CDR: Re: why should it be trusted?

[Sampo A Syreeni]

On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote:

>>Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the
>>society?
>
>That's a nice belief. Can you show it to be true?

In a society where a significant part of an individual's life is spent
nonproductively and high productivity generally means high education and
learned skills, extension of the individual's life significantly beyond the
time required to learn these skills is a must in order for the average
individual to break even with the cost of education and upbringing. Of
course, this perhaps does not imply care of the elderly. This is not at
issue here.

>>This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue
>>insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless
>>maintain a public health insurance infrastructure.
>
>Rather, I would say that individuals should be able to decide on
>the level of health care that they are willing to pay for.

Quite. I argue that should hold beyond their individual capability to pay
for the care.

>>Following the same line
>>of reasoning, it is beneficial for the society as a whole (whether through
>>the government or through concerted action of individuals) to pressure any
>>insurer to comply with this general goal.
>
>Even if I conceded your premise (which I don't), I certainly don't believe that
>this is true.

How is this? If the premise holds, it is beneficial to make health care
ubiquitously available. This cannot be achieved if some people are allowed
to opt out of the gamble.

>This is basically equivalent to "the end justifies the means".

Which is pretty much what I'm after.

>How do you feel about forced sterilizations of mental patients and
>other "undesirables"? Society would benefit by not having them reproduce.

It is far more effective to not put money into their sustenance early on.

>>I think this can be accomplished without the Men with Guns as well.
>And now you've completely lost me.
>How would you compel people to pay taxes without a threat of violence?

By making sure the people are completely dependent on the state, probably
through some pretty unfair engineering of contracts you cannot avoid if you
are to stay alive.

Sampo Syreeni <decoy at iki.fi>, aka decoy, student/math/Helsinki university