'Bama proposing obese state emps. pay more for insurance - Page 4

Betty · 09-03-2008, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Why stop at weight?

As Alex pointed out certain diseases can be hereditary, tall people don't live as long,overly fit people actually have a higher mortality rate as do lefties and anyone that does not drink moderate amounts of alcohol.

Now with the advent of genetic testing there are all sorts of new windows opening for determining who is higher risk for the insurance industry.

And then they could just start monitoring you right? Who says if you had one drink today you wouldn't have one tomorrow, or that you would have 10 tomorrow.

It works now because we all pay into it. Yeah - I may be fat... but you've got a family history of breast cancer and that guy over there is going to get lung cancer. We've ALL got something wrong with us now or will have something wrong someday. They would have to either exclude everyone or charge everyone more... hmmm...

Should I pay more my whole life because I'm overweight? If so, then you should go bankrupt when you (not YOU but - you in a general sense) get cancer and have to have surgery and chemo and all that. Right? It's only fair that if I have to pay more all along that when something really bad happens to you that you have to pay a hefty price then.

But that's the whole point of having health coverage isn't it? To avoid having to pay an enormous fee sometime in the future.

And what about the person who develops a disease after paying decades into it, and then gets told that they are no longer covered. Oh wait - that happens now already doesn't it.

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 08:03 AM

A fine goal. I just have seen no evidence ever of the government containing cost or limiting buraeucracy when it gets involved in anything.

Interestingly, it is a state agency that is proposing additional costs for the obese.

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betty

And then they could just start monitoring you right? Who says if you had one drink today you wouldn't have one tomorrow, or that you would have 10 tomorrow.

And to reiterate what I just posted, it is a state agency proposing additional costs for the obese.

Moonliner · 09-03-2008, 08:11 AM

And I wonder if obese people really do have higher heath care rates overall. If on average they die younger they have less years to need health care. Over the long run they are less likely to need the cost of long term health care for issues like cancer or alzheimers because they would already be dead.

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 08:13 AM

Very interesting point, Moonliner.

My mother in law recently had a major heart attack. She is approaching 70, but eats well, exercises, and is not in the least overweight. The costs associated with it were immense (4 days ICU, 4 days non ICU in the hospital).

Ghoulish Delight · 09-03-2008, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Very interesting point, Moonliner.

My mother in law recently had a major heart attack. She is approaching 70, but eats well, exercises, and is not in the least overweight. The costs associated with it were immense (4 days ICU, 4 days non ICU in the hospital).

Individual cases are not what matters. You will always be able to find variation from actuarial tables when you look at individuals. Just because one person beats the odds doesn't change the reality of the average.

Insurance is the only game where you hope to lose your bet.

scaeagles · 09-03-2008, 08:51 AM

Except that she her mom and grandmother both died of heart attacks. Family history and all.

Not Afraid · 09-03-2008, 09:44 AM

I'm completely uninsurable.

Morrigoon · 09-03-2008, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner

And I wonder if obese people really do have higher heath care rates overall. If on average they die younger they have less years to need health care. Over the long run they are less likely to need the cost of long term health care for issues like cancer or alzheimers because they would already be dead.

I've heard this before.

Alex · 09-03-2008, 10:33 AM

Yeah, that's why I oppose seatbelt laws. The money the state saves in medical bills is more than wasted paying to educate kids that should be dead or in vegetative states.

Yes, that's a non sequiter. I have no point.

09-03-2008, 08:03 AM	#32
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	A fine goal. I just have seen no evidence ever of the government containing cost or limiting buraeucracy when it gets involved in anything. Interestingly, it is a state agency that is proposing additional costs for the obese.
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 08:11 AM	#34
Moonliner 8/30/14 - Disneyland -10k or Bust. Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 9,022	And I wonder if obese people really do have higher heath care rates overall. If on average they die younger they have less years to need health care. Over the long run they are less likely to need the cost of long term health care for issues like cancer or alzheimers because they would already be dead. __________________ - Taking it one step at a time.
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 08:13 AM	#35
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Very interesting point, Moonliner. My mother in law recently had a major heart attack. She is approaching 70, but eats well, exercises, and is not in the least overweight. The costs associated with it were immense (4 days ICU, 4 days non ICU in the hospital).
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 08:51 AM	#37
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	Except that she her mom and grandmother both died of heart attacks. Family history and all.
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 09:44 AM	#38
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	I'm completely uninsurable.
	Submit to Quotes

09-03-2008, 10:33 AM	#40
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Yeah, that's why I oppose seatbelt laws. The money the state saves in medical bills is more than wasted paying to educate kids that should be dead or in vegetative states. Yes, that's a non sequiter. I have no point.
	Submit to Quotes