Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Article: "Obese employees cost their companies more than twice as much as healthy-weight employees"

Obviously, the fact employers are measuring this in the first place opens an avenue for discrimination in hiring practices--another reason I don't think healthcare coverage should be in employers' hands but a public good like in every other developed nation. I'm sure they make the same often unspoken calculations for older and disabled employees too:


  • Not surprised to see this since some companies won't hire smokers. Of course, healthcare coverage as a public good would eliminate all these practices. But since we're an "exceptional" nation, we're the only OECD nation that doesn't make available universal coverage !
  • edited November 2021
    Tax the calorie count !
  • Howdy,

    Tough issue. Years ago, I ran restaurants for a few years. I liked Tall people. They could reach further and get further with less steps. @carew388 mentioned smokers. How about Delta charging their unvaccinated employees $200 per month to cover their medical costs.

    As for universal health, we should have both universal health care AND universal education. That is only if you want capitalism to work. For it to work you must have competition and handicapping some percentage of your population with either inadequate health care or education is not competitive but a rigged game. Good Lord, it's so bad we have to import educated workers. What we have is hardly capitalism but rather a form of neo-feudal economic slavery.

    That said, the costs associated with unhealthy employees are much more than just the medical bill. How about time off? Infecting your coworkers?

    and it goes,

    peace and wear the damn mask,

  • The goal should be to promote better health and education. Free health care and free education does not equate to healthier smarter people. Lifestyles need to change.
  • edited December 2021
    Free health care and free education does not equate to healthier smarter people.
    Except study after study shows that public healthcare does lead to healthier people, that in every other developed nation that offers public healthcare citizens have longer average life expectancies and spend less per capita on healthcare than we do. In fact, that healthcare can affect their lifestyles as because it is public, doctors and patients can practice preventive medicine.

  • +1 Lewis And worse to me is that we're the only developed nation, outliers really, that's having this silly non-productive discussion. Citizens in other nations wouldn't tolerate threats to their health insurance coverage-only here in Outlier Nation !
  • I have no problem with public health care. It will likely give obese, drug abusing, tobacco using, sedentary people a bit more access to treatment. Actually, study after study shows changing these lifestyles, which the USA is famous for, will do exponentially more for the USA health statistics than just public health. If the system can change lifestyles I'm in.
Sign In or Register to comment.