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 are currently enrolled in my employer's plan. I pay the same as a coworker even though he is 300+ LB and have missed many days of work due to health issues.
Because you are a part of a group health insurance plan at your job.
You are paying for everyone in your group.
I've worked a lot with buying benefits for various organizations and the organization itself is viewed by insurance companies as a 'pool' of covered persons.
If you went out by yourself to get insurance, you 'd more than likely pay more than what you are paying at work because the risk of any potential health issues you may have in the future is covered by everyone else's premiums. Plus your company is paying a part of your premium. Companies typically pay 50-75% of the premium for each employee.
For all you know, you could have some cancer growing in you right now whose cost will greatly surpass the 300lb co-workers issues if he/she has diabetes or heart disease or some other issue. Weight is also not a guarantee that someone has specific health issues either. I have a co-worker (who I adore and actually consider a friend outside of work) who is not obese and who is thinner than me and "looks" healthier but they have polycystic kidney disease and has a host of health problems and will more than likely need a kidney transplant in the next couple years. Even though I'm sure I have about 50lbs on them, I don't have any health problems. We pay the same as well for our insurance. This particular co-worker is always afraid that they will lose their job because they would not be able to live the quality of life they live due to their health condition. Many health issues are hereditary (my co-workers disease is hereditary) and there is no way of knowing what people will get in the future.
FWIW one of my main "liberal" leans is that I do support a wide ranging public option for health insurance. I don't support abolishing the private sector insurance industry (mostly because a lot of people would be out of work) but I do support giving people the option of joining Medicaid or Medicare in order to cover everyone. This would actually allow employers to be outside the burden of providing insurance to their employees. You think you shouldn't pay as much as your 300lb co-worker but I'm certain that your employer pays 2-3 times for your insurance versus what you are paying yourself. One of the largest expenses for companies/institutions is health insurance premiums for their employees. Employees are typically ignorant about how much the company is paying for you. It is a LOT of money on an annual basis usually 7-9 figures or more depending on the number of covered persons.
For the last time folks, healthy people are a bigger drain on the health insurance industry than unhealthy people because end of life care that involves Alzheimer's and other cognitively-diminished conditions are much more expensive to treat.
Person A hits the weights, jogs 676 miles per day, eats his oatmeal.
Person B hits the Twinkies, alcohol, and drugs.
Person A lives until he/she is 93 with the last 6 years under treatment for those Alzheimer's/dementia/cognitive issues. $$$$!!!
Person B gets some early health conditions due to that "bad" lifestyle which yes.. in the shorter term accrue cost on the collective. But he also has a heart attack and dies at 61. No cognitive-care expenses.
I understand why nearly all of you folks either don't understand this or deny it. Your precious State has developed a system that promotes division and misinformation.
The first reply to this thread mentioned how insurance companies do have rewards in place for healthy choices (so the OP was wrong to begin with). Much like the State itself the insurance industry has incentive to keep you alive. Unlike the State though, which wants all of us to pay in for 30+ years and never collect (by dying), the insurance industry wants us to live longer to collect on those end of life costs.
Marxism is a confusing and often hypocritical system. Why you folks enjoy it so I'll never know.
Ya know, you may have a point, and I never thought of it that way.
I still always go back to how awful our food is in this country. I do wonder if we ever get to a day where there is national health care, would then the nation crack down on the horrible-ness of our food? It seems like it would then be in their best interest to have better crops and closer watch on GMO's, and etc etc.
Also, why wouldn't we just get our physical every year - full work up with blood, psychology test, everything- and then submit it for possible penalty or reimbursement?
It's really hard: Either no one has health care, or everyone has healthcare. Each choice is bad in it's own way. But the absolute worst choice of all is the one where "only rich people get to live healthy".
All insurance should be based on actuarial science and risk calculation. A car insurer can jack up the rates of the 4x DUI person, and the home owner's insurer can jack up the rates of the person who builds in the earthquake/tornado/flood plain zones, but the health insurer cannot jack up the rates of the 55 year old morbidly obese smoker with Type 2 diabetes...because it would be mean.
Government meddling is exactly 100% of the reason behind all of the foolishness with health care and health insurance pricing, costs, etc.
I agree 100%. I exercise daily and keep my weight in check. I don't smoke. Yet I have to pay for those who abuse themselves. I am totally against that.
If we want to do it like car insurance. Force these people to pay their fair share with high insurance premiums and if they don't or can't pay. Lock them up. Or simply don't treat them if they get ill. People get locked up for drinking and driving.
I've said several times that I don't care about the obese guy or the system. I care about myself. I'm not questioning the current system because I care for the system. I question it because I care about fairness to myself.
Regarding lifespan, I plan on living forever.
Thank you Jim Fixx. But can you at least try to engage on this because there were some deeper points there that you completely missed.
The part you fundamentally do not grasp is that insurance is not always fair. *gasp*
There are societal pressures which manifest in law and regulation and those are all heavily heavily regulated.
Imagine your co-worker gets cancer and their costs the next year or two are going to be 50k a year but they only make 30k a year. Should we increase their premiums to 60k annually? What about pre-existing conditions? I already pointed out how social security is unfair to smokers and the obese but you didn't like hearing an example where it's unfair in your favor.
Setting aside healthcare let's talk car insurance. You're obviously smart so this is a test, let's see if you can logic through the problem.
Let's say you have regular drivers and then some people that had past DUI, crashes etc. but have their license back and are now looking for insurance.
Regular Drivers actual annual insurance cost = 2k
Past Bad driver actual annual cost = 10k
However, that's not what they ultimately get charged because the past bad driver goes into a risk pool etc. and ends up paying 4k and the regular drivers pay 2.3k to pick up the slack.
Why does that make sense for society and even for some of the other drivers?
Spoiler
If you charge them 10k they'll drive uninsured anyway. Getting them to pay *something* because accidents will happen anyway and rehabilitating their driving record is incentive.
Insurance is messy. You're dealing with people, politics etc. good thing you went into more cut and dried (not easier mind you but more linked to reality like physics) because working in insurance would likely drive you nuts from what I'm picking up on.
I haven't even given some of the REALLY egregious examples of politics messing with insurance rates.
But the absolute worst choice of all is the one where "only rich people get to live healthy".
I've heard this before where eating healthy = expensive. This is absolutely not true.
Potato is cheap. Oatmeal (NOT instant) is cheap. Rice is cheap. Vegetables like lettuce are cheap.
My lunch yesterday was a bowl of old fashioned oats + slices of bananas. I guarantee you, that was a lot cheaper than a double cheeseburger meal at mcdonalds.
I guess my company has a better program, I usually earn $1,200 a year into my HSA due to the program, and the results do affect how much you get.
Rg
Many employers offer similar plans. My job gives employees $1650 in an HSA which covers almost an entire year's worth of deductibles for a family (deductable for family is $2000 - we have a very good plan. HSA money is also allowed to be used for consecutive years - not the same as an FSA BTW; so we can have a large amount in the HSA over a course of years to pay for any unexpected occurrences).
I believe that some do. If you compare someone who is obese and leads a seditary lifestyle, versus someone who is fit and exercises regularly Id say that the premiums paid for each policy would differ. And if they don't, then they should be charging more for those that don't care enough about themselves.
Plans sponsored by employers do NOT pay differing amounts in premiums for each member of the group. However, they DO pay more for sick people for reimbursing the insurance companies for the actual care provided at healthcare facilities. Most employees, as I noted above are pretty ignorant about how insurance benefits work at their job. The employer is covering the brunt of the expenses for you. They pay a part of your premium AND they pay whatever the group premiums don't cover in regards to actual healthcare expenses. Say you have 100 employees and all employees pay $500 a month for the group plan. The group plan is actually $1000 a month for each member. So the employees pay $600,000 for the premium on an annual basis. The employer pays another $600,000 for the premiums on an annual basis for a total of $1.2 million.
The cost of healthcare for a group of 100 employees is DEFINITELY going to be over $1.2 million annually. The employer covers the cost of the charges from healthcare providers that exceed $1.2 million.
FWIW one person at your job who has cancer will easily surpass $1.2 million by themselves. So the obese people really aren't that heavy of users in group policies like thin people like to think they are. The people that cost the most money are those who have children (women workers or the wives/partners of your male co-workers) maternity is very expensive, especially if c-section is involved or a premature infant stay in NICU. Cancer, specific types of diseases (like hepatitis C treatment especially - it is VERY expensive, or cystic fibrosis, or some other disease that most of you don't think about).
The issue with baseing premiums and discounts on health is you cannot tell how healthy someone is by looking at them or completing a basic physical exam.
You could be a 20 y/o and fit on the outside but have multiple sclerosis, Lupus, Cancer, early onset Rheumatoid Arthritis, and countless others that will not show up on routine exams for years, likely after they are apparent in the person's 30-40's. We are talking multi-millions in treatment with no signs until the damage has started.
Too much focus on waist size alone and not on health. I have personally examined many what I like to call "Skinny-Fat" people. People who are at the door of a heart attack or stroke but look wonderful from the outside. Perfect weight, active, everything we look for in a healthy person. So don't get caught up in Thin=Healthy as it can be quite the opposite. Genetics aka family hx. plays a bigger role for many in the USA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroWord
I agree with this point. There are unlucky circumstances. A number of years ago, I was hit with a rare condition. Purely genetic that I inherited. Wasn't cheap to get treatment for it.
That said, many of the healthcare costs these days are bogged down by preventable diseases associated with obesity.
On the above comments - what Daryl mentioned is total true. You cannot tell by looking at someone how healthy they are. Someone who is fat, may very well be more "healthy" than a thinner person in regards to the blue.
I'll note for the OP in the green, that you admitting you had a "rare condition" and that it was "genetic" means that you are more of a risk or an equal risk as an obese person. Your weight and habits don't matter if you have had any sort of health condition that is known to cost a lot of money.
Unfortunately I sat through and still do at times, multiple meetings about healthcare benefits since one of my "categories" I work on in supply chain is healthcare and prescription benefits for large companies/organizations. The cost of treating certain genetic conditions greatly exceeds the annual cost of others. Someone who is obese and has diabetes for example, may manage their disease well and not have much cost associated with their condition versus a thin person who has a genetic disorder like my co-worker who has kidney disease.
OP you should check the open market for how much it would cost you to get health insurance as an individual. I doubt it would be cheaper for you than your group policy at work no matter how healthy you think you are.
Thank you Jim Fixx. But can you at least try to engage on this because there were some deeper points there that you completely missed.
The part you fundamentally do not grasp is that insurance is not always fair. *gasp*
There are societal pressures which manifest in law and regulation and those are all heavily heavily regulated.
Imagine your co-worker gets cancer and their costs the next year or two are going to be 50k a year but they only make 30k a year. Should we increase their premiums to 60k annually? What about pre-existing conditions? I already pointed out how social security is unfair to smokers and the obese but you didn't like hearing an example where it's unfair in your favor.
Setting aside healthcare let's talk car insurance. You're obviously smart so this is a test, let's see if you can logic through the problem.
Let's say you have regular drivers and then some people that had past DUI, crashes etc. but have their license back and are now looking for insurance.
Regular Drivers actual annual insurance cost = 2k
Past Bad driver actual annual cost = 10k
However, that's not what they ultimately get charged because the past bad driver goes into a risk pool etc. and ends up paying 4k and the regular drivers pay 2.3k to pick up the slack.
Why does that make sense for society and even for some of the other drivers?
Spoiler
If you charge them 10k they'll drive uninsured anyway. Getting them to pay *something* because accidents will happen anyway and rehabilitating their driving record is incentive.
Insurance is messy. You're dealing with people, politics etc. good thing you went into more cut and dried (not easier mind you but more linked to reality like physics) because working in insurance would likely drive you nuts from what I'm picking up on.
I haven't even given some of the REALLY egregious examples of politics messing with insurance rates.
Well, I don't have an answer to everything. The problems you presented certainly have merits. Just like how I can get cancer tomorrow.
But it still is pretty undeniable that obesity greatly increases one's chances to get cancer, heart disease, etc. I'm not understanding the emphasis on the possibility that we all always have at least some chances to get ill no matter what we do.
Think ok of it this way. Suppose I want to cross a busy street. So, I close my eyes and just jay walk across the street while cars are zooming past me. A random person grabs my arm back and yell out "you wanna die? What's wrong with you?"
How would that person react if my answer is "we all gotta die some time". Does that make sense to you? Does the chance of a piece of the international space station falling right on me tomorrow mean I can stop worrying about all the risks in life? Should I start driving down the interstate on the wrong side of the barrier wall because an asteroid might hit earth a couple days from now? Let's take it a step further. I can go out and rob a bank and then make the argument that I broke the law, the guy going 10 over the speed limit broke the law and he only got a ticket for it. So, I shouldn't go to jail I should only get a ticket for robbing a bank.
I'm not understanding this emphasis on dilute the significance of healthy lifestyle choices and their impacts on lowering the risks of diseases like Type 2 and heart disease. Are you saying my chances of getting Type 2 is exactly the same as a morbidly obese person even though I can do 10 reps of pullups?
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.
But can you at least try to engage on this because there were some deeper points there that you completely missed.
I already pointed out how social security is unfair to smokers and the obese but you didn't like hearing an example where it's unfair in your favor. 
