Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mlodj

The 2020 Corona Thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, DiPros said:

I try not to get into these discussions.  While I totally get what vikas is saying, why reward folks that made bad choices with getting vaccinated before someone else?  But the thing is, it is their choice to make.  Or  do we just eliminate fast food, soda, alcohol, and tobacco  and all things that are so bad for us?   Good luck with that.

Those aren't the choices. People are free to make whatever choices they want. But then let United Healthcare charge fat people and smokers more, since they will have greater health needs. Let auto insurers charge more to cover an alcoholic. Let the free market function. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

It's part of a longer term discussion regarding incentive structures. You are actively punishing people who have made responsible choices and rewarding people who have been lazy and irresponsible. This only guarantees that you will get more and more irresponsible, lazy and stupid people overall. It's akin to giving people on welfare more money for having another kid -- so we are going to incentivize people who already can't afford to raise their kids to have..checks notes...more kids. 

Insurance companies should be allowed to charge overweight people and smokers more in premiums. Create consequences for bad behavior, not rewards. 

It's kind of hard to game this out like you would with welfare or insurance premiums, since the pandemic is a one-time thing.  I get your perspective on it, but I'm not sure if it applies since (hopefully) this will be the only pandemic these people live through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

Why not just admit that Sweden’s approach has been a failure?  I don’t get it...

I promised another poster to explain the rationale behind the strategy.  I wasn't intending to defend it.  As I said in my opinion, I think they got the strategy mostly right but failed on the execution and in at least the key nursing home area they failed miserably.  So for sure there was a large failure there.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

It's part of a longer term discussion regarding incentive structures. You are actively punishing people who have made responsible choices and rewarding people who have been lazy and irresponsible. This only guarantees that you will get more and more irresponsible, lazy and stupid people overall. It's akin to giving people on welfare more money for having another kid -- so we are going to incentivize people who already can't afford to raise their kids to have..checks notes...more kids. 

Insurance companies should be allowed to charge overweight people and smokers more in premiums. Create consequences for bad behavior, not rewards. 

This I believe could work.  I do pay higher premium for life insurance since I cannot stay smoke free for an entire year, which is when you are considered QUIT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

It's part of a longer term discussion regarding incentive structures. You are actively punishing people who have made responsible choices and rewarding people who have been lazy and irresponsible. This only guarantees that you will get more and more irresponsible, lazy and stupid people overall. It's akin to giving people on welfare more money for having another kid -- so we are going to incentivize people who already can't afford to raise their kids to have..checks notes...more kids. 

Insurance companies should be allowed to charge overweight people and smokers more in premiums. Create consequences for bad behavior, not rewards. 

Yeah but I think it's a different comparison. On one hand you're talking about mitigating the spread of a 100 year pandemic. On the other you're talking about general health and well being. You could make the case to behave differently in one than the other. I generally agree with not rewarding bad behavior, but in this circumstance it's a little different I'd say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VanHammersly said:

It's kind of hard to game this out like you would with welfare or insurance premiums, since the pandemic is a one-time thing.  I get your perspective on it, but I'm not sure if it applies since (hopefully) this will be the only pandemic these people live through.

So then we just act like their will be consequences for bad life decisions until there are actual consequences? So we are the parent that keeps threatening to take away the iPad, but then never follows through. That works out well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DiPros said:

This I believe could work.  I do pay higher premium for life insurance since I cannot stay smoke free for an entire year, which is when you are considered QUIT

And that's your choice to make, which I fully support. I used to smoke too. And I should have been charged more for health insurance because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DiPros said:

Thank you!   Sent this info to my daughter.  She's an educator and will be up next even before me, so I can't say I did it so can you!

She's just afraid of it I think, so thank you for especially for the Emily Oster article that explains how the mRna works.

Of course!  Emily Oster is a personal favorite of mine.  She has some videos out there as well if that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

And that's your choice to make, which I fully support. I used to smoke too. And I should have been charged more for health insurance because of it.

People who pay premiums and never file a claim, yes I feel they should be rewarded.  I think one auto insurer does this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vikas83 said:

And that's your choice to make, which I fully support. I used to smoke too. And I should have been charged more for health insurance because of it.

This is the classic topic of where one can draw the lines. Of course one could assert that there shouldn't be any lines at all.

For example, in the car insurance market females used to get lower rates because they were females.  I'm not sure if that is still ok in the US.  If one gender/race/age/whatever has a lesser need for health care should the cost for them be less for any variable or is there a set of variables which cannot be used to set price?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DiPros said:

This I believe could work.  I do pay higher premium for life insurance since I cannot stay smoke free for an entire year, which is when you are considered QUIT

at my current & previous employers, smokers do pay a higher premium for health insurance. the previous employer even had a smoking cessation plan to help ee's get off the cigs. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DrPhilly said:

This is the classic topic of where one can draw the lines. Of course one could assert that there shouldn't be any lines at all.

For example, in the car insurance market females used to get lower rates because they were females.  I'm not sure if that is still ok in the US.  If one gender/race/age/whatever has a lesser need for health care should the cost for them be less for any variable or is there a set of variables which cannot be used to set price?

I am fine with no line, but that won't work. IMO, race shouldn't be a factor, despite the fact that there are differences. Gender is fair game, however, and does impact health insurance premiums. Men don't get pregnant, and women of child bearing age pay more. Age should 100% be fair game -- older people should pay more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vikas83 said:

I am fine with no line, but that won't work. IMO, race shouldn't be a factor, despite the fact that there are differences. Gender is fair game, however, and does impact health insurance premiums. Men don't get pregnant, and women of child bearing age pay more. Age should 100% be fair game -- older people should pay more.

Why should gender be a factor but not race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

So then we just act like their will be consequences for bad life decisions until there are actual consequences? So we are the parent that keeps threatening to take away the iPad, but then never follows through. That works out well.

Like I said, I get where you coming from, but I'm just not sure if it applies to this particular event.  If the message is that you can be unhealthy and you'll live through a once-in-a-century pandemic, then I'm not sure it really matters that that lesson will be learned, since it'll never happen to them again.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Why should gender be a factor but not race?

I have no problem with race being a factor, as I wrote. I am just accepting the political reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

auto insurance companies use statistical analysis of claims to formulate their premiums, no?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

You don't seem to understand that explaining the why/how about something isn't the same thing as defending it.

Should Sweden have mandated masks in all indoor public spaces before October?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Like I said, I get where you coming from, but I'm just not sure if it applies to this particular event.  If the message is that you can be unhealthy and you'll live through a once-in-a-century pandemic, then I'm not sure it really matters that that lesson will be learned, since it'll never happen to them again.  

Anyone else surprised Van is pushing back hard on Vikas's idea that fat people should pay more for health insurance? 

Me neither. :roll: 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

auto insurance companies use statistical analysis of claims to formulate their premiums, no?  

Yes, which is why younger males pay more. Health insurance companies do much less of it. But the biggest factor for health insurers is obesity, which they don't take into account. There should be an obesity surcharge.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kz! said:

Anyone else surprised Van is pushing back hard on Vikas's idea that fat people should pay more for health insurance? 

Me neither. :roll: 

 

giphy-2.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kz! said:

Anyone else surprised Van is pushing back hard on Vikas's idea that fat people should pay more for health insurance? 

Me neither. :roll: 

First round of vaccines - healthcare and frontline workers

Second round of vaccines - those that get winded climbing a set of stairs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

This is legitimately insane. Let's prioritize those that have made poor life choices and taken no responsibility for their health. This ties into the discussion on entitlements -- when you remove people from the consequences of their bad decisions, you get more bad decisions. This is even worse -- let's REWARD people for being irresponsible. 

 

#FATLIVESMATTER

I take it your polos aren't XXXL.  :roll:

I've established that since I'm a middle-aged white guy who is in good health and not a front line worker I'm last in line to get the vaccine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I have no problem with race being a factor, as I wrote. I am just accepting the political reality.

Ok, right.  Gender will be ok politically if males have to pay more but I don't think it will be accepted if females or other have to pay more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Yes, which is why younger males pay more. Health insurance companies do much less of it. But the biggest factor for health insurers is obesity, which they don't take into account. There should be an obesity surcharge.

agreed. it should work the same way as auto insurance. how obese are we talking though?  :unsure:  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Ok, right.  Gender will be ok politically if males have to pay more but I don't think it will be accepted if females or other have to pay more.

You really struggle with reading comprehension. I already wrote that women do pay more when they are of child bearing age. People accept it because it has always been that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...