Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If we made everyone over 300lbs lose 100lbs, we’d also see those benefits.

Same if we limited the amount of cigarettes or alcohol people purchased.

Certainly the same if we enforced our drug laws around things like fentanyl (although ODing in a Waffle House parking lot at 32 might actually save the taxpayer some money in the long run).

 help



> If we made everyone over 300lbs lose 100lbs, we’d also see those benefits.

> Same if we limited the amount of cigarettes or alcohol people purchased.

We already attempt to do these things through public health campaigns and laws against the purchase of cigarettes/alcohol by minors.

You're actually making my point for me, because public interventions to reduce smoking have saved tens of millions of lives and many billions of dollars of taxpayer money.

> Certainly the same if we enforced our drug laws around things like fentanyl (although ODing in a Waffle House parking lot at 32 might actually save the taxpayer some money in the long run).

In what universe is the US not trying to enforce laws around fentanyl?


Sure, and I'm saying that under that same justification, we should extend the same requirements to these other public health crises that President Biden tried to create for COVID vaccination.

Federal worker? BMI needs to be below 30, because otherwise you're costing the system too much. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7990296/

Private sector business with 100 more employees? Nobody is allowed to smoke on premises because of the risk of second hand smoke, just like the OSHA justification for vaccination requirements.

>In what universe is the US not trying to enforce laws around fentanyl?

Oregon passed Measure 110, decriminalizing heroin, methamphetamine, and fentanyl, only backtracking because the policy was so bad. California has Prop 47, knocking possession down to misdemeanors on par with jaywalking. New York has safe injection sites, and I'm going to guess this isn't for safe injection of insulin.

Enforcement of laws around these drugs would mean arresting and prosecuting the flocks of fentanyl users bent over in Philly's Skid Row, SF's tenderloin, or basically all of Portland: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9372555/Philadelphi...


Your point being ? That we should not do anything unless we do everything with no exception (that's an absurd way to view things and not a counter argument whatsoever), or that those things should be done (which is probably true but doesn't change his point at all) ?

I'm agreeing that the current implementation of our public health system is a worst-of-all-worlds option.

Weigh 500lbs, don't work, and drink a six pack a day? You get free healthcare via Medicaid, making the taxpayer shoulder your burden.

Self-employed, 35, and can run a 7 minute mile, but broke a bone? Expect outrageous healthcare costs, deductibles, etc.

The current approach to public health is the epitome of a moral hazard.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: