If it is being paid for by tax payers there is a good argument I think.
Why should I pay for someone's health care when they are making conscience decisions to make their health worse without my say in it.
So why don't we deny coverage for people who do risky things like Ski or bungee jump when they get hurt?
We shouldn't. But coverage for health care covering "risky" behaviors should COST more.
Just as Automobile insurance costs more the more claims or accidents you have.
That said, I believe INSURANCE is what fucked up the health care system in the first place and caused the cost of health care to become unaffordable. Insurance schemes allows the cost of a commodity to exceed the free market controlled price of that same commodity....thereby providing a massive pool of funds to be regulated and delegated...among wealthy CEO's and politicians that work with them.
Actual insurance works that way. Insurance adjusters set the premium for a given person based on how much risk there is that they'll need health care. The problem is "group insurance".
Yeah right. Your "Actual Insurance" is exactly WHY health care is unaffordable and bankrupting so many Americans today.
??? Actual insurance works fine. Group insurance is what destroys markets.
Except that you fail to understand or explain the basis for the "PREMIUM". Who determines the Premium, how is it calculated, is it the most efficient vehicle to get the patients available resources towards the necessary treatment and does it have the best interest of the person in need of the service in mind? And how much of the premium is simply padding for deep pockets?
ALL these things are government REGULATED, and government is NEVER the most efficient handler.
It's like justifying taxation by saying "things have to be paid for", with no analysis of the actual costs or why and then expecting there to be no waste of tax payer funds and no abuse of that massive pool of money. Gee, that never happens
I can't say I really understand your argument at all.