Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny
There are always those eager to take away freedoms that do not affect them. The whole concept of insurance is shared risk. How would you like to pay for health insurance based on your diet, amount of exercise and prior health problems? Be careful of what you wish for because you may get it. I can say that based on the lack of driving skills I see every day around TV, many should be paying much more for auto insurance. Why should I subsidize their accidents since I am a good driver who never had an accident? Why should young people pay into Social Security when they may not be alive to collect? Your thinking leads down a very slippery slope indeed.
|
Freedoms can also be taken away through taxation. And there are always those who are eager to take someone elses money because it doesn't affect them. Those who are taxed, lose the freedom to spend their money as they choose.
This is not about insurance. Those who get the free bypass operations etc. are those who can't afford it and don't have insurance.
You talked about subsidizing accidents and you're right about that. If someone gets into an accident their insurance goes up. And yours might go up a little too. But why should I subsidize someones bypass operation when it's related to being overweight or obese?
The slippery slope also applies to taxing one person to pay for the bypass of another. And it's not about Social Security, fire insurance or car insurance. This is about New York City protecting itself from fiscal ruination. When it sees an epidemic such as obesity, it has a right, on behalf of taxpayers, to take some defensive measures. And it all started many years ago when New York City had some very serious fiscal problems. There's a limit to how many bypass operations New York City can give away for free.