Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Nov 5, 8:29?am, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:01:53 -0700, Tim wrote: sounds to me like the old "chip-under-the-skin" deal. 1984? Yes, it's pretty easy to imagine something like that now that technology has evolved the way it has. Imagine that you now have the ID chip that everyone thought would be a good idea to reduce crime of all kinds, and also imagine that you are enrolled in the nationally funded health plan that everyone thought was such a good idea. The health plan knows *everything* about you of course. Suppose you are now sitting down to eat in a nice restaurant at an "on topic" marina, about to order their world class prime ribs. They've already scanned your chip at the door of course so that they know you won't be a criminal threat, and so you don't have to worry about carrying your credit cards. As you place your order, an alert comes up from the health plan telling you not to order the prime ribs because they are bad for your high cholesterol ( a function my wife presently performs). You press the over ride button because you're willing to take a calculated risk once in a while. Another message comes back and says: "Fine, if that's what you really want to do, but be advised that you will no longer be covered for medical benefits". The possible variations on this scenario go on and on, the technology is readily available, and the temptation to create the linkages would be too compelling to ignore. Do you still think ID chips are a good idea? That's not as far out as you think. Now that our purchases are routinely tracked in grocery stores, it's only a matter of time before some insurance company declares "Sorry, Mr. Policyholder. We're not going to pay for your angioplasty because we have evidence you have been buying a case of Twinkies every month for the last five years. Your health problems are the result of your own bad decisions, so you pay." |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Nov 5, 8:29?am, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:01:53 -0700, Tim wrote: sounds to me like the old "chip-under-the-skin" deal. 1984? Yes, it's pretty easy to imagine something like that now that technology has evolved the way it has. Imagine that you now have the ID chip that everyone thought would be a good idea to reduce crime of all kinds, and also imagine that you are enrolled in the nationally funded health plan that everyone thought was such a good idea. The health plan knows *everything* about you of course. Suppose you are now sitting down to eat in a nice restaurant at an "on topic" marina, about to order their world class prime ribs. They've already scanned your chip at the door of course so that they know you won't be a criminal threat, and so you don't have to worry about carrying your credit cards. As you place your order, an alert comes up from the health plan telling you not to order the prime ribs because they are bad for your high cholesterol ( a function my wife presently performs). You press the over ride button because you're willing to take a calculated risk once in a while. Another message comes back and says: "Fine, if that's what you really want to do, but be advised that you will no longer be covered for medical benefits". The possible variations on this scenario go on and on, the technology is readily available, and the temptation to create the linkages would be too compelling to ignore. Do you still think ID chips are a good idea? That's not as far out as you think. Now that our purchases are routinely tracked in grocery stores, it's only a matter of time before some insurance company declares "Sorry, Mr. Policyholder. We're not going to pay for your angioplasty because we have evidence you have been buying a case of Twinkies every month for the last five years. Your health problems are the result of your own bad decisions, so you pay." If they wanted to restrict their claims, it would be much easier to just to say "anyone who exceeds their ideal weight or cholesterol levels by more than X% will not longer be covered by their health insurance, since your health problems are the result of your own bad decisions, you now pay. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|