Which kinda baffles me, as the no.1 argument by the pro UHC crowd is that people who have pre-existing conditions cannot obtain coverage. I find it amazingly full of **** that there are regulations that pertain to obesity and smoking. Most likely, obese & smokers or both, are a rather large segment of our society. It would probably be more exclusionary than the pre existing conditions crowd in terms of sheer numbers.
I don't really fall into the extremes of the pro-uhc or anti-uhc crowds. My point of view on this I guess represents a "third way".
Right now, if you have cancer through no fault of your own or if you are born with a genetic condition, it can be very difficult for you to obtain health coverage because of the financial risk you present to insurers.
However, if you take terrible care of yourself and are significantly obese, more than likely you will be able to still obtain insurance coverage for the same rate that a fit individual pays that exercises regularly and eats right despite the fact that you will statistically cost far more in health care than a fit individual will. The same is true with Medicare, your taxes to pay for it are the same and your rates are the same.
Do away with that ability for people that make poor life choices regarding their health to externalize those costs to others and you will go a long way towards curbing health care costs for everyone.
A perfect example of how ridiculous the current system is are those scooters they advertise for old people. You know the ones where otherwise healthy looking seniors are shown riding around in their electric scooter and the commercials tell about how they can get Medicare to pick up the whole cost for it -
First off, I have never known a doctor to tell anyone not to walk if at all possible. Even if you have significant arthritis or heart failure, they still want you walking as much as you can.
Secondly, I have never seen anyone in one of those scooters that was not either so fat that their ass hung 3 feet off of each side of the seat, or was not a smoker with emphysema.
So basically we have a system now where taxpayers are buying electric scooters for chain smokers and fat asses while a breast cancer survivor gets denied coverage and has to be absolutely financially destitute before she can qualify for public assistance.
If health care reforms don't address that, and none of them are that either side is proposing, then what is the point? We are not going to curb costs and address the moral dilemma of the uninsured and underinsured until we start allowing Medicare, Private Insurers, and Employers offering group plans to charge individuals premiums that reflect the actual costs of the risks of their poor life choices in regards to their personal health. Of course, in a country where nearly half the population is obese, that's not probably not going to happen. Instead we will get more of what we have now, fat asses on disability and loony seniors on Medicare shouting down cancer survivors and muscular dystrophy patients yelling at them "why should I have to pay for your health care" - as if the rest of us don't pay for theirs.
