obamacare to have a surcharge for smokers

[Zoom-boing]

Yup. Why are smokers singled out and not drinkers or diabetics?

why just diabetics?.....why not people with other serious heath issues?...

Pre-existing conditions?

Yes. People with p/e's should pay more, they are a higher risk to insure.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...vy-smoker-gets-great-deal-with-obamacare.html

So, what is the Republican plan to get insurance companies to stop charging more for smokers?

Never mind. I already know the answer to that.

Get rich feeding out of the public trough working only one third of the year. Works for Boehner.

As long as you're wanting to charge more for various behaviors, how about his skin-cancer-causing-tanning-bed-addiction. Matter of fact, there's not much he does that could be called healthy and us tax payers get to foot the bill.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Asthma has many triggers and smoking is just one of them. Most people that have asthma will have it whether they smoke or not however smoking will often make Asthma attacks worse.

Asthma is an interesting thing. When my eldest daughter was 4 years old, the pediatrician told us she had "mild asthma" and that we needed to keep a close watch on it, and to never smoke around her. She's mid 20's now and has no lung issues, never used asthma medication and smokes. Merely anecdotal, but I think many over-blow asthma to the point that kids and parents over-react resulting in excessive and unneeded treatment.

But surely, you did not smoke around a four year old who was predisposed to asthma.

I say, smoke all "you" want but "you" don't have the right to force others to smoke "your" cigarettes.

BTW, I live in a pretty backward area, where a lot of people smoke. We often see people smoking with their little kids in the car. We smell cigarettes on people quite often. Early yesterday, checking in for surgery, there was one group in particular who just reeked. One guy, the patient, didn't have any teeth you could see, they all wore crappy, shabby clothes, obviously poor and were talking to a financial aid case worker. No money, no insurance but they could afford cigarettes.

As disgusting as they smelled, imagine being the surgery staff working on that guy. Its really cold here but there were patients wrapped in blankets, sitting outside in wheelchairs, just puffing and shivering.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Smokers have always paid more for insurance.

Only if they bought insurance. Now they have no choice.

If they didn't buy insurance, those of us who did got to pay they way.

Its way past time they paid for their own hc insurance.

 

[Zoom-boing]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...vy-smoker-gets-great-deal-with-obamacare.html

So, what is the Republican plan to get insurance companies to stop charging more for smokers?

Never mind. I already know the answer to that.

Get rich feeding out of the public trough working only one third of the year. Works for Boehner.

As long as you're wanting to charge more for various behaviors, how about his skin-cancer-causing-tanning-bed-addiction. Matter of fact, there's not much he does that could be called healthy and us tax payers get to foot the bill.

Now you're catching on.

Private insurance charging more is one thing, gov't doing it and joe taxpayer foots the bill ... hell, then we will all be wanting a say in what others do, what behaviors they engage in.

 

[Flopper]

This isn't new.

There were smoking surcharges prior to ObamaCare.

Yup. Why are smokers singled out and not drinkers or diabetics?

The ACA is simply allowing insurance companies to charge higher rates for smoking, something they have done for many years. It's a continuation of war the against smoking that government has waged for 50 years.

To charge higher rates for pre-existing condition would violate one of the primary purposes of the law.

 

[Zoom-boing]

This isn't new.

There were smoking surcharges prior to ObamaCare.

Yup. Why are smokers singled out and not drinkers or diabetics?

The ACA is simply allowing insurance companies to charge higher rates for smoking, something they have done for many years. It's a continuation of war the against smoking that government has waged for 50 years.

To charge higher rates for pre-existing condition would violate one of the primary purposes of the law.

No kidding. I'm against this primary purpose of the law.

You have a p/e, you are a higher risk, you pay more.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Which will effectively price them out of the insurance market.

ObamaCare slams smokers with sky-high premium costs, could backfire | Fox News

Unlike drug addicts, alcoholics, or the obese -- all of whom represent higher-than-average medical costs -- smokers are the only such group with a pre-existing condition that ObamaCare penalizes. It allows insurance companies to charge smokers up to 50 percent more than non-smokers for an identical policy.

For example, premiums for a 64-year-old non-smoker, according to the Kaiser Health Calculator, cost $9,000 a year for a standard "silver" insurance plan.

The same policy for a smoker could cost $13,600.

When "affordable" health care is 33% to 50% of your income, it isn't so affordable any more.

I have posted it before, so I'm not looking it up again. But there was a study out of Vanderbilt that showed that smokers do not cost the system that much. They tend to die in mid 50s. Problem solved. It is th he is such a dumb **** he doesn't know if he is coming or going.

Okay, this is it. THIS post is the funniest damn example of Twist and Shout I have ever read.

Another good one -

... and as also stated in this thread, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were fought by chain smoking very fit 20 year olds. In fact they smoked ******* unfiltered luckies.

I'm of the Vietnam era - 67yo. I just had surgery that my younger sister cannot have because she's such a heavy smoker, she would not survive the anesthesia. I'm not in touch with her but last time I talked to her, I thought it was her son - early 20s and already a heavy smoker, just like mom.

I've said it before - my whole family eats meat, smokes, is diabetic and they're all kicking off at an early age while I'm traveling to France, Belgium, Great Britain, the Caribbean and, next year, Wales and Ireland.

What bizarre thinking - smoke while you're young so you'll be sick and then die by 55.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...vy-smoker-gets-great-deal-with-obamacare.html

So, what is the Republican plan to get insurance companies to stop charging more for smokers?

Never mind. I already know the answer to that.

Get rich feeding out of the public trough working only one third of the year. Works for Boehner.

As long as you're wanting to charge more for various behaviors, how about his skin-cancer-causing-tanning-bed-addiction. Matter of fact, there's not much he does that could be called healthy and us tax payers get to foot the bill.

Now you're catching on.

Private insurance charging more is one thing, gov't doing it and joe taxpayer foots the bill ... hell, then we will all be wanting a say in what others do, what behaviors they engage in.

Post the part of the bill that says 'government charging smokers more'.

People get screwed over by their employers and they blame Obama. Or their insurance company charges the for smoking and they blame Obama.

Every one of you know better but not one of you will admit it.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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!!!

Who should foot the bill for the brain injuries?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

Did you even bother to read the rest of my posts?

I have ZERO problem with people who are higher risk paying more because they are higher risk. Period. Not just smokers ... people with any type of pre-exsiting condition. We pay more because the hubs smokes, as it should be. The problem with obamacare is that now those who have any type of pre-existing condition will not pay more even though they are more of a risk to insure. I have a HUGE problem being forced to pay more so that those with pre-exsiting conditions don't have to, so they get to 'pay the same'. That is bullshit.

You're not aware of the 80% mandate then.

And you don't agree with Socialist EMTALA.

Whatever.

 

[Zoom-boing]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...vy-smoker-gets-great-deal-with-obamacare.html

So, what is the Republican plan to get insurance companies to stop charging more for smokers?

Never mind. I already know the answer to that.

Get rich feeding out of the public trough working only one third of the year. Works for Boehner.

As long as you're wanting to charge more for various behaviors, how about his skin-cancer-causing-tanning-bed-addiction. Matter of fact, there's not much he does that could be called healthy and us tax payers get to foot the bill.

Now you're catching on.

Private insurance charging more is one thing, gov't doing it and joe taxpayer foots the bill ... hell, then we will all be wanting a say in what others do, what behaviors they engage in.

Post the part of the bill that says 'government charging smokers more'.

People get screwed over by their employers and they blame Obama. Or their insurance company charges the for smoking and they blame Obama.

Every one of you know better but not one of you will admit it.

I didn't say smokers, did I? Gov't is charging everyone who does not have a p/e more so those with p/e's get to 'pay the same'.

Again, have you NOT read any of my posts??? We pay more because the hubs smokes, and that's as it should be.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...vy-smoker-gets-great-deal-with-obamacare.html

So, what is the Republican plan to get insurance companies to stop charging more for smokers?

Never mind. I already know the answer to that.

Get rich feeding out of the public trough working only one third of the year. Works for Boehner.

As long as you're wanting to charge more for various behaviors, how about his skin-cancer-causing-tanning-bed-addiction. Matter of fact, there's not much he does that could be called healthy and us tax payers get to foot the bill.

Now you're catching on.

Private insurance charging more is one thing, gov't doing it and joe taxpayer foots the bill ... hell, then we will all be wanting a say in what others do, what behaviors they engage in.

I just noticed the rest of this -

Insurance charged/charges more. Not government. Don't pretend you don't know that.

Yes, taxpayers have subsidized congress' health care all along. That was government mandated. Why didn't that bother you all these years?

 

[martybegan]

Which will effectively price them out of the insurance market.

ObamaCare slams smokers with sky-high premium costs, could backfire | Fox News

Unlike drug addicts, alcoholics, or the obese -- all of whom represent higher-than-average medical costs -- smokers are the only such group with a pre-existing condition that ObamaCare penalizes. It allows insurance companies to charge smokers up to 50 percent more than non-smokers for an identical policy.

For example, premiums for a 64-year-old non-smoker, according to the Kaiser Health Calculator, cost $9,000 a year for a standard "silver" insurance plan.

The same policy for a smoker could cost $13,600.

When "affordable" health care is 33% to 50% of your income, it isn't so affordable any more.

I have posted it before, so I'm not looking it up again. But there was a study out of Vanderbilt that showed that smokers do not cost the system that much. They tend to die in mid 50s. Problem solved. It is th he is such a dumb **** he doesn't know if he is coming or going.

Okay, this is it. THIS post is the funniest damn example of Twist and Shout I have ever read.

Another good one -

... and as also stated in this thread, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were fought by chain smoking very fit 20 year olds. In fact they smoked ******* unfiltered luckies.

I'm of the Vietnam era - 67yo. I just had surgery that my younger sister cannot have because she's such a heavy smoker, she would not survive the anesthesia. I'm not in touch with her but last time I talked to her, I thought it was her son - early 20s and already a heavy smoker, just like mom.

I've said it before - my whole family eats meat, smokes, is diabetic and they're all kicking off at an early age while I'm traveling to France, Belgium, Great Britain, the Caribbean and, next year, Wales and Ireland.

What bizarre thinking - smoke while you're young so you'll be sick and then die by 55.

The post I was responding to implied that smoking will lead to lower defense capability, which was the point (the idiotic point) I was refuting, not the tangent you shot off on.

Try to read the ******* post before responding you moron.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now you're catching on.

Private insurance charging more is one thing, gov't doing it and joe taxpayer foots the bill ... hell, then we will all be wanting a say in what others do, what behaviors they engage in.

Post the part of the bill that says 'government charging smokers more'.

People get screwed over by their employers and they blame Obama. Or their insurance company charges the for smoking and they blame Obama.

Every one of you know better but not one of you will admit it.

I didn't say smokers, did I? Gov't is charging everyone who does not have a p/e more so those with p/e's get to 'pay the same'.

Again, have you NOT read any of my posts??? We pay more because the hubs smokes, and that's as it should be.

ZoomBoing, you post variations of the same thing over and over and over.

No, I didn't read all your posts.

 

[Flopper]

Which will effectively price them out of the insurance market.

ObamaCare slams smokers with sky-high premium costs, could backfire | Fox News

Unlike drug addicts, alcoholics, or the obese -- all of whom represent higher-than-average medical costs -- smokers are the only such group with a pre-existing condition that ObamaCare penalizes. It allows insurance companies to charge smokers up to 50 percent more than non-smokers for an identical policy.

For example, premiums for a 64-year-old non-smoker, according to the Kaiser Health Calculator, cost $9,000 a year for a standard "silver" insurance plan.

The same policy for a smoker could cost $13,600.

When "affordable" health care is 33% to 50% of your income, it isn't so affordable any more.

I have posted it before, so I'm not looking it up again. But there was a study out of Vanderbilt that showed that smokers do not cost the system that much. They tend to die in mid 50s. Problem solved. It is th he is such a dumb **** he doesn't know if he is coming or going.

Okay, this is it. THIS post is the funniest damn example of Twist and Shout I have ever read.

Another good one -

... and as also stated in this thread, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were fought by chain smoking very fit 20 year olds. In fact they smoked ******* unfiltered luckies.

I'm of the Vietnam era - 67yo. I just had surgery that my younger sister cannot have because she's such a heavy smoker, she would not survive the anesthesia. I'm not in touch with her but last time I talked to her, I thought it was her son - early 20s and already a heavy smoker, just like mom.

I've said it before - my whole family eats meat, smokes, is diabetic and they're all kicking off at an early age while I'm traveling to France, Belgium, Great Britain, the Caribbean and, next year, Wales and Ireland.

What bizarre thinking - smoke while you're young so you'll be sick and then die by 55.

Live Fast and Die Young.
That's pretty popular thinking for 20 something but as we grow a little older we're not too sure. Next thing we know we're pushing 70 and we figure it's too late to change. Unfortunately, most people have to learn this for themselves.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I have posted it before, so I'm not looking it up again. But there was a study out of Vanderbilt that showed that smokers do not cost the system that much. They tend to die in mid 50s. Problem solved. It is th he is such a dumb **** he doesn't know if he is coming or going.

Okay, this is it. THIS post is the funniest damn example of Twist and Shout I have ever read.

Another good one -

... and as also stated in this thread, WWII, Korea and Vietnam were fought by chain smoking very fit 20 year olds. In fact they smoked ******* unfiltered luckies.

I'm of the Vietnam era - 67yo. I just had surgery that my younger sister cannot have because she's such a heavy smoker, she would not survive the anesthesia. I'm not in touch with her but last time I talked to her, I thought it was her son - early 20s and already a heavy smoker, just like mom.

I've said it before - my whole family eats meat, smokes, is diabetic and they're all kicking off at an early age while I'm traveling to France, Belgium, Great Britain, the Caribbean and, next year, Wales and Ireland.

What bizarre thinking - smoke while you're young so you'll be sick and then die by 55.

Live Fast and Die Young.
That's pretty popular thinking for 20 something but as we grow a little older we're not too sure. Next thing we know we're pushing 70 and we figure it's too late to change. Unfortunately, most people have to learn this for themselves.

Lucky for them, its a very short learning curve.

 

[Harry Dresden]

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.

Did you even bother to read the rest of my posts?

I have ZERO problem with people who are higher risk paying more because they are higher risk. Period. Not just smokers ... people with any type of pre-exsiting condition. We pay more because the hubs smokes, as it should be. The problem with obamacare is that now those who have any type of pre-existing condition will not pay more even though they are more of a risk to insure. I have a HUGE problem being forced to pay more so that those with pre-exsiting conditions don't have to, so they get to 'pay the same'. That is bullshit.

question Zoom....should someone who develops a disease while insured..... at that point have their premium raised?...

 

[Pop23]

But wait, obomacare is a tax, the surcharge is an additional tax so the smokers cost of healthcare is covered.

There then can be no excuse for the sin taxes placed on tobacco.

That OK?

 

[Flopper]

But wait, obomacare is a tax, the surcharge is an additional tax so the smokers cost of healthcare is covered.

There then can be no excuse for the sin taxes placed on tobacco.

That OK?

I repeat. The ACA does not require that premiums should be higher for smokers. The insurance companies set their premiums. If they chose to do so, they could set the premium the same for smokers and not smokers.

The only way to make sure the companies charge the same premium for smokers and non-smokers is through legislation.