From: jbugden@smtplink.alis.ca
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 10:03:32 +0800
To: Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
Subject: RE: Risk v. Charity (was: RE: Workers Paradise. /Politica...
Message-ID: <9608178430.AA843010044@smtplink.alis.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li> wrote:
>On Tue, 17 Sep 1996 jbugden@smtplink.alis.ca wrote:
>> Black Unicorn <unicorn@schloss.li>
>> >You are saying that everyone on the planet has a right to health
>> > insurance and disability insurance whether they can afford it or not.
>> > This is folly.  The result is serious moral hazard problems.
>> 
>> Almost, but not quite. I'm saying that within our two countries at least
>> (Canada, U.S.) everyone could have access to medically necessary
>> procedures because the *society as a whole* can afford it.
>
>The decisions about what is or is not medically necessary must by
>design be made by government in a socialized medicine regime.

People do make decisions that affect other people. If you feel safer in the good
hands of Allstate than at the government trough, good for you.

Personally, I trust in Allah, but I still tie up my camel. 

> This evades an important point as well.  Namely, who cares if society
> can afford it?

Some things are seen as investments in the future of a society. I view both
Education and Health through this lens.

>> But there is a balance between accurately pricing the risk and
>> minimizing the cost of the bureacracy that polices this pricing. 
>
> Oh, I see.  Let's give the program to the government then.  Good idea.
> That will reduce the cost of the bureacracy.

The point is still valid. Are we not trying to minimize this cost?

>> There are also many ways to modify behaviour, not all of them direct. 
>
> And all of them buy into the notion that people are not to be made
> personally responsible for their high risk behavior.

There it is again. Blame the sick for their lack of moral fibre.

Not every victim of lung cancer smokes. Besides, people are notoriously poor at
evaluating the probability of unlikely events (see reference below). A
"punishment" that happens 30 years after the "crime" is no deterrent. Prevention
is usually cheaper than treatment. 

> I prefer market solutions.

I prefer solutions.
James