Health Care winners and Losers

People on the left of our political spectrum believe they get to pick winners and losers. Case in point, The Urban Institute believes we should tax food as has been done with done with tobacco and alcohol. They go on about the obesity epidemic causing increases in health care costs. I for one do not argue with the concept that we must combat obesity. I have struggled with this my entire life. Taxing certain foods simply won't do it.

If you want obese people to respond financially there are things that can be done within the private sector. The congressional health care overhaul bill bans refusing health care coverage for pre-existing conditions. This takes away any consequences for unhealthy behavior. I have been for most of my adult life around 300 pounds and now have diabetes and a heart disease risk in my family. I pay the same premium for health care insurance that my co-workers do even though most of them are slim and healthy. If my rates were based on my life circumstances I would be forced to take a harder look at my behaviors. As I get older I might even be refused coverage. I have been struggling to get healthier, if my health care costs went up astronomically I might be forced to get much more serious about it. Additional taxes on soda, doughnuts etc., not even close. To change the insurance market though government would have to rescind a good many mandates that are in place today. One size fits all insurance allows unhealthy behaviors to go on with no consequences as most left wing ideas do. Additionally if we add taxes to selected foods (no chance of that list being arbitrary based on political contributions at all is there?) we will also be taxes healthy people for the same foods. That doesn't seem fair to me. Who gets to decide what is unhealthy. The Adkins diet considers carbs unhealthy. Tax on pineapple. Other diets urge low fats. Olive oil anyone? Ok you say we would never tax those foods, they are healthy foods. The question is who gets to decide? Some smart person that works for the government. Once again they believe they know more than us.

While we in the taxing mood though, risky sexual behaviors cause huge medical costs (government coverage for children of single mothers, sexually transmitted diseases, long term care of HIV and AIDS). Maybe we can find a way to tax them as well. People who jump out of airplanes for pleasure have higher accident incidents than normal. Should we tax this? People who ice skate may have higher accident occurrences. (I broke my ankle a few years back). Tax them as well? Where does it end?

Government cannot be trusted to decide who is a winner and who is a loser. There is no way to remove human nature from the equation. Whoever goes on the committee will have a bias as to what is unhealthy and what is healthy. Using government to try to make people be healthy is like using a sledge hammer to drive a finishing nail. They can only impose broad based solutions. It cannot be successful. Real reform would actual let the market impose outcomes based on real life circumstances, not who has the best lobbyists.