What if mandatory health insurance could save lives?

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by ARDY, Dec 12, 2019.

  1. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I just came across this article about an accidental study
    Basically, the treasury department (irs) sent out a letter to people who paid a fine for not having health insurance. The letter explained how they could get insurance and encouraged them to do so. Unfortunately, for budgetary limitations, the letter did not go out to some people that it otherwise would have reached. Thus was created an accidental randomized study of the impact of these sorts of efforts

    https://apple.news/AjC9tvHqpSq26dfI7pQvEng

    As I understand it... the study found that for uninsured people between 44-64 who got insurance as a result of the letter... their death rate was 12% lower


    The subsequent research, published by Mr. Goldin with the Treasury economists Ithai Lurie and Janet McCubbin, found that gaining coverage was associated with a 12 percent decline in mortality over the two-year study period (the first months of coverage seemed to be most important, presumably because people could get caught up on various appointments and treatments they might have been missing).
    for the moment let’s assume thus study is correct that a government policy such as requiring health insurance could reduce the death rate. Would that be a legitimate undertaking of our government. Would such an effort be different than, for example, air pollution reduction regulations, car safety regulations, or FAA AIRLINE regulations which are also aimed to reduce death rates?
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2019
  2. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    13,414
    Likes Received:
    8,980
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't see it as governments role to protect people from their own will.

    I support education campaigns (such as the one that resulted in these findings), but the individual should always have a choice.
     
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2019
    FatBack, roorooroo and Idahojunebug77 like this.
  3. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i do not want to put words in your mouth but only seek to clarify

    would you think people should not be required to wear motorcycle helmets
    People should be able to use any drug
    The faa should be eliminated
    Airbags and seat belts should only be optional equipment
    Pollution regulations should be eliminated in favor of a law suit approach
    There should be no regulation of food safety or additives
    Medical Drugs should no longer be tested
    Doctors should not require certification
    All Highways should be built as private toll roads
    Fire departments should be privatized
    Etc
     
  4. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    13,414
    Likes Received:
    8,980
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Helmets/airbags/seatbelts should not be a requirement of the state. A company offering auto insurance would certainly be responsible in contractually requiring helmet/airbag/seatbelt use of its customers.

    People already use any drug. How is it helping them by throwing them in jail for it? The war on drugs is a debacle.

    The FAA is primarily involved in protecting people from other people (in aircraft), which is in most cases a legitimate function of government.
    -same for pollution regs, food and additives safety regs, medicine regs

    It should not be a crime to practice medicine without a license if you aren't hurting others. Laws barring the use of certain procedures or drugs on others without proper training (or perhaps without clearly disclosing a lack of proper training) are justified and appropriate in the interest of protecting people from other people.

    Not sure where you're going with the highways and fire depts... I only said I don't see it as governments role to protect people from their own will.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2019
    roorooroo likes this.
  5. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    NATIONAL PRIORITIES AND THE NATION'S DISCRETIONARY-BUDGET EXPENDITURES

    Life-span by OECD-country graphic is here: Life expectancy at birth

    You will note from the graphic that for the US it is presently at a 78.6 years (datapoint date is 76.1 for men and 51.1 for women). Also note the countries are in the highest range - from 81.4 and 83.6 at the upper end for a variety of EU-countries. And what do we learn from those observations?

    That lifespan is very largely a matter of healthcare - and in that upper range the countries noted all maintain a National Healthcare System. ALL OF THEM!

    Just what does it take to wake-up Americans to the Great Waste that is made when the Discretionary Budget allocates 55% of its total to the DoD. The budget for Health and Human Services is the same as that for the Veterans Affairs (at 7%).
    [​IMG]

    Now who thinks that the above chart is an indication of how badly we have set our National Priorities? And who saves more American lives, the DoD or Health Care?
     
  6. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    FURTHERMORE

    As I never tire of saying - the National Budget reflects national priorities. A vote for the Replicants is a vote for the DoD - where a good portion of the above pictured budget goes to companies providing "services" to that single entity;

    Far more important, boyz-'n-girlz, is who pays for what medical-expenses in France (from here):


    Yes, my income taxation here in France is likely higher than in the US for the same income bracket. But, does that fact make me the "loser" in the game of Health-care?

    Nope ... !
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2019
  7. william kurps

    william kurps Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2019
    Messages:
    5,041
    Likes Received:
    1,868
    Trophy Points:
    113

    How did getting a letter and paying $500 bucks a month with a $8,0000 deductible save anyones life?


    It's not health insurance, the article is ridiculous propaganda.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2019
  8. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I anticipated such a response..., and so I posed the question as “what if..”
     
  9. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If mandatory medical insurance saved all lives, including mine, it still would not be worth it.
    Give me liberty or give me death.
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  10. Idahojunebug77

    Idahojunebug77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mandatory health insurance will never save lives. The best of healthcare can only postpone death for a short time. Is it really worth our tax dollars to keep a near invalid alive given their lack of contribution to society?
     
  11. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not "healthcare"; it's medical care. Don't think for a second that just because you have medical insurance that you have healthcare. If people put even a fraction of the time and money that they put into medical insurance into actual healthcare, they wouldn't need so much medical care. I personally know people who sacrifice diet, exercise and rest (healthcare) to maintain medical insurance.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2020
  12. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    LIFESPAN AGES

    Really quite wrong. Meaning "dead wrong"!

    National Healthcare Systems in European nations have shown clearly by means of average lifespan-ages many years longer than the US at 79! (See OECD chart here.)

    Note that European averages are around 82.5 years! Now, what do you think is the reason for that difference. First and foremost, it is the fact that the EU employs National Healthcare Systems. Which means what?

    That people get the Much-Lower-Cost healthcare attention throughout their lifespan. Yes, GPs in Europe do not earn $210K a year as they do in the US!

    Moreover, the quality of healthcare is equal to that of the US, which is very, very good. The problem being that not enough Americans take advantage of it because it is too damn expensive!

    Private healthcare systems offered to employees are very expensive. And how is that cost recuperated? Companies that provide the insurance to their people add the HC-cost to total costs and recuperate them from their sales.

    Which means this: If you do not have private healthcare insurance, you are still paying for it (on behalf of somebody else) when you go shopping! Sucker!

    Moreover, America's cost per person of healthcare is STUPENDOUS compared to elsewhere. (No wonder Indian doctors - educated for free - are trying to make it into the US! See here:
    [​IMG]

    (As the saying goes: Eat your heart out! Or move to Canada where costs are only half as much ... ;^)
     
  13. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Show us any OTHER REFERENCE (other than Apple) publicized of what was proposed!

    The US government provides healthcare ONLY to those working for it ...
     
  14. Idahojunebug77

    Idahojunebug77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's silly, I am not wrong, eventually even Europeans will die. A few years one way or the other hardly seems worth all the anxiety.

    I have never understood the obsession with living longer just to be wheeled around the cafeteria at the retirement center. Quality of life while young would seem to be a much better measure than longevity.
     
  15. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
  16. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yes, quality of life. Imo that includes the fact that in the USA (for many people with health issues) there is a pervasive anxiety about health care expenses; an anxiety rudely muscles its way into the final years

    https://www.mdedge.com/psychiatry/article/55272/relieving-health-care-cost-anxiety
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2020
  17. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks. The first sentence in that article says it all:
    The Replicants cannot get it through their thick skulls that the reason the average lifespan in Europe is 3/4 years longer than the US is that National Healthcare systems provide the means for sustaining good health.

    Yes, Europe has a healthcare problem that began when I set foot in France and discovered (quite by accident) the first "McDonalds" on the Champs Elysees - downstairs of a shopping building almost hidden. It soon overwhelmed France in only two years.

    To wit the French have a weight-problem nowadays and TV is full of ads of how supposedly to handle it. Useless all of them. Stop eating so much and start excercising! - that's the best advice ...
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2020
  18. StarFox

    StarFox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,518
    Likes Received:
    1,784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Here is a question, what if madatory health insurance killed people?


    You see we heard a lot from democrats how republicans wanted to kill people by not backing Obamacare. But the ACA raised premiums 200 to 300% raised the out of pocket 300% and caused the average family to pay ungodly prices for health insurance that they could not afford to use because they went from an average deductible of $1000 to $4500 and an out of pocket expense of $3000 to $7150 (mandated by law) so now the incentive is to NOT seek care but stay home because your mandated insurance was worthless for the most part. That is what getting the government involved will do to ya.
     
  19. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    38,501
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Compared to national health care, it does. Strange question...
     
  20. Idahojunebug77

    Idahojunebug77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    113
    National healthcare is mandatory healthcare insurance. Did you think the people would not be required to pay for national health care with higher taxes?
     
    Collateral Damage likes this.
  21. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    38,501
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    Trophy Points:
    113
    National health care is not insurance. It is provision that allows for efficiency gains through aspects such as economies of scale.
     
  22. Idahojunebug77

    Idahojunebug77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    113
    National health care is insurance. The state ensures one will receive some level of health care in exchange for higher taxes. A taxpayer will be taxed inspite of their need for healthcare. The state will have the same incentives to reduce expenditures as a private insurance company.
     
  23. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    8,176
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    HEALTHCARE IS ALL ABOUT LIFESPAN

    Here in Europe, if mandatory National Health Insurance (supposedly) kills people, then the government investigates and a charge is made against the practice involved.

    Just like in the US ...

    The Replicants will say ANYTHING to keep privatized medicine private. Whyzzat? Because the salaries are Very Juicy!

    Your GP in the US earns more than $210K a year. See BLS data here: May 2018 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates - in the list seek item
    "29-1062 Family and General Practitioners" - then note the average income of $211,780

    A GP in Europe working for the National Health Services would be lucky to make half that amount - and if they do make that amount shown, then they likely have a Private Practice and apply fees as they see fit.

    Furthermore, and the most important aspect of Healthcare is "lifespan". In Europe the average overall lifespan in around 81/82 years. In the US, lifespan was reduced one year due to the opioids scandal and is now around 78.

    We Yanks living here in Europe under National Healthcare will more than likely live 3/4 years longer than you-plural in the US! (See that fact visually shown here: World Maps of Life Expectancy )
     
  24. Reiver

    Reiver Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    38,501
    Likes Received:
    1,694
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it isn't and repeating that error won't wash. National Health Care refers to direct provision, free at point of access. The NHS is a key example, such that public health became the biggest employer. Insurance will typically maintain privatised provision and therefore continue private sector inefficiencies.
     
  25. Idahojunebug77

    Idahojunebug77 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    535
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A rhetorical question, if a brit chooses not to buy private insurance are they still covered by NHS?
     

Share This Page