a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by rthomas6
rthomas6  ·  2920 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: A New Policy Disagreement Between Clinton and Sanders: Soda Taxes

The way I look at it, lung cancer in smokers and obesity in the general population are both negative externalities because of the increased burden on our healthcare system. For people that do not have insurance or are on medicare (which is a significant portion of people), taxpayers and hospitals cover the cost of their poor decisions. There's the hidden cost right there. That's all a negative externality is: a hidden cost not reflected in the price of some good.





reguile  ·  2920 days ago  ·  link  ·  

This is why I said that insurance companies should be able to charge more for things like smoking (they can), and without insurance in the US you have to pay for your treatment anyways.

It is currently illegal in the US to not have insurance, so not being able to pay high costs shouldn't be a significant issue.

As well, It is well within the governments right to charge for medicaid if they wanted to punish smokers for smoking, or people for living unhealthy lifestyles. A tax is not needed.

rthomas6  ·  2920 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I understand your point, but it's not true that those without insurance in the US have to pay for their treatment. They owe money to the hospital that treated them, but they often don't pay it. Hospitals are not allowed to refuse service for emergency care. Additionally, while it is illegal in the US to not have insurance, the penalty is a small tax penalty, and the law doesn't stop a lot of people from still not owning insurance of some kind.

I do think insurance companies should be able to charge more for things than smoking, but I think, while maybe not needed, a tax would help the problem even more.