Best
147 Comments
Post
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #92
    !
    @Fishbone345 If I had a chart that told me every action you took over the course of a week and perhaps a breakdown of any illnesses you are genetically predisposed to, I guarantee you I could find flaws enough to justify charging you more for your insurance. The same could be said of *anyone.* Being alive is risky.
    Yes, smoking is horribly unhealthy. Yes, obesity is, too. People with unhealthy habits to change need to be consulting with their doctor on a regular basis. Why would we then choose to withhold medical care from those folks? That doesn't make sense. It's impractical.
    We pool our resources and we share the services.
  • #95
    !
    @Zazziness Nice theory, very PC and loving, too bad it doesn't pay the bills. Fact is, costs are soaring ever higher, due directly to people who are obese. It's way more than people think it is. New beds, surgical tools, wheelchairs, dressings, medications, people on duty.
    I choose not to subject myself to diabetes, I shouldn't have to suck it up for those who do.
  • R Load more replies

  • #5
    !
    I don't smoke tobacco and I don't allow it in my home. Having said that I will support additional charge for tobacco smokers about the same time as we triple the health care insurance for the obese. Since the AMA says obesity is the single worst PREVENTABLE killer in America. Worse than Tobacco. Why don't we start with Numero Uno as the place to get our ducks lined up on Health care?
  • #10
    !
    Let's not forget alcohol can have a huge negative impact on health. So as long as we're trying to force people to "be healthy," everyone who ever takes a drink goes on the list of higher insurance rates.
  • #19
    !
    @Zazziness I don't drink alcohol either. I have no objection to what you say but I do remind you that the AMA says 95% of obesity is due to laziness, overeating, fast food and sugar. Fat is not beautiful. It's killing this nation. We're a bunch of porkers.
  • #44
    !
    @jessejaymes A big part of it is the crap food science that the govt passes off as healthy. We're a nation addicted to carbs and scared of fat, not telling people that carbs turn into sugar which turns into body fat, while fat is typically used immediately or discarded.
  • #49
    !
    @AceLuby that's my understanding as well. What people just won't accept is that it's just as cheap to eat decently as it is to eat poorly. And it only takes about 10 days and you system stop screaming for the crap food and start enjoying the good food. I can't go a day without my salad topped with Tuna (packed in water) and my dab of low calorie Ranch dressing. But I did read what you're saying. Fat is not all bad anymore than all Cholesterol is bad. There is good fat and bad fat.
  • R Load more replies

  • #126
    !
    If you smoke, please stop. I know it's hard. I have had 3 of my close family members died of lung cancer and they smoked. Yes, I would say but lower the insurance if in a program to stop.
  • #58
    !
    Do they charge bisexuals more because of the risk of gettig aids? How about heavy drinkers,pot smokers,over weight people and the list goes on. Iam no smoker but if you liberals and this goverment want fairness be fair to everyone. You can't pick and choose, hypocrites!
  • #20
    !
    Yes, and if you don't want to pay more, then quit. I quit years ago, best thing I have ever done. I don't get sick as often (which has saved me hundreds in healthcare costs alone), can actually taste and enjoy my food, have more energy throughout the day, I could go on and on about the positives of quitting smoking. It is proven that smokers are sick more often and their illnesses are more complicated. I don't care if one smokes as I used to, but if that smoker doesn't want to quit, then he/she should be made to pay the extra in difference in healthcare costs, not those who have quit or never smoked to begin with.
  • #17
    !
    I quit smoking 13 yrs ago....tobacco smoke makes me sick now. Still I suppose I could still suffer the effects...what would I pay?

    But until the late 1970s smoking was considered reasonably healthy, and in the 40s 50s and 60s it was practically a universal habit. Just listen to some old Lucky Strikes commericials. You'll hear things like "deep down smoking enjoyment" "Light up a lucky" to relax...(you deserve it)......"never a rough puff".......on radio, TV, magazines, billboards.....I think that many people initially smoked without being educated....they were mislead. misinformed, and propagandized. There needs to be some consideration of this.
  • #4
    !
    Possibly but what about other health risks. Such as overweight, high stress jobs, poor eating habits, alcoholic and etc, etc.
  • #14
    !
    Smoking (and smokers) has been demonized to the point where people are willing to over look such discrepancies. The obese cost far more then smokers.
  • #29
    !
    @Yank I don't know anyone willing to overlook smokers - by and large they are ostracized wherever you go to a cigar bar. Locally, our Town Counsel is debating a ban at public beaches. No one want the intrusion of the smell of smoke
  • #34
    !
    @martydotcom I didn't say smokers were overlooked, I said smoking/smokers are demonized and other preventable activities that cost as much or more than smoking are over looked.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #77
    !
    @martydotcom

    You mention cigar bars. Perhaps you should also look up the facts about cigar smokers. High life expectancy, better health longer in life, less stress, and low cholesterol.
  • R Load more replies

  • #22
    !
    non smokers get a discount - this verbiage is a more palatable way of selling the concept
    Non obese should also get a discount
    alcohol use too difficult to monitor
  • #33
    !
    Your concept of risk management is superficial.

    If you split the general population into sub-groups, you could make a case for it, but then you'd have to admit that all sorts of behaviors change the risk profile of any identifiable sub-group.

    Skydivers, drinkers, aggressive drivers, farmers, miners, policemen, they all present a higher risk profile than the population as a whole.

    Where do you stop once you start down this path?
  • #43
    !
    that is the insurance company's problem. they are making the gamble that the insured isn't going to get sick or die, then they have to take the odds... no matter what.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • R Load more replies

  • #147
    !
    This is the most rediculous thing I have ever hear...almost. Why should snokers pay 50% more? Not all smokers have health issues, not all smokers end up getting bronchitis, azma, COPD, emphazema, lung cancer, etc...Alot of non smokers get these illnesses without ever being around a smoker. And I agree with the other folk, what about over weight people, people addicted to drugs & needing meds to get off, people with life term illnesses that have to go to the Dr every month? Should they all have to pay for what life has thrown at them? NO! I pray this never passes.
  • #141
    !
    My answer is yes, but on the same hand should those who drink pay more for health insurance? How does the insurance company know how much you drink or how often?

    If you're involved in a drunken car wreck, your insurance company picks up the cost. If you're drunk and fall down and get hurt, your insurance company pays your medical bills. If you contract an alcohol related disease (much like my step kids' mother did) and spend months dying in the hospital, your insurance will pay for that. In her case, she had no insurance so you and I paid for it.

    If we're controlling costs due to vices, then let's not pick and choose. Maybe the taxes from tobacco and alcohol should go to care for those will eventually need medical care from using these products. Let the users pay their own way.
  • #136
    !
    So long as the government allows tobacco products to be sold then insurance should be the same. Looks at how much money the government gets from tobacco tax, this is the only reason tobacco is still legal. Do insurance companies charge more for drug and alcohol use and addiction? Tobacco is just as much an addiction as any other drug. Make it illegal, then we cane go from there. Oh but that will never happen because of the governments greed!
  • #132
    !
    I understand that a person incurs the most of their health care expenses for geriatrics care. I also understand that smokers die much earlier than none smokers, thus avoiding the extended geriatric care cost. Now if this is true, my smoking is saving insurance companies and taxpayers money. Your welcome, I'm just doing my patriotic duty. ;-]
  • #131
    !
    Smoking / Chewing tobacco, etc. are known and avoidable health risks. If you have a poor driving record you pay more for car insurance and the same should apply to bad health habits.
  • #129
    !
    Why not ban cigarettes? There is NO up side to smoking. We talk about banning all kinds of other things. But why not something that does NOTHING good? Oh...cause this way makes money.
  • R Load more comments...
Post