary depending on the act. 


10/30/2012 6:47 PM
Posted by moy23 on 10/30/2012 12:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by seamar_116 on 10/30/2012 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 10/29/2012 9:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/29/2012 7:57:00 PM (view original):
Then what's the solution? There is no private market for senior health insurance. It's not profitable at rates anyone can afford. If Medicare doesn't spend enough already, how do we afford Medicare?

ps - these are legitimate questions that I don't know the answers to, not some sort of set up for an argument.
I'm certainly in the minority when I say this.... but I'm for making health insurance more like every other insurance..... THERE FOR EMERGENCIES AND ACCIDENTS ONLY. Your auto insurance doesn't cover routine maintenance like tire rotations and oil changes, you do. Your home owners insurance doesn't cover a new furnace or replacement air filters, you do. Why does health care have to cover preventative visits, contraceptives, etc?.... it should be there for emergencies only. That would help ease the cost burden tremendously.

As far as preventative measures go.... I'd subsidize a salad so it's less expensive than McDonald's burgers. I'd spend money to educate parents that juice contains a ton of sugar which turns into fat.... it's not as healthy as you think it is for your child. We have a tremendous health problem from the growing obesity in this country at every grade level into adulthood. That's the real problem imo.
Moy,

The reason it makes sense to cover preventative medicine is because is is much cheaper to provide well care, than it is sick care. Think how much better off we are when dental care insurance started covering preventative things like cleanings, and sealants? Cavities are almost non-existent for a generation of kids who have had proper dental care.

Finding out about health problems when they can more easily be addressed is far less expensive that waiting until a problem someone has the stroke or heart attack or outward signs of cancer, etc.
while I don't disagree in theory about preventative care.... the problem is most Americans are not doing anything to prevent themselves from increasing their own health risks....Why should I have to pay, or an insurance company, for an increasingly obese population and/or smokers? all the preventative healthcare in the world will not reduce the longterm risks these people bring on themselves.
Moy,

I certainly agree about the personal responsibility angle. With auto insurance, your rates are based in part on your driving history, so a bad driver pays more. But health insurance to some extent is different, because there are factors that are outside individual control, like gender and genetics. Smokers should pay more, that's a choice. Excessive drinkers, should pay more...but who sets the line? Same thing with weight.

But the ability to see a doctor when necessary should not hinge on what job you have or how wealthy you are, should it? And if a person does have a health history beyond one's control should that mean that someone can never change jobs?
10/30/2012 7:07 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2012 5:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 5:05:00 PM (view original):
If the act is irresponsible, the consequences of it are irresponsible.


I'd continue this but I'm on my way to the gym.  Because I don't want to be part of the problem.
Going to the doctor is not the consequence. It's an act.

Unhealthy eating, smoking, binge drinking, and playing with knives are all acts, along with choosing to go or not go to the doctor.

The consequences vary depending on the act. 


The consequence of juggling knives is a cut hand.

The consequence of overeating, heavy smoking and binge drinking is poor health.

Another act is going to the doctor.   Which you could have avoided by being smarter.
10/30/2012 7:18 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 4:56:00 PM (view original):
swamp, are you really saying that fat people aren't a healthcare problem?   Please tell my you're not.
I am saying that overweight people are not the worst problem in the world. We are not seeing higher costs based on weight.

We would have the same skyrocketing medical costs if we had half as many obese people.
10/30/2012 7:40 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 7:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2012 5:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 5:05:00 PM (view original):
If the act is irresponsible, the consequences of it are irresponsible.


I'd continue this but I'm on my way to the gym.  Because I don't want to be part of the problem.
Going to the doctor is not the consequence. It's an act.

Unhealthy eating, smoking, binge drinking, and playing with knives are all acts, along with choosing to go or not go to the doctor.

The consequences vary depending on the act. 


The consequence of juggling knives is a cut hand.

The consequence of overeating, heavy smoking and binge drinking is poor health.

Another act is going to the doctor.   Which you could have avoided by being smarter.
Agree.

But once you have acted irresponsibly and injured yourself you face another choice. To go to the doctor or not go to the doctor.

Going back to your original example. You cut your hand and need stitches. Going to the doctor ensures that the wound heals correctly and in a timely manner, reduces the likelihood of infection, and allows a professional to evaluate the injury and determine if things are worse than you think they are. What is irresponsible about that choice?

We should be encouraging people to make smart decisions like this. People taking advantage of their insurance and using $500 worth of benefits is short money and not the driving force behind increased health insurance premiums. People not taking responsibility and not seeing a doctor regularly and allowing chronic conditions to manifest, along with an aging population of baby boomers are the main drivers of increased rates.
10/30/2012 7:43 PM
Posted by swamphawk22 on 10/30/2012 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 4:56:00 PM (view original):
swamp, are you really saying that fat people aren't a healthcare problem?   Please tell my you're not.
I am saying that overweight people are not the worst problem in the world. We are not seeing higher costs based on weight.

We would have the same skyrocketing medical costs if we had half as many obese people.
You are pulling that out of your asshoIe.
10/30/2012 7:43 PM
It's part of the problem if the same hand could have been dealt with by using a $2 bottle of alcohol and a box of band-aids.   Which, if one knows the trip to the doc of coming out of pocket, is how most people would handle it.
10/30/2012 7:45 PM
Posted by swamphawk22 on 10/30/2012 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 4:56:00 PM (view original):
swamp, are you really saying that fat people aren't a healthcare problem?   Please tell my you're not.
I am saying that overweight people are not the worst problem in the world. We are not seeing higher costs based on weight.

We would have the same skyrocketing medical costs if we had half as many obese people.
So people getting diabetes, having heart attacks, and strokes among other medical issues at a younger age doesn't increase health costs. Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookay.
10/30/2012 7:46 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2012 7:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 10/30/2012 7:18:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 4:56:00 PM (view original):
swamp, are you really saying that fat people aren't a healthcare problem?   Please tell my you're not.
I am saying that overweight people are not the worst problem in the world. We are not seeing higher costs based on weight.

We would have the same skyrocketing medical costs if we had half as many obese people.
You are pulling that out of your asshoIe.
THIS is something we can agree on.
10/30/2012 7:49 PM (edited)
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 7:43:00 PM (view original):
It's part of the problem if the same hand could have been dealt with by using a $2 bottle of alcohol and a box of band-aids.   Which, if one knows the trip to the doc of coming out of pocket, is how most people would handle it.
Even if it could have been dealt with at home, that is short money. An insurance company that primarily pays out small claims for minor injuries is an incredibly profitable one with low rates. I run an insurance brokerage. Insurance companies want their insureds to use their policies to take care of small issues like this so that they don't turn in to big issues later.

Now is your chance to back out of this. Your convoluted argument is not valid.

EDIT: In other words, the companies, for the most part, want to cover preventative care with a copay so that people don't avoid the doctor until they are dying and need hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care.

10/30/2012 7:50 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 10/30/2012 7:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/30/2012 7:43:00 PM (view original):
It's part of the problem if the same hand could have been dealt with by using a $2 bottle of alcohol and a box of band-aids.   Which, if one knows the trip to the doc of coming out of pocket, is how most people would handle it.
Even if it could have been dealt with at home, that is short money. An insurance company that primarily pays out small claims for minor injuries is an incredibly profitable one with low rates. I run an insurance brokerage. Insurance companies want their insureds to use their policies to take care of small issues like this so that they don't turn in to big issues later.

Now is your chance to back out of this. Your convoluted argument is not valid.

EDIT: In other words, the companies, for the most part, want to cover preventative care with a copay so that people don't avoid the doctor until they are dying and need hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care.

Don't count on that.   There was a time when men were men and they "rubbed dirt on it" when they were hurt.    They rode bicycles without helmets.   No seatbelts.   The world worked just fine.    Every tiny cut is not life-threatening.   Sometimes you can use a band-aid.  That's why they're still in business.
10/31/2012 6:59 AM (edited)
Posted by seamar_116 on 10/30/2012 6:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 10/30/2012 12:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by seamar_116 on 10/30/2012 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 10/29/2012 9:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/29/2012 7:57:00 PM (view original):
Then what's the solution? There is no private market for senior health insurance. It's not profitable at rates anyone can afford. If Medicare doesn't spend enough already, how do we afford Medicare?

ps - these are legitimate questions that I don't know the answers to, not some sort of set up for an argument.
I'm certainly in the minority when I say this.... but I'm for making health insurance more like every other insurance..... THERE FOR EMERGENCIES AND ACCIDENTS ONLY. Your auto insurance doesn't cover routine maintenance like tire rotations and oil changes, you do. Your home owners insurance doesn't cover a new furnace or replacement air filters, you do. Why does health care have to cover preventative visits, contraceptives, etc?.... it should be there for emergencies only. That would help ease the cost burden tremendously.

As far as preventative measures go.... I'd subsidize a salad so it's less expensive than McDonald's burgers. I'd spend money to educate parents that juice contains a ton of sugar which turns into fat.... it's not as healthy as you think it is for your child. We have a tremendous health problem from the growing obesity in this country at every grade level into adulthood. That's the real problem imo.
Moy,

The reason it makes sense to cover preventative medicine is because is is much cheaper to provide well care, than it is sick care. Think how much better off we are when dental care insurance started covering preventative things like cleanings, and sealants? Cavities are almost non-existent for a generation of kids who have had proper dental care.

Finding out about health problems when they can more easily be addressed is far less expensive that waiting until a problem someone has the stroke or heart attack or outward signs of cancer, etc.
while I don't disagree in theory about preventative care.... the problem is most Americans are not doing anything to prevent themselves from increasing their own health risks....Why should I have to pay, or an insurance company, for an increasingly obese population and/or smokers? all the preventative healthcare in the world will not reduce the longterm risks these people bring on themselves.
Moy,

I certainly agree about the personal responsibility angle. With auto insurance, your rates are based in part on your driving history, so a bad driver pays more. But health insurance to some extent is different, because there are factors that are outside individual control, like gender and genetics. Smokers should pay more, that's a choice. Excessive drinkers, should pay more...but who sets the line? Same thing with weight.

But the ability to see a doctor when necessary should not hinge on what job you have or how wealthy you are, should it? And if a person does have a health history beyond one's control should that mean that someone can never change jobs?
read up on the healthcare system in Singapore. it's a hybrid universal/individual health savings accounts system where everyone benefits from varying degrees of government subsidies, but where the government does not pay for routine checkups (I.e. the little things). that said it allows for families to have healthcare accounts on there own funded with their own payroll income.... and it plays nice with the private sector too. there are government hospitals in Singapore as well.... run to be as efficient as the private hospitals.... it's really interesting what they have accomplished there and still rank near the top in overall healthcare worldwide.
10/31/2012 1:02 AM
Moy,

Thanks for the info...I will check on that. I have several students from Singapore. I hope to get down there soon...only about 4 hours away.
10/31/2012 8:51 AM
Doctors are incentivized to perform as many procedures to the uneducated consumer as they can.

This is part of what's wrong with the way things are currently run. Doctors SHOULD be recommending only those procedures which are medically necessary, which means they should NOT be paid based on the number of procedures they do or recommend. This is something that needs fixed.
Or the government steps in and pays for your heart surgery, your chemo, your hip replacement, your diabetes medicine, etc. Which is the worst case scenario.
Death is always the worst case scenario, at least for the person involved. This is why costs shouldn't even be considered in medicine for the purposes of making those decisions.

There was a time when men were men and they "rubbed dirt on it" when they were hurt.    They rode bicycles without helmets.   No seatbelts.   The world worked just fine.
To say "the world worked just fine" is incredibly myopic. Life was more dangerous as a result of many decisions, some of which you list here. You can choose to ignore that fact, but it doesn't make it any less true. Sure, health care costs less when you don't get any, but that's making an obvious statement in an effort at missing the forest for the trees.
 
 
of 18
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Real Opinions? Who Do You Vote For And Why?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.