If the federal government is investing money in a person's education, do they have the right to ensure that they are investing in someone who has a longer life expectancy, and is therefore a better return on their investment?   Question Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Answer Questions | Question Comments | My Questions | Favorites | +Add Question
LATEST POPULAR PRIORITY
RANDOM

All | Games | Funny | Entertainment | Quizzes | Weird | Tech | People | Arts/Lit | News | Science | Sports | Places | Misc

1,370 hits 2.3 (3 votes) Share Favorite | Flag 10 years ago by catchall

Should federally funded financial aid be preferentially given to healthier people (after need and ability are taken into account)?
If the federal government is investing money in a person's education, do they have the right to ensure that they are investing in someone who has a longer life expectancy, and is therefore a better return on their investment?


Put This Question on Your Page (MySpace, Livejournal, Blog, etc)
[Preview] EMBED CODE:


Bottom Last Post

10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 3/15/10 - 6:45:48 PM EST (GMT-5)
Sure, because that wouldn't cause any lawsuits about discrimination.
10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Tuesday 3/16/10 - 10:15:45 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, because as Harold pointed out, it would just open a big legal can of worms. It would also reinforce the whole 'Nanny State' mentality, something I wholeheartedly disagree with.

I can understand taxpayers being concerned with using their money to invest in a person who spends most of their time on the couch eating pints of Ben & Jerry's, but not all poor health is a product of poor lifestyle choices. There would just be too much red tape and questionable judgement calls involved in trying to fund people based on their health.
10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Wednesday 3/17/10 - 2:45:45 AM EST (GMT-5)
I mean, I get the lawsuits (especially after a closer reading of the ADA) and how this wouldn't really be a great idea at all.

But how would it "reinforce the whole 'Nanny State' mentality?
10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Wednesday 3/17/10 - 11:48:35 AM EST (GMT-5)
Why should we give money to people who are able-bodied and healthy over the people who would have a drastically harder time finding and holding a job and living independently? It's hard enough for healthy people to raise enough money for a college education, but how is a sick/disabled person supposed to raise that same amount of money, but with less work opportunities and higher medical costs?
10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Wednesday 3/17/10 - 11:56:44 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 3/17/10 - 11:48:35 AM Koto wrote:
Why should we give money to people who are able-bodied and healthy over the people who would have a drastically harder time finding and holding a job and living independently? It's hard enough for healthy people to raise enough money for a college education, but how is a sick/disabled person supposed to raise that same amount of money, but with less work opportunities and higher medical costs?


If they have a hard time holding a job and/or living independently, what makes you think that they can handle going to college?

10 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Wednesday 3/17/10 - 11:59:45 AM EST (GMT-5)
If we are going to start giving preference to healthy people, why don't we start giving preference to those with majors that will help them get better jobs? More aid for engineering and science majors, less aid for women's studies and philosophy majors...
10 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Friday 6/4/10 - 6:45:19 AM EST (GMT-5)
As someone who is overweight according to BMI (BUT WHO IS OTHERWISE HEALTHY AND WHO LIFTS WEIGHTS), no, I think this is a horrible idea.

On Wednesday 3/17/10 - 11:59:45 AM CowDung wrote:
If we are going to start giving preference to healthy people, why don't we start giving preference to those with majors that will help them get better jobs? More aid for engineering and science majors, less aid for women's studies and philosophy majors...

This makes sense, though. Not that I would favor it, either. (one of my majors is philosophy.)
10 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Friday 6/4/10 - 7:28:09 AM EST (GMT-5)
I like the idea of giving people financial incentives to be healthy, but I don't see how this could work. Being obese, for example, probably isn't going to lead to life-threatening health problems so quickly the person would default on the loan he or she received for undergraduate tuition at the age of 18 or so. Perhaps a regular physical check-up could be used to determine what kind of default insurance a person has to carry on such loans?



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Top



10 Most Popular Questions Today
1 If a defendant is found `not guilty`, do you assume that they are innocent?

2 Should transgender people use the bathroom of the gender on their birth certificates, or by what gender they most look like?

3 Have you ever gotten a small loan of a million dollars?

4 Have you ever been in a fist fight before?

5 Is Rock and Roll here to stay?

6 Would you rather have no elbows or no knees?

7 Do you think Donald Trump will become the president of the United States?

8 Is Squidward`s skin color blue or green?

9 Has anyone from youthink ever been on Jeopardy?

10 Are you a dedicated follower of fashion?

More Questions
Friends
Daily Moment of Joy
Personality Quizzes
Funny Videos
I-Am-Bored.com
Free IQ Test
The Impossible Quiz
Intelligence Test
Relationship Test
Doodie Cartoons
 
Edit