Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Liberals who want smokers to pay more and think they should pay more, have yet to explain how requiring individuals to pay 50% of their annual income in insurance premiums will give them cheaper and better insurance.
It should be evident that it won't stop there. There are all kinds of behaviors that the government intends to control. Just ask Mayor Bloomberg what the proper role of government is and what it should control. He has a whole list.
and now so sad for them.... it is the LAW that they have to pay for coverage....Liberals who want smokers to pay more and think they should pay more, have yet to explain how requiring individuals to pay 50% of their annual income in insurance premiums will give them cheaper and better insurance.
It should be evident that it won't stop there. There are all kinds of behaviors that the government intends to control. Just ask Mayor Bloomberg what the proper role of government is and what it should control. He has a whole list.
the way i see it.... if you voted for obama i would hope that insurance is 90% of your income.... i hope they liked the change.
I agree, it is a slippery slope. The question will be were to draw the line of ....risk.
They are not "denying" anyone for a pre existing condition...they are just going to charge them more....
Liberals who want smokers to pay more and think they should pay more, have yet to explain how requiring individuals to pay 50% of their annual income in insurance premiums will give them cheaper and better insurance.
It should be evident that it won't stop there. There are all kinds of behaviors that the government intends to control. Just ask Mayor Bloomberg what the proper role of government is and what it should control. He has a whole list.
the way i see it.... if you voted for obama i would hope that insurance is 90% of your income.... i hope they liked the change.
I agree, it is a slippery slope. The question will be were to draw the line of ....risk.
They are not "denying" anyone for a pre existing condition...they are just going to charge them more....
The hubs smokes, we pay nearly $500/yr more on our premium (not obamacare, employer sponsored), always have. They should pay more -- higher risk pays more. Period. What isn't fair is that obese, diabetics, drunks, p/e's -- none have to pay more the rest of us have to foot the bill so they get to pay 'the same'. That is the bullshit part.
Then people who ski regularly, play impact sports, or do other risky things should have thier premiums impacted as well.
Some guy eating cheetos in a barco-lounger isnt going to require an airlift and 3 operations to unshatter his leg after failing to grab that wicked mogul.
And this is how it goes down: because we are all paying for each others' health care, how everyone else lives becomes our business.
Farewell, Liberty. Twas nice while it lasted.
Or drug addicts for that matter. We don't have to support smokers, we do have to support druggies.
lets not forget having sex.... any idea what comes from having sex???
there are more drivers then there are smokers.
You have just demonstrated something about yourself that the rest of us have known all the time.
If you walked more and ditched the car you would be far healthier plus be far less likely to get in a head on collision with a Mack truck leaving you with severe head injuries requiring a lifetime of sucking up healthcare.
God, micro managing my fellow Americans is just a load of fun
Yep, good times
there are more drivers then there are smokers.
You have just demonstrated something about yourself that the rest of us have known all the time.
and what might that be jake?
You have just demonstrated something about yourself that the rest of us have known all the time.
If you walked more and ditched the car you would be far healthier plus be far less likely to get in a head on collision with a Mack truck leaving you with severe head injuries requiring a lifetime of sucking up healthcare.
God, micro managing my fellow Americans is just a load of fun
Yep, good times
This is more than just a social matter, it is also a matter of national security. We are one of the more unhealthy nations in Westerndom, and we will not always be able to count on a volunteer armed forces.
I wish you folks would realize we live in a techno-society that he is moving ever more quickly.
You have just demonstrated something about yourself that the rest of us have known all the time.
If you walked more and ditched the car you would be far healthier plus be far less likely to get in a head on collision with a Mack truck leaving you with severe head injuries requiring a lifetime of sucking up healthcare.
God, micro managing my fellow Americans is just a load of fun
Yep, good times
This is more than just a social matter, it is also a matter of national security. We are one of the more unhealthy nations in Westerndom, and we will not always be able to count on a volunteer armed forces.
I wish you folks would realize we live in a techno-society that he is moving ever more quickly.
There are many triggers for asthma attacks. Smoking is one of them but so is air pollution, pets, dust mites, mold, colds, respiratory syntactical virus, allergies, breathing certain chemicals, some medications, and even exercise and laughter. Most people that have asthma will have attacks whether they smoke or not. Smoking tends to make attacks worst and more often.Lucy, you got some spalnin to do
U.S. asthma rates are at an all-time high, CDC says. - Los Angeles Times
Asthma rates UP. How on earth can that be?
Yep, gettin rid of them nasty smokers made everyone more healthy
Want to talk lung cancer, throat cancer, emphysema ?
Sure, post your links, but at the same time explain why, when what was once considered one of the major triggers of asthma attacks was nearly eliminated in public (and private) buildings, the rate of both asthma cases and attacks have gone UP. That is statistically impossible, without a greater trigger appearing.
I know, it's either Global Warming or BUSH!
Liberals who want smokers to pay more and think they should pay more, have yet to explain how requiring individuals to pay 50% of their annual income in insurance premiums will give them cheaper and better insurance.
It should be evident that it won't stop there. There are all kinds of behaviors that the government intends to control. Just ask Mayor Bloomberg what the proper role of government is and what it should control. He has a whole list.
the way i see it.... if you voted for obama i would hope that insurance is 90% of your income.... i hope they liked the change.
I agree, it is a slippery slope. The question will be were to draw the line of ....risk.
They are not "denying" anyone for a pre existing condition...they are just going to charge them more....
That's just it, pre-existing condtions will not be charged more. According to obamacare, they can't be. WE all are paying more - people with no pre-exsiting conditions - so they don't have to.
You have just demonstrated something about yourself that the rest of us have known all the time.
and what might that be jake?
That you can count! The fact is the original argument of drivers and smokers is not equivalent.
There are many triggers for asthma attacks. Smoking is one of them but so is air pollution, pets, dust mites, mold, colds, respiratory syntactical virus, allergies, breathing certain chemicals, some medications, and even exercise and laughter. Most people that have asthma will have attacks whether they smoke or not. Smoking tends to make attacks worst and more often.Want to talk lung cancer, throat cancer, emphysema ?
Sure, post your links, but at the same time explain why, when what was once considered one of the major triggers of asthma attacks was nearly eliminated in public (and private) buildings, the rate of both asthma cases and attacks have gone UP. That is statistically impossible, without a greater trigger appearing.
I know, it's either Global Warming or BUSH!
There are many triggers for asthma attacks. Smoking is one of them but so is air pollution, pets, dust mites, mold, colds, respiratory syntactical virus, allergies, breathing certain chemicals, some medications, and even exercise and laughter. Most people that have asthma will have attacks whether they smoke or not. Smoking tends to make attacks worst and more often.Sure, post your links, but at the same time explain why, when what was once considered one of the major triggers of asthma attacks was nearly eliminated in public (and private) buildings, the rate of both asthma cases and attacks have gone UP. That is statistically impossible, without a greater trigger appearing.
I know, it's either Global Warming or BUSH!
That does not answer the question. The airwaves were full of psa's telling us how second hand smoke was responsible for much of the asthma in this country. Now we all but eliminate it indoors and the asthma rate increases
Statistically impossible
and what might that be jake?
That you can count! The fact is the original argument of drivers and smokers is not equivalent.
both have risks.....
i know.... no more football!!!
If smoking was the primary cause of asthma, then yes asthma rates would fall with the rate of smoking, but it's not. There are other factors that are pushing asthma rates up. Physicians advise people not to smoke because it's a factor they can control. It's far more difficult to control air pollution, mold, respiratory infections, pet dander, etc..There are many triggers for asthma attacks. Smoking is one of them but so is air pollution, pets, dust mites, mold, colds, respiratory syntactical virus, allergies, breathing certain chemicals, some medications, and even exercise and laughter. Most people that have asthma will have attacks whether they smoke or not. Smoking tends to make attacks worst and more often.Sure, post your links, but at the same time explain why, when what was once considered one of the major triggers of asthma attacks was nearly eliminated in public (and private) buildings, the rate of both asthma cases and attacks have gone UP. That is statistically impossible, without a greater trigger appearing.
I know, it's either Global Warming or BUSH!
That does not answer the question. The airwaves were full of psa's telling us how second hand smoke was responsible for much of the asthma in this country. Now we all but eliminate it indoors and the asthma rate increases
Statistically impossible
Skiing, playing impact sports, etc are not pre-existing conditions. Being obese is, being a diabetic is, smoking is. These things are known to cause associated health issues.
People with p/e's absolutely should pay more for their health insurance. obamacare or no obamacare. If you are a higher risk you pay more for being a higher risk because you cost more to insure. Period.
Again, risk is risk. Someone who skis or skydives, or does anything else like that has a higher risk of costing money due to accident, or even from the long term wear and tear those actions put on a body.
Are you ok with people who are not higher risk paying more so that those who are higher risk get to pay 'the same'? I'm not.
What about swingers? all that care free loving is dangerous, charge them more.
This isn't new.
There were smoking surcharges prior to ObamaCare.
Yup. Why are smokers singled out and not drinkers or diabetics?
why just diabetics?.....why not people with other serious heath issues?...
Again, risk is risk. Someone who skis or skydives, or does anything else like that has a higher risk of costing money due to accident, or even from the long term wear and tear those actions put on a body.
Are you ok with people who are not higher risk paying more so that those who are higher risk get to pay 'the same'? I'm not.
Exactly.
Why should I pay higher premiums to make up for the sick smokers?
BUT
Why would anyone think this has anything at all to do with ObamaCare? Surely people know that insurance companies have been charging more to smokers for some time now.
Seriously. Is there even one person who does not already know this? (Well, obviously, the OP ... )
And is there anyone who does not already know that its the insurance companies who do it? (Well obviously, not the OP ...)
As I posted, even alcoholic, chain smoking, tan addict, 64yo Boehner knows that.
But, smokers could talk to their insurance company about lowering their rates.
