Things to Think About if You're Considering SD (Sioux Falls: 2009, insurance)

[DeadwoodJ]

I'll be glad for my car insurance as I turn 25 next month and since I bought a house my car insurance will go WAY down .....I bought a house in Harrisburg in November and since its brand new I pay only the lot taxes which are about $750 for $140,000 house.....next year, when my taxes go up to include the house I think the current Mill in Harrisburg is $17.61x$1000 so that equals.....about $2400.....stupid quick expanding school districts....always wanting new buildings

[Jammie]

Originally Posted by DannyBanany

Jammie, I don't think that it's fair for people under 25 to pay higher car insurance rates either. In fact, it's ageism and it's considered illegal. You would think that they would start you off with a clean slate and see how you do at first. I guess it kind of depends on obese people and health insurance. If they have a condition (thyroid, genetics, etc.) I don't think their rates should be any higher than a someone who's healthy. If they have a drive-thru addiction and an inactive lifestyle they should pay more.

Sorry, but I think smokers should have to pay higher premiums. They choose to put themselves at risk for health complications.

OK, that's fair enough. What about alcoholics? Social drinkers? Obese? It doesn't seem fair to single out one group and since they're now on group two (the obese), who will they go after next? People who ski or snowmobile or ride motorcycle? Just where would they put the cutoff point?

Ashnat, like I said~I don't know if they still do that in Indiana, but I had relatives who lived there and when their children were being educated, they had to pay for all those things. It was northwestern Ind. and my understanding is that it was statewide. But that has been several years ago so I don't know if it's still the case. But my point is, would all parents find that as an acceptable alternative? Personally, I wouldn't think it'd be fair and it could put a lot of strains on budgets. You may have the income level where you could do it, but many people don't. Just throwing out alternatives and there is a possibility that money will be more free flowing for everything~law enforcement, education, etc. IF the stimulus bill passes.

Deadwood, the rate of tax in my county is nearly 21 per 1,000. That's quite comparable to most counties in our state.

[BusySocialWorker]

Where I work, smokers do pay higher health insurance costs - not much, but something and I do think that is right - Smoking is different then riding a motorcycle or social drinking in that it is proven that it causes health problems, not that it might. By smoking you are conciously making a choice that WILL impact your health - it is not a question of if it will, it is when it will.

The same thing happens with life insurance - they ask about your behaviors and you pay based on that.

[Jammie]

Originally Posted by BusySocialWorker

Where I work, smokers do pay higher health insurance costs - not much, but something and I do think that is right - Smoking is different then riding a motorcycle or social drinking in that it is proven that it causes health problems, not that it might. By smoking you are conciously making a choice that WILL impact your health - it is not a question of if it will, it is when it will.

The same thing happens with life insurance - they ask about your behaviors and you pay based on that.

OK, so how do you explain the fact that a friend of mine who moved away several years ago just called to let me know that her 40 year old sis is dying of cancer? She never smoked, wasn't around second hand smoke, didn't work where there was smoke, etc. Then versus the man I spoke with a couple weeks ago who was at a retirement home~outside~having a cig who said he was first caught smoking at age 14. His birth date was March, 1912. This isn't isolated and I personally know of another lady who smoked right up to the end of her life at 106. I know you're occupation is related to the medical profession so I'm sure you do see a lot of the misery smoking causes. But you wouldn't see the people that it has never harmed.

I didn't mean for this to end up turning into a "smoking" thread either, but I guess I only have myself to blame. Somehow we've moved away from constructive criticism of our state and ways to improve it and I'm more at fault then anyone so I'll just read.

[ashnat]

Smoking doesn't cause all types of cancer. I'm assuming you meant lung cancer, tho.

[Jammie]

Originally Posted by ashnat

Smoking doesn't cause all types of cancer. I'm assuming you meant lung cancer, tho.

I wasn't going to post on this thread again, but I don't want to be rude so I'll answer your question. Yes, lung cancer.

But now you have me curious~Stats are generally gathered by figuring that someone needs to be smoke-free for ten years in order to not have "tobacco related" on their death certificate. Unless it's an accident, you can be pretty sure it'll be there for things like all types of cancer, heart attack, stroke, pneumonia, etc~things that non-smokers often die from, too.

SO, I'm wondering if this situation would be different~friend's Sis would've been a smoker and have cancer~would've you asked me if it was lung cancer or would've you taken it into consideration that it may not be tobacco-related? Just curious and you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

Right now the bill has failed and I think it was mentioned by someone else earlier. The vote was 18 to 19, but it will definitely be brought back another time. The state just wasn't prepared to lose the revenue. BUT I did learn something~it would not have affected the reservations and their casinos at all.

[DeadwoodJ]

Yea, I don't know if some laws passed by states or counties can be enforced on most Indian Reservations because they're ruled by the Department of Interior I think......Thats why they can have casinos etc....Usually they have their own police and government.....

[ashnat]

I would have asked what type of cancer. Breast cancer would have come to mind.

[SD snowbird]

Ok, gotta do it - there are bars, restaurants and all the others that are non-smoking. There are ones that are smoking. The choice of the business. The choice of the consumer. If you don't smoke, don't go to the "smoking places" if you do smoke, don't go to the "non-smoking places". It's all about choices people. As for service workers, they choose the place they work. If you don't smoke, why would you choose to work in a place that allows smoking. Once again, it's all about choice people...

[Chris19]

SD snowbird, you have a very good point, even though I may not agree with you completely. As for me, I do not like going to bars all that often due to a lot of them being smoky and my allergies and sinuses usually act up around second-hand smoke. Same with certain restuarants.