Posted on 03/01/2008 6:05:00 AM PST by Sub-Driver
'Fat tax' imposed on obese
March 02, 2008 12:00am Article from: The Sunday Telegraph
A "FAT tax" is being imposed on the obese, with life insurance firms charging at least 50 per cent more on their premiums.
The increased charge can be as much as 300 per cent if obese applicants fall into other high-risk health categories, such as being a smoker or having previous medical conditions.
All major insurance companies have introduced the policy, according to brokers.
Lifebroker Financial Assurance, Australia's leading online life insurance broker, told The Sunday Telegraph that overweight people should expect to pay higher premiums.
Chantelle Pain, insurance consultant with the firm, said: "Some insurers are more lenient than others, but the premium which obese people pay ranges from 50 per cent extra.
"Being significantly overweight means you are at greater risk of contracting certain diseases. It is the same as increasing a smoker's premium or someone who has previous medical conditions."
A body mass index (BMI) of 30 or more is attracting the price hike.
This is assessed when you fill out an application form that requires you to provide your personal details including height and weight.
A BMI of 20 to 25 for adults is considered healthy, but some doctors believe a BMI figure may not always be an accurate measure of health, as athletes often have a high weight-to-height due to the muscles built up for their sport.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
This should be allowed right after they impose taxes on stupid people. I am pretty confident that there will be more money collected on the stupid people vs fat people.
I don’t see the problem. The life insurance companies (private entities) should be able to develop their own underwriting policies, since ultimately they are on the hook to pay the medical bills. Fat people have more medical problems.
Duh.
Fat chance they get any from me.
What’s your view on increasing insurance premiums on people who engage in risky sexual practices? Don’t HIV patients require a lot of medical attention?
Turns out it’s private insurers doing this, not the governmente. And Australia (where this is happening) has less of an obesity problem than the U.S.
First they came for the smokers and ....
I went to a high school play last night and the number of enormous butts was amazing. Some of these, mostly women, in their 20s, 30s and 40s could barely walk they were so fat. Some had canes.
I don’t blame the insurance companies one bit. If you cannot take care of yourself why make the rest pay.
Exactly, this article is BS.
While it’s reasonable for insurance underwriters to raise premiums on higher risk insureds, I can’t help but think that government has its own plan to fight obesity by reintroducing wartime-style rationing.
Why not? If government believes that it can’t be controlled any other way, it will impose rationing one way or another.
Smokers should pay more for life and health insurance. What is wrong with that?
I came to the NE from Broward and 90% of the women are fat slobs....Its rare to see a nice bod........
The article is implying a tax on the obese...don’t think it won’t happen.
>>>>>on the hook to pay the medical bills. Fat people have more medical problems.
The story is about life insurance, not health insurance.
When does this population rise up and kill political correctness? Of course, that IS the beauty of PC; it renders mute; null and void the voices that otherwise would resist.
I have no problem with tobacco taxes. I generally like use taxes. I hate income, wealth or profit taxes. I wish all federal highways were toll roads and use the $ to eliminate all income and business taxes. If you do not like tobacco taxes you can quit smoking.
I add this to my list of reasons I’m glad I’m getting up in years.
>>>>>>I don’t blame the insurance companies one bit. If you cannot take care of yourself why make the rest pay.
I’m overweight, mostly due to an illness which kept me inactive for a good while but which is now finished (so losing all of that weight is my new imperative).
IMO, the insurance companies can charge whatever they want for their product.
Absolutely. A private insurer should be able to specify ANY conditions upon which it will grant insurance, including sexual practices, lifestyle, occupation, physical condition, etc. That’s why it’s called PRIVATE.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.