Comparative Performance of American Health Care

baraka

farfromglorified wrote:

If you need me to clarify a premise, demand clarity. If you want to ignore premise though, that's different.

Uh ok, I demand clarity! See my 'premise' above.

farfromglorified wrote:

Is it that simple baraka? Are there not reasons that person only makes $25k per year, or is that just blind, irrelevant happenstance? Furthermore, is an insurance company denial just wrong by default? I mean, let's say you're an insurance company and I'm a 55 year old man who smokes, drinks, eats fried chicken everyday and has already had 2 heart bypass surgeries. Should you have to cover me, knowning full well that there's a 99.9% chance that I'm going to cost you thousands of times more than you can legally collect in premiums?

The reason is that the man's job only pays $25k a year. What are you getting at here?

And no, a denial is not wrong by default. But a lot of denials are 'wrong'. Your example of the unhealthy 55 year old man is not the case for all. I do feel the man in your example is responsible for his poor health and these factors should be considered. But then you have folks like sicnevol. He did not 'choose' his genetic predisposition.

farfromglorified wrote:

Yes, in part. I also mean that you cannot ignore the nature of the solution you're proposing either. The most effective way to "fix" the healthcare system would be through violent eugenics, but good premises would invalidate that as a solution.

:rolleyes: