After backing it up with expert opinion, Scott Lemieux makes the commonsense response to the argument that giving people health insurance creates moral hazard:
The thing is, being healthy is its own powerful incentive.Maybe I'm unusual, but even though I have decent health insurance Idon't actually enjoy being sick, bedridden, in physical pain, spendingtime in doctor's offices, etc. Do people really think it's common --even subconsciously -- for someone with a relatively healthy lifestyleto get health insurance and see that as an opportunity to go on thatall Popeye's, deep-fried HoHos, and Cutty Sark diet they've beenhankering for? I don't understand this reasoning at all. There may beroom for some minor disincentives at the margin, but the idea thatuniversal healthcare won't work because the possibility of beingbankrupted by medical bills is the major incentive people have to behealthy is bizarre.
The fact that insurance will cover your tracheotomy doesn't make smoking more appealing. When people with the means to do otherwise persist in unhealthy lifestyles, it's usually because they're pursuing some minor present satisfaction at the expense of what they acknowledge as a greater future good. It's among the most common forms of human irrationality, and it's something that public policy has to deal with in a lot of areas. You're not going to change their behavior by throwing a future financial crisis on top of the future medical crisis that they're already risking. If the heart attack or the tracheotomy is too far in the future to motivate them, adding the threat of future bankruptcy isn't going to make a difference.
