Should we penalize smokers and the obese?

[Dragonlady]

The ideas that people have here of government funded health insurance would be laughable, if you people really didn't believe this shit.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

You would think that the supposed party of personal responsiblilty (repubs) would be all for the idea of risk based premimums for medical insurance.

If you have a couple DUI's, your car insurance goes way up. If you have a bankruptcy in your credit profile, you cost of money goes way up or you can't borrow money at all.

If you file too may claims on your homeowners insurance, they will cancel your policy.

And I don't hear a single right winger complaining about that.

But weight 350 pounds, smoke two packs of cigs a day and eat nothing but McDonalds all the time......and the right wingers think those people should not pay more for their health insurance.

That's not the issue at all. The problem is when the insurance is mandated, or when the relative 'premiums' are implemented in the form of tax penalties and fines. In a free market, if an insurance company wants to discriminate against fat people, or smokers, or bad drivers, or whatever, it's their right. And it's my right to refuse to do business with them if I think they are out of line. Or at least it was my right, until PPACA came to town.

How is it you right wingers want to slow the growth of government and private paid health coverage, but don't want people to pay penalties for unhealthy behaviour?

rw's don't want to have to pay their own way. They also want to continue forcing the rest of us to pay for the health care of terrorists and illegals.

Not sure I fit the 'right-winger' motifYour posts and opinions are teepotter all the way. You want total freedom, no responsibility and no bills to pay. You support corporations like Koch's owning the US, you support big insurance companies dictating our medical care and hate giving the decisions back to patients and doctors. You'll deny it but all you have to do is go back and read the ridiculous things you've written, which is why I ignore most of your posts., but for me it's a matter of not wanting government dictating personal health habits. Simple as that.

Link please because, all your whining aside, I don't know of any "personal health habit" that is "dictated" by the government. Earlier, someone said something about smoking/huge sugary drinks being "banned". Again, I know of no place where smoking and drinking sugar has been banned.

 

[dblack]

You would think that the supposed party of personal responsiblilty (repubs) would be all for the idea of risk based premimums for medical insurance.

If you have a couple DUI's, your car insurance goes way up. If you have a bankruptcy in your credit profile, you cost of money goes way up or you can't borrow money at all.

If you file too may claims on your homeowners insurance, they will cancel your policy.

And I don't hear a single right winger complaining about that.

But weight 350 pounds, smoke two packs of cigs a day and eat nothing but McDonalds all the time......and the right wingers think those people should not pay more for their health insurance.

That's not the issue at all. The problem is when the insurance is mandated, or when the relative 'premiums' are implemented in the form of tax penalties and fines. In a free market, if an insurance company wants to discriminate against fat people, or smokers, or bad drivers, or whatever, it's their right. And it's my right to refuse to do business with them if I think they are out of line. Or at least it was my right, until PPACA came to town.

How is it you right wingers want to slow the growth of government and private paid health coverage, but don't want people to pay penalties for unhealthy behaviour?

rw's don't want to have to pay their own way. They also want to continue forcing the rest of us to pay for the health care of terrorists and illegals.

Not sure I fit the 'right-winger' motifYour posts and opinions are teepotter all the way. You want total freedom, no responsibility and no bills to pay. You support corporations like Koch's owning the US, you support big insurance companies dictating our medical care and hate giving the decisions back to patients and doctors. You'll deny it but all you have to do is go back and read the ridiculous things you've written, which is why I ignore most of your posts., but for me it's a matter of not wanting government dictating personal health habits. Simple as that.

Link please because, all your whining aside, I don't know of any "personal health habit" that is "dictated" by the government. Earlier, someone said something about smoking/huge sugary drinks being "banned". Again, I know of no place where smoking and drinking sugar has been banned.

It's not hard to find examples of jackasses who want to use government to tell us how to live. In fact, here's a link:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...nalize-smokers-and-the-obese.html#post6769172

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As usual, when you're called on your lies, you weasel out.

Coward.

 

[dblack]

As usual, when you're called on your lies, you weasel out.

Coward.

Name calling is awesome. Got anything else? Like a real argument?

 

[Dragonlady]

The whole point of health insurance is that everyone, regardless of their health, gets put in the same pool, and everyone pays the same premium for health insurance. Otherwise people with pre-existing conditions could never find affordable coverage.

If you start charging extra for life-style choices, what about genetic abnormalities? What about family histories with high heart disease or cancer rates? What about you choice of city or country living - cities are less healthy? Should discounts be given for gym memberships? Should hard driving business executives should pay more because they deal with a lot of stress which saps the immune system? Where does it end?

Instead of bitching and whining about having to buy health insurance, why don't you look at the why the US spends more per capita than any other country in the world, and gets so much less for the $$$ they spend? Or how the health care industry lies to the public to convince them that things would be worse if public health care came in. There is some truth in what they say. Their profits would go down.

 

[thanatos144]

Should homosexuals have to pay more for their risky sexual behavior?

 

[jasonnfree]

Maybe people that live near mountain top removal sites should pay higher premiums? Or maybe bill the extra premium money to the MTR companies that profit from blowing off the tops of mountains.

Mining: Destroying Mountains | Beyond Coal

 

[BillyV]

The whole point of health insurance is that everyone, regardless of their health, gets put in the same pool, and everyone pays the same premium for health insurance. Otherwise people with pre-existing conditions could never find affordable coverage.

If you start charging extra for life-style choices, what about genetic abnormalities? What about family histories with high heart disease or cancer rates? What about you choice of city or country living - cities are less healthy? Should discounts be given for gym memberships? Should hard driving business executives should pay more because they deal with a lot of stress which saps the immune system? Where does it end?

Instead of bitching and whining about having to buy health insurance, why don't you look at the why the US spends more per capita than any other country in the world, and gets so much less for the $$$ they spend? Or how the health care industry lies to the public to convince them that things would be worse if public health care came in. There is some truth in what they say. Their profits would go down.

Except that's not how it works in Canada according to the Fraser Institute; premiums are based upon ability to pay:

The 10 percent of Canadian families with the lowest incomes will pay an average of about $487 for public health care insurance in 2012. The 10 percent of Canadian families who earn an average income of $55,271 will pay an average of $5,285 for public health care insurance, and the families among the top 10 percent of income earners in Canada will pay $32,628.

The Price of Public Health Care Insurance: 2012 Edition | Fraser Institute

"From each according to his abilities; to each according to his needs."

 

[thanatos144]

How about we tax Pot heads more???? They are a drain on our health care costs as well..... And sluts and Transsexuals and how about blacks???? With that Sickle cell anemia they get that is a drain as well! PORN STARS!!!!! they should pay triple the taxes as well as strippers.....

 

[Dragonlady]

Except that's not how it works in Canada according to the Fraser Institute; premiums are based upon ability to pay:

The 10 percent of Canadian families with the lowest incomes will pay an average of about $487 for public health care insurance in 2012. The 10 percent of Canadian families who earn an average income of $55,271 will pay an average of $5,285 for public health care insurance, and the families among the top 10 percent of income earners in Canada will pay $32,628.

The Fraser Institute is lying. They are a right-wing think tank with an avowed agenda to end publically funded health care in Canada. Health care administration and funding is handled by the provinces and there are some minor differences in the funding formula from province to province

Our family has an income far above the $55,271 they are quoting and we are currently paying $2500 for our health insurance. Our rate was $500 lower when I was working because my employer paid a portion of our supplemental insurance coverage, but my husband's does not, he just makes the group rate plan available to his employees.

In Ontario, your employer pays the Employer Health Tax at a rate of .98% on the first $400,000 of income, and 1.95% on amounts over $400,000. So yes, if you are making $1.7 million a year in salary alone, your employer would pay $34,000 a year in health insurance premiums for you, but it would be paid by your employer, not you. The employee would pay the same rate for supplemental insurance and individual premiums that we have, which is $25 per month per working family members, plus some amount for your supplemental coverage, not dissimilar to what we are paying.

 

[thanatos144]

We should tax Progressives more For just being ignorant fascists.

 

[jasonnfree]

We should tax Progressives more For just being ignorant fascists.

fascists lean to the right.

 

[thanatos144]

We should tax Progressives more For just being ignorant fascists.

fascists lean to the right.

You can keep repeating that lie but it isn't going to make it true.

 

[Dragonlady]

We should tax Progressives more For just being ignorant fascists.

fascists lean to the right.

You can keep repeating that lie but it isn't going to make it true.

One of the reasons why the Western powers didn't come down harder on facism in the 1930's was because facists were right wingers who were adamantly opposed to communism and Hilter, Mussolini and Franco were considered strong foes of the true enemy, communism.

 

[thanatos144]

fascists lean to the right.

You can keep repeating that lie but it isn't going to make it true.

One of the reasons why the Western powers didn't come down harder on facism in the 1930's was because facists were right wingers who were adamantly opposed to communism and Hilter, Mussolini and Franco were considered strong foes of the true enemy, communism.

they were socialists you dumbasses

 

[Againsheila]

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.

Then you have to start charging more for people with arthritis, or muscle spasms, or large boobs (which cause back pain). Tall people have more health problems than short people, charge them more. (gravity is not our friend) Or charge more for people with sedentary jobs, they aren't as healthy as those doing physical labor jobs. It's a slippery slope.

 

[BillyV]

Except that's not how it works in Canada according to the Fraser Institute; premiums are based upon ability to pay:

The 10 percent of Canadian families with the lowest incomes will pay an average of about $487 for public health care insurance in 2012. The 10 percent of Canadian families who earn an average income of $55,271 will pay an average of $5,285 for public health care insurance, and the families among the top 10 percent of income earners in Canada will pay $32,628.

The Fraser Institute is lying. They are a right-wing think tank with an avowed agenda to end publically funded health care in Canada. Health care administration and funding is handled by the provinces and there are some minor differences in the funding formula from province to province

Our family has an income far above the $55,271 they are quoting and we are currently paying $2500 for our health insurance. Our rate was $500 lower when I was working because my employer paid a portion of our supplemental insurance coverage, but my husband's does not, he just makes the group rate plan available to his employees.

In Ontario, your employer pays the Employer Health Tax at a rate of .98% on the first $400,000 of income, and 1.95% on amounts over $400,000. So yes, if you are making $1.7 million a year in salary alone, your employer would pay $34,000 a year in health insurance premiums for you, but it would be paid by your employer, not you. The employee would pay the same rate for supplemental insurance and individual premiums that we have, which is $25 per month per working family members, plus some amount for your supplemental coverage, not dissimilar to what we are paying.

Well, I'm not an expert on Canadian health care nor on the political leanings of the Fraser Institute; however, the Canadian government reports spending $140 billion on its health care system, and the population is about 34.5 million, a per capita cost of just over $4,000. So if you are paying $2,500 for you and your husband, it would seem that your health care is being subsidized by at least $5,500 per year, or you are paying it through other not so obvious means (like taxes).

The point the Fraser study was making was that, since the system is largely funded by income taxes, higher income groups pay a greater amount in funding the health system (much as under the US Medicare system). The difference in the US is that a private insurance policy premium is based only on risk and return, not ability to pay, therefore the premium for a middle income person is the same as that for a poor or rich person with the same risk profile.

As for the Employer Health Tax, I would argue that any payment made by your employer on your behalf is money that would have been available to you in salary had the government not mandated that payment (or said another way, that your salary is determined (reduced) partly based on the additional amounts that will have to be paid under the terms of your employment, including tax payments made on your behalf).

If you'd like to look at what Fraser has put forth and argue the contents, by all means do. Just calling them "right wing liars" is not productive nor does it help in getting to the truth.

 

[dblack]

The whole point of health insurance is that everyone, regardless of their health, gets put in the same pool, and everyone pays the same premium for health insurance. Otherwise people with pre-existing conditions could never find affordable coverage.

No. It's not. Insurance is a hedge against risk. It invariable entails an overhead in what it covers. It isn't a club you join that magically makes health care cost less. In fact, it does the opposite. In limited quantities, this kind of coverage can be nice security for unforeseen circumstances.

But our habit of thinking of insurance as something that makes health care more affordable is delusional. And it's that delusion that's at the core of our problems with health care. Health insurance can provide a safety net against bad stuff you hope never happens and isn't likely to. For ordinary health care expense, the stuff we can all expect in ordinary life, it's utterly foolish to funnel all that money through insurance companies, with them taking their cut.

If you start charging extra for life-style choices, what about genetic abnormalities? What about family histories with high heart disease or cancer rates? What about you choice of city or country living - cities are less healthy? Should discounts be given for gym memberships? Should hard driving business executives should pay more because they deal with a lot of stress which saps the immune system? Where does it end?

It doesn't.

Instead of bitching and whining about having to buy health insurance, why don't you look at the why the US spends more per capita than any other country in the world, and gets so much less for the $$$ they spend? ...

Well, I have. Which is why I'm bitching and whining about insurance. I'll be damned if I'll volunteer for a life time of "tithing" to the very same industry that's painted into this corner in the first place.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are the rw's ignoring the fact that high risk people are already charged more for their insurance?

Why are the rw's lying about government and/or taxes and/or ACA when its actually insurance companies who decide who gets charged a higher premium?

It would be a lot easier to discuss this issue if rw's didn't constantly make up their own reality about it.