Ping
Well, technically, it’s presonal responsibility. If you’re full of unhealthy habits, don’t expect the rest of us to pay for your unhealthy lifestyle. But it should be a choice. You wanna smoke, no problem, pay extra in health insurance. Wanna eat steak and mashed potatoes all the time and have high cholesterol (like myself), expect to pay more for health care.
Simple economics.
I wonder if MSNBC would have written such a glowing review if employers were viewing homosexual behavior as a health risk and penalizing employees accordingly.
Further evidence (if any were needed) that we need the tax break for insurance premiums and health costs transferred from employers to individuals.
It would solve a whole helluva lot of problems right there. Take a ball and chain off american business, create real health insurance “portability,” and eliminate most—if not all—incentive towards “ageism” in the workplace and snooping into employee health histories.
Now all we need are some politicians (beginning with our current president) to show some guts and determination and start flogging this to the public at every opportunity.
If you live in a hurricane zone (e.g.,Florida) you pay higher homeowner's insurance premiums.If you're a skydiver you pay higher life insurance premiums.So if you're a smoker....
This strikes at the heart of the problem of increasing health costs in the United States.
“Don’t smoke. That’s all. Just don’t smoke.”
-—Yul Brynner
Another reason to de-link insurance and employment.
I can't say as I particularly like this. But, I understand the logic behind it.
Unreal.
My simple question is who is to judge these things?
I don’t like anything that’s left to the subjective whim of any group.
On the flip side, there are plenty of “Health Conscious” people who are at the doctor’s all the time, and then there are people like me who only go to the doctor when it’s completely needed.
But I smoke, so I should pay greater premiums even though my benefits use is far less than most?
This is why I don’t like ideas like this, if it was based on actual use, that would be a different story.
Just like car insurance, don’t increase a persons premiums until they show that they make excessive use of it.
If your recreational habits extend farther than time in the gym (Mandatory time in the gym) or sedate walking and bird watching (in approved safe areas), look out, that list will get longer...
I can see lawsuits demanding what the justification for these seemingly arbitrary surcharges is. If they can’t substantiate it then its discrimination.
Well, all I have to say is that if they pull this with my health insurance it’s time to talk to a lawyer regarding health threats of homosexuality versus smoking.
The solution is to sever the link between employment and benefits.
Pay me my whole salary in cash and let me buy my healthcare and fund my retirement on pre-tax dollars.
All the folks in this thread taking the “if you don’t want to pay more, don’t smoke, eat, etc.” attitude will be shocked to find how quickly charging people more for unhealthy habits will bring about national socialized health care.