10-03-2012 08:22 PM
31 12
tools
  1. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    I see smokers constantly getting treated for their " indulgence ". I know the tax payer's dollars do to treatments. They get a stroke, get treated and come right back. Today a patient at a health facility told me that the government should wait on him no matter what because he is a citizen.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 06:41 PM
  2. tomatoes11's Avatar
    As long as their premium is higher I don't see why not. The more they pay in health insurance, the better chance they spend less on nicotine.
    10-02-2012 06:49 PM
  3. phirefly's Avatar
    Everyone should be offered health insurance but I agree your premium should be based on your health habits. At work we can get $600 dollars in extra health credits based on certain criteria such as BMI, BP and Not Smoking. So in essence those that smoke and/or do not take care of themselves pay more than the rest of us. BMI is very subjective so you can get a note from a doctor saying your BMI is good for you to still get the credit if you are over the limit.
    10-02-2012 07:09 PM
  4. 12Danny123's Avatar
    Well in nz. no they don't why? Becuase the nz government is going to ban smoking by 2025 and they are raising the cost by $10 a year. If you are caught smoking in 2025 are are gonna get hunted down by the government. Most likely go to jail. It's dead simple in nz. You smoke you pay the price of your choice. Nz rules are very strict. Like your kid has to go to kindy garden and if you don't get a job. Your dept raise by one cent per week or month? We do offer health insurance for people but not smokers
    10-02-2012 07:13 PM
  5. GoodThings2Life's Avatar
    I find smoking to be a disgusting habit, but I'd never tell someone what they can or cannot do with their body. If you choose to poison yourself, it's your life to cut short. I don't feel any government leadership should have the right to choose for you either.

    In any case, I have no problem offering healthcare to anyone... but I think knowingly poisoning yourself SHOULD carry a higher premium cost to it as an incentive for healthier living.
    alpinestars1z likes this.
    10-02-2012 07:47 PM
  6. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Well I'm talking about the people who don't have private insurance and rely on the medicare to help them out.

    Well cigarettes in the US are not potent enough.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 07:50 PM
  7. sinime's Avatar
    Do obese people deserve health insurance?

    Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 08:10 PM
  8. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    I wanted to throw that question in here too, I knew it was only a matter of time before someone would ask.

    And that depends. If they have some kind of thyroid problem that they can't loose weight, then yes they deserve it.

    If they are just some fat pig that can't stop eating, then **** no. I had a fat person tell me she is fat because of the elevator. It has nothing to do with that fact she is capable of consuming a whole chicken per day.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 08:31 PM
  9. Matthew Mazzenga's Avatar
    Well in nz. no they don't why? Becuase the nz government is going to ban smoking by 2025 and they are raising the cost by $10 a year. If you are caught smoking in 2025 are are gonna get hunted down by the government. Most likely go to jail. It's dead simple in nz. You smoke you pay the price of your choice. Nz rules are very strict. Like your kid has to go to kindy garden and if you don't get a job. Your dept raise by one cent per week or month? We do offer health insurance for people but not smokers
    NZ sounds like a horrible place to live.
    10-02-2012 08:48 PM
  10. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Why that's a good thing, you can punish people for killing themselves slowly.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 09:45 PM
  11. vp710's Avatar
    I wanted to throw that question in here too, I knew it was only a matter of time before someone would ask.

    And that depends. If they have some kind of thyroid problem that they can't loose weight, then yes they deserve it.

    If they are just some fat pig that can't stop eating, then **** no. I had a fat person tell me she is fat because of the elevator. It has nothing to do with that fact she is capable of consuming a whole chicken per day.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    How about people who drink? Do they deserve insurance? People with non-congenital diabetes? People who work under dangerous conditions (oil rigs, miners, fishermen, farmers, etc.). How about high stress level jobs? Stress will literally kill you. How about people who have developed cancer from working in unhealthy conditions? All of these people could have made better choices for their health but do they deserve we cut off their access to health insurance? No. A premium makes sense if they're higher risk though.
    twincamfxd likes this.
    10-02-2012 10:01 PM
  12. vp710's Avatar
    Why that's a good thing, you can punish people for killing themselves slowly.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    Prepare for black market cigarettes and the crime that comes with illegal drugs.
    10-02-2012 10:02 PM
  13. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    How about people who drink? Do they deserve insurance? People with non-congenital diabetes? People who work under dangerous conditions (oil rigs, miners, fishermen, farmers, etc.). How about high stress level jobs? Stress will literally kill you. How about people who have developed cancer from working in unhealthy conditions? All of these people could have made better choices for their health but do they deserve we cut off their access to health insurance? No. A premium makes sense if they're higher risk though.
    I'm not talking about jobs. And drinking that's ok . People drink on occasions and a little bit of wine is good for you once in a while.

    We already have crime and illegal drugs. What else is new? I don't see your point.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-02-2012 11:35 PM
  14. twincamfxd's Avatar
    I have known several people who have died from liver related illness related to alcoholism. Its the same story, different vice.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
    10-02-2012 11:39 PM
  15. squire777's Avatar
    I read an interesting paper a couple of years back that talked about how in present times alcohol is now a bigger burden on societies than smoking. It mentioned the physical/health issues, mental health issues, crimes, accidents, and social aspects such as broken families.
    10-02-2012 11:56 PM
  16. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Yeah but your not actively killing people around you when you drink. When you smoke, other people's health diminishes from second hand.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-03-2012 12:04 AM
  17. twincamfxd's Avatar
    Unless they are driving....

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
    10-03-2012 12:42 AM
  18. vp710's Avatar
    I'm not talking about jobs. And drinking that's ok . People drink on occasions and a little bit of wine is good for you once in a while.

    We already have crime and illegal drugs. What else is new? I don't see your point.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    Let me try and make it clearer for you: there are a lot activities that pose a serious threat to one's health other than the very demonized smoking habit. They can be job related, diet related, related to your location, physical activity, sexual habits, etc. These all are choices you have to make at one point or another. Indeed, you can always get another job, change your diet, where you live, exercise more, or engage in less dangerous sports, be more responsible with who you date, etc.

    If you bar health insurance to smokers because they willingly harm themselves, then you should also do the same for all who you engage in risk activities. Speculator? No health insurance. The level of stress endured under your working conditions will put you at risk of heart problems by the time you're 40. Drinking too much soda? No health insurance. At risk of diabetes. You live next to a refinery? No health insurance. It's been proven homes next to oil industry facilities put you at risk of cancer. Enjoy surfing, rafting, mountain biking? No health insurance. These activities increase the risk of bone fracture drastically. Enjoy having multiple short-lasting relationship and engage in sexual activities with them? No health insurance. You put yourself at risk of STDs.

    On top of that, what if a smoker gets hit by a drunk driver, needs rehabilitation to learn how to speak, eat and walk properly again but has no health insurance? How what happened is his fault and what are we punishing him for?

    Yeah but your not actively killing people around you when you drink. When you smoke, other people's health diminishes from second hand.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    Are we talking about smokers' access to health insurance or second-hand smoking?
    10-03-2012 01:53 AM
  19. mmacleodbrown's Avatar
    Im in the UK, so believe that everyone is entitled to health treatment no matter what they do with their bodies. You pay the price by the amount of years you lose from your lifespan, it is an individuals choice as to whether they party hard and die at 30 or stay sensible and live to 80..
    10-03-2012 02:09 AM
  20. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Let me try and make it clearer for you: there are a lot activities that pose a serious threat to one's health other than the very demonized smoking habit. They can be job related, diet related, related to your location, physical activity, sexual habits, etc. These all are choices you have to make at one point or another. Indeed, you can always get another job, change your diet, where you live, exercise more, or engage in less dangerous sports, be more responsible with who you date, etc.

    If you bar health insurance to smokers because they willingly harm themselves, then you should also do the same for all who you engage in risk activities. Speculator? No health insurance. The level of stress endured under your working conditions will put you at risk of heart problems by the time you're 40. Drinking too much soda? No health insurance. At risk of diabetes. You live next to a refinery? No health insurance. It's been proven homes next to oil industry facilities put you at risk of cancer. Enjoy surfing, rafting, mountain biking? No health insurance. These activities increase the risk of bone fracture drastically. Enjoy having multiple short-lasting relationship and engage in sexual activities with them? No health insurance. You put yourself at risk of STDs.

    On top of that, what if a smoker gets hit by a drunk driver, needs rehabilitation to learn how to speak, eat and walk properly again but has no health insurance? How what happened is his fault and what are we punishing him for?



    Are we talking about smokers' access to health insurance or second-hand smoking?
    Both. Stressful jobs don't kill anyone other than the person doing the job.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-03-2012 02:30 AM
  21. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Im in the UK, so believe that everyone is entitled to health treatment no matter what they do with their bodies. You pay the price by the amount of years you lose from your lifespan, it is an individuals choice as to whether they party hard and die at 30 or stay sensible and live to 80..
    That's not good enough. Chain smokers should be dropping like flies. There are too many tax dollars being spent on their health or what's left of it.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-03-2012 02:33 AM
  22. vp710's Avatar
    Both. Stressful jobs don't kill anyone other than the person doing the job.
    Ah, come on, you're being dishonest. The reason you used for not treating smokers is because their habit kill them, not other people. And even if we stopped giving access to health insurance because they're potentially hurting other people (which would not make sense at all and be stupid), no one would have health insurance.

    I see smokers constantly getting treated for their " indulgence ". I know the tax payer's dollars do to treatments. They get a stroke, get treated and come right back. Today a patient at a health facility told me that the government should wait on him no matter what because he is a citizen.
    10-03-2012 02:35 AM
  23. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    Ah, come on, you're being dishonest. The reason you used for not treating smokers is because their habit kill them, not other people. And even if we stopped giving access to health insurance because they're potentially hurting other people (which would not make sense at all and be stupid), no one would have health insurance.
    Second hand does kill other people. Here's an example a father smokes at home for several years during that time his daughter ( a child ) is living with him. By the time she is a teen, she has emphysema. She never smoked. But due to your understanding that's not her father's fault. So she pulled that lung disease out of her ***.

    And why would other people not have health insurance. I am referring to smokers.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-03-2012 02:46 AM
  24. vp710's Avatar
    10-03-2012 02:57 AM
  25. WasteSomeTime's Avatar
    I don't understand, what is this.

    Sent from my SGH-i677 using Board Express
    10-03-2012 03:10 AM
31 12
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD