Should we penalize smokers and the obese?

[dblack]

Why should we have to pay for some kid who wants to fuck around or some druggie that gets an infection from a used needle or an overdose?

You shouldn't.

 

[Dragonlady]

Why should we have to pay for some kid who wants to fuck around or some druggie that gets an infection from a used needle or an overdose?

You shouldn't.

You are already paying for these people in the most expensive ways possible. Pay for birth control, abortions, or welfare. Pick one. Birth control is the cheapest, overall. Welfare the most expensive. Insurance companies WANT to pay for birth control. It's cheaper than paying for a live birth. They probably charge more when they DON'T cover it because they know what the alternative will be.

 

[Spoonman]

Do penalties for smokers and the obese make sense?

... Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.

But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates...

Some have said they don't like the ACA because they can no longer get their health care for free. Should the rest of us have to pay for smoker's and the obese higher health care costs? If not, how do we make them responsible for their own higher health care costs? Or, does their right to smoke and be fat negate our right to not have to pay those extra costs.

And, yes, the extra costs do fall to the entire society to pay.

Instead of worrying about women's health insurance paying for birth control, maybe its time we forced smokers and the obese to pay higher premiums.

so what are the annual healthcare costs for the non smokers and obese?

 

[TyrealJenkins]

Penalizing smokers is racist. Because all blacks smoke somethin. I dont know of a single black man that doesnt smoke weed.

 

[Noomi]

Penalizing smokers is racist. Because all blacks smoke somethin. I dont know of a single black man that doesnt smoke weed.

You're an idiot, mate.

 

[Katzndogz]

Why should we have to pay for some kid who wants to fuck around or some druggie that gets an infection from a used needle or an overdose?

You shouldn't.

You are already paying for these people in the most expensive ways possible. Pay for birth control, abortions, or welfare. Pick one. Birth control is the cheapest, overall. Welfare the most expensive. Insurance companies WANT to pay for birth control. It's cheaper than paying for a live birth. They probably charge more when they DON'T cover it because they know what the alternative will be.

The cheapest way is really to let it go. Stop paying for birth control, abortions or the children when born, unless they are removed. Stop paying for the health care of drug addicts AIDS victims or alcoholics.

After all, we have 60,000 or more foreign adoptions a year in this country, we could do with a few unwanted pregnancies. Just imagine, even insurance companies won't have to pay for a live birth. That's the responsibility of the adoptive parent.

 

[lynn63]

I managed the health insurance for a small company for 13 years and I hate to tell everyone but insurance companies have looked at the life styles of everyone applying for health insurance for a long time. And, rates reflected bad behavior. So, if you smoked or drank too much or had any kind of pre-existing disease or were over-weight, you paid a higher premium than those who were considered average. And, if they found that you lied on your health questionaire, they could and did cancel your policy or increase the premium substantially. Also, they could deny coverage if they felt someone was a high risk. Remember ACA was partially written BY insurance companies.

Oh look folks, FACTS.

Welcome to the board DeeDee and thanks for being the voice of reason.

They want us to believe that our bad behavior is the sole cause of the top five mortality rates while they ignore the high levels of pollutants we are exposed to on a daily basis throughout our lifetime that causes mutations in our genes for those diseases to emerge in the first place.

 

[tunalips]

Do you think they will start giving smokers a handicap pass like they give fat people?

 

[dblack]

Do you think they will start giving smokers a handicap pass like they give fat people?

Corporatism promises a future of special perks and favors depending on what class(es) you belong to. Choose one from column "A", or two from column "B".

 

[KissMy]

Do penalties for smokers and the obese make sense?

... Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.

But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates...

Some have said they don't like the ACA because they can no longer get their health care for free. Should the rest of us have to pay for smoker's and the obese higher health care costs? If not, how do we make them responsible for their own higher health care costs? Or, does their right to smoke and be fat negate our right to not have to pay those extra costs.

And, yes, the extra costs do fall to the entire society to pay.

Instead of worrying about women's health insurance paying for birth control, maybe its time we forced smokers and the obese to pay higher premiums.

A fat tax will not work at all because more fat people are poor & don't pay for their health care. Most poor people are fat because good tasting fatty & sugarier foods are cheaper than yuckier high protein foods. The only way a tax would work is to tax foods that have high processed carbs, sugar & fat. Remove tax on healthy foods. This way the poor who don't pay for their healthcare can't afford the good tasting unhealthy food that makes them fat. Give us a tax or health insurance credit for physical activity community service.

 

[earlycuyler]

Do penalties for smokers and the obese make sense?

... Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.

But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates...

Some have said they don't like the ACA because they can no longer get their health care for free. Should the rest of us have to pay for smoker's and the obese higher health care costs? If not, how do we make them responsible for their own higher health care costs? Or, does their right to smoke and be fat negate our right to not have to pay those extra costs.

And, yes, the extra costs do fall to the entire society to pay.

Instead of worrying about women's health insurance paying for birth control, maybe its time we forced smokers and the obese to pay higher premiums.

What about those that are drug users, addicted to pain killers, alcoholics, those that jump from bed to bed, skydivers, bungee jumpers motorcyclists?

Why do we pay a higher cost for them? Shouldn't they pay higher costs?

Yes all. I should not have to pay the consequences of other peoples hobbies and vices. I do find it lazy though to go directly to lardo's and smokers though. They are just easier targets, and easier to get money from.

 

[rightwinger]

Smokers should be forced to indulge their filthy habit hunkered down outside in the cold and rain

Fat people should be forced to wear bathing suits

 

[koshergrl]

Do penalties for smokers and the obese make sense?

... Annual health care costs are roughly $96 billion for smokers and $147 billion for the obese, the government says. These costs accompany sometimes heroic attempts to prolong lives, including surgery, chemotherapy and other measures.

But despite these rescue attempts, smokers tend to die 10 years earlier on average, and the obese die five to 12 years prematurely, according to various researchers' estimates...

Some have said they don't like the ACA because they can no longer get their health care for free. Should the rest of us have to pay for smoker's and the obese higher health care costs? If not, how do we make them responsible for their own higher health care costs? Or, does their right to smoke and be fat negate our right to not have to pay those extra costs.

And, yes, the extra costs do fall to the entire society to pay.

Instead of worrying about women's health insurance paying for birth control, maybe its time we forced smokers and the obese to pay higher premiums.

Omg, this is so funny. "how do we make them responsible for their own higher health care costs"? Seriously? How many times has the right said that exact same thing when it comes to illegal aliens, drug addicts, criminals?

Make up your fucking minds. Though all you're doing is making evident what we've all known all along..you really don't want free health care for all. You want free health care for YOU. The rest can die and rot, for all you care.

Do you have any idea how many pregnant welfare recipients smoke through their pregnancies???? Do you have any idea how many welfare recipients are obeses?

 

[dblack]

A fat tax will not work at all because more fat people are poor & don't pay for their health care. Most poor people are fat because good tasting fatty & sugarier foods are cheaper than yuckier high protein foods. The only way a tax would work is to tax foods that have high processed carbs, sugar & fat. Remove tax on healthy foods. This way the poor who don't pay for their healthcare can't afford the good tasting unhealthy food that makes them fat. Give us a tax or health insurance credit for physical activity community service.

Re: the bolded portion - do you realize that this sort of food is heavily subsidized by state policy? It's the impulse to use government to manipulate people and markets toward some supposed 'greater good' that creates these problems in the first place.

 

[KissMy]

A fat tax will not work at all because more fat people are poor & don't pay for their health care. Most poor people are fat because good tasting fatty & sugarier foods are cheaper than yuckier high protein foods. The only way a tax would work is to tax foods that have high processed carbs, sugar & fat. Remove tax on healthy foods. This way the poor who don't pay for their healthcare can't afford the good tasting unhealthy food that makes them fat. Give us a tax or health insurance credit for physical activity community service.

Re: the bolded portion - do you realize that this sort of food is heavily subsidized state policy? It's the impulse to use government to manipulate people and markets toward some supposed 'greater good' that creates these problems in the first place.

Yes I know a lot of the problem is because it has been subsidized. Another problem is people demand this type of food. People prefer tender fatty steak to tough lean steak. They prefer soda pop to water. They prefer potato chips to fresh salads. Sweet fatty foods taste good & the advertising increases it's desirability. I can clip tons of coupons for unhealthy foods & take them to a store that will double them & give reward points for them. Finding ones to clip for fresh veggies, fruits & lean meats is nearly impossible.

 

[Katzndogz]

We have more fat people today because in 1998 the standard for healthy weight was lowered. Overnight perfectly normal people became overweight.

 

[koshergrl]

And because we have so many more single-parent working households, or households where both parents work, the TIME factor has become huge. You can spend 15 hours a week purchasing and preparing healthy food during the week....or you can drive through McD's and not have to do dishes.

The stuff is deadly, but it's almost impossible for working parents to resist the draw.....

 

[dblack]

A fat tax will not work at all because more fat people are poor & don't pay for their health care. Most poor people are fat because good tasting fatty & sugarier foods are cheaper than yuckier high protein foods. The only way a tax would work is to tax foods that have high processed carbs, sugar & fat. Remove tax on healthy foods. This way the poor who don't pay for their healthcare can't afford the good tasting unhealthy food that makes them fat. Give us a tax or health insurance credit for physical activity community service.

Re: the bolded portion - do you realize that this sort of food is heavily subsidized state policy? It's the impulse to use government to manipulate people and markets toward some supposed 'greater good' that creates these problems in the first place.

Yes I know a lot of the problem is because it has been subsidized. Another problem is people demand this type of food. People prefer tender fatty steak to tough lean steak. They prefer soda pop to water. They prefer potato chips to fresh salads. Sweet fatty foods taste good & the advertising increases it's desirability. I can clip tons of coupons for unhealthy foods & take them to a store that will double them & give reward points for them. Finding ones to clip for fresh veggies, fruits & lean meats is nearly impossible.

But do you get my point though? You're proposing taxing food that is, in large part, overly cheap and plentiful because of existing subsidies. How about just remove the subsidies and leave people free to make their own decisions, unimpeded by artificial incentives or penalties?

My goal here isn't to help you solve the obesity problem, but to give you pause to consider how many of these problems are caused by ill-conceived efforts to solve problems that aren't a proper concern of government. Removing bad regulations won't solve all the problems you want to solve. But it will give us a clearer picture regarding which of our problems are real, and which we are inadvertently creating with bad law. Then we can figure out how to solve them without resorting to law enforcement to tell people how to eat.

 

[Ernie S.]

Also higher premiums for those who do not eat at least 5 fruits and vegetables each day, sedentary people whether thin or fat, soda drinkers, insomniacs since sleep deprivation severely affects health, those that drive recklessly, and anyone else engaging in any type of unhealthy behaviors. Sounds fair to me. NOT!

.....add those without a library card, and don't read at least 10 books a year!

....and those who watch reality shows....

.....or get the Victoria Secret catalog but don't have women in the home....



Watch this space for future developments.

Pretty stupid to pile up straw men because you are fat or smoke and don't want to pay for your own health care. OTOH ...

What about those that are drug users, addicted to pain killers, alcoholics, those that jump from bed to bed, skydivers, bungee jumpers motorcyclists?

Why do we pay a higher cost for them? Shouldn't they pay higher costs?

There is a case to be made that there are far more than those two lifestyle choices that could and should be considered.

So ... Should we penalize those who choose to engage in known causes of higer health care costs and early death?

As the article asks, should we just let them die early?

Should we charge higher rates for people living in inner city ghettos?
Heaven forbid THEY die early. It's so inconvenient to get them to the polls.

They all ready cost the rest of us a disproportionate amount in health care, food stamps, housing, education and law enforcement.

Most are in that situation due to poor choices by them or their parents just like the obese and smokers.

The difference is smoking and obesity are not socially acceptable to Progressives and the poor ghetto dwellers are dependable Democrat votes.

 

[koshergrl]

Most ghetto dwellers smoke like fiends, and a disproportionate number of them are obese as well.

The law is discriminatory against the progressives' darlings!!! Fucking morons. Shows how little they know about the people they have created, and now protect.