Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We were notified that there will be a surcharge added to our monthly premiums beginning in 2015 for anyone using any product with nicotine in it at all.
That includes vaping, gum, & patches.
Estimated to be $75. on individuals and almost $160. for couples insured with the company.
These estimated rates are based on what they would be if they had been instituted this year so I gather the costs will be higher in actuality.
You must quit by August 1st to avoid the surcharge coming next year.
Smoking is a hazard for sure but what about those that are obese, eat fast food, drink soda, or drink alcohol?
Don't use "you" if you don't mean it in the specific sense. Specify exactly who you're talking about.
Would you prefer that I use "one." One never knows what one can do if one is... no thanks. If you can't take a general you, then I'm very sorry for your linguistic inflexibility. I'm not going to write a treatise in Shakespearean English. This is not the turn of the seventeenth century.
And be that as it may, I shalln't respond to THINE volleys, for I shall assume THEE to be involved in the insurance business. Thus, it is a rather useless exercise that ONE enter the fair city walls of Rome and express ONE'S disdain for the glorious Roman Empire.
It's interesting. My spouse doesn't lie, and my spouse doesn't even smoke, but rather just chews nicotine gum. I wonder, since you're a right-winger and my spouse is a liberal, whether that default assumption of deceptive intention differs based on political perspective.
You have seen the way I feel about freedom & liberties?
I'd prefer you say who you mean. The reason why none of those perturbations work for you is that they still don't apply to me, personally, so my objections still apply, objections for which I noticed you don't have a response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
You have seen the way I feel about freedom & liberties?
Charging smokers more has been going on for a long, long time and has nothing to do with Obamacare.
That some emoployer sponsored group healthcare plans also seek to impose higher premiums on smokers, is really no different.
I think 75-80% of the population does not smoke.
Actually you're incorrect about the Obamacare part. This was, in fact, part of Obamacare.
Lighting up may cost you under the Affordable Care Act. The health-care law bars insurers from charging people higher premiums for costly health conditions, so diabetics or cancer patients pay the same rate as healthy people the same age. But there’s an exception for the 19 percent of American adults who smoke: Insurance companies can charge them premiums as much as 50 percent higher than nonsmokers will pay.
Here's what I don't understand. If a smoker is quitting and utilizing products such as nicotine gum and/or vaping, this is penalizing them as well. So, the supposed incentive to quit smoking (e.g. the higher cost if you smoke) is removed even if a person utilizes smoking cessation products. I think they need to figure out a way to differentiate between those using these products and those smoking.
On another note, does anyone find it odd that an insurer can charge more for smoking but cannot for recreational drug use?
I remember the yearly forms my parents got every year going back to the early 90s. If you smoked, you paid a higher rate.
I thought the right was all about personal responsibility? Apparently not when it comes to taking responsibility for your own poor choices instead of forcing others to subsidize your crappy lifestyle.
Just like smokers and life insurance.
Where did the idiots in government come up with the $75 because it isn't anywhere near enough.
Here's what I don't understand. If a smoker is quitting and utilizing products such as nicotine gum and/or vaping, this is penalizing them as well. So, the supposed incentive to quit smoking (e.g. the higher cost if you smoke) is removed even if a person utilizes smoking cessation products. I think they need to figure out a way to differentiate between those using these products and those smoking.
On another note, does anyone find it odd that an insurer can charge more for smoking but cannot for recreational drug use?
They do charge for recreational drug use.
Thats why I have to get a physical every year, checking my blood for drugs and disease. But I pay low premiums. Yes, I do vaporize nicotine
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
