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 all know that being overweight increases the risks of heart disease, diabetes, heart attack, etc. Should higher risk individuals in group plans pay more for their insurance? Is it prudent to charge more for obese employees than their thinner counterparts who end up subsidizing their insurance costs? What about state and federal employees who receive insurance from the taxpayer?
We all know that being overweight increases the risks of heart disease, diabetes, heart attack, etc. Should higher risk individuals in group plans pay more for their insurance? Is it prudent to charge more for obese employees than their thinner counterparts who end up subsidizing their insurance costs? What about state and federal employees who receive insurance from the taxpayer?
We all know that being overweight increases the risks of heart disease, diabetes, heart attack, etc. Should higher risk individuals in group plans pay more for their insurance? Is it prudent to charge more for obese employees than their thinner counterparts who end up subsidizing their insurance costs? What about state and federal employees who receive insurance from the taxpayer?
When will this all stop? What about people who drink soda or what about those who don't wear their seat belts or what about people who have a family history of say, breast cancer? where is it going to stop? The next thing you know someone will decide vegetarians should get a deduction on their insurance because they live a healthier lifestyle or visa versa, maybe they are not getting enough protein..?/ what about the person who exercises regularly compared to the one who doesn't do anything but lay on the couch at night, watching television..??
Really interesting should be also tax those who are skinny who eat bacon and eggs and appear to be healthy but really are close to having a heart attack.
then again it would be hard because you cant tax the food.
After all eggs were good for you then bad for you, then only the white part of the egg etc.
Do we really want to start discussing what is considered FAT based on a percentage of body fat, and or maybe loot at finding the real cost to insurance companies and why the cost is so high. Seems to me FAT people will only make insurance companies richer in how much they can charge of which will only be higher prices.
Its also true that black people also are more likely to eat unhealthy foods based on culture and ecomomic status. Do we really want to start this unfair system because the reality is not about being FAT but something else.
We all know that people who ride motorcycles have more head injuries that put them in long-term care facilities than non-motorcycle rides. If we start taxing people based on their life style, where do you end? Tax skateboarders, motorcycle riders, people who go clubbing, etc., etc.
They are higher risk health insurance wise, hence they pay more for insurance.
At my company, you get a $300/yr discount if you prove you go to a gym on a regular basis because that makes you a lower risk, insurance wise.
Some companies make you get a physical before they even give you health insurance.
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.
