Did I mention the 100° summers or the fact that people usually live 20+ miles from where they work?

I agree with you generally on the incentives, but it took us 70 years to paint ourselves into this corner, and we’re not going to get out of it because of a third-order incentive.

▲

AuthAuth 2 days ago | parent [-]

Thats not every where nor is it everyone. Im not saying it will specifically be bikes but the government will be incentivized to have a healthier population. It could be higher tax on cigs, or sugars, it could be more annual leave it could be any number of wellbeing policies.

▲

zdragnar a day ago | parent | next [-]

But it is many places. You can't just magically hand-wave away the fact that the demographics between these places are wildly different, and that changes the burdens on the systems in place.

▲

nradov a day ago | parent | prev [-]

From a political philosophy standpoint, this is exactly why many people oppose a single-payer healthcare system. When the government is paying for everything it creates a financial incentive for an intrusive nanny state. We can argue about the positives and negatives, and maybe we would be healthier overall, but many Americans simply don't want the government telling them what to do.

https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo413854...

	▲	jfyi a day ago \| parent [-]
		We are getting the "intrusive nanny state" regardless of financial incentives of a given healthcare system. That ship has sailed. It's a goal, not a side effect.