Of course a rote analysis would show tremendous cost savings to just denying everyone health care or insurance coverage after the age of ___, if all you are counting is the dollars spent to extend life versus the economic productivity measured as annual income over the years that person's life was extended.
The glaring and obvious problem with such a naive analysis is the associated costs to society of actually implementing such a program.
We can conclude that smokers aren't exerting a net direct cost to the health care system due to their smoking, while simultaneously concluding that it's in the interest of public health and overall society to reduce smoking. Just don't tell me you're doing it as a cost saving measure!
The glaring and obvious problem with such a naive analysis is the associated costs to society of actually implementing such a program.
We can conclude that smokers aren't exerting a net direct cost to the health care system due to their smoking, while simultaneously concluding that it's in the interest of public health and overall society to reduce smoking. Just don't tell me you're doing it as a cost saving measure!
reply