Obama Care will target cigarette smokers.....

[Esmeralda]

They need ways to make money.

so they need a way to push the costs off onto the people who are sick.

Ciggy smokers are far more likely to be sick huh.

Its better than making people who are sick and didnt do things to make themselves sick the target of these rules.


I personally think they should not be allowed to shift the costs like this and merely make their money by insuring more people and accepting a certain level of profit INSTEAD of always trying to increase the profit margin on the backs of sick people they do business with

Don't insurance companies adjust your health insurance rates according to your lifestyle, i.e., charging higher rates for people who smoke and take other risks with their health?

 

[jon_berzerk]

They need ways to make money.

so they need a way to push the costs off onto the people who are sick.

Ciggy smokers are far more likely to be sick huh.

Its better than making people who are sick and didnt do things to make themselves sick the target of these rules.


I personally think they should not be allowed to shift the costs like this and merely make their money by insuring more people and accepting a certain level of profit INSTEAD of always trying to increase the profit margin on the backs of sick people they do business with

Don't insurance companies adjust your health insurance rates according to your lifestyle, i.e., charging higher rates for people who smoke and take other risks with their health?

the medical field adjusts its prices

to compensate for insurances that reimburse at low rates

 

[Greenbeard]

Obama Care will target the unhealthy groups like cigarette smokers, drinkers, and over weight persons. Unhealthy folks will get the short end of the stick.

Rating premiums on tobacco use is already allowed in the individual market in 45 states + D.C.. What's changing is that now there will be federal restrictions on how much health insurers can vary those premiums (no more than 1.5:1 for a smoker's plan).

This at the same time that rating on any number of other factors will no longer be allowed.

In other words, insurance companies' ability to "target" anyone via higher premiums is being restricted here, not expanded.

 

[dblack]

They need ways to make money.

so they need a way to push the costs off onto the people who are sick.

Ciggy smokers are far more likely to be sick huh.

Its better than making people who are sick and didnt do things to make themselves sick the target of these rules.


I personally think they should not be allowed to shift the costs like this and merely make their money by insuring more people and accepting a certain level of profit INSTEAD of always trying to increase the profit margin on the backs of sick people they do business with

Don't insurance companies adjust your health insurance rates according to your lifestyle, i.e., charging higher rates for people who smoke and take other risks with their health?

Yes they do. But, before PPACA at least, if you don't like how an insurance company does its 'adjusting' you can stop doing business with them. You can't decide to 'stop doing business' with government. If we set the state up as our insurance company, or worse mandate that we buy insurance from an insurance cartel, we're stuck.

 

[dblack]

Obama Care will target the unhealthy groups like cigarette smokers, drinkers, and over weight persons. Unhealthy folks will get the short end of the stick.

Rating premiums on tobacco use is already allowed in the individual market in 45 states + D.C.. What's changing is that now there will be federal restrictions on how much health insurers can vary those premiums (no more than 1.5:1 for a smoker's plan).

This at the same time that rating on any number of other factors will no longer be allowed.

In other words, insurance companies' ability to "target" anyone via higher premiums is being restricted here, not expanded.

It's being standardized and converted to a state decision, rather than a market decision. Which means government regulators (ideally representing the will of the majority) decide, and the rest of us are stuck with their preference.

 

[Esmeralda]

They need ways to make money.

so they need a way to push the costs off onto the people who are sick.

Ciggy smokers are far more likely to be sick huh.

Its better than making people who are sick and didnt do things to make themselves sick the target of these rules.


I personally think they should not be allowed to shift the costs like this and merely make their money by insuring more people and accepting a certain level of profit INSTEAD of always trying to increase the profit margin on the backs of sick people they do business with

Don't insurance companies adjust your health insurance rates according to your lifestyle, i.e., charging higher rates for people who smoke and take other risks with their health?

Yes they do. But, before PPACA at least, if you don't like how an insurance company does its 'adjusting' you can stop doing business with them. You can't decide to 'stop doing business' with government. If we set the state up as our insurance company, or worse mandate that we buy insurance from an insurance cartel, we're stuck.

Well then, I suggest you stop smoking, begin drinking moderately, lose weight, exercise regularly, and make sure you have safe sex. Then you won't be targeted for high cost health care. Oh, and don't forget to wear your seatbelt.

 

[dblack]

Well then, I suggest you stop smoking, begin drinking moderately, lose weight, exercise regularly, and make sure you have safe sex. Then you won't be targeted for high cost health care. Oh, and don't forget to wear your seatbelt.

Wow... at least you wear it proud!

Kudos on your honesty.

And, oh yeah, go fuck yourself.

 

[Esmeralda]

Well then, I suggest you stop smoking, begin drinking moderately, lose weight, exercise regularly, and make sure you have safe sex. Then you won't be targeted for high cost health care. Oh, and don't forget to wear your seatbelt.

Wow... at least you wear it proud!

Kudos on your honesty.

And, oh yeah, go fuck yourself.

And I'll be the one laughing all the way to the bank because my health care costs will be lower, not to mention saving hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars a year by not having to buy cigarettes. And feeling about ten times better than the average obese smoker as I go through my daily life.

 

[Truthmatters]

If you want all people to have healthcare you have to have a system with all people in it.
EVEN people who have NO money.


Insurance companies should have to serve all people and use the large numbers who can pay something to gleen their profit from.

If they can not do it strictly on BIG numbers of clients then it will HAVE to be made public.


You can not opperate a decent healthcare system where you have a whiole class of people who cant get any care.


You will end up with the poor sick making the paying people sick.

 

[dblack]

Well then, I suggest you stop smoking, begin drinking moderately, lose weight, exercise regularly, and make sure you have safe sex. Then you won't be targeted for high cost health care. Oh, and don't forget to wear your seatbelt.

Wow... at least you wear it proud!

Kudos on your honesty.

And, oh yeah, go fuck yourself.

And I'll be the one laughing all the way to the bank ...

I can hear the sadistic cackling now.

I know 'fascist' is an inflammatory term, and perhaps to vague for fruitful discussion. So let's just call people who support these kinds of measures "authoritarian jerkoffs who want to use government to tell other people how to live".

 

[Intense]

Thin Red-Line News


Obama Care will target the unhealthy groups like cigarette smokers, drinkers, and over weight persons. Unhealthy folks will get the short end of the stick.

And so they should. If people were monetarily rewarded for living a healthful lifestyle, more people would do so, saving money for everyone.

What's next? Gays? Drug Users? Extreme Athletes? Motorcycle Riders? Emergency Responders? Surfers? Climbers? Military Personnel? Golfers? that's high risk, right? Why stop there. There's meat eaters? How about those that consume genetically modified foods. How about those on dangerous prescription drugs? How about those that don't brush and floss every day? How about those that don't practice daily hygiene? Those that don't chew enough before swallowing? Those that drink through straws? Those that refuse to drink through straws? How about those that eat other peoples french fries, I hate that. Shit, that should be taxed. Pavlovian Response can be fun, huh. Why not buy it, take it home, and fuck up your kids heads with it, so that they can spend the rest of their lives in therapy. Good for the economy.

 

[Esmeralda]

Wow... at least you wear it proud!

Kudos on your honesty.

And, oh yeah, go fuck yourself.

And I'll be the one laughing all the way to the bank ...

I can hear the sadistic cackling now.

I know 'fascist' is an inflammatory term, and perhaps to vague for fruitful discussion. So let's just call people who support these kinds of measures "authoritarian jerkoffs who want to use government to tell other people how to live".

I don't care how you live as long as it doesn't affect me. But if someone is unhealthy because of poor lifestyle choices, and that poor health makes my health care cost more, it affects me. Surely you can put that two and two together. As well, people who smoke in enclosed places affect me. Huge people who sit next to me on airplanes and take up more than their alloted space affect me. If none of that affected me, I wouldn't care at all. So it is not about wanting to dictate to others just because I like to dictate to others; it is because the things they do affect me in a negative way; therefore, I am justified in having an opinion about it and wanting something to be done about it. And before you go there: I don't drive a car; I car pool and use mass transit.

 

[Stephanie]

well lets just hope our daddy government decides abortions aren't good and they should be banned or taxed so people will stop having them

 

[Truthmatters]

the right has forced this country to avoid what it will have to do eventually anyway.


Universal care.

healthcare cant be left to chance.


You cant pretend sick people dont make other people sick.

You cant pretend only people with healthcare get hit by trucks

 

[dblack]

And I'll be the one laughing all the way to the bank ...

I can hear the sadistic cackling now.

I know 'fascist' is an inflammatory term, and perhaps to vague for fruitful discussion. So let's just call people who support these kinds of measures "authoritarian jerkoffs who want to use government to tell other people how to live".

I don't care how you live as long as it doesn't affect me. But if someone is unhealthy because of poor lifestyle choices, and that poor healthy makes my health care cost more, it affects me.

It doesn't affect you unless your insurance companies covers the people in question. If you don't like that your insurance company covers smokers, or anyone else on your shit list, I'd suggest you find another insurance company.

Or, create a government agency that will force everyone else to conform to your idea of a clean and virtuous life...

Or, the aforementioned fucking yourself should always be considered as an option.

 

[Truthmatters]

there are two choices.

You allow people to die in the streets for lack of care


or


You craft a way for all to pay for everyone to get care.


The right will have to proclaim they want children dying in the street so they can have cheaper health care.

You are the sociopathic party

 

[Stephanie]

the right has forced this country to avoid what it will have to do eventually anyway.


Universal care.

healthcare cant be left to chance.


You cant pretend sick people dont make other people sick.

You cant pretend only people with healthcare get hit by trucks

yeah sure, wanting to be free from government and be responsible and make your own decision for your life, is now called being forced

 

[dblack]

there are two choices.

You allow people to die in the streets for lack of care


or


You craft a way for all to pay for everyone to get care.


The right will have to proclaim they want children dying in the street so they can have cheaper health care.

You are the sociopathic party

I've sort of learned to discount any screed that starts with 'there are only two choices'. It's almost always a con.

 

[slackjawed]

At present a couple I know have not been sober for several years. They both smoke cigarettes and pot, but the real damage comes from each of them drinking at least one bottle of cheap whiskey every day. Based on the fact that they can't work, because they drink so much, they both get disability. Whether this is how it is supposed to work or not I have no idea. But they are disabled because they are drunks according to them. They each get social security disability every month.

While some who work and do pay for their insurance under the new rules, many will fall into the group that is too poor to pay, like the drunks I speak of.
Then all it means is that they will be on the dole and the government will pay those higher rates.

win-win for the insurance companies

 

[Esmeralda]

I can hear the sadistic cackling now.

I know 'fascist' is an inflammatory term, and perhaps to vague for fruitful discussion. So let's just call people who support these kinds of measures "authoritarian jerkoffs who want to use government to tell other people how to live".

I don't care how you live as long as it doesn't affect me. But if someone is unhealthy because of poor lifestyle choices, and that poor healthy makes my health care cost more, it affects me.

It doesn't affect you unless your insurance companies covers the people in question. If you don't like that your insurance company covers smokers, or anyone else on your shit list, I'd suggest you find another insurance company.

Or, create a government agency that will force everyone else to conform to your idea of a clean and virtuous life...

Or, the aforementioned fucking yourself should always be considered as an option.

I believe you are the one who is expressing anger that the government is providing health care insurance and they will be targeting unhealthful lifestyle choices for highe premiums. Therefore, I'd be happy with staying with them. As you are the one who is unhappy with how the government will run things, it would make more sense for you to seek out and sign up with an alternative program. BTW, I lived and worked in the EU for 4 years. I paid taxes, a very high rate, and I assume much of that went to the universal health care program, of which I was able to avail myself if I needed it. In four years, I saw a doctor 3 or 4 times for minor problems, such as the flu, shots for traveling, and check ups. In other words, I didn't need it and didn't use it while I paid for other people to use it. And I didn't bitch about it once because I believe in universal health care. Still, the point is valid that if people live a more healthful lifestyle, they use health care less and bring everyone's costs down. If I were seriously injured in an accident or were to get seriously ill, I would use such a program and would appreciate that it existed. That is why I don't complain: it is INSURANCE. That is what insurance is for: in case you need it. I'd be happy paying for life insurance for 400 years and never needing it.