Thomas wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:I don't much care for denying Insurers the ability to charge more for poorer medical histories. How does that make any sense? A person who eats sensibly, exercises and takes better care of themselves deserves to pay for supersize smoking alcoholics? I don't think so.
If you were running for president, Bill, how would you handle Bipolar Bear's epilleptic son? He has a
Grand Mal seizure about once a week, and it's only for a kilobuck a month of medicine that he doesn't get them once an hour and hasn't died from one yet. This is a birth defect. BiPolarCub did nothing to bring this onto himself.
You seem to be against obliging insurance companies to insure him at an affordable rate. So tell me, do you think the social safety net should support people like him, whether or not they can pay for it? And if yes, how would a president Occom Bill finance this category of cases?
The impression I got from Obama's plan is that it would force Private Insurers to ignore histories. Why is that necessary if there is to be a federally guaranteed alternative? Of course the boy should be covered; but I don't see where it's necessary to cover him at the expense of punishing the poor guy next door who takes exceptionally good care of himself; thereby reducing the chances of his own health care being much of an issue.
Pay for it? I favor an increase in Death Taxes in general; simply because I'd rather pay a bigger chunk of my own obligation
after I die. This is both progressive, and rewards the healthy lifestyle; since the longer you live; the longer before you pay. Secondly; Alcohol and Tobacco are always ripe for a tax increase, and I can ill imagine a fairer source to get the dough to pay for healthcare... since the more of these products one consumes; the more likely he is to be an expensive health risk. Frankly; I think it would be a good idea to add Sugar to the list; as I believe it to be a leading cause of crappy health. Lastly; it seems to me that even an increase in the percentage SS taken out of Income would at least be somewhat progressive in reducing the burden on the poor. Straight increases on healthcare insurance across the board make the least sense to me of all.
I don't like the idea of giving people a free pass to destroy their health with wanton disregard for the cost, nor do I think it's fair that more conscientious people should pick up the tab for their (
my)excesses. If we're aiming for a personal mandate, with government guarantees, than I think it is only fair to attempt to tax the sources of health destroyers both to discourage unhealthy behavior and maintain some level of personal accountability.
