I don’t doubt they do for Healthcare but for the billing system I dont think they are. They aren’t going to your employer and saying Steve is fat so we’re charging an extra $200 for him, but you can pass that on to him so the rest of your employees don’t have to pay. In the end when they go to charge you and your employer they’ll just give you the total rate to cover x people and then split it up by person.

Correct me if I’m wrong but the administrative overhead and health privacy implications would be too much to assess individual health cost liability.

Yeah they’re going to keep track of every visit and procedure to make sure you aren’t “overusing” your coverage and deny you if you do, but passing that un aggregated data over to the actuarys seems infeasible.

This argument is so dumb. It’s quite often paired with " I don’t want to pay for fat people’s and smokers poor life choices", like do you think united Healthcare doesn’t cover the third of the population that’s obese, or is even making them pay more? Unless you’re one of the few people getting Healthcare from the marketplace your insurance provider doesn’t have enough info to assess health risk and adjust prices, you’re employer buys a bulk plan and you become a line in a database with maybe your age on it but not much else. You and your employer are paying the same amount whether your a marathon runner or a chain smoking alcoholic.

Eh, not really, ags sue companies all the time for not acting in there shareholders interests. It’s usually more along the lines of the CEO giving a contract to his buddy that costs the company more, but any time a public for profit company pursues some interest other than maximizing shareholder value they open themselves up for a lawsuit. It could be a purely nepotistic or self dealing interest, or it could be your interest in justice, if it’s not about making money and you didn’t disclose to the shareholders that your decision is not about making money you have defrauded them who are invested solely to make money.

It’s a reading of the fiduciary duty of loyalty that most companies and courts have come to accept, if you knowingly do something to decrease shareholder value for some personal interest than you can be sued for it. This is the reason public benefit companies exist, so you can pursue noble causes like dei or fighting climate change that may reduce profits, without risking a lawsuit.

This can be used for good such as in the case of the 2021 McDonald’s shareholder lawsuit that alleged it’s failure to address rampant sexual harassment caused a loss of reputation and shareholder value. Ironically as a result it implemented a DEI program to address the problems…

The problem with the lawsuit is that they have to prove the dei stuff was about some ideology of the board and not about making money. Which will be hard to prove because at the time forecasts probably would’ve showed that embracing dei would increase profits. Even today they probably made more money off the rainbow merch then they lost.

This isn’t even the craziest story from florida this week, did you miss the story of the Floridian terrorist who shot an Israeli tourist thinking they were Palestinian earlier this week?

I guess DeSantis has been quiet aver since he was destroyed by trump but the people of Florida have been maintaining there reputation.