Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rktman

The solution to the problem does not seem all that perplexing to me. Insurance costs should be based on your measure of exposure for the insurance company. Teenage drivers, those with tickets, and those who have had accidents pay more for auto insurance. If you weigh 300 pounds, never exercise, and smoke, you should pay higher premiums than someone who takes care of himself. If you engage in the highest risk factor, male to male anal sex (which is now celebrated in elementary school curriculum), your premiums should be through the roof.


41 posted on 07/09/2014 7:09:42 AM PDT by doug from upland (Obama and the leftists - destroying our country one day at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: doug from upland

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/tabor/050119


47 posted on 07/09/2014 7:11:51 AM PDT by doug from upland (Obama and the leftists - destroying our country one day at a time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

To: doug from upland

Unfortunately the whole mess is set up by actuarial tables instead of a case by case/individual process. I smoke and the only med I’m on is for psoriasis. Other than that, my own health is good to excellent. Granted some smokers are in terrible health and end up costing more insurance wise. I was probably in a lot better health and in better shape than a lot of my co-workers were. But, due to the tables, I get to pay more. Same for life insurance. I declined to certifiy being smoke free so it costs me more for my life insurance. Oh well.


64 posted on 07/09/2014 7:27:25 AM PDT by rktman (Ethnicity: Nascarian. Race: Daytonafivehundrian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson