Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 54:21 — 24.9MB)
Stephanie and Mike talk about whatever issues or questions you have. This episode’s question(s):
I’m a long-time listener and I love the show.
As an anarchist living in NH for the free state project, I care deeply about liberty. I have noticed a troubling trend among many, perhaps a majority of free-staters I have met here in NH. Early movers to the FSP that I have met tend to be young and healthy, but I have noticed a great deal of self-destructive behavior, most prominently tobacco smoking. However, this question could refer to all types of self-destructive behaviors that specifically have long-term health consequences (obesity, smoking, drug abuse, uncontrolled medical conditions like high blood pressure, etc). I have no statistics to back up my observation, but it seems that the smoking rate among free-staters is much higher than in the general population
As someone who loves liberty, I believe people have a right to do whatever they want with their body, including destroying it. However, I also care about people’s health and I feel that most people engaging in these behaviors have no sense of the long-term consequences. I have seen the devastating consequences of long-term cigarette smoking, most notably lung disease (emphysema/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and cardiovascular disease which result in very poor quality of life and a very high level of health care (which is very costly). I suspect that most smokers know that it is bad for them but don’t understand that it sets them up for heart-attacks and severe lung disease requiring oxygen at home. After that painfullly long introduction, here is my question:
What will happen when young otherwise healthy liberty-minded smokers develop these diseases which require very expensive healthcare? Most of these individuals don’t have health savings set aside or health insurance, much less the long-term care insurance which would be necessary to pay for their end-of life care without using the government medical system. Is it cognitive dissonance which allows this, or do people just not think about the long-term consequences of their behaviors? I see this as problematic for individuals who wish to remain principled in terms of liberty but will eventually require care which they cannot afford due to their self-inflicted illnesses. I predict many of these individuals will end up utilizing medicare and/or medicaid out of necessity or will simply be unable to pay for their hospital bills, both of which run contrary to the principles of liberty. Perhaps you could have a guest on the show who is a smoker to explain their position on this issue. Thanks a lot for the show; keep up the good work.
- The anonymous hippopotamus
Disclaimer: take us with a grain of salt!
loading...
Porc Therapy is a pro-freedom relationship talk show that takes a unique look at the question of how we can attain the most individual liberty possible, starting with our personal lives and relationships with others. 
This question comes about only after government healthcare is legitimized. In other words, the questioner presents themselves like “dittos rush” to set off the show- so that they will not be attacked. But anyway, these people generally approve of government healthcare, “free” government healthcare, etc.
These people have been told that everyone else’s behaviours affect all- because it increases the cost of government health care (which they say is free right??) but obviously they know, actually costs. If the government “provides it” that means we are all taxed and if we allow others to have their “destructive” behaviour then they are raising our taxes- we should put them all in jail!!!
So apparently, people on welfare can’t help themselves, but since smokers can choose to not smoke- they are just abusing the system!
the real abuser is the system. If we were not all forced to pay for each others health care, etc, this would not even be an issue.
We need to get back to liberty and privacy, and mind your own damn business.
libertymatters
loading...
my remedy? (anticipating before someone says “how would you do it differently?)
1. No Group Heath care. The only “groups” are the pool of clients of each health insurer. Each insurance company decides the percentage of clients with high risk conditions they will take and operates accordingly. If they do not take on another high risk, then the customer uses a competitor.
2. Individual policies, like car insurance, but instead, offer policies with terms like life insurance- 10, 20, 30 years worth. Pre-existing conditions 6 to 18 months. Deductibles from $500 to $5000. Rates according to the choices on these limits for the insured.
3. Health Insurers use reinsurance to protect themselves in the case of large spikes of claims.
4. Insurers compete to lower the cost of surgeries to keep premium margins in check, because they compete for business between other insurance companies- holding down premiums – to something as affordable as car or home insurance.
5. Employers who wish to offer a competitive benefit at all, would simply pay for their valuable employees deductibles- a far less expensive prospect.
6. If you lose your job- your insurer offers a few months of additional coverage paid for by your several months of premiums, while you find your next job. If you are out of work longer, you work directly with treatment providers, pharma providers for assistance. All of this would cost less, because in an already competitive market, these prices are already held down. NO CARTELS.
So the point is: Would you rather have CARTELIZED HEALTH CARE?
libertymatters
loading...